THE

CRUSADES
OF

21ST CENTURY

BY RIAZ AMIN
Vol-I

Dedicated to the sons of Salah-ud-Din, if some of them are still alive

somewhere; otherwise it is in the memory of the departed souls.

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.6C
RUSADE OR CRUSADES7
OBVIOUS AND OMINOUS..20
AFGHANISTAN ATTACKED..30
PAKISTAN'S PREDICAMENT40
CRUSADES CONTINUES.50
TENACIOUS TALIBAN60
TERRORISM VS TERRORISM..70
KUNDUZ AND KHANABAD80
MADRASSA AND MULLA...90
BRAHIMI AT BONN...101
KANDAHAR AND KARZAI..111
TUNNELS OF TORA BORA..121
IT'S CRUSADES..130
PROXY CRUSADES....145
SUCCUMBED SUDDENLY....154
PRESSURE PERPETUATED.....162
AXIS OF EVIL..172
MIDTERM OF INTERIM...183
REQUIREMENT OF REFERENDUM..196
CRUSADES IN MIDDLE EAST.206
CRUSADES IN THE SUBCONTINENT...217
BUSH AND THE BANIA.230
VICTORY WITHOUT WAR..239
MISERABLE MUSLIM UMMAH.249
KARZAI COMPLETES THE TERM263
CRUSADES IN MIDDLE EAST-II279
CRUSADES IN THE SUBCONTINENT-II..289
CORRECTION OF CONSTITUTION..300
TOWARDS ELECTIONS...312
SCREAMS OF SACK'M.322
RUNNING OUT OF REASON...333
3

A YEAR AFTER ATTACKS..343

ALMOST ABANDONED369
DICTATOR DELIVERS DEMOCRACY.384
OIL, ISRAEL OR ELSE.400
BREAK IN BRINKMANSHIP...413
DEMOCRACY RESTORED..424
TERRORISTS TERRORIZED..437
AFGHANISTAN A YEAR AFTER451
VOLUNTEERED TO BE VULNERABLE...473
HOLY WAR TURNED UGLY...496
FEARED AND THE FORGOTTEN..509
AILING AFGHANISTAN.......................................................................523
MIGHT IS RIGHT537
WAR IS NOT OVER558
PROVED BY PILLAGE..572
NEXT FIT CASE..585
LIBERATED TO BE LIBERATED604
PARALLEL PATHS TO PEACE...616
NO END TO TERROR631
ILLEGITIMATE IS LEGITIMIZED644
ROADS AND ROADBLOCKS655
AGONIES OF AFGHANS...667
IRAQ: AN EXAMPLE.680
ORDEALS OF THE ALLY.695
TERRORISM IN IRAQ..713
PLIGHT OF THE PARTNER724
TWO YEARS AND TWO WARS...736
AWKWARD AFGHNANISTAN762
PURGING PAKISTAN775
RECARIOUSLY POISED..792
FORAYING FROWNING AND FEIGNING...804
CHANGES DEMAND CHANGE..834
EXTERNAL CHANGES845
4

POLITICAL INSTABILITY..857
ECONOMIC FRAGILITY.867
CHARACTER FAILINGS..877
CHANGES IN ARMED FORCES.892
HOLD THEM IN HIGH ESTEEM909

INTRODUCTION
This is collection of unpublished articles written after 11 th September
2001. These articles have been written in the form of running commentary. It is
nothing but simple description of events with sprinkling of instant comments.
Instantaneous comments are never conclusive. So is the case with this
commentary.
The quality of commentary largely depends upon observation, knowledge
and prejudices of the commentator. His assessments are influenced by his
hopes and apprehensions, which seldom materialize hundred percent.
If all our hopes come true the planet Earth will become Heaven and if all
the apprehensions materialize it will turn into Hell. This planet will never
become a hell or a heaven, but only temporarily. It will remain Earth forever or
as long as the Creator so desires.
Some observations and comments were proved wrong within the period
of writing, but these were not altered, because that would have amounted to
tempering with own hopes and apprehensions. First thoughts have been
preserved to help the readers to draw their own conclusions.
Each article bears the date on which it was completed. As events
overlapped the writing period of successive articles, so repetitions became
unavoidable. However, repetitions save the reader from cross-references
making the linkage easier.
In short these articles constitute history in raw form; the history of a
period in which hopes of humanity have been eclipsed by apprehensions. The
decision-making abilities of the leaders have been impaired by fear, mistrust
and suspicion.
Therefore, the war that started with attacks of 11th September is likely to
be more horrendous in consequences than the two great wars, despite
trumpeting of its noble aims. In this war Muslim World in general and
Pakistan in particular will be at the receiving end. This has been the motivating
force behind recording of this commentary.
MUMAMMAD RIAZ AMIN

CRUSADE OR CRUSADES
On 11th September 2001 United States was subjected to air attack only
second time in its history. First attack was on Pearl Harbour. This time the
World Trade Centre in New York and Pentagon in Washington were targeted.
On both occasions America was surprised and shocked, because it never
considered itself vulnerable to such attack due to its geographic proximity.
Similarities in two attacks were restricted to the element of shock and surprise
only.
Attack on Pearl Harbour was carried out with warplanes, piloted by
Japanese, enrolled and trained for waging war. Attack on 11th September was
carried out with three passenger aircraft piloted by unknown civilian hijackers.
Neither the aircraft nor the hijackers could be expected to launch a lethal attack
requiring military expertise and precision.
Attack on Pearl Harbour was preemptive in nature. It
destroying vessels of US Navy before those could be mobilized
Pentagon and World Trade Centre were attacked in retaliation
unjust policies of America, but at this juncture it is difficult to
military term for this attack.

was aimed at
against Japan.
to biased and
find a precise

THE ACT
Was it an act of war or terrorism? Western Media while breaking the
news termed it as an attack on America. Notwithstanding the means and
methods employed, which were more akin to terrorism, in essence it was an act
of war. If so then it could be called as counter-attack or counter-offensive
against American excesses.
Who carried out the attack and why? The attackers were yet to be
identified, but from day one Western Media blamed Islamic fundamentalists in
general and Osama and Taliban in particular. Whereas the identity of attackers
would require time to be established, the purpose of attack was very clear. It

was to convey to the Americans that death and destruction caused through
biased and unjust policies of their government could also be brought to their
doorsteps.
To achieve the aim of a military operation, careful selection of targets is
very essential. The wizards of military planning sitting in Pentagon would agree
that targets selected for this attack fully conformed to the principles of military
strategy.
One of the targets was Pentagon, the nerve centre of American military
might. The high-tech military operations, unleashed all over the world, are
planned, executed and controlled from this place with the sole aim of enforcing
American will on other nations.
To this end, Americans do make efforts to have justifications and
consensus, but if these do not come-forth readily, they care little for their nonexistence. They do not hesitate in using brute military force at times and places
of their choosing. They do what they want.
Second target was World Trade Centre, the symbol of Americas
economic strength. It was hub of activities focused on maintaining economic
supremacy, which in turn is used as tool of war for exploitation or coercion.
The planning and execution of operation were flawless. Secrecy was the
hallmark of its planning. During execution not a single man faltered in his
resolve to accomplish the assigned task. They showed unflinching courage and
commitment while responding to the call of duty.
Only those, whose pride had been hurt severely and those who had firm
faith in righteousness of their cause, could demonstrate such a resolve. They
wanted to convey to the entire world that they had been wronged and in the
same stride tell the wrong doer that his acts could be avenged.
The killing of innocent people working in World Trade Centre was not
part of their aim. It was regrettable co-related damage. Borrowing the words
from the civilized world it may be said that it was unavoidable collateral
damage. If civilian casualties were the primary aim of attackers, then they
would have chosen other targets, which could be attacked with relative ease.

THE REACTION
The entire world expressed its profound grief and sorrow over loss of
lives of innocent people. The act of terrorism was condemned unanimously.
Muslim countries, including Pakistan, promptly sympathized with America. The
Americans were obviously shocked, grieved and angry. They talked of revenge.
Revenge from whom?
American intelligence agencies were surprised more than anyone else
was. They were absolutely clueless about the attackers. US Administration
lacked the moral courage to say so and accept their incompetence. But it did not
remain silent about culprits for long. While the investigations were in progress,
the proclaimed offenders, Osama and his men were blamed.
Western Media accused Muslims immediately after the incident. AntiIslam feelings were fanned. Even Bush was carried away by the events and he
vowed to launch crusade against perpetrators of terrorist attack on America.
Only literary persons understand the difference between crusade and Crusades.
People in Muslim World know only one meaning.
Since end of Cold War America was in search of a villain worthy of its
stature. Osama, a civilian fugitive having no shelter of his own, could not be a
befitting match for a Yankee hero. Taliban were accused as supporters of
terrorism to raise the stature of villain. Afghanistan ruled by Taliban and Osama
were bracketed together.
This too failed in making the recipe to the taste of hero-worshipers. There
was definite requirement of adding some spice. It was added. Pakistan, a friend
of Taliban Government, was asked to choose the side with which it stands.
The offer was made as one last chance.
Pakistan always condemned terrorism, because it has been a victim of
ghastly acts of terrorists for the last twenty years. Pakistan had also extradited
persons accused of terrorism. Why then Pakistan was asked to make a choice
without wasting any time?
Whichever side Pakistan chose to stand with, it would have suited the
super power. In case it stood with Americans, it would facilitate piecemeal
annihilation of the enemy. In case Pakistan decided otherwise, it would have
added the spice they were looking for.

Pakistan came into being on the basis of Islamic ideology. It is the only
Islamic State that has acquired nuclear capability. Despite its economic fragility,
it is undoubtedly a source of pride and psychological strength for the entire
Muslim World. The Crusaders would have felt elated while fighting against
such a villain.
Reactions of two other countries are worth mention i.e. India and Britain.
India offered all possible assistance for war against terrorism with the intention
of fulfilling its own designs against Pakistan. Its attitude in this critical situation
should act as an eye opener for those who were eager to befriend India during
Agra Summit.
Britain is no more a power of any reckoning at global level. It is
incapable of influencing events at international stage, militarily. Britain
understands it very well, but its desire to show-off in international arena is still
alive.
Standing on the side of American giant fulfils this desire. Muslim World
should have no difficulty in understanding mischievous nature of Britains
reaction. Looking at it, with reference to Palestine and Kashmir, makes it easier
to understand.

NO OPTION SCENARIO
Pakistan had never been confronted with an external threat of this
magnitude in its entire history. Dismembering of Pakistan in 1971 too could not
be equated with threat that emanated from the dust of World Trade Centre. In
fact the forces acting from within, more than the external factors, caused the
catastrophe thirty years back.
It is said that Pakistan was asked to choose from the options offered to it.
No. Pakistan had no choice. It had become a victim of circumstances and had to
take the American side. No decision making was required. American leadership
had dictated the decision to Pakistan. The President of Pakistan bravely
owned it.
What about the so-called second option? The President, in his address
to the nation, indirectly pointed out the consequences of this option. Pakistans
major concerns would have been threatened had it acted otherwise:

10

Pakistans nuclear and missile capabilities would have been attacked and
destroyed. UN inspectors would have been placed to deny the acquisition of
this capability in future.

Freedom movement in Kashmir would have been dubbed as terrorism,

thereby compromising the Kashmir cause.

Pakistans economy would have been crippled through imposition of

strict economic sanctions, like Iraq.

Indians would have been encouraged, if at all they lack in it, to fulfill
their hegemonic designs. Pakistans territorial integrity would have been
threatened.

Pakistan could have considered the second option, provided it had the
slightest of hope that Islamic World would have stood along its side. No
Muslim country would have dared to act against wishes of the super power.
These countries are incapable of standing for their own cause, what to talk of
taking side of someone else. They are a bunch of sick and wounded soldiers of
Allah.
Looking at the events and circumstances, it can be said that decision
taken by Pakistan was not voluntary. It was extracted under duress. Whatever it
might be, voluntary or involuntary, good or bad, liked or disliked, it has brighter
and darker sides. The brighter side is that situation has been saved for the time
being. Immediate threat has been averted.
Sooner or later Pakistan may find itself standing on the wrong side. It
will be extremely unfortunate. How?

War against terrorism may be focused on individuals, groups and

organizations of a particular race or faith.

State terrorism perpetrated against Palestinians and Kashmiris may

continue unabated. It may also be intensified or even baptized to become
part of holy war against terrorism.

Religious and political leaders in Islamic states may be targeted and

eliminated on slightest of pretext through covert operations. Bush has
threatened to restart such operations.

11

Strikes against terrorists may cause collateral damage to the extent,

which may not be acceptable to the people of Pakistan or even to the
government.

It was for these apprehensions that Pakistan has been hesitant in the past
to take the side of Americans. There are no major disagreements regarding
terrorism, except the scope and the strategy of fighting against this menace.

RATIONAL COURSE
Americans have decided to launch crusade against terrorism. Entire
civilized world is standing with them. Pakistan and many Muslim countries
are also willing to support them. How to go about henceforth? It is easier said,
than done.
The fight against terrorism must begin with spelling out the aim of this
holy war. This cannot be done without defining terrorism. It is not difficult to
frame a definition, but the problem is to have consensus on any particular
definition.
Before proceeding further one must endeavour to define terrorism. It may
be defined as: Hostile acts that target neutral parties, resulting in killing of
innocent people and destruction of their property, and/or cause fear in hearts of
the survivors; whether the perpetrators of such acts are individuals or groups of
individuals or agencies of a state.
The aim of this holy war should be, to eliminate all forms of terrorism
from all over the world. It implies that all forms of terrorism should be
targeted, particularly the state terrorism which is mother of all other kinds of
terrorism. To defeat terrorists comprehensively, sincere efforts should be made
to eradicate the causes of terrorism.
What are the causes of terrorism? Injustice dispensed through unjust
policies of governments imposed by use of force, is the root cause. Hence, state
terrorism is the ugliest of all forms of terror. Many states resort to perpetration
of cis-frontier and trans-frontier terrorism out of which India and Israel stand
out conspicuously.
American people and their government, must pause, ponder and evaluate
the situation in totality. There is no shame in determining and accepting that

12

portion of the blame, which may fall on their shoulders. They must ask
themselves as to why they are disliked or even hated by so many peoples in so
many countries of the world.
America claims to be leader of the world, but fails to understand the
difference between a leader and a bully. A leader, good leader, is respected and
loved. A bully is feared and hated. It is important that Americans must make the
right choice, bully or a leader.
The will of God, favourable circumstances and their own efforts of more
than half a century have placed them on the high podium of world leadership.
They should endeavour to transform America into good leader, rather than
allowing it to degenerate into a bully.
Americans are not tired of boasting about their values. They should also
learn to respect values of other nations, instead of ridiculing those. They love
enjoying their freedom, but tend to forget that their freedom ends at the point
from where the nose of someone else starts. They have bled numerous noses in
exercising their right to enjoy with their stick. They must learn to respect the
rights of others, if they sincerely want to suppress terrorism.
They hold peace and justice in high esteem. Here too they are guilty of
practicing double standards. In their eagerness to dispense justice and maintain
peace, they fall prey to their exuberance and cause injustice to large portions of
humanity and ruin peace of many nations. Death and destruction caused by
ruthless use of their military might and through imposition of economic
sanctions applied as tools of war cannot be justified even in the name of noble
values like peace and justice.
Nothing was done to stop atrocities committed in Bosnia and Kosovo.
However, after the massacre of thousands of innocent people, trials of war
criminals were held. Award of a few years imprisonment, to some out of many,
was no justice.
America has never condemned the state terrorism perpetrated by Israel
and India. When UNSC drafted a resolution recently to condemn Israel,
America threatened to veto it. In Durban Israel was likely to be blamed for its
racist policies, sensing that American and Israeli delegations walked out. India
had already abstained for reasons of its own. These events can be included in
the list of causes of attack on America.
13

Planning and execution of war against terrorism should be guided by the

principle of restraint and caution. Contrarily, the initial reaction of American
people, their Administration and Western Media was impulsive. Everyone
talked about revenge in words of his own liking. Bush chose the sacred word of
crusade. Fingers were pointed towards Muslims, even when nobody knew as
yet who the attackers were.
Consequences of impulsive reaction are seldom pleasant. Fanning of antiIslam feelings resulted in numerous untoward incidents in America and in other
parts of Christian World. The gravity of implications of such incidents was
quickly felt.
Bush realized the consequences of lose talk. He toned down and hurried
to visit some Islamic Centres in America, with a view to undoing the damage
caused by his initial verbal outbursts. It was to the credit of Muslims that they
did not react similarly against Christians living in Islamic countries.
Those who are keen to fight against terrorism should exercise utmost
restraint. Maximum information should be collected, collated and analyzed to
produce concrete evidence against the suspected culprits. This incident should
not be used to settle outstanding issues of an old agenda.
Osama and Taliban are mere suspects; they cannot be accused unless
plausible evidence is produced. The suspicion too appears to be an outcome of
mindset. Talibans refusal to hand over Osama also misleads to draw wrong
inferences. There is need to understand the social values of Afghans. They hold
their guests in very high esteem. It is not easy for them to comprehend who
treat their parents like disposable items.
Possibility of involvement of other organizations or states, including
Israel, should not be ruled out. Israelis are not novices in this field. They must
have refrained from direct involvement. It will be very difficult to trace out
their indirect involvement.
Those who know the working of intelligence agencies understand how
opposing agencies penetrate each other and then prompt opponents to act in a
manner that undermines interests of the penetrated agency. The cause of other
party is served unwittingly. It is unfortunate that even if the investigators find
some clues about involvement of Israel, they will never disclose their findings
to the world.
14

Most of the hijackers so far identified are Arabs. The events preceding
September 11 also indicate that attack was carried out in retaliation against proIsrael policy of America. Ironically, no Arab country has been accused. May be
America considers that flirtation with Arabs serves their cause better than
confrontation.
Operations in war against terrorism should be dictated by military
considerations, planned and executed as such. No operation should be prompted
by political exigencies or executed for political gains. Toppling of a few
governments, here and there, should be avoided. Political efforts should
concentrate on eradication of causes of terrorism.
War against terrorism will be absolutely unconventional. In conventional
war different dimensions of enemy are fairly well defined. In unconventional
war enemy presents no front, no flanks and no rear. Enemy in war against
terrorism will be much more elusive. Americans have fought and won many
conventional wars. They fought only one unconventional war in Vietnam and
lost it.
America must refrain from extensive and excessive use of destructive
force. The experience of Vietnam tells that mathematically America might have
destroyed North Vietnam about twenty times, yet at the end of the day its
soldiers fled from Saigon defeated.
Technological advancement has placed lethal weapons at the disposal of
US Armed Forces in abundance. These weapons can hit pre-designated pinpoint
targets. However the experience of Iraq War has revealed that users have yet to
learn a lot about judicious use of these weapons.
They have to learn to differentiate a military command post from a
civilian shelter and a chemical factory from a milk plant. They must exercise
utmost caution to avert collateral damage; otherwise military operations will
prove to be counter productive.
The principle of restraint is equally applicable to media war. Western
Media is trying to portray Muslims as dirty villains, who are uncompromising
hard-liners, intolerant fundamentalists, primitive, barbaric and enemies of the
civilized world.

15

It is true that Western Media is exclusive private domain of Zionists.

Nevertheless, governments of the civilized world must exercise some control
over it for promotion of peace. Venomous propaganda cannot be allowed as
right of freedom of speech.
Arabs carried out the attack, but Zionists are indirectly responsible for
endangering the security of Americans. If they are not checked, the security of
America will be exposed to serious threats. Some white Americans already feel
unsafe to travel with an Arab or Asian. They will soon feel uncomfortable living
with millions of Arabs and Asians in addition to the Niggers of America?
Will America adopt a rational course? This important question cannot be
answered without reviewing the American psyche.

AMERICAN PSYCHE
Psyche of a nation can be determined by gleaning through its history.
Study of history is a laborious task, but not in case of American nation. It is not
a long history. In words of a Turk, it is as old as my great grandfather.
Who are the people called Americans? They are outsiders, the
immigrants. Real Americans were Red Indians, who are as threatened as bison,
if not extinct like passenger pigeons.
Initial migrants were all Europeans. They were mostly high sea
adventurers, who in their files included absconding criminals and pirates. They
came to America to capture, plunder and own the homeland of native Red
Indians.
The invaders conquered the continent, because they possessed
gunpowder and exercised no restraint in using it against Red Indians. This
advantage was supplemented with biological warfare. Disease of small pox was
spread in Indian Tribes using covert means. Betrayal was also used as tool of
war. Truces and pacts were negotiated and then violated to own advantage.
Continuous plundering during the conquest could not satisfy the urge of
accumulating wealth. Adventurous and the greedier joined hands in launching
expeditions to discover hidden treasures and gold mines. Those who failed in
gold hunt were unlucky. Those who succeeded were not lucky either. The most
treacherous and the sharp shooter killed others to own the fruits of collective
effort.
16

Gold hunt also failed in quenching their greed for wealth. They thought
of benefiting from vast spans of fertile land through cultivation and plantation.
This required large labour. The demand of labour was met by hunting, capturing
and transporting Niggers from Africa.
They were sold like animals and were kept as slaves for generations to do
forced labour. Their white masters were not ashamed of the means used for
acquisition of wealth. They were definitely proud of possessing it. The Brain
Drain is a continuation of the same old economic strategy in a refined manner.
Inputs of poor are exploited to increase output of the rich.
American civil war was fought between industrial north and agricultural
south. This war produced a new breed of people, the turncoats. They were the
people who changed sides as frequently as the situation tilted in favour of one
side to the other. They were pioneers of modern diplomacy i.e. there are no
permanent friends and no permanent enemies, but only permanent interests.
In Second World War America sided with Allied Forces and defeated
Germans and Japanese. The victory was made easy by the concept of carpet
bombing of German soil and use of weapons of mass destruction against Japan,
the atom bombs. Nevertheless the victory made the victor proud and arrogant.
After the war some German leaders were tried and punished for
committing war crimes. This was something new to the world. Till then the
victors in human history had been either pardoning or beheading the defeated
right in the battlefield. Americans preferred to legitimize their sinister
intentions.
The arrogance led them to wage war in Korea and then in Vietnam.
Despite indiscriminate use of their colossal air power augmented with chemical
warfare, they had to abandon the Vietnam adventure, with dented pride and
arrogance.
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan provided an opportunity to undo the
damage caused by Vietnam War. America provided unconditional and unlimited
support to Afghans fighting against Soviets. USSR was defeated and
subsequently disintegrated. American pride and arrogance were restored.
Islamic states, particularly Pakistan, played major role in it.

17

Soon after came the Middle East crisis, initiated by Iraq, but prompted by
vested interests. Arab countries contributed significantly in defeating and
destroying a brotherly state, Iraq. American arrogance was cemented. It attained
the height never ever reached in the past.
Arrogant people believe that whatever they think is correct. When others
agree they need not be obliged, they have to. If someone disagrees, they take
immediate cognizance and punish him. Their interests are of prime importance.
All that serves their interests is just and rest is unjust. They suffer from complex
of self-righteousness, which undermines rational thinking.

PAKISTANS ROLE
The Pakistani nation is passing through the most critical period of its
history. In days to come Pakistan has to do a lot of tight rope walking. Its
survival will hinge on maintaining the balance. A slip of its decision-makers can
land the country in serious trouble.
People of Pakistan can help their leaders in maintaining the balance by
providing them a stick moulded out of fine material of Unity, Faith and
Discipline. They should not be unduly apprehensive about possible negative
fallout of Pakistans stand against terrorism.
The precarious situation places Pakistan in a position of advantage as
well. While remaining in the mainstream, Pakistan has an opportunity to
influence the events favourably. It will face numerous disappointments, but by
remaining steadfast it can hope that ultimately it shall overcome all the
difficulties.
Pakistan must work for keeping the war correctly focused. Terrorists and
causes of terrorism should be tackled simultaneously. This menace has to be
eradicated in its entirety. State terrorism cannot be ignored or deferred for
reasons what so ever. At the same time the right of self-determination, of
suppressed people, should not be equated with terrorism. In fact, freedom
fighters are in the forefront in war against terrorism.
The war against terror should not be selective. It must not be focused on
certain individuals, organizations or countries, lest it turns into Crusades.
Pakistan must try to prevent crusade converting into Crusades. It is likely to
start in Afghanistan and may move on to another Muslim country, but it should
18

not end there. The war must go on, to suppress state terrorism perpetrated by
countries like Israel and India.
This can be done better from the platform of OIC. Unity of Muslim
Ummah is the need of hour. United, they have a chance to stand, divided they
will surely fall, one by one. Pakistan must initiate moves for the unity of
Muslims.
Taliban Government is likely to be toppled by outside forces, acting
directly or indirectly. Pakistan should try to prevent this, because it would
destabilize Afghanistan once again. In case it becomes inevitable, the chances
of which are bright; Pakistan should at least try to prevent anti-Pakistan forces
replacing Taliban.
Toppling of Taliban Government has another implication. Mullah Omar
and his colleagues will vanish, but about a million of Taliban will not evaporate
in thin air of Afghanistan. They will go underground and fight against the
installed regime. Many of them can resort to terrorism and create problems for
the neighbours as well.
India is trying to take undue advantage of the situation. The President of
Pakistan has categorically asked India to lay off. It is very important that it
does. That will largely depend upon America, failing which India will try to
avail the opportunity.
Pakistan should persistently stress upon its partners to exercise maximum
restraint and caution as explained earlier. Excessive and extensive use of force
will not help the cause; instead it will create numerous problems, particularly
for Pakistan. It can also be counter-productive.
Pakistan should not look for monetary gains. The lowest of Pakistanis
will not like to pocket few dollars as reward for spilling blood of a Muslim
brother. However, millions of Afghans are likely to migrate and create related
problems in Pakistan.
It will be fair to ask friendly countries to help Pakistan in shouldering this
burden. In fact Pakistan has the right to demand it, as well as compensation for
economic damages caused to it in the past through imposition of unjust
sanctions.

19

CONCLUSION
On 11th September the attackers conveyed the message to America very
clearly. The manner it was conveyed was rather too harsh. Therefore, it is not
likely to be received and understood in correct perspective.
Americans have been badly hurt. Their psyche will dictate them the same
old course, which they have been treading in the past. They will not leave their
arrogance aside for a while, although by doing so they can save themselves
from further harm.
They will discard the virtue of wisdom considering it as crutches of the
weak. The will not understand that it can make a strong, the strongest. Their
history has taught them that might have always been proved right. Hence to
expect that they will adopt a rational course will amount to asking for
impossible to happen.
Pakistan has opted to be with them. It should do what it must. If it fails,
the crusade against terrorism will be fought with the spirit of Crusades. At some
stage the war may openly turn into Crusades. It may start with attacks against
Muslims and end there.
The Americans, having achieved their mission, will once again betray
Pakistan, as they have done in the past, more than once. The Yankee hero will
turn his coat inside out, from blue to red, pack his possessions and vanish into
the Wild West whistling tunes of democracy, freedom and justice.
Pakistanis, like Red Indians, will keep wondering as to what wrong they
might have done, to deserve that fate. They will be sitting exhausted on rubble
and in smoke and dust created by war. When dust will settle, they will find
themselves in the company of hostile neighbours.
The Yankee hero will march on to abode of some other Red Indians
followed by yet another. The game will go on. Can this be averted? Yes,
Muslims must unite and prepare themselves for their defence as Allah has told
them to do. They should prepare in a manner that their preparedness causes fear
in hearts of their enemies.
Ordinary Muslims however can only wish this. Their leaders are
complacent as ever. Presently Americans seem to be following instructions of

20

Allah more religiously. They, with their readiness for war, have caused terror in
the hearts of many rulers of Islamic states.

26th September 2001

21

OBVIOUS AND OMINOUS

The clouds of dust and smoke raised by the collapsing World Trade
Centre have started clearing. Complete settling down will take time, but all that
is lurking on the horizon is becoming visible. The emerging scene bears no
signs of silver lining.
The civilized world, led by America, is all set to launch crusade against
terrorism. The plans have been formulated and details are being sorted out.
Resources have been mustered and marshaled. Deployment of forces is almost
complete.
America is ready to start the war against terrorists. Who is a terrorist?
This important and basic question remains unanswered. Nobody has bothered to
mention the causes of terrorism, what to talk of taking measures to eradicate
these. The war is about to start without declaring its aim.
The above omissions are not the result of fits of war hysteria. These
important aspects have been left unidentified and unexplained by design.
Perpetrators of war against terrorism know very well what they will be doing
and what for.
The uncivilized people, who will be at the receiving end, have been left
guessing. They have to draw their own conclusions for safeguarding their
interests. In case of complacence the events, as they unfold, will leave them in
state of shock and helplessness.

INTERNATIONAL SCENE
International resolve to fight against terrorism markedly lacks the
enthusiasm as compared to the one demonstrated during the Gulf War. What is
the reason of this indifference? It is not because of any disagreement on the
necessity of eliminating the menace of terrorism, but on the strategy for fighting
against it.
Only six countries, apart from America, have agreed to directly
participate in war. Out of these six, Britain is the keenest to initiate action as
early as possible. The motivating force behind this exuberance is selfaggrandizement. Canada, Australia and New Zealand are obedient children of
Brits family. They feel assured in the company of their parents. France and

22

Germany are two important countries that have agreed to take active part as and
when required.
Muslim states will provide battleground for this holy war as no other
soil can be holier than the soil of Islamic countries. Holy war must be fought
on holy grounds. It will obviously start in Afghanistan where Taliban claimed
to have imposed Islamic Shariah. Subsequently it can be escalated to other
Muslim states at the discretion of the civilized world.
Foreign ministers of Islamic countries have agreed to hold a meeting in
Qatar during second week of October. The agenda proposed for the meeting
falls well short of the expectations of Muslim Ummah. It is an image of
policies of the majority of governments rather than a reflection of the will of
Muslims.
If these ministers are converging on to Qatar to convey condolence and
condemnation with reference to the incident of 11th September, it will mean
nothing but waste of time and effort. Most governments of Islamic World have
already done it quite sincerely and solemnly.
The deliberations of foreign ministers should be futuristic. They must
understand the game plan of the civilized world. At the same time they must
demonstrate the will and determination to save Muslim Ummah from
horrendous consequences of the projected holy war.
There is very little for optimism. Leaders of Muslim countries are
moving much slower than the events. There are visible cracks in their unity.
Majority of them is suffering from inferiority complex and lacks the courage to
do what they ought to do. This meeting will be of little use to Muslim cause. If
any thing happens to the contrary, it will be a miracle.
Organization of Arab countries is slightly cohesive as compared to OIC.
Arabs have pronounced common interests; therefore they are expected to act in
unison. State terrorism perpetrated by Israel against Palestinian is the main
cause of present crisis. Arabs must ask America to chain their watch-dog of
the Middle East.
But the moves made by Arabs so far lack urgency and determination.
Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have severed their diplomatic relations

23

with Taliban. This has been done to remain on the right side of America rather
than promoting interests of Arabs.
Arabs have made some moves, which reflect their desire to act
independently. All of them have declined to participate in a coalition directly.
Only a few have agreed to provide indirect support by allowing the use of their
air space and ground facilities. They have opposed Powells idea of targeting
Iraq after Afghanistan.
However, during Rumsfelds visit to Middle East, they have not been
assertive, as they should have been, against the atrocities committed by Israel.
They have to put their act together to seek justice for Arabs in general and for
Palestinians in particular.
Russia has provided indirect support to the Coalition. In words of Blair
its support is far beyond the expectations. It must have provided intelligence;
terrain information and lessons learnt from their experience of Afghanistan.
This support may be unexpected for Blair as he was looking at it in the context
of Cold War. People of this region expect much more than that.
Russia has definite interests in this holy war. It would like to salvage
some of its pride left behind in mountains of Hindukush Range, during retreat
from Afghanistan. Russians would also like to legitimize their military action
against Chechen freedom fighters. The destruction of Afghanistan and Taliban
will also check re-embracing of Islam by the people of Central Asia.
Central Asian Republics cannot act independently and that too against the
wishes of Russia. Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have pronounced differences with
Taliban and they openly support Northern Alliance. In these circumstances they
were expected to willingly support the holy war and they have.

THE LEAD ROLE

America appears to be failing in choosing the rational course. The
employment of diplomatic and military efforts in war against terrorism remains
biased. Decision to freeze funds of terrorist organizations has targeted Muslims
only. Those who have been asked to hand over some suspected terrorists are all
Islamic countries.
State terrorism against Palestinians and Kashmiris continues. No definite
diplomatic effort has been directed to check it. On the contrary, it seems that
24

perpetrators of state terrorism enjoy the quiet support of the super power. That
is why it is gaining momentum.
Terrorism, aim of war and the causes have been left undefined. Are
Americans suffering from off-centre vision? Have they closed their master
eye? No. These ambiguities have been left by design to obscure the vision of
others. They, for themselves, are very clear about their aims and objectives.
The obscurity grants them fair amount of flexibility. An extremist who
resorts to militancy against the civilized world is a terrorist. As and when he
starts serving their interests, the honour of fighting for democracy or freedom
or justice can be bestowed upon him. People of Pakistan and Afghanistan
should know it better.
More than three weeks have passed since attack on America, but combat
action against terrorism has not yet started. Those who are impatient to see the
fireworks may be misled to believe that America is exercising undue restraint.
Those who know how the war machine is geared will understand that the time
to judge the exercise of restraint has not yet arrived.
The action cannot start without deployment of firepower, transportation
of combat troops to the close proximity of the battlefield, positioning of
elements of Special Forces, collection of terrain information and intelligence
about enemy dispositions. All these actions were initiated immediately after 11 th
September, which would require at least four weeks to complete.
Most important of these tasks is positioning of Special Forces. American
commandos have been exercising with Pakistans SSG for the last many years
for similar contingencies. The closing of Islamabad Airport, soon after 11 th
September, can be related to the movement of Special Forces.
Military action against Taliban is imminent. The war will start with
missile attacks from south combined with bombing by warplanes. It will
continue for sometime as it happened during Gulf War. Northern Alliance will
be provided all possible military support to launch ground attack against
Taliban. Once resistance of Taliban would be broken, the combat troops of the
Coalition will move in to accomplish the mopping up of terrorists.
Attack on Afghanistan will aim at destruction of training camps, killing
of as many prominent terrorists and their supporters as possible, and toppling of

25

Taliban Government and installation of new government. It is difficult to

forecast the time schedule of these events. But, the war in Afghanistan is likely
to continue until these goals are achieved.
Foreign sponsored rulers have never survived in Afghanistan. The
planned replacement of Taliban is likely to be resisted. US Administration
understands this very well, therefore the plans to ensure survival of such
government must have been prepared.
At this moment America is interested in dispensation of death and
destruction to perpetrators of terrorism. All that happens to government and
people of Afghanistan thereafter is not a matter of concern at this stage.
America wont mind if Afghans continue fighting with each other and drive
themselves back to stone age, where they belong to.
Bush claimed that America is against Taliban, but not against Afghan
people. He has tried to increase the weight of his argument by sanctioning aid
worth 320 million dollars to provide relief to Afghan people. They are the same
people who were deserted by America after Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan. They were left high and dry.
The revival of friendly feelings for Afghans, more than a decade later, is
quite meaningful. Why America has been moved now about the plight of
Afghans? All these overtures are aimed at subverting the loyalties of Afghans
for Taliban Regime.
America wants them to turn against Taliban. The gesture appears to be
noble, but the motive is definitely not. This aid is part of psychological warfare.
It is being employed as tool of war. Large sums of secret funds will also be
spent for this purpose.
Taliban, despite their political isolation, have made some diplomatic
moves. All these moves were to gain time by stalling the attack. They know for
sure that war cannot be averted without accepting the demands of America.
But, they have not budged from their stand on Osama Bin Laden. Their
last move to try Osama in Afghanistan, if evidence was provided, has been outrightly rejected by Bush. No talks, it is time to act. Thus the war seems to be
around the corner.

26

SIDESHOW
Pakistans decision to stand by the side of America has caused
considerable disappointment to India. Despite this unexpected decision India
has stepped up its propaganda and diplomatic efforts to accuse Pakistan for
sponsoring terrorism in Kashmir.
The slightest of diplomatic success would encourage India to take
punitive action against Pakistan. To guard against Indian adventures Pakistan
placed its Air force on high alert immediately after 11 th September. Other sister
forces would have also taken the preliminary actions for mobilization.
India continued pursuing its nefarious designs. Pakistan was blamed
immediately after the bomb explosion in assembly building in Srinagar. It is
quite interesting that Indians always know the real culprits soon after such
incidents. They dont believe in wasting time in investigations.
Bomb blast in Srinagar coincided with Jaswants visit to UK. He raised
hue and cry against cross border terrorism perpetrated in Kashmir. It must have
pleased Jaswant when Straw was able to see threat to democracy. It was a
definite diplomatic success of India and that too on weak moral grounds.
Jaswants counterpart in Pakistan remained confined to Islamabad, but he
was not inactive. He preferred to achieve foreign policy goals with the help of
his knowledge of poetry. Gentlemen are known for their gentle manners. In fact
nobody from the entire cabinet went out of Pakistan, except Finance Minister.
He went to New York with a begging bowl.
On 3rd October an aircraft was suspected of being hijacked. Indian
authorities could not ascertain anything on that day. BBC was smart enough to
know that the hijackers had asked for the flight plan for Lahore. Next day this
drama was over and BBC dubbed it as comedy of errors.
This incident amply reflected the ill will for Pakistan harboured by
Western Media. It is always looking for excuse to blame Pakistan for terrorism.
No matter how flimsy the excuse might be, they have the means to blow it up.
They can turn a comedy of errors to a tragedy of terror.
At the end of first week of October Blair visited Islamabad and New
Delhi. During his visit to India, Vajpayee openly blamed Pakistan for cross
border terrorism. He went on to call Pakistan the home of host of terrorist
27

organizations. In Islamabad, Pakistan failed to mention the state terrorism

perpetrated by India.
Pakistans approach is pronouncedly defensive. Initiative rests in hands
of Indian diplomats, who are trying their utmost to influence the events
favourably. Pakistan only reacts as the events unfold. Reaction has been
preferred over action. One fails to understand the rationale behind defensive,
rather apologetic, approach of Pakistan regarding Kashmir.
In fact Pakistan surrendered initiative right at the outset. Immediately
after attack on America some Muslims were killed in Lucknow. Next day
during daily press briefing by foreign ministrys spokesman, his attention was
drawn to this incident.
The spokesman replied that he would not like to comment on internal
affairs of India. This gesture of decent neighbourliness deserved applause. India
applauded it by imposing ban on Muslim students organizations. The pattern
has not changed since then.

PAKISTANS PERFOMANCE
Pakistans ordeal was not over with the decision to remain with the
mainstream. It has to put in sustained effort, not only to survive in torrents of
the stream, but also to maintain the right direction to reach where it must.
Unfortunately, Pakistan is merely trying to remain afloat and be carried by the
torrents. Determining of direction and destination has been left to rapids of the
mainstream.
The midnight telephone call of 11th September and meeting of DG ISI
with officials of US Administration have done the damage. The language and
tone used by US officials during conversation and briefing must have shaken
the confidence of our decision-makers.
Verbal bashing does affect ones composure and confidence. Rulers of
Pakistan are not so strong that they could have escaped from negative effects. It
appears that they have surrendered their right to act independently. They are
waiting for instructions to come from elsewhere and act accordingly.
Pakistan has opted for lesser evil as stated by the President. It does not
mean that out of Taliban and America, he has chosen the latter. He dare not

28

mean that. What he meant can be explained better with the help of a Punjabi
proverb. Onions have been preferred over leather sole.
Soon after 11th September, Pakistan was asked to eat first onion. It was to
freeze funds of some terrorist organizations. Pakistan closed the eyes and
swallowed it. Bitterness of the taste remained unexpressed. Next to come was
the evidence against Osama.
Pakistan accepted the evidence provided by America. Opinion of experts
who examined the evidence cannot be challenged for two reasons. Firstly, the
evidence has not been disclosed and secondly the competence of examiners is
not known. However, the experience tells that evidence collected by
intelligence agencies usually fails to withstand strict judicial scrutiny.
Agreeing to toppling of Taliban Government and reinstatement of King
Zahir Shah followed the onion of evidence. It was a clear deviation from the
previous stand of Pakistan. Despite consenting to the toppling of Taliban,
Pakistan continued voicing its apprehensions about foreign sponsored
government. Pakistan has started feeling bitterness of onions.
Composition of new government in Afghanistan is likely to be a major
disappointment for Pakistan. Its base could be broad or narrow and it could be
the outcome of internal or external arrangements, in either case it is likely to
have a sizeable number of persons who will be anti-Pakistan.
President of Pakistan in one of his interviews predicted that days of
Taliban Government are numbered. As head of state and a former friend of
Taliban he should have desisted from making a prophetic statement. Such
things are understood better without saying them. Destiny can neither be
predicted nor altered.
Pakistan has been a friend of Taliban. Their government may not survive
for long, but millions of Taliban will remain in its neighborhood. Pakistanis
would like to retain their goodwill. They would never like to alienate their
Afghan brethren. It would be against the interest of Pakistan.
That was about the onions already eaten. The Chef is ready to offer
another plate full of onions:

Stop infiltration across Line of Control, otherwise India will be

permitted to take punitive action.
29

Ban all militant organizations, particularly Jehadi groups.

Take action against religious parties and close certain Madrassas, if not
all. US Ambassador has already met the concerned minister in this
connection.

These onions will be hard to swallow and even harder to digest. Pakistan
must resist eating these, because:

Freedom movement in Kashmir could be subverted.

Jihad is an important tenet of Islam. Equating it with terrorism can result

in violent resentment.

Jihad is the basic theme for motivation of Pakistans Armed Forces. Its
absences will have demoralizing effects.

Religion is the binding force of our national unity. Ethnic and linguistic
groups will fill in the vacuum created by imposition of restrictions on
religious parties. These groups are capable of threatening the integrity of
Pakistan.

Pakistan has been rewarded for its civilized behaviour. Some unjustly
imposed sanctions have been lifted, loans rescheduled and some aid for
refugees has been provided. Government controlled electronic media has been
giving wide coverage to such news. Very little has been said about serious
setbacks to Pakistans economy, because of the crisis created by the threat of
holy war.
People of Pakistan are mature enough to understand that in the present
situation, in which their vital national interests are at stake these pea-nuts are
of little significance. They want no monetary gains at the cost of any
compromise on major concerns.
They know that hands extended in generosity can be pulled back any
time. They have learnt through experience that the civilized world can be
mean enough to demand return of given charities. The also know that American
leaders can grind things so hard that even F-16 aircraft can be melted into
edible oil.

30

CONCLUSION
Murkiness is clearing. The first thing that has become visible is American
strategy for war against terrorism. It has decided to take the war back to the
courtyards of those who launched counter offensive on 11th September. America
has decided to hit at the base of counter offensive.
Bush Administration has preferred to control terrorism by accelerating
the mortality rate of its perpetrators, instead of decelerating their birth rate.
Preventive measures have been discarded, because their effectiveness is time
consuming. Punitive action has been preferred for speedy results.
The terrorism has been diagnosed as tumor. Obviously the usefulness of
medication has been discarded and case has been referred to the team of
surgeons. This is the strategy for holy war, if at all it qualifies to be termed as
strategy. The basis, on which it has been evolved, is revenge. It conforms to
American psyche.
The optimists have seen some positive indicators. They believe that
America may change its foreign policy. In Middle East it may support
establishment of an independent Palestinian State. It may also realize the
importance of solving Kashmir dispute in accordance with UN resolutions.
However, these indicators could prove illusions. America will be
reluctant to bring such a change in its policy, fearing that it could be credited to
the leader of al-Qaeda. Therefore, an end to state terrorism perpetrated by India
and Israel is not in sight.
An encouraging development is toning down of the cry of clash of
civilizations. Bush and Blair, of late, have many good words to say about Islam
and its followers. It seems that they have realized that such a clash could cause
turmoil in global village and the consequences would be unbearable for either
civilization.
The fever of clash of civilizations is like malaria, which can recur any
time if not treated with care. Leaders of the civilized world are advised to
take proper doses of right medicine. They must take injections of tolerance and
accommodation for other civilizations.

31

Pakistan has been focus of kind attention of the civilized world. This
attention, no matter how long it lasts, will not guarantee the security of
Pakistans national interests. It should not lead Pakistan to complacence. It must
work relentlessly to safeguard its own interests.
Pakistan has opted for eating onions. Quite a few onions have been
consumed already and more will be offered sooner or later. The onions to come
next will be bitter in taste as well as in their effects. The shrewdness of
Pakistani leaders will be tested in declining to eat these bitter onions and at the
same time avoiding the alternative punishment.
They must remember that because of Pakistans nuclear capability it still
remains a potential target of holy war. Its name will keep popping up in
various kinds of watch-lists. The government should ensure that Pakistans
name does not hop from watch-list to hit list.
Sideshow between India and Pakistan is concurrently going on with
drama on the centre stage. This show has the potential of overshadowing the
main drama. Pakistan must prevent it, but without being timid and apologetic.
Its dispute with India is related to Kashmir, for which it must adopt aggressive
diplomatic approach, deferring the aesthetics for a change.
7th October 2001

32

AFGHANISTAN ATTACKED

Twenty-six days after 11th September America attacked Afghanistan. It

marked the beginning of holy war. Going by the American standard time the
devil and the angel chose almost the same time of the day for their evil and
noble acts.
It was Sunday morning in America, the time to go to church and pray,
God bless America, only America. After prayers people could sit in front of
their television sets and watch the devil paying the price of his sins. The day
and the time were selected for the convenience of Americans.
While breaking the news of attack on Mulla Omars Afghanistan, the TV
announcer pointed towards a small dot of light on the screen and said, it is a
cruise missile hitting a target in Kabul. He continued, apologetically, it is not
like the one the viewers saw during Gulf War.
Video coverage of the firework failed to present a spectacle, as the
Americans would have liked to see. They must have noticed the marked
difference between Saddams Baghdad and Omars Kabul. Mulla had very little
to pay as price.
Attack on Afghanistan shocked many, but surprised none. The world has
been waiting for this. People around the globe had argued for and against the
necessity of war, but they agreed that it would come soon. They differed in their
views but not in expectations.

VIEWS OF THE COALITION

Bush came on air soon after the start of attack on Afghanistan. Looking
through the windows of White House he previewed the war. Salient points of
his preview were:

America has tried its best to avert the war, but opponents have failed in
meeting its demands.

Our cause is just. He said this addressing to the soldiers of American

Armed Forces.

It will be a long drawn war lacking in visible successes.

Enemy has to pay the price.

33

His claim that America exercised utmost restraint was bogus. The war
does not start with firing of the first bullet. It begins with essential preliminary
moves. America initiated these moves immediately after 11th September. On
completion of these moves America did not wait for a minute. It started the war
as early as was militarily possible.
The waiting period could not be reduced, but it could have been used for
finding a negotiated solution. America persistently refused to have any
diplomatic contacts with Taliban. US Administration, perhaps, considered such
contacts below the status of a super power. America was bent upon dictating
terms. This was no way to exercise restraint.
The warring sides, particularly the soldiers, have to believe in justness of
their cause. Belief of soldiers in their cause has great influence on the outcome
of war. Bush had to give a motivation talk at the start of war. Keeping this in
view he said, our cause is just.
His claim cannot be taken as gospel. Historians will establish the fact
once they analyze the war at some later stage. While giving their verdict on
justness of the cause, they will also examine the cause of Osama, Omar and
their men, irrespective of the means adopted to promote that.
It is true that success in this war will not come easily. It has to be a long
drawn war. It will not last for days or weeks or months, but for years. Either
side will feel the exhaustion at some stage. Consequences will be bitter for
either side; more so for a side enjoying affluence rather than the one having
very little to lose.
Bush has warned Taliban that they have to pay the price now. Price of
what? Obviously it will be the price of their refusal to succumb to the dictates
of a super power. Like the justness of the cause, the price too cannot be worked
out at the beginning of war.
It will be determined after all transactions are made. Experts will then
prepare the balance sheets and conclude which side paid more than the other
did. It has to be remembered that Afghan Enterprise has been running in loss
for the last twenty years. Their cash account books, at the beginning of the
transactions, show very little in credit.

34

Blair looked down from Downing Street and had slightly different view.
He was quite vocal about Britains active participation in war. He indulged in
boasting and claimed that British Armed Forces are the best in the world. Selfprojection is the precise reason for which Britain is always ready to stand on
American side.
After boasting he came to the crux of the matter. He said that after 11th
September economic business in the civilized world had nose-dived. Experts
feared that it might not recover from this setback. Something had to be done for
its revival.
Hence, action was preferred over inaction. The war against terrorism
may have been named as Enduring Freedom but its aim is to secure economic
interests of the civilized world. It is clear deviation from noble aim of the
holy war announced earlier.

SUCCESSES AND FAILURES

Bush had rightly said that there would be no visible successes. About a
week later he announced the completion of first phase of the war. He claimed
that goals set-forth for this phase have been achieved. He did not dilate on the
goals. In fact the Coalition forces achieved nothing, except further destruction
of an already destroyed country.
It is claimed that war is against terrorism. So far not a single terrorist has
been confirmed killed or wounded. It is true that it could not be done with air
attacks alone. It can only be achieved through ground action. That has yet to be
launched.
Battles in and around Hindukush Range have become inescapable. When
will ground-action begin? What will be its outcome? It remains to be seen. Only
one aspect of ground action can be visualized at this stage. Its outcome will
greatly depend upon the destruction caused by air attacks.
America has launched a well-planned psychological offensive against
Taliban to subvert the loyalties of Afghans, but no significant desertions or
dissentions have been reported so far. Food drops have failed to produce the
desired effects. At some stage the drops may be stopped saying that packets of
food were falling in the hands of combatants.

35

In days preceding the war, value of Rupee and Afghani increased against
Dollar. This was a strange phenomenon. The currencies of two most affected
countries were performing better. This could be explained only with the help of
principle of demand and supply.
Reportedly, tons of Rupees and Afghanis have been purchased. Local
currency was needed urgently to buy the loyalties of warlords and tribal heads,
as Afghans are known for their weakness for monetary temptations. Intelligence
agencies must be working overtime in purchasing the precious commodity of
loyalty.
The quantity and quality of the purchases made are not known. May be
Talibanization has some curing effect on this age-old decease of Afghans. It
may also be remembered that Afghans often unite against foreign aggression
forgetting their differences. The true picture has not yet emerged.
The users of smart bombs have failed in controlling the collateral
damage. Bombs have outsmarted them in dispensation of infinite justice.
Similar damage during attack on America was criticized, condemned and
condoled in all corners of the world. The damage in Afghanistan is regretted by
some and forgotten. Has America refrained from practicing double standards?
Can double standards help defeating terrorism?
The holy war has neither promoted peace in any part of the world so far
nor has it made America a safer place. Instead Americans have been exposed to
more threats. Anthrax is the first and nobody knows how many more are in
store. Americans will live in perpetual scare. The must learn to endure
freedom and forget about enjoying it.
Taliban have been steadfast in their resolve to fight against the military
might of a super power. Intense bombing by the Coalition and ground attacks of
Northern Alliance have not dented their resolve. The results of the first phase
indicate that they are prepared to face the worst.
Many experts had declared Taliban as no match to America. They had
written them off well before the start of war. Their assessment was based on
statistics of military hardware only. They have devised the yardsticks to
measure capabilities of hardware, but they have no device to measure infinite
capabilities of software, the human beings. The results of war fought so far
must have surprised many experts.
36

Ho Chi Min was not lucky enough in having the advice of such experts.
Otherwise he would have listened to them and surrendered well before the
Americans fled from Vietnam. Perforce he had to continue a bloody war and
win it.
Mulla Omar is lucky to have wisdom showered on him, but he is not
benefiting from it. Some experts would like to tell him that unlike Vietnam,
there would be no Ho Chi Min Trail in Afghanistan through which his fighters
could be supported. He may still not listen. Why?
It is difficult to be understood by the experts. It is beyond the scope of
their calculations. They dont have a yardstick to measure human will and
determination, particularly that will of a man, which merges into the Will of
Allah. Mulla is not pushed about the outcome of war.

WORLDS VIEW
Foreign Ministers of OIC met on 10th October to discuss the prevalent
situation. They failed in formulating a strategy for safeguarding the interests of
Muslim Ummah. Duration of the meeting was too short for meaningful
deliberations on a complex situation.
They were generous enough to establish a fund for rehabilitation of
Afghanistan, while quietly consenting to continuation of its destruction. They
could not muster the courage to tell America to stop bombing Afghanistan and
refrain from punishing the entire nation just to catch one suspect. Someone has
rightly de-abbreviated OIC as Oh! I See.
The meeting, however, opposed the escalation of holy war. This too was
not the outcome of their courage. Most of them feared that the next victim
could be anyone of them. Had they acted prudently, they would have demanded
from the civilized world to define terrorism, identify its causes and take action
to remove those. The aim of war should be all encompassing and not selective.
Unfortunately the leaders in most countries of Muslim World think and
act differently from the aspirations of their people. The leaders are quite vocal
in condemning the terrorist attack on America; the people vehemently condemn
the attack on Afghanistan. Leaders have sided with America, who is obsessed
with revenge. The people are angry about anti-Islamic policies of the civilized
world.
37

The leaders act timidly making rationalism as an excuse. The people

react violently and unwittingly damaging their own cause. Both may be right in
their thinking, but both are wrong in their acts. They must tow common line of
action. The leaders can do a lot in ensuring uniformity in respective actions.
Two Islamic states of Far East are an encouraging exception. The leaders
and the people of Indonesia and Malaysia have opposed attack on Afghanistan.
Geo-strategic importance of these countries may make the civilized world to
listen. May be other Islamic states are encouraged to take lead from them. They
should know that most of them have their own geo-strategic importance.
Arab countries have taken a low profile. They might be hoping for the
possible change in Anglo-American foreign policy regarding Israel. The
outcome of Blair-Yasir meeting must have encouraged them. They are waiting
for the unexpected to happen.
There is a remote possibility of acceptance of viability of Palestinian
State. But Arabs should never hope that someone would remove Israeli tumor
from their body. The civilized world will only provide medication for
temporary relief from pain and agony.
China has opposed protraction of war against Afghanistan, despite
having complaints of militancy in one of its provinces. China will not like a war
waged against terrorism to secure and promote political and economic interests
of the West. Russia has supported the Coalition, but some experts have warned
America about the dangers of deeper incursions in Afghanistan. The word
deeper is applicable to time and space.
There have been a few public rallies in the civilized world against holy
war. Even civilized societies have some uncultured people. Opposition to war
will grow faster than anticipated, if the war continues for one or two years as
desired by Bush.

WATCHING FROM NEIGHBOURHOOD

Standing in his courtyard, the President of Pakistan looked over the mudwall of Durand Line and viewed the war differently. He said that attack on
Afghanistan should be precise, surgical and short. It was not a candid view or
assessment of a soldier who has fought two wars. It was a desire of a leader of a
neighbouring nation, who feared the fallout of protracted war.
38

Pakistan does not want the war to drag on. Protraction of war is bound to
result in its escalation. If it escalates the sideshow will overshadow the holy
war. These were the views, which the President wanted to convey to Bush, who
had said that it would be a long drawn war.
There is another implication of a prolonged war. Opposition to war will
grow in Pakistan and people may resort to violent protests, creating law and
order problems for the government. This, combined with external threat
looming large, may undermine the security of Pakistan.
The President also cautioned the Coalition to keep the Northern Alliance
north of Hindukush. The Alliance should not be allowed or supported to
advance southward and takeover Kabul. An incursion of non-Pushtoons into
Kabul will result in bloodshed. It will jeopardize the aim of the Coalition. The
plan to install new government could also be delayed.
Pakistan wanted broad-based government to be installed in Afghanistan
with minimum of external interference. So far the Coalition is listening or
pretending to be listening to Pakistans viewpoint. Zahir Shah Option is steadily
moving ahead. Kings men have arrived in Pakistan to promote democratic
values of the civilized world.
After attending the conference in Qatar, Foreign Minister of Pakistan
categorically opposed extension of holy war to another country without the
approval of UN. He forgot that taming of UN has never been a problem for
America.
The UN has never hesitated in playing to the tunes of the super power. Its
approval, as and when required, will come forth in shortest possible time. He
also forgot that in case Pakistan is the next target, then its opposition to
extension of war becomes irrelevant.
The threat of escalation is not from Anglo-American Coalition only.
Indo-Israeli Axis poses far more serious threat. America criticized Israel for
recent killing of a Palestinian leader, but it was promptly told to keep shut,
saying that Israel was doing the same what America was doing in Afghanistan.
One wonders who the real super power is; America or Israel. Taking lead from
this, India also wants to punish Pakistan.

39

People of Pakistan have supported the decision of their government with

a pinch of salt. The result of recent Gallop survey amply reflected their inner
feelings. According to survey report a large majority was against the war
imposed on Afghanistan just to kill or capture one person. The purposeless
killing of innocent people hurts them. It is a natural reaction. Every Muslim
should feel hurt if one of them is harmed anywhere in the world.
Despite their grief and anger, the people of Pakistan have been wise
enough to support their government. They have not come out to streets to give
vent to their feelings. They are learning to take bitter pills. Pakistanis are
definitely maturing as a nation.
Some people organized peaceful protest rallies. It is their right to do so.
Government has no reason to feel perturbed about peaceful rallies. However,
there were some incidents in Quetta and Karachi where protesters resorted to
violence. Government and the people know it well that these miscreants were
either outsiders or their strings were controlled by the outsiders. They must be
dealt with sternly.
Politicians, intellectuals and experts participating in discussions telecast
by PTV have generally supported the government. Some of them are quite
vocal in supporting the attack on Afghanistan. They have praised America for
its war against terrorism and blamed Taliban for resultant killing of innocent
Afghans.
One of them advised Taliban to surrender immediately, without giving a
fight. He advised them for saving Afghans from bloodshed. Such advisers are
certainly facilitating the psychological war of America. He forgot that Mulla
wouldnt be listening to his advice, as he is averse to telecasts.
The political party of this advisor has orchestrated its support in a
planned manner. He may be doing it on the instructions of his party leader who
is enjoying her freedom in the civilized world. The aim is to be on the right
side of the super power to fulfill their personal and party ambitions.
This party knows that roadmap for democracy has to be followed by
military leaders. It would like to muster American support in general elections
as and when these are held. The party leader is indeed a farsighted person.

40

India and Pakistan are two main actors in the sideshow. Their
performance has earned mixed applause. Both have been praised for their
support for war against terrorism. Both have been rewarded with lifting of
sanctions. Pakistan has earned some monetary rewards in terms of rescheduling
of loans and grant of relief packages.
India on the other hand has benefited through freezing of funds of
individuals and organizations supporting freedom movement in Kashmir. In
some cases it has been done just to please India. Nothing has been done or said
against state terrorism. In this particular act India has overshadowed the
performance of Pakistan.
Success of Indian diplomacy is likely to encourage her to indulge in overacting. President of Pakistan has talked to Vajpayee primarily for this reason.
He condemned bomb blast in Srinagar and stressed upon the need for resuming
dialogue to carry forward the peace process started at Agra. He conveniently
forgot that the peace process was not started but sabotaged at Agra and
Vajpayee would surely like to carry that forward.
The telephone call failed to produce the desired response. Indian guns
and mortars fired across the border killing one and wounding many civilians.
This aggression coincided with Powells visit to Pakistan. It was to tell America
and Pakistan what India wanted.
People of Pakistan hoped that during his visit to Islamabad, Powell would
say something about state terrorism perpetrated in Kashmir. In press conference
held at the end of his visit a very straightforward question was asked on this
issue. He said everything about Kashmir except condemning the barbaric
actions of Indian Armed Forces. Politicians beware. Soldiers are excelling in
the field of diplomacy.
To expect that Powell would have given a stern statement against state
terrorism, that too a few hours before his departure for New Delhi, amounted to
expecting too much. It would have been against the norms of diplomacy as
well. Whatever he said after his meeting with Indian leaders carried the real
message. He conveyed to them that America wanted a negotiated solution of
Kashmir dispute.
An Indian journalist asked him about the dangers of an Islamic bomb.
He promptly replied, Nonsense. It was heartening to hear this from
41

representative of the civilized world, who had coined the phrase of Islamic
bomb. One would like to suggest to him that he should also tell the same thing
to Western Media and in the same manner.
Pakistans economy was in very poor state before the incident of 11 th
September. War clouds have dampened the hopes of its recovery. Protraction of
war will cause further damage. Therefore, Pakistan is justified in asking
compensation for the war damages, despite that greed was not the basis on
which it decided to side with America.
The civilized world played significant role in weakening Pakistans
economy after it attained nuclear capability. It has been made a front line state
once again, but very little economic assistance has been provided to help
Pakistan in overcoming its problems.
The help so far provided is much less than peanuts rejected by Zia.
Powell was asked for help to relieve Pakistan from the debt burden. He
promised to carry a strong message. Will the message bind America in any
moral obligations? History negates it.

CONCLUSION
Holy war has started. Its holiness remains questionable on two
accounts. Bush said that now they have to pay the price. These words mean
nothing but revenge. Blair said that action has been preferred over inaction.
The war has been preferred over peace for economic gains.
The results of aerial bombing of twelve days might not be very
encouraging for the attackers. No specific success has been achieved against
perpetrators of terrorism or their supporters. Not to talk of killing one, the
Coalition does not know their whereabouts. This has made the ground action
inevitable.
If ground action also fails in achieving quick success, will America resort
to use of nuclear weapons? America has the weapons that produce limited and
controlled effects. Americans have used atom bombs in the past and are most
likely candidates to use these in future, but not in Afghanistan.
There will be no target in Afghanistan on which use of nuclear weapons
could be necessitated or justified. However, use of chemical weapons cannot be
ruled out. These could be used to smoke out the terrorists.
42

Pakistan must continue urging the Coalition to keep the war as short as
possible. Its protraction will result in general resentment. It can also result in
escalation. Both eventualities can pose grave threats to the security of Pakistan.
The Coalition is working hard on diplomatic front for formulation and
installation of new government in Afghanistan. Keeping in view the progress so
far made on diplomatic as well as military front, it may be said that
implementation of political plan will be delayed.
Nevertheless, the Coalition is determined to replace Taliban Government.
Pakistan must not leave any stone unturned to ensure that new government
should be as friendlier as possible. At the same time Pakistan must never create
an impression that it is interfering in internal affairs of a neighbouring nation. It
would be against its own principled stand on Afghanistan.
The civilized world has started talking about importance of settlement
of Kashmir dispute. Pakistan should not be lulled by it. It must further drive the
point home. Diplomatic efforts should be reinvigorated to push for solution of
Kashmir. The Arabs should do the same for Palestine.
Pakistan possesses the capability of nuclear deterrence. It has helped
keeping India at bay. Western Media continues its propaganda against dangers
of nuclear bombs lying in an unstable country laden with extremists. Some
lobbies want to rob Pakistan of this asset. It must be safeguarded.

17th October 2001

43

PAKISTANS PREDICAMENT

Pakistan is providing maximum support to America for its war against

terrorism. Despite the whole-hearted participation in holy war, Pakistan lacks
the sense of pride. Why?
After 11th September Pakistan should have been given time to deliberate
and decide at its own. It would not have opted to stand with other side, but its
participation would have looked voluntary. The manner in which it was asked to
decide was quite humiliating.
America caught Pakistan by the neck and asked to decide immediately.
Its ruler went through short, but intense battle between his heart and mind. The
conscious mind quickly subdued the conscientious heart. Resultantly the
decision had to have an element of guilt, rather than having a touch of pride.
The war in Afghanistan has been raging for more than three weeks. There
are no signs of its ending. Against the wishes of all Pakistanis, it is likely to
continue for indefinite period. It is time to look at Pakistans role in this war and
assess its gains, losses and prospects for the future.

EXTENT OF PARTICIPATION
An alert military mind dictated the need of full participation. Pakistan has
undoubtedly made significant contributions towards this war. But the
compassionate Pakistani heart demands downplay of the real extent of
participation.
The participation of Pakistan began at political front. Pakistan withdrew
its support to Taliban Government. It was not an easy decision for a country that
had friendly relations with Taliban since their emergence to power in
Afghanistan.
Pakistan has been supporting the legitimacy of Taliban Government and
rightly too. Taliban exercised control over more than 90 percent of
Afghanistans territory. They had restored peace in areas under their control,
which was no mean achievement.
The decision to take 180 degrees turn was risky in more than one way.
The area on either side of Pak-Afghan border is inhibited by Pushtoons. They
have close bonds of race, religion and culture. Durand Line could prove too

44

fragile against these strong binding forces. This was the most dangerous of all
the risks involved.
Pakistan has severed political and economic relations with Taliban. Only
humanitarian aid is allowed to flow into Afghanistan. Diplomatic relations have
been restricted to the working of Afghan Embassy and Consulates in Pakistan.
This limited relationship is not maintained for any diplomatic interaction, but to get feedback on the effects of war. It is not for reading the pulse of
an old friend, but to read the mind of a new adversary. Pakistan has started
picking up American habits.
Pakistan opposed the idea of toppling Taliban Government, but only for a
while. It soon agreed to its replacement by a government headed by worn out
ex-King of Afghanistan. Pakistan is prepared to accommodate a person who
never had any goodwill for it.
Pir Gillani was encouraged to hold a conference at Peshawar to promote
formulation of new government under Zahir Shah. Pakistan has provided
necessary administrative and diplomatic support for organizing the meeting.
On the other hand, activities in support of Taliban, organized by some
parties, were suppressed. Movement of leaders opposing war was obstructed.
Rallies were disrupted on the pretext of maintaining law and order. All these
actions were taken to prove Pakistans willing participation in war against
terror.
To begin with, Pakistan vehemently opposed any role of Northern
Alliance in new government. Later on it softened its stand and agreed that in
future setup the Alliance has the right to get its due share. Pakistan has
accepted this knowing well that India, Russia and Iran support the Alliance. In
the context of Afghanistan, none of these countries have any sympathies for
Pakistan.
Following the instructions of America, Pakistan promptly froze the funds
of some individuals and organizations accused of indulging in terrorist
activities. Pakistan knew it well that America has targeted these organizations,
because of their support to freedom movement in Kashmir, yet it proceeded
against them.

45

Pakistan claimed that it was providing limited military support to war

against terrorism. In words of the President, it is restricted to provision of
intelligence, use of air space and logistic support only. Pakistan is reluctant to
accept that it is doing the maximum it could.
Provision of intelligence is no mean contribution. Information about
enemys military assets is gathered and accumulated through sustained effort.
Pakistan being a neighbour had this information readily available and that must
have been provided to the Coalition. Provision of intelligence is undoubtedly an
act of war.
Intelligence agencies of Pakistan are also working, in collaboration with
CIA, to topple Taliban Government. At the same time they are helping in
formation of new government. ISI has vast experience in political field. It has
destabilized or toppled many legitimate governments.
No doubt they have performed well on home ground and in front of own
crowd, but in case of Afghanistan they might be finding the going little difficult.
Despite their limitations intelligence agencies are putting in their best on
political front.
Pakistan has provided three airports for the so-called logistic support.
The nature and extent of this support remains unexplained. So far these airports
have come into play only once. A rescue operation was carried out in
connection with commando raid conducted in the vicinity of Kandahar.
Rescue operation conducted in relation to a commando raid cannot be
termed as logistic support. Extraction of a commando force is very much a part
of the combat action. The Coalition may not be using these airports for fighter
aircraft, but these are definitely being used as forward air bases.
Forward air bases are seldom used for logistic support. These are meant
for providing close support to fighting on the ground. These, being nearest
available airfields to Kandahar, will be used quite frequently when the ground
fighting starts. Nothing will prohibit the Coalition to use these for fighter
aircraft, if the situation so warranted.
Pakistan cannot be asked to do more than what it is doing already.
America has commended its contribution, but Pakistan is shy of projecting the
role it is playing in the ongoing war. Apart from the lack of pride, the other

46

reason could be that it wants to avoid negative reaction of the public. That is
why the spokesman of Foreign Ministry is never tired of denying the presence
of foreign troops on Pakistani soil. May be the helicopters placed on these
airfields are remote controlled.
It is true that Armed Forces of Pakistan are not directly participating in
this war. The reasons are:

Pakistan Navy does not have the capability to support an attack on

Afghanistan.

PAF, barring a few F-16, has an obsolete fleet. It can do very little to
assist high-tech air resources of the Coalition.

Pakistan Army could not be asked to do something, when ground troops

of the Coalition have done nothing so far.

Nevertheless, Armed Forces of Pakistan are not sitting idle. Because of

the hostile attitude of India most of them are already committed. Bulk of ground
forces is manning the borders. Some are employed on internal security duties.
PAF is placed on high alert and so should be some units of the Navy.
Pakistan wants that attack on Afghanistan should be quick and short. The
demand is quite logical. Protraction of war is wrought with dangers. The
Coalition, however, has failed to do so, may be for reasons beyond their control.
Pakistan had stressed upon avoidance of collateral damage right at the
beginning of war. The Coalition forces have cared very little for avoiding such
damage. Innocent civilians, including women and children, are being killed
every day. The collateral damage is more than the damage inflicted on fighters
of al-Qaeda and Taliban, yet Pakistan has not resented or criticized
indiscriminate bombing. Acceptance of unacceptable by itself is a significant
contribution.

LOSSES AND GAINS

The government-controlled media has been exaggerating the benefits of
standing on American side in holy war. Common man in Pakistan has
developed the habit of disbelieving official claims. The experience has taught
him to believe only that which he sees himself. His observation negates the
claims of government.
47

To be in the neighbourhood of a country, where a super power is waging

war, is a great security hazard by itself. In addition to that Pakistans everambitious adversary, India, is trying to take advantage of the situation. It has
made calculated moves to heighten the tension.
Indian Army has moved close to the border. Some squadrons of IAF have
been positioned at forward airbases. Pakistan has reacted to Indian moves.
When two armies get so close to each other they are likely to indulge in
skirmishes on very flimsy excuses. Most wars begin with skirmishes.
The aggressive posture adopted by India is quite provocative. Pakistan
has been compelled to exercise restraint against the psyche of its people. They
know that India wants to impose a war on them. They also understand the
implications of fighting a war in the prevalent situation. They have been
constrained to decline the acceptance of Indian challenge.
The war might not be the ultimate desire of India. It could be aiming only
at committing armed forces for indefinite duration. It would cause extrabudgetary expenditure on Pakistans meager financial resources. Movement,
deployment and maintenance of troops on border cost a lot.
When troops remain deployed on eastern border and war in Afghanistan
lingers on, Pakistan is likely to face some law and order problems. It will be
difficult to control the situation with leftover resources, which may cause
internal instability. An unstable country possessing Islamic bomb has its own
connotations.
Vajpayee will be signing an arms deal with Russia during his
forthcoming visit to Moscow. Since long India is madly busy in accumulating
military hardware. The civilized world has never questioned India or Russia
for their military cooperation; whereas China and Korea have been frequently
questioned about transfer of missile technology to Pakistan.
America has never missed an opportunity to deny Pakistan the
acquisition of technology required for having minimum defensive capability.
During APEC conference, a meeting held for economic cooperation, Bush did
not forget to talk to Chinese leaders about his concern about transfer of missile
technology.

48

Pakistan has lost friendly Afghanistan. It now finds itself in

disadvantageous position. This was quite evident from expressions of its
Foreign Minister. In a programme telecast on PTV he was asked various
questions about situation in Afghanistan. Every time his answer began with a
prayer to Allah, thereby accepting Pakistans inability to influence the events.
Pakistan can only sit back and pray.
There are only two political and military forces in Afghanistan. Pakistan
has access to none, whereas India has close contacts with Northern Alliance. It
is maintaining cordial diplomatic, political and military relations with Northern
Alliance.
Afghanistan has remained unstable for more than two decades. Its
instability is likely to persist, because of the uncertainty about duration of the
holy war. Unstable Afghanistan does not conform to security interests of
Pakistan.
In collaboration with America and Afghans living away from their
homeland, Pakistan is trying to formulate a broad-based government to replace
Taliban. It is quite difficult to specify dimensions of an ideal broad base. If the
base is broadened beyond manageable limits the new government will look flat.
Its flat look will impress nobody. If dimensions are reduced, the government
erected on a narrow base will not be able withstand the thrust of forces acting
within Afghanistan. It will surely tumble.
A government broad-based or narrow-based, formulated through interaction with foreigners will not be liked by majority of Afghans. The history
dictates that new government should have a firm base. Only the people of
Afghanistan can provide such base. It is their exclusive right and they must be
allowed to exercise this. Only then peace can return to Afghanistan ensuring its
stability. Pakistan has lost the ability to ensure or to contribute towards peace
and stability of Afghanistan.
Pakistan was hosting more than two million Afghan refugees before the
war. During the war their population is likely to increase to about four million.
The areas subjected to aerial bombardment are inhibited by Pushtoons. They are
rushing to take refuge in Pakistan.
Pakistan has tried to check free flow of refugees by asking UN
organizations to establish refugee camps inside Afghanistan, but many will
49

make it to Pakistan. This alien population can pose serious internal security
problems. A pinch of that has already been felt in Quetta.
Second major concern of Pakistan is the revival of its economy. The
holy war might have been initiated to secure economic interests, but not of
Pakistan. The war has made no positive contribution towards its revival; instead
the task has become even more difficult.
Exports of Pakistan have declined sharply. Many export orders placed
before the war have been cancelled. In one particular case the clearance of an
export consignment was delayed because of Anthrax scare. The decline in
exports is likely to persist.
Foreigners working in multi-national companies have left Pakistan. Even
the Chinese felt unsafe and departed. When ordinary workers feel unsafe, how
can investors come to Pakistan? In environments of insecurity the economic
activity ought to decline and it has. Soon Pakistans economic losses will run
into billions.
Hate crimes in the civilized world have increased. Pakistanis have been
specially targeted, by this new brand of civilized criminals, in recognition of
their contribution to holy war. This will discourage Pakistanis from going to
the civilized world in future.
Policy of the civilized world about nuclear capability of Pakistan
remains biased. Before the start of war Pakistan was offered generous
assistance to make its nuclear arsenal safe. Making safe meant rendering it
ineffective. Bush is still concerned about transfer of missile technology, which
is closely linked to nuclear deterrence.
Western Media continues propagating about imaginary threats posed by
nuclear capability of Pakistan. Even Larry King dared asking the President that
in an unstable Pakistan, its nuclear weapons may fall in the hands of
fundamentalists.
The President replied unconvincingly saying that such fears were
unfounded. He should have replied the question in the same manner in which
Powell replied to a journalist in New Delhi; nonsense. Unfortunately even a
head of state of third world dare not say this to a TV compere of the civilized
world.

50

Pakistans nuclear capability is defensive in nature. It has been acquired

for a definite purpose. Pakistan has no hegemonic designs like India or like
those who criticize it. Even if these weapons fall in the hands of
fundamentalists, they will not hurl these right and left. These weapons will be
used only for the security of Pakistan.
Nobody has ever asked India the same question about its rapidly growing
nuclear arsenal, despite the fact that these weapons in India are already in the
hands of Hindu fundamentalists who burn churches and kill priests at random.
India is clearly a beneficiary of the practice of double standards on issue of
nuclear proliferation.
India has intensified the state terrorism in Kashmir. The civilized world
has ignored violations of human rights in a manner as if nothing untoward is
happening. This has encouraged India to commit crimes against humanity
blatantly. It has promulgated a new law, which is much harsher than TADA.
Western Media, instead of taking note of the atrocities committed by
Indian soldiers, is trying to equate freedom movement of Kashmiris with
terrorism. Propaganda for subversion of this movement has increased of late.
Pakistan on the other hand has failed in projecting the Kashmir cause
effectively. As of today, this cause may not have been undermined, but it has
surely suffered major setback.
In comparison to Pakistans losses the gains have been very few. It has
received lot of pats on its back for taking a bold decision to fight against
terrorism, but apart from pats, Pakistan has received only a few packets of
peanuts.
The peanuts are usually served as appetizers. Pakistans appetite is being
aroused, but there is no activity indicating that the dinner is about to be laid.
Perhaps it will never be served. In short, the gains of Pakistan are too few to be
compared with its losses.

FUTURE PROSPECTS
The Government of Pakistan is showing lot of optimism for future
prospects. The leaders believe, or have been made to believe, that the path
being treaded by them will lead them to the heaven. Is it a reality or illusion?
Only time will tell.
51

Experience of the past and present realities, however limit the vision of
common Pakistanis. The experience tells them that the civilized world never
wanted Pakistan to be militarily or economically strong or any Muslim State for
that matter.
Keeping their experience in view, Pakistanis are not very optimistic.
They have seen that Pakistans major concerns i.e. national security, economy,
Kashmir cause and nuclear capability have been subjected to numerous threats
in the past. The prevalent situation has added to the gravity of these threats.
They find no reasons for optimism.
Optimism of Pakistani leaders is based on the logic that its participation
in holy war should be reciprocated. They fail to understand that such logic
does not exist in books of the civilized world. Therefore, rulers of Pakistan
may have to reconsider prospects for the future realistically.
America will never compromise on principles. One of these principles
is to deny acquisition of military strength to any and every Muslim country.
Pakistan will never be allowed to acquire even the bare minimum to meet its
genuine requirements.
For its support during holy war at best Pakistan can expect a
consignment of weapons for fighting against terrorists. A few sniper rifles may
be delivered along with US instructors for imparting necessary training. There
will be no change in biased policy of the civilized world. The balance of
power in South Asia has already tilted in favour of India and it will continue
tilting further.
Contrary to the expectations of Pakistani rulers America has plans to
reward Pakistan in Yankee style. A think tank has predicted that Pakistan will
disintegrate by the end of second decade of twenty first century. It may be
remembered that foreign policy goals are determined by analyses carried out by
such think tanks.
The West wants to keep Afro-Asian countries embroiled in inter-state
conflicts. Asia is already bleeding profusely, yet they are working on IndoChina confrontation in the garb of containment of China. This confrontation
will keep whole of Asia quite busy.

52

Pakistan is an obstacle in development of Indo-China confrontation. It

distracts attention of India. If this distraction is removed, then India can wholeheartedly devote its time and resources to contain China. The prediction of
think tank fits in here.
The civilized world will do nothing overtly for disintegration of
Pakistan by due date, which coincides with the date by which China is expected
to emerge as major economic power of the world. It will only be ensured that
the phenomenon of Pakistans disintegration should look natural. Its economy
should not be allowed to recover from the downward dip. It is going on the
right direction to hit the ground. A country with weak economy is prone to
political disintegration.
The holy war will make significant contribution in this context:

The war will have adverse effects on Pakistans exports, which will
further accentuate the balance of payments.

The war will also pull the shutters down on foreign investments.

The ever-growing number of refugees will cause social, economic and

environmental imbalances.

The hatred against Pakistanis working abroad will compel many of them
to return. Resultantly foreign remittances will be reduced considerably.

The civilized world will not provide sufficient economic help to bailout
Pakistan from the precarious situation. Pakistan will certainly get some
assistance, but it will not be adequate to meet the bare minimum requirements.
Pakistan has received and will continue receiving lot of appreciation. The
fancy commendation cards will however not help Pakistan in any way.
Western Media, on the other hand, is working overtime to undermine Kashmir
cause and subvert its nuclear capability. America will continue following double
standards on nuclear proliferation. In times to come Pakistan will find it
difficult to preserve its nuclear capability.
It all sounds utterly pessimistic, but experience of the past and realities of
the present cannot be ignored. History repeats itself harshly for those who tend
to forget it. All that is visible must be viewed discerningly. Past and present
indicate the future. These indicators should determine ones hopes and
expectations.
53

The picture is undoubtedly gloomy, but we must not try to improve it

with a brush of unfounded optimism. It will amount to obliteration of the facts.
We must have the courage to look at it as it presents. This is our picture. Only
then we shall be aware of our vulnerabilities. An aware person is likely to try to
prevent the unpleasant from happening. Unaware is doomed to meet the sudden
end.

CONCLUSION
Gains or no gains and the prospects are bright or gloomy; Pakistan cannot
go back on its decision. Pakistans predicament is to remain in the mainstream
and pay the price. A colossal amount has been already paid. Nobody knows
how much more will be paid by the end of war. The end too is not visible.
Even this no win situation presents Pakistan a unique opportunity to
speak its heart out. To this end Pakistani rulers must present the case of
oppressed Muslims convincingly and emphatically. The President of Pakistan
should attend the forthcoming meeting of UN General Assembly. In his address
to the august gathering he must tell them that:

In war against terrorism the world community should adopt a rational

approach.

Do not pluck leafs of the poison tree. Nothing but poison will ooze out
with the plucking of each leaf.

Cut the roots of this tree. Do not water it. Let it dry. Political disputes are
its roots. Do not sponsor or ignore them.

Stop mad spree of vengeance. The spilling of innocent blood will spread
more terrorism.

Make UN strong and effective to ensure peace and dispense justice. Do

not abuse it for promotion of vested interests.

Ensure economic fair play. Do not divide the world in blocks of

producers and consumers.

The message is very simple. It should be conveyed in plain words. Use of

confusing diplomatic language should be avoided. If the distinguished
members of the world organization do not understand, then their crusade means

54

something different. The sons of Salahudin should know, for their own good
that Bush is trying to get into the shoes of Richard the Lion.
As regards India, Pakistan has no option but to exercise utmost restraint.
It should not hurry in reacting to the moves of its adversary. India will try its
best to provoke Pakistan so that it has justification for its adventurism.
Pakistan has lost the ability to influence events in Afghanistan. It does
not mean that it should forget its important neighbour. Pakistan must remain
abreast with emerging scenario and try to re-establish the lost contacts. In all
eventualities it must aim at peaceful co-existence.

25th October 2001

55

CRUSADE CONTINUES

When a war, particularly a one sided war, fails to achieve the goals set
forth, it has to continue. In the absence of any military, political or moral
pressures on perpetrators of aggression, the war in Afghanistan is not likely to
be halted.
The authority responsible for protection of human species, UNSC, has
issued a shooting license to America. It is for unlimited period and valid for
shooting in all seasons. There are no restrictions of any kind.
Although the license is meant for big game i.e. the beasts of terrorism,
yet the holder being a privileged VIP of the civilized world can shoot any
species, including ducks and doves. There is no limit on the size of shooting
party or on the daily bag per gun.
America has been granted complete freedom of action. There is no
compulsion to complete the intended score in hurry as no time limit has been
imposed. It will be done to the convenience of the hunting party. Therefore, the
shooting spree that began on 7th October is likely to continue without any break.

MILITARY FRONT
After completion of high altitude bombing the Coalition gradually
resorted to low flying bombing and use of gunship aircraft. It meant that the
threat of ground fire has been eliminated. It also implied that the conditions
have become favourable for ground operations as well.
On night following 20th October commandos were dropped near
Kandahar and retrieved next morning. The aim of this raid remained secret and
nothing has been said about its achievements. Obviously the commando raid
was a complete failure.
Taliban claimed shooting down a helicopter; the Coalition has rejected
their claim. The outcome of raid has a lesson for the Coalition. The fighting on
ground is far more hazardous than aerial bombardment. Therefore, American
will be more discreet in launching such operations in future.
On eighteenth day of war the military leadership of the Coalition made
some bold confessions. These admissions belied the earlier claims of their
political leaders, including those made by Bush. They admitted that:

56

Taliban have stopped advances of the Northern Alliance on Kabul and

Mazar-e-Sharif.

Taliban have proven to be tough warriors. They are doggedly hanging

on.

Mulla Omar is not discouraged by the hopelessness of the situation. For

him not to see the inevitability of what will happen has surprised
them.

Killing of Osama will not end the terrorism. If he were gone tomorrow,
the same problem would exist.

Kabul and Mazar-e-Sharif are the only two sectors where ground fighting
is going on. The Coalition is providing continuous close air support to Northern
Alliance, yet Taliban have successfully repulsed all attacks on their positions.
It can be argued that Northern Alliance is not keen to push towards
Kabul, till they are permitted to capture the city and allowed to retain it. The
delay in attack on Mazar-e-Sharif is not for this reason. Capture of this city will
be of great help for the Alliance in securing entire area north of Hindukush.
The Coalition must be earnestly urging the Alliance to break the
stalemate. The likely cause of this stalemate could be that tough warriors are
doggedly hanging on. But the real cause is that Northern Alliance is also as
keen to avoid casualties as the Coalition is. It wants the aerial bombing to make
its task easier.
Russia must be equally impatient for the capture of this city as quickly as
possible. It has provided 40 tanks and 100 APCs primarily for the battle of
Mazar-e-Sharif. An Indian delegation has also visited them for consultations.
Russia-India-Iran triangle is becoming conspicuously visible in this war.
Reportedly Russia is prepared to commit about a quarter of a million
troops against Taliban. Blair had rightly declared that Russia was willing to
provide support far more than the expectations. Russia definitely wants to play
an active role at least in northern Afghanistan. It would like Taliban to be
pushed to the south of Hindukush, earlier the better. Russia will commit its
troops only to make the borders of Central Asian States safe.
Mazar-e-Sharif lies far away from Pushtoon areas, but it has immense
strategic importance for defence of northern Afghanistan. Rail and road
57

communications from Dushanbe, Samarkand, Khanabad and Ashkabad

converge onto this border city.
Taliban are not hanging on to it so dearly without any military
considerations. These considerations have compelled Taliban to present a welldefined front. However, these are relevant to conventional warfare and not to
guerilla warfare. Presentation of well-defined front is a serious mistake
committed by them.
Fighting an entrenched battle against enemy having overwhelming air
superiority is likely to prove fatal. They will be subjected to relentless carpetbombing. The casualties suffered will outweigh the advantage of retaining this
town for any duration no matter how long it might be.
Talibans decision to resort to static defence must have been to the liking
of the Coalition, but the determination with which they are fighting has not
pleased their enemy. The Coalition has been constrained to recognize some
sterling qualities of Taliban i.e. resilience and tenacity. The tough warriors
have demonstrated these qualities individually and collectively.
The Coalition will feel elated if some of its soldiers display similar
fighting qualities in days to come. It would not amount to asking too much from
them. After all in its ranks and files there are soldiers who are the best in the
world.
Now that certain qualities of Taliban have been formally recognized
Western Media is advised to shed certain adjectives it often uses for them. In
future it should call Islamic fundamentalists and militants as resilient,
tenacious and tough warriors. The words like unaccommodating,
uncompromising, hard-liners, savage and barbaric have become too worn-out
due to their extensive use.
Sophistry does not suit the people of the civilized world. It must be
shunned. The advice, if taken in the right spirit, will help Western Media in
having sizeable stock of decent vocabulary by the end of war, no matter who
wins it.
It is correct that terrorism will not end with the killing of Osama or his
host, Mulla Omar. In words of Musharraf, plucking of leafs will be of no use,

58

as long as the roots of the tree remain intact. No measures have been initiated as
yet to eradicate the causes.
After eighteen days of uninterrupted aerial bombing and an unsuccessful
commando action, there was general gloom in higher echelons of the Coalition
forces. The have started contemplating about the inevitability of ground
operations.
The conditions, which permit unopposed attacks by low-flying aircraft
and gunship helicopters, should also be favourable for ground attacks. The
gloom is unfounded. To achieve the goals of holy war they must urge
themselves to go ahead. Aerial bombardment alone cannot accomplish the task.
Ground operations have become due since long. The delay speaks of
apprehensions and hesitation of the Coalition. Apprehension and hesitation in
war are generally the outcome of cold feet. But slow progress on political front
provides a ready-made excuse to the soldiers.
Americans have failed in killing any of the terrorists or their supporters.
High-tech locating devices have failed in spotting the elusive enemy. The
devices have either developed some defects or have some inherent limitations.
The locating devices have to be calibrated and augmented.
If these inadequacies are not addressed urgently, the high-tech soldiers
will lose faith in smartness of their precision weapons. They have already
resorted to use of cluster bombs. Indiscriminate use of these bombs is a clear
indication of their desperation.
Cluster bombs are basically meant for area targets, where troops operate
in the open. These are ineffective against enemy operating from bunkers and
caves. Americans know it well yet they are using these bombs. The habit of
indiscriminate use of military might, developed over decades, has become
irresistible.
Many of these bombs have not exploded, which will remain a hazard for
the civil population long after the end of war. The unexploded bombs will add
to the menace of millions of mines left behind by Russians. Despite that the
Americans have the cheeks to claim that they are taking all possible measures
to avoid collateral damage.

59

Americans are going all out to hunt Taliban and their guests. Mosques,
hospitals, old people homes, residential areas, warehouses of humanitarian aid;
name any place that can be visited by Taliban; have been targeted. All the
damage resulting from the bombing of these places automatically becomes
unavoidable.
The hunting party is indulging in impulsive shooting. The hunters do
not care about seeing or spotting the game. They press the trigger on hearing
slightest of flutter. The result is that they have yet to encounter a beast, but dead
ducks and doves are scattered all over.
Desperation of Americans will increase with the passage of time. In
extreme desperation they may drop a few bombs on refugee camps. If
warehouses of ICRC can be destroyed then what stops them from attacking a
refugee camp.
Intelligence reports can make them believe that some terrorists or Taliban
are hiding in camps. Nobody will dare questioning the veracity of intelligence
reports. The resultant killing of innocent refugees will be swept under the carpet
of unavoidable collateral damage.
During initial days of bombing an ICRC warehouse was destroyed. The
mistake was regretted. About a week later three more were burnt to ashes in an
air attack on Kabul. The aid that was meant for fifty thousand needy people
disappeared in smoke. It brought no shame to the civilized world. This time
the mistake was not even regretted.
With one hand the Americans are dropping food packets so that Afghans
have the warm feelings of their generosity. With other hand they are torching
the huge quantities of humanitarian aid. Afghans are surely experiencing the
heat of Yankees vengeance.
Bush and Rumsfeld cannot justify these ghastly mistakes of their
soldiers. The force behind these mistakes is none other than revenge. No
amount of harping can make an act of devil to look like an act of angel.
An arrogant superman, who has been hit by Mr. Nobody and in front of
everybody, can do anything in revenge. He will punch and kick all that comes
across him. He might not be able to catch Mr. Nobody, but would certainly

60

create lot of mess and in the process end up with few broken knuckles and
swollen toes.
Americans are doing exactly the same. They are bent upon destroying a
nation and destabilizing the entire region, just to get hold one suspect. They
are suffering from insanity and indulging in cruelty. They will kill as many
Afghans as deemed appropriate, because this is the only commodity that can be
paid by them as price.
The latest debate on possibility of using nuclear weapons in Afghanistan
is the outcome of this revengeful attitude. Even non-military people understand
that entire Afghanistan presents no worthwhile target for these weapons.
Military considerations do not and will not dictate their use.
No doubt Americans are trigger-happy, but they will not use these bombs
simply because that they have plenty of them. They will not commit heinous
crime of that magnitude. It will cause irreparable damage to their cause, as the
world opinion will react violently against their use.
Without using these weapons the Coalition is causing widespread
destruction. This is cruelty, which cannot be justified even in the name of
military strategy or tactics. In no way it can facilitate achieving of the noble
objectives of holy war.
The opposition to relentless bombing of Afghanistan is increasing.
Human Rights Watch and many countries have asked categorically to stop it.
Others have voiced their concern politely. Sensible people of America and
Britain have also criticized the aimless killings.
It may be said that military operations in Afghanistan have lost the
objectivity, if there was any to start with. The declared aim of the holy war
was to eliminate terrorism. It began with a cry, get Osama, dead or alive. At
this juncture nobody talks about Osama. Mulla Omar and his colleagues are
mentioned more frequently. Formulation of broad-based government has
become a major concern. Many forces have come into action to pursue their
interests. In the ensuing stampede the noble aims are being crushed.

61

POLITICAL FRONT
The political war is progressing very slowly. In fact there is no progress.
The casualty scared soldiers are happy to have it as an excuse for delay in
launching ground operations.
Immediately after capture of Kabul or Kandahar there will be
requirement of installing a political government. The fall of Taliban will create
a political vacuum, which ought to be filled immediately. But, Zahir Shah is
still living on the other side of Suez Canal.
CIA, ISI, Pir Gillani, Kings representative and innumerable castaways
have failed to come out with a viable solution. Bags full of money have not
dented the unity of Taliban. Perhaps, the portrait of Abraham Lincoln printed on
US currency does not approve the promotion of democracy in the manner in
which is being done.
UN has nominated Brahimi to workout a substitute government. He is an
expert on Afghanistan and his experience tells him to go slow. He knows that it
cannot be done over-night. Cautious forward movement of Brahimi may add to
frustration of the Coalition.
Western Media has criticized the stalemate on political front. The slow
progress is an obvious outcome of hasty start of military operations. America
jumped into war without doing preliminary political spadework. The criticism is
justified.
Political campaign, based on well thought out plan, should have started
much before the attack on Afghanistan. Certain political objectives should have
been achieved and only then military action should have been launched to
complete the task in minimum time. Ironically, America decided to do it other
way round.
The dismal progress on all fronts may compel the Coalition to do
something contrary to the liking of Pakistan. America may also opt for the
lesser evil. Northern Alliance may be urged to launch ground offensive with
assurance that it will get lions share in future political setup.
In that case Tajiks and Uzbeks will dominate the future government. It
will be a tragedy but only for Pakistan and Pushtoons. Concerns of Pakistan

62

have little importance as long as interests of America are served. This option
can help America in saving casualties as well as time.
In addition to the assurance about lions share, Northern Alliance will
avail this golden opportunity in more than one way. It will exploit the
compulsion of the Coalition to maximum advantage by scrounging sufficient
arms and ammunition for fighting for at least a decade.
The Coalition will feel the pinch of bargaining skills of Afghans. It will
not be easy to seduce them to attack Taliban positions until their demands are
met. In that case it will be America to succumb under pressure, not the Afghans.
Disintegration of Afghanistan is another possibility. Northern
Afghanistan will be dominated by the neighbouring states with or without
consuming it formally. Iran will take care of Herat. Afghanistan inhabited by
Pushtoons may be provided a government composed of fugitives or can be left
at its own embroiled in civil war.
This possibility cannot be ruled out because so many forces are acting
from within and outside. All the forces are centripetal in nature. A truncated
Afghanistan, inhibited by Pushtoons has a dangerous connotation for Pakistan.
It can lead to the revival of Pushtoonistan issue.

UNFORTUNATE NEIGHBOUR
The President announced that no attack on Afghanistan emanates from
Pakistan. It does not mean that Pakistan is not supporting the holy war.
Pakistan cannot absolve itself from hate crimes being committed in
Afghanistan against innocent Muslim brethren.
Pakistan is undoubtedly abetting the crime. In history name of Musharraf
will appear with those of Bush and Blair and not with Omar and Osama. Such
announcements can only provide a temporary relief to the guilty conscience.
Rulers of Pakistan are suffering from perpetual agony. In battle between
heart and mind their soul has been badly bruised. The mind is still trying to
assure them about advantages of remaining with the mainstream. The heart
refutes it. It wants the war to be short or at least it should be halted during
holy month of Ramazan. The mind argues that it cannot be halted halfway.

63

Pakistan had the first catch in war against terrorism. On 25 th November

an unidentified person was handed over to US authorities. A special plane flew
to Karachi to take him away. The manner in which he was handled at the airport
indicated that he was not an ordinary person. Rumsfeld rightly said that
Pakistans contribution is commendable.
Three days later Pakistan had the first taste of bitter consequences of the
war. Terrorists attacked a church in Bahawalpur and killed eighteen civilians.
The law enforcing agencies have no clues about the terrorists, but one thing is
certain that it is an outcome of the ongoing war.
The President claimed that our major concerns have been safeguarded by
the decision to support war against terrorism. He has tried to draw premature
conclusions. The holy war has just started and it will continue for years. It is
too early to be conclusive. Despite being in the mainstream the threats to our
national interests have not diminished.
The incident of Bahawalpur indicates that internal security of Pakistan
has been exposed to serious threats. As the war continues, so shall the
opposition to it with increasing intensity. Rising emotions are bound to result in
violent reactions.
The militants are the obvious source of violence, but the real danger lies
in hidden hands of the enemy. Taking advantage of the situation, enemy will
perpetrate terrorism in Pakistan. It will pose serious threat to internal security of
Pakistan.
Present state and future prospects of our economy are amply reflected in
the latest report of the State Bank. The facts and figures included in this report
out-rightly contradict the claims of our optimist leaders. The picture of our
economy, as reflected by the report, is not at all rosy.
Nuclear capability of Pakistan is being made controversial on the basis of
unfounded apprehensions. The Government of Pakistan has been kept busy in
giving explanations. Pakistan is certainly being forced to work hard for
retention of this capability.
The list of frozen accounts has risen beyond eighty. Many organizations
of freedom fighters have also been included in the list. Arab countries have
objected to inclusion of some Palestinian organizations, but Pakistan has

64

obediently kept quiet about organizations supporting freedom movement in

Kashmir. The noose is gradually being tightened on Kashmir cause.
Western Media has alleged that ISI is working for Taliban. Pakistan is
also blamed for flow of arms and ammunition across the border. These
allegations are undoubtedly baseless, but definitely not aimless. The efforts to
label Pakistan as terrorist state are still on.
Russia and India are actively participating in the game being played
inside Afghanistan. Pakistan has become a spectator or at best a commentator. It
has been screaming about does and donts of the game, but nobody seems to be
paying any heed to its screams. Vajpayee has said it with ever-growing
confidence that there will be no place for Taliban in future political setup for
Afghanistan. He is in position to influence the events and make predictions.
Visit of Rumsfeld to Pakistan has confirmed the foregoing. He did not
come here to make any concessions. Ramazan or no Ramazan, the war will
continue. Saudi Government might be apprehending some trouble in that
month, but it would not be a problem of America. It is the responsibility of
Saudis and must rest on their shoulders.
He visited Pakistan to inquire about insecurity of Pakistans nuclear
weapons, double play of ISI and reports about provision of arms to Taliban.
Pakistani leadership humbly submitted the explanation and assured him that its
nuclear weapons are in safe hands and it is not betraying the Coalition.
Without accepting or rejecting the explanation, Rumsfeld must have told
Pakistan that its performance on political front of the ongoing war requires
definite improvement. He might have offered again the assistance for the safety
of Pakistans nuclear weapons. In the same context he must have asked to hand
over some nuclear scientists to America for their safe custody.
Pakistan, on the other hand, failed in raising the important issue of hate
crimes committed against its citizens working in America. However, on the
following day the issue was mentioned in a press briefing, whereas it should
have been brought to the notice of America formally during visit of Rumsfeld.

CONCLUSION
Crusading nations had urged that the war against terrorism should not be
taken as clash of civilizations. It was neither against Islam nor Afghans. It was
65

only against terrorists and their supporters. The conduct of war so far has
negated these claims. The war has been biased. It has been targeting the evil
forces of a particular faith. Perhaps the needle of evil finder is stuck in one
particular direction.
How is it possible that there are no extremists or terrorists in followers of
other faiths? The civilized world in particular is considered absolutely free of
this evil. It has been taken for granted that the civilized people never commit a
terrorist act. They only commit hate crimes. The term hate crime provides a
blanket cover to all their acts, even those which are clearly the crimes against
humanity.
As privileged citizens of civilized world each one of them has been
authorized not only to identify a terrorist but also to shoot him at sight. They are
considered quite competent to recognize a terrorist. They know that turban and
beard are visible signs of evil. The two make a deadly combination and
provide sufficient justification for killing those who wear turbans and keep
beards.
The civilized people are exempted from going into finer details. They
need not waste their precious time in differentiating between turban and beard
of a Khalsa from those of an Afghan. All their slips can be easily covered
under the well-coined term of hate crime.
Like their civilian brethren, soldiers of the civilized world have also
been granted immunity to all their crimes committed by act or neglect. They
can commit no war crime. They only cause unavoidable collateral damage.
People of Afghanistan are the unfortunate victims of this category of hate
crimes.
The atrocities committed by Indian and Israeli soldiers on Kashmiris and
Palestinians are also no crime according to the logic of the civilized world.
They are simply punishing the militants in the process of enforcing the law of
their land.
America has not adopted a rational approach. The reasons are; one, it
cannot ignore constant pressure of Jews thumbs on its jugular vein. Secondly, it
wrongly apprehends that a positive change in its policy could be taken as retreat
against terrorists. These compulsions prohibit America to follow the right path.
Morality of war will become highly questionable if America continues pursuing
66

its biased policy of the past and Muslims will be justified in inferring that only
they are being targeted.
The biased war may prove a blessing in disguise for the Muslims,
provided they discreetly observe every action of the civilized world. Once
they identify the real aim of the so-called holy war, they may find courage to
oppose it. The people of Muslim countries are generally aware of this, but their
rulers are not voicing their concerns convincingly. The rulers must marshal their
resources at least for fighting the media war. If al-Jazeera can do it, the rich
rulers of Muslim countries should have no problem in doing it even better.

7th November 2001

67

TENACIOUS TALIBAN

Taliban is the word most frequently uttered and heard these days.
Everyone is ready to say something for and against Taliban. Paradoxically it is
the least understood word and more so are the people whom it represents.
What are the meanings of word Taliban? It is plural of TALIB, which
means one who seeks or one who has an earnest desire for something. It is
always combined as prefix. The succeeding word specifies the nature of desire.
It is frequently used with ILM i.e. Talib-e-Ilm, one who seeks knowledge
or a student. It can also be combined with other words like ISHQ i.e. Talib-eIshq or a lover. This particular brand of Taliban neither represents students nor
lovers. In their case it can be prefixed with AMAN i.e. Talib-e-Aman, a peace
seeker or a peace lover.
A reader, who has benefited from the awareness spread by Western
Media, on reading this interpretation, is likely to scream, very funny, quite
ridiculous. How the hell Taliban can be called peace seekers? They are
terrorists. Entire civilized world hates them.
That is what the Taliban are; some people hate them, others dont. The
opinion of contemporary people, pro or anti Taliban, cannot be taken as final, as
their vision is obscured by their prejudices. The generations to come will have
all the relevant information to give the final verdict and in future they will be
remembered as such.

EMERGENCE OF TALIBAN
Emergence of Taliban is a mystery for most people. It is not a mystery,
but a fascinating reality. The story of their success in a war-torn country has
touch of a fairy tale. It is difficult to be believed by those who judge everything
on the basis of logic.
After ten years of fierce fighting, the Soviets finally decided to quit
Afghanistan in 1989. Before their departure they struck a deal with America.
Both countries agreed to cease supply of military hardware to the people of
Afghanistan. But both pumped in maximum arms and ammunition before the
cut-off date.

68

The departure of the vanquished, the Soviet Union, had to be quiet and
unceremonious. Ironically the victor also vanished like a genie, after having his
interests served well. His lost pride had been rediscovered. America was at the
verge of becoming sole super power of the world. It was no more pushed about
the plight of Afghans.
Afghans who had helped America in its quest for the lost pride were left
alone to take care of their ruined homeland. Afghanistan was their country and
they had to solve its problems. Americans had sponsored only the war;
reconstruction was not their obligation.
Pakistan helped Afghans for restoring political stability in Afghanistan.
An interim government under Rabbani, a Tajik, was installed for a specific
duration. On expiry of this period, Rabbani refused to relinquish the power.
Resultantly, various ethnic groups under their respective warlords started
fighting with each other.
The civil war further ruined Afghanistan through its length and breadth.
The enormity of destruction surpassed the one experienced during the Soviet
occupation. The next five years were the worst period of the history of
Afghanistan. There was complete anarchy.
Warlords took control of various cities and adjoining valleys. They
imposed their authority with the help their guns. Life and property of common
citizens were at the mercy of soldiers of different warlords. They indulged in
loot, rape, arson and killings. The rulers taxed everything and everybody
without giving anything in return.
Emergence of Taliban began in 1994. At that time Mulla Omar was not a
Talib-e-Ilm, or a student. He was a Mulla, or a teacher in a Madrassa. One of
his students was kidnapped, sexually assaulted and killed by a local commander
of the ruler of Kandahar.
This incident hurt and angered Mulla Omar. He discussed it with his
colleagues, the teachers of his Madrassa. They all unanimously decided to fight
against the evil forces, which had ruined the peace and tranquility of their
country. In other words they decided to launch crusade for peace.
House of the commander was attacked. His guards defected and the
culprit was killed. The people commended Mulla Omars action and rushed to

69

join him. Kandahar and its surrounding area were secured in no time.
Emergence of Taliban had begun.
He then moved towards Pak-Afghan border and cleared the area up to
Spin Boldak. During this operation he discovered an underground depot north
of Spin Boldak. He found a large quantity of arms and ammunition, which was
left behind by the Soviets.
After that Taliban moved northward. Ismail was defeated at Herat.
Hikmatyar was encountered during their advance towards Kabul. His entire
Lashkar defected, but he managed to escape. Ahmed Shah Masood vacated
Kabul and took refuge in secure base of Panjsher Valley.
Dostum was the last to be defeated by Taliban. With the fall of Mazar-eSharif, Taliban ruled over 90 percent of Afghan territory. The speed, with which
Taliban succeeded, surprised many experts of military strategy.
In Afghanistan military and political strategy of Imperial Britain had
failed more than once. In recent past the Soviet military might and the mind
could not match the stubbornness of Afghans. Renowned gladiators had failed
in this arena, but a Mulla defeated all and sundry. Obviously, the experts had
many questions to ask.
Their inquisitive minds do not believe in miracles. They raised numerous
queries. Who are Taliban? How have they defeated so many experienced
warlords in such a short time? Who has trained them? From where did they get
arms and ammunition? Who sponsored them?
Taliban are an army led by a schoolteacher. They all joined this army as
volunteers. They struggled for restoring peace in their country and they
succeeded in accomplishing their mission. Undoubtedly, they are Taliban-eAman, the peace seekers.
The secret of Talibans success did not lie in their military strategy. It was
made easy by the moral grounds on which they fought against their rivals. It
was fought for the love of their country and to bring peace back to their people.
The secret lied in justness of their cause.
Throughout his campaign, Mulla Omar ensured that peace returned to the
areas liberated from the clutches of warlords. Justice was dispensed promptly.

70

Criminals were punished in accordance with Islamic laws. Illegitimate and

cruel taxes were abolished. People had a sigh of relief.
During the campaign, the people living under warlords envied their
brethren of areas liberated by Mulla Omar. They wished and in some cases
approached Taliban for their liberation. It was for this reason that almost every
victory of Taliban was preceded by large-scale defections of opposing soldiers.
Mulla Omars campaign was not for military conquest. It was not for
grabbing power or for personal grandeur. He did not shift to Kabul to have
pomp and show of a head of state. He preferred to stay in his mud house near
Kandahar. He fought for ending the agony of people of Afghanistan. The war
was for ensuring safety of lives and property of common Afghans.
Training of Taliban was conducted by the Soviets and Americans. They
had gone through intensive training over an extended period of more than a
decade. Entire training was conducted in real battlefield conditions. No
simulators were used. Thanks to clash of interests of two super powers, who
chose Afghanistan to settle their disputes.
Military hardware was also made available through kind courtesy of
America and the Soviet Union. All that had been pumped in hurriedly, before
their quiet departure, was available in dumps quite intact. These dumps fell in
the hands of Taliban when warlords were defeated one by one.
Taliban never requested anybody for help of any kind. They never asked
for arms or money or even food. This had not happened in the recent history of
Afghanistan. Some eyebrows had to be raised in disbelief.
Taliban did not require any sponsor for their quest for peace. They fully
realized that it was their problem and only they could solve it. They had firm
belief in righteousness of their mission and in their abilities to accomplish it.
They were bound to succeed. Unfortunately these men of peace were soon
blamed for destroying the peace of others.

CAMPAIGN OF MAILIGN
Emergence of Taliban coincided with emergence of America as an
unopposed super power of the world. American pride and arrogance had been
fully restored after Gulf War. Americans cherished the unique status of lone
super power.
71

Their rejoicing, however, lacked glamour. It was due to the absence of

any worthwhile challenge. This led to the birth of new ideas. They talked of
New World Order and clash of civilizations. They eagerly looked for
someone on whom they could flex their muscles.
Three years later Taliban emerged in Afghanistan. They restored order in
war-torn country in quick time. Return of peace was attributed to imposition of
Shariat and rightly so. Mulla Omar was proclaimed as Ameer-ul-Momineen.
Resurgence of Islam, no matter how humble it might be and how far it
lay from the civilized world, could not be overlooked. The civilized people
dont like the clock moving backward. Something had to be done to keep the
clock ticking forward.
Followers of Islam had been identified as potential enemies of the
civilized word. The Western Media was already busy in maligning them.
Taliban, the new flag bearers of Islam, drew their attention. Well-orchestrated
propaganda was launched to ridicule them.
Those who are too vocal about Islam are considered as fundamentalists
and extremists. This particular brand, Taliban, was accused of rigidity,
intolerance and belligerence. They were depicted as an ominous threat to
democracy, peace and justice.
They were declared as nincompoops in politics. They lacked
understanding of diplomatic norms. Therefore, any political or diplomatic
contacts with them were of no use. Even a dialogue was not worth the effort.
This was done to isolate them. Political isolation of the undesirables is part of
the modern global strategy.
Their social values were also ridiculed. They were blamed for gender
discrimination, because they deprived women of basic rights of education and
work. Captions of shuttle cork Burqas or moving tents were shown as proof of
gender discrimination.
Even their pathetic poverty, to which the civilized world had
contributed a lot, was made a laughing stock. Pictures of poor Afghans were
shown with footage bearing feelings of disgust rather than any sympathy. Mulla
Omar was blamed for their miseries.

72

Shariat laws promulgated by him were criticized for being too harsh.
Punishments awarded were cruel. Taliban were dubbed as savages of Stone
Age. They were misfits in modern era. They must be sent back to Stone Age,
where they belong to.
Unfortunately some sections of Pakistani press also joined in this
propaganda unwittingly. Clippings of such pictures and stories were reproduced
to make the reading attractive rather than making it constructive. The damage to
the image of Islam was done to promote business interests.
After the incident of 11th September the propagandists intruded into
private life of Mulla Omar. The media sarcastically broke the news that he has
more than one wife. One of them is a daughter of Osama. His guest too has
married a young Yemeni girl. The aim was to equate them with Rasputin.
Taliban also erred, as all human beings do. Interpretation of teachings of
Islam, against idol worship, was stretched too far. Statues of Buddha were
destroyed. In their exuberance to preserve their Islamic identity, aid workers
were arrested for preaching Christianity. Some criminals took advantage of
tribal traditions and sought refuge from Taliban.
They should have refrained from demolishing the statues of Buddha.
Those were casting no shadow on the glory of Islam. Mahmood Ghaznavi and
others like him had spared these for some sound reasons. The priests, in the
garb of aid workers, should have been told to get lost rather than arresting them.
Taliban sheltered many criminals wanted by Pakistan. They should not
have been treated as persons seeking refuge. These were involved in sectarian
killings. Pakistan repeatedly requested for their extradition, but Taliban did not
listen.
It will however be wrong to equate Osama with criminals wanted by
Pakistan. The righteousness of his mission and strategy remain disputed. In
view of the grievances of Muslims all over the world, his mission has an
element of justness. However, the approach he adopted and the means he used
for achieving it cannot be justified.
The civilized world condemns Osama for terrorism. The majority of
Muslims, despite their disapproval of his strategy, sympathizes with his

73

mission. Only time will decide whether he is indulging in perpetration of

terrorism or committing hate crimes or fighting for redress of grievances.
His strategy has many anomalies. He failed to assess correctly the
reaction capability of his adversary. He ignored the devastating nature of
modern warfare, because of which even Russia and China avoid direct
confrontation with America. His decision to challenge America single handedly
was fatal mistake. Taliban allowed him to operate from the soil of Afghanistan.
It was a mistake on their part.
Taliban provided the opportunity to their adversaries. They got the
themes of propaganda they were looking for. Utilizing the power of their media
they exploited mistakes committed by Taliban. The legitimacy of Taliban rule
was challenged and they were isolated.
Isolation of Taliban was not the outcome of western propaganda alone.
Russia loathed Afghanistan since 1989. Tajikistan and Uzbekistan harbour
ethnic prejudices against Taliban of Pushtoon origin. So is Iran because Taliban
crushed Shiite opposition. Indian enmity is proverbial; friend of enemy is an
enemy. China has its own apprehensions about resurgence of Islam in its close
proximity. Even in Pakistan many intellectuals and politicians consider them as
troublesome neighbours.
The people of the civilized world believed that Taliban were exactly the
same as projected by their media. They were branded as an evil force. They
had to be hated. At last Americans found someone for awarding and executing
the punishment. They thought that thrashing of Taliban would certainly add
luster to their supremacy.
Today Taliban find them on the altar. The silent support and sympathies
of millions Muslims around the world will not be able to rescue them. The quiet
support against growling high-tech beasts will be of very little use.

AFGHAN PSYCHE
Unlike Americans, Afghans have a long history. Afghanistan has been a
crossroad of many civilizations. It is a roundabout of civilizations as they call
it. Their culture is an outcome of inter-action of most civilizations of the past. It
is a blend of tribal traditions and religious teachings.

74

Taliban are mostly sons of Pushtoon tribesmen, who strictly abide by

their tribal customs and traditions. Adherence to tribal customs is not a matter
of choice or convenience, but an obligation. Nobody can think of ignoring
these.
They are born free. They love freedom and know how to protect it. But,
parameters of personal freedom are well demarcated by their traditions.
Therefore, nobody intrudes into the domain of others.
Education in tribal areas is generally imparted in religious schools.
Mullas of their Madrassas encourage students to seek knowledge, but not for
the sake of having it. They stress upon practicing their knowledge in letter and
spirit. They may not be men of letters, but they are definitely the men of
words.
Elders of the family and Mullas are obeyed with respect. Their words are
taken as final and nobody can think of challenging their authority, because
elders scrutinize all matters in the light of tribal customs and religious
teachings. Sifting of good from evil is their exclusive responsibility. Once they
decide, to the best of their judgment, the decision is strictly implemented.
Tribal culture has pronounced social values. These are not violated for
any worldly gains. Exigencies, no matter how compelling these might be,
cannot be taken as an excuse to over-ride the social values. Osamas case amply
proves this.
Tribal Afghans are poor, simple and hardworking. They generally mind
their own business and do not poke their nose in affairs of others. Like all poor
people, they have no time for such frivolous occupations.
They excel in the art of parleys. They not only know how to put across
their viewpoint, but also have the patience for listening to others. They say what
they mean and do, what they say. Their yes does not mean no, or no does
not mean yes. They shun hypocrisy. It is for this reason that they are
considered novices in modern diplomacy.
They will readily agree once convinced. They dont like to be bullied. To
them there is no Hikmat in falling prey to a bully. Their consent had to be
earned on the strength of argument. Once they decide to take a stand, they take
it at all costs.

75

They did not succumb to American pressure for these very reasons.
Firstly, they did not like the bullying attitude of America. Secondly, they were
convinced about correctness of their stand. Mulla thought that it was not correct
to extradite Osama in the absence of any evidence. He was prepared to pay the
price.
They do commit mistakes as poor always do. They are not the kings, who
can do no wrong. But, they do not practice double standards. They stick to one
standard, right or wrong. They do not harp about freedom, justice and peace,
but try to promote these in the light of their faith and traditions.
They are tough warriors. The Coalition felt no shame in accepting their
character qualities of resilience and tenacity. They are extremely tenacious
when it comes to defending their homeland. Afghan history is full of evidence
in this context and it is accessible to everyone. It is not like the evidence against
Osama.
Some British experts of the past had identified their weakness for money.
Afghans are poor people, inhibiting a land devoid of natural resources. Their
temptation for money is understandable. Foreigners have exploited this
weakness quite frequently. Mulla Omar, however, has eradicated this weakness
to great extent. Money has failed to subvert the loyalties of Taliban.
These experts also opined that Afghans treat their women as their
property. Today it is called as gender discrimination. The experts forgot to
mention that they look after and protect their property even at the peril of their
lives. Women might be discriminated, but not disrespected
Taliban are inward looking people. They consider themselves as humble
followers of Islam. They want peace for their war-ravaged country. Taliban
have never indulged in terrorism in countries, which accuse them for this crime.
They do not blame others for their miseries. Americans have contributed
a lot towards aggravation of their poverty, but they do not accuse them. They
have never questioned Americans for promoting own interests at the cost of
Afghan blood.
They do not criticize civilized world for breading watch-dogs in and
around Muslim states, which bite and kill every one, not sparing the children
even. They have never told them that the dust raised by the demolition of a

76

statue was not thicker than the blood of a Palestinian or a Kashmiri or an

Afghan child.
They do not object to social evils of other societies, which are practiced
in the name of personal freedom. They know that the celebrities of civilized
societies first produce illegitimate children and then try to legalize them by
solemnizing matrimonial ties, but they have never criticized this practice of
social values in reverse order.
They have never approved or applauded terrorism. They never refused to
hand over Osama, but only until plausible evidence was provided. They never
declined to have dialogue. It was America, which considered it below its dignity
to talk to men with turbans and beards.
Actually the urge for action obscured the importance of dialogue. When
action started the civilized world forgot about morality. While crusading
against evil, they are now supporting the proven terrorists like Dostum and
Fahim.

STRATEGY OF TALIBAN
Taliban were completely isolated, yet they decided to fight against the
might of a super power. They have preferred to take a stand rather than
succumbing to pressure. It is very bold decision. Some would like to call it
foolhardy.
America has abundance of resources and support of many countries.
Taliban have very little, not enough even to be termed as limited resources. It
is an unequal match, rather a no match. The referee, the United Nations, as a
rule should have stopped the fight before it started, instead of arranging it.
In a disparately one-sided situation, there is no room for the weaker to
apply any strategy. At best Taliban can rely upon their determination, use the
knowledge of ground to their advantage, and conserve their resources and
energy for use in critical moments of the war. To this end they should:

Avoid fighting against the strength of the enemy. Wait till enemy exposes
his weakness.

77

Present no front unless absolutely unavoidable, but it should be for

minimum duration. Pullout before it becomes unbearable or
impracticable.

Keep military assets dispersed as far as possible, but within convenient

limits.

Exercise restraint in retaliating against air attacks to preserve their

resources for the right moment.

Fall back to the south of Hindukush without spending much of time,

energy and resources in defending areas north of it.

Put up minimum resistance to defend cities and towns of Pushtoon

territory. Get dispersed in countryside to start guerrilla war.

Counter subversive moves of enemy by keeping own fighters highly

motivated.

On diplomatic front Mulla Zaeef has performed well. America did not
like this vent kept open for getting the feedback. That lone voice has been
silenced in the interest of third party. Counter intelligence is another important
task. While sitting in caves Taliban have remained alert to threats posed by
enemy intelligence agencies. They have outwitted, outsmarted and
outmaneuvered CIA and ISI in case of Abdul Haq.

CONCLUSION
Mulla Omar has rejected all the worldly Hikmat. It does not mean that
he is unable to contemplate the enormity of consequences. He knows full well
the price he has to pay. Like him many people in the past have fought wars
knowing well that they would end up as losers. He is not the only one.
It is a matter of belief. Mulla Omar is convinced that he is right. Taliban
have so far shown complete trust in his leadership. In the absence of evidence
they all staunchly believe that Osama is not involved in the incident of 11th
September therefore, their stand is morally correct.
As long as they remain in this frame of mind, they will not give up their
struggle. They will continue fighting a war in which they will suffer colossal
losses. They will not be able to withstand the crushing blow of combined
military might of the developed world.
78

They have fought for more than a month, which is beyond the
expectations of many experts. If they continue fighting conventional war, they
will definitely suffer major reverses. Their chances lie in unconventional war,
provided they retain resources and stamina for that.
Taliban may be defeated, but they will not formally surrender. Hence, the
end of war in Afghanistan is not likely to come with the fall of Taliban regime.
It is far beyond the limits of contemplation. Pakistan is likely to have, which it
never wanted, an unstable Afghanistan.
Taliban will go. Everybody has to go. They may be defeated, but they
will not be blamed for not trying. And who knows that in future they might be
remembered in words, quite different from those, which are used for them
today.

11th November 2001

79

TERRORISM VS TERRORISM

During fifth week of the war Taliban lost the first battle of conventional
war. Mazar-e-Sharif was vacated. They could not withstand the onslaught of
carpet-bombing. Any defence-line would have crumbled under bombing of that
magnitude.
A week later Taliban rule was reduced from 90 percent of Afghan
territory to 20 percent only. Taliban now hold a few remote provinces of
Afghanistan i.e. Kandahar, Helmand, Zabul and Urozgan. They have lost entire
northern Afghanistan, except town of Kunduz and all the eastern and southern
provinces adjoining Pakistan.
Their resistance is restricted to two places. In the north a Taliban
commander is encircled in Kunduz and in the south they are hanging on to their
stronghold at Kandahar. These battles could be the last they would fight in
conventional war.
Success of the Coalition so far is splendid, that too without employing its
own ground forces. It can be attributed to the might of their high-tech airpower,
which was applied ruthlessly. It was not deterred by the allegations of
collateral damage.
Northern Alliance played a key role in this success. They provided the
ground forces the Coalition needed. These troops were well acquainted with
battleground. Therefore, they were of great help in capturing the entire northern
Afghanistan and the capital, Kabul.
The eastern and southern provinces have fallen to Pushtoon commanders.
Their timely reaction has saved the people of these areas from the wrath of
Northern Alliance. These commanders are now better placed to make positive
contribution in shaping the future of Afghanistan.
Nobody expected that Taliban would win few battles in conventional war.
Some hoped that they would put up determined resistance for a longer period
than they actually did. These sympathizers hoped against the hope. In fact
Taliban fought much longer than their military strength and strategy could
permit.

80

STRATEGY OF THE COALITION

After three weeks of ceaseless bombing, the Coalition realized that the
goals of war could not be achieved with air attacks alone. The military leaders
of the Coalition were compelled to contemplate seriously about the
inescapability of ground operations.
The experience of an aborted commando action near Kandahar
discouraged the Coalition from launching of any large-scale ground operations.
The casualties suffered in an operation conducted by well-trained soldiers were
too many. Therefore, conduct of ground operations by the civilized soldiers
was ruled out.
Efforts were made to muster uncultured troops from Muslim countries,
but without success. Hence, the Coalition was left with no choice, but to use
Northern Alliance. To achieve the immediate goal of the war i.e. toppling of
Taliban Government, the Coalition evolved following strategy:

Provide all-out support to Northern Alliance and employ its troops in

ground operations.

To this end the Alliance should be made a partner of the Coalition. If

need it may be given the status of a privileged partner.

The Alliance should be favoured politically for its contribution in military

operations.

Focus of air attacks should be shifted from towns to front lines as

presented by Taliban in Mazar-e-Sharif and Kabul.

Intensity of close air support should be increased to inflict maximum

casualties on Taliban fighting on these fronts.

Restrict own involvement to provision of advisors and technical

personnel essential for directing air support missions.

Avoid entanglement in ground battles. Do not commit own troops.

The crux of this strategy lay in keeping the best in the world away till
the worst is over. The strategy was based on following considerations:

All the neighbouring states will quietly consent to this strategy.

81

Russia will not only agree, but also willingly provide maximum military
assistance to Northern Alliance.

India will be immensely pleased.

The risks involved in committing own troops in hostile environments will

be eliminated. The Coalition will be saved from suffering casualties.

The presence of leaders like Dostum and Fahim, who are known for
committing atrocities, should be ignored. Poison is the best anti-dote for
poison. Use terrorists against terrorists.

It will facilitate achievement of immediate goals of the war in shortest

possible time.

A visible success on ground will defuse the onslaught of criticism

launched by own media.

Pressure of Muslim World, who is demanding stoppage of bombing

during Ramazan, will reduce.

Dependence on Pakistan will be considerably reduced.

The strategy clearly reveals that entry of Northern Alliance into Kabul
was not accidental. It was planned and executed deliberately. Following is the
corroboratory evidence:

Bush was very pleased after the capture of Kabul by Northern Alliance.
He was not perturbed about the violation of commitments made to him
by the Alliance that it would not enter Kabul.

Northern Alliance continuously received messages from Bush to shun

violent retributions. But he was not unduly perturbed when Alliance, like
Israel, did not pay any heed to his instructions.

Farhadi, Ambassador of Alliance to the UN, was asked as to why

Northern Alliance troops entered Kabul against the directive of Bush? He
categorically replied that America told us to do that.

If the Coalition were really serious in stopping its entry into the Capital,
it would not have provided close air support in this sector. Taliban front
line in the north of Kabul could have been used as barrier to check their
entry.
82

The way this victory was projected by Western Media made it evident
that the civilized world longed for this to happen. Notwithstanding the
fact that a journalist, instead of a general, led the victory march, it was a
success most welcomed.

Some youngsters chanting victory slogans, including death to Pakistan

were shown following the journalist. It carried a meaningful message for
Pakistan, which opposed entry of the Alliance in Kabul.

People were shown welcoming Northern Alliance. Beards were being

shaved and Burqas were thrown away in celebration. This projection was
meant to justify entry of the Alliance. Despite the fact that many of these
incidents could be attributed to revengeful attitude of the Alliance
soldiers.

Rabbani was allowed to come to Kabul, where he was received like a

head of state. This was done to convey that the Alliance would play a
dominant political role in future.

The Coalition was totally dependent on Northern Alliance for provision

of troops for conventional fighting. The final battle at Kandahar is yet to
be fought. Northern Alliance could not be asked to reach Kandahar
bypassing Kabul.

America is closer to winning the war, but its victory is marred by its
deceitful and atrocious approach. The war started as crusade against the evil of
terrorism. It soon drifted towards ending the rule of Taliban in Afghanistan.
In the process America has destroyed entire Afghanistan, Osama and his
colleagues are still at large. The war has been waged with the sole aim of
revenge. America wants to bring everything in Afghanistan to the level of zero
point. Rhetoric of broad-based government, free zone, humanitarian aspects
and reconstruction of Afghanistan has been used as ploys.
Once the destruction is completed, the Afghans may be left alone to clear
the debris and reconstruct their country to their liking. Americans have a busy
schedule ahead of them. They will move on to some other country to continue
further destruction.
Americans have been carried away by their urge for revenge. They have
sided with known terrorists of Northern Alliance to apprehend few suspects.
83

It is said that end justifies the means. In this case the end and the means both
fall in the category of evil.
Taliban on the other hand have been quite upright and magnanimous in
their defeat. They have not shed the blood of a single innocent person. These
savage terrorists have freed those accused, who were apprehended by them
before the start of war. No quick or infinite justice was dispensed to them. The
captives were treated humanely as confirmed by them after release.

PERFORMANCE OF TALIBAN
Retreat of Taliban began at Mazar-e-Sharif. Taliban forces defending this
garrison were no better than ill-equipped light infantry units. Aerial bombing of
the Coalition and ground attacks of Northern Alliance severed their lines of
communication. It had become impossible to maintain the garrison logistically.
After having doggedly fought for more than four weeks, Taliban
realized the futility of line-defence. They decided to give up conventional war
and abandoned the town. The Alliance troops entered the garrison jubilantly and
committed numerous atrocious acts.
Kabul was also vacated for the same reason. In both cases Taliban quietly
slipped away. In military terminology, they successfully achieved a clean
break. They decided to retreat quite late, but executed it efficiently under
adverse conditions. Had Taliban done it soon after the start of war it would have
been of more tactical value?
Military history is full of examples of armies suffering more losses
during retreat than in the battlefield. In case of Kabul the Coalition failed in
turning Talibans retreat into a rout. Whatever it might be, the Coalition has
achieved a visible victory. Taliban have not been able to inflict any serious
damage on Northern Alliance and their supporters. Overall it has been a onesided battle.
Fall of Kabul was immediately followed by loss of all the eastern and
some of the southern provinces. What happened to Taliban of these provinces?
There were no reports of large-scale surrenders. They could not have managed
mass escapes. At best only a few prominent leaders could have gone to areas
still held by Taliban.

84

The majority of them have certainly dissolved into Pushtoon population

of these provinces. They must have reached some understanding with local
commanders, or both might have mutually decided to unite against Northern
Alliance. Entry of the Alliance troops into Kabul and their retribution has
definitely resulted in realization of need to strengthen the unity of Pushtoons.
Possibly Pakistan might have helped in reaching such understanding.
After the fall of Kabul, there were reports that some Taliban and Arabs
were trying to enter tribal areas of Pakistan. Their entry in tribal areas could
have serious implications. Therefore, Pakistan must have taken precautionary
measures to guard against it.
Nature of Pak-Afghan border is such that no amount of troops can stop a
determined person from crossing it. Pakistans border posts are few and far
apart. The tribesmen know the entry points better than many soldiers do. They
also have sympathies for their Pushtoon brothers living across the border.
Under the circumstances, the best way to check their inflow was to have
some space to act as buffer zone. Pakistan could have created it by encouraging
local commanders to take over Afghan provinces adjoining its border. ISI has
well-established contacts with these commanders and both enjoy some degree
of mutual understanding and trust.
Interests of Pakistan, Pushtoons and Taliban converged, because all of
them saw a common enemy in Northern Alliance. If Taliban have willingly
agreed, and most probably they have, to hand over the charge to local
commanders, then they have done a great favour to a friend of the past. They
have created a buffer zone for Pakistan. They have also provided an opportunity
to Pushtoons to keep the Alliance at bay.
Mazar-e-Sharif, Kunduz and Kabul constituted the forward line of
Talibans defence. Taliban would have liked to vacate Mazar-e-Sharif and
Kunduz simultaneously, but their force at Kunduz could not retreat because of
the severing of their escape route. Therefore, a protracted battle at Kunduz has
been forced upon them.
Taliban forces at Kunduz are now fighting for survival. Sooner or later
the opponents will overcome and the battle is likely to end up in a massacre.
Thus Americans will achieve the first conspicuously visible success against
Taliban at Kunduz.
85

Taliban must have planned intermediary defensive positions as well, but

because of fighting doggedly on first line and suffering too many casualties,
they were forced to fall back on last line of defence at Kandahar. Battle of
Kandahar will also not last for long, because entire air resources of the
Coalition will concentrate on this city. Here too Taliban will suffer heavy
casualties; in case they decide not to hand over the garrison to a local
commander at the earliest.
Taliban have devoted valuable time, efforts and resources to conventional
fighting. It has taken a heavy toll. They are left with very little to continue their
resistance in the form of guerrilla warfare, in which they had a chance to
perform better. It will now be extremely difficult for them to regroup and
reorganize for carrying out hit and run operations. In the absence of any
support from outside, guerrilla war is not likely to start in foreseeable future.
The future of Afghanistan largely depends upon the nature of relations
between Pushtoons and the Alliance. At present the two are separated apart by a
deep gulf of hatred. It will be very difficult to bridge this gap. Consequently the
Pushtoons will remain at the receiving end as the Alliance enjoys support of the
Coalition.
The attitude of Northern Alliance demonstrates that it has learnt no lesson
from the past. The support of America has made them arrogant. They have
committed atrocities in all the areas captured by its soldiers. The continuous
retribution may lead Afghanistan to another bloody civil war.
The evil forces, which were defeated by Taliban, have re-emerged. It
does not promise any good for Afghans. Apart from the Alliance the Coalition
has encouraged all the opponents of Taliban to capture as much of the territory
as they could. Most of them have enmities with each other and because of that
Afghanistan has been virtually disintegrated. It would require a super-human
effort to reunite it.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PAKISTAN

A night before the fall of Kabul, the issue of Northern Alliance entering
the city was discussed in a PTV programme. The participating guest insisted
that soldiers of the Alliance would surely enter the capital. The compere

86

vehemently refuted his viewpoint. He said that Bush has assured our President
about this.
He had to stress upon official version. The experts like him are paid for
drawing favourable interpretations. When statements are clear and leave
nothing to be read in between the lines, they still do not give up. They then
draw encouragement from the body language and chemistry of leaders.
In this particular case only face reading would have sufficed, which
should not have been a problem for experts of body language and chemistry of
leaders. While giving the statement regarding entry of Alliance into Kabul,
facial expressions of Bush belied his words. If a lie detector were used, there
would have been a loud BEEP when he said, Northern Alliance will not enter
Kabul.
There is a quote in civilized world that all is fair in love and war,
Perhaps, more so in case of war. Americans have centuries of experience to
reach an agreement and then violate it. They can violate any agreement as long
as their supreme national interests are served. It is part of their psyche.
Pakistan should expect more betrayals as the time passes.
Despite these established facts about American behaviour the
Government of Pakistani has again trusted them for their words. Once again its
rulers have failed in reading the American mind correctly.
The reports of Taliban and their Arab guests entering tribal areas of
Pakistan have been pouring in continuously. Pakistan has denied such reports,
knowing well that if some of them wanted to cross the border, it wont be all
that difficult.
Pakistan will not be able to stop them, as they will not seek asylum
through proper channels. Once they come in and their presence is reported or
suspected by intelligence agencies, Pakistan will be asked to get hold of them.
It will not be an easy task to accomplish. Pakistans inability will provide an
excuse to the Coalition for attacking suspected tribal areas.
Some terrorists can even be spotted or reported in Kala Chitta range or in
forests of Murree and Kahuta. Air strikes in these areas will become necessary
and UN will be pleased to grant permission. America will surely use precision
weapons in air attacks, yet some collateral damage may become unavoidable.

87

Pakistan has also been alleged for flying two sorties to pullout its
advisors working with Taliban at Kunduz. The allegation, at best, can be termed
as a joke. However, it does indicate the extent to which its enemies can go to
harm Pakistan.
Iran has pointed the next target to America for its holy war. Radio
station at Mashhad has announced that Osama has gone to tribal areas of
Pakistan. The announcement speaks of Irans good-will for Pakistan as well as
unity of Muslim Ummah.
The above reports reveal that gradually the things will be made
unbearable for Pakistan. Next time America may not feel the necessity of
deceiving or betraying Pakistan. Instead, Pakistan could be forced to desert
America and then pay the price of desertion.
Government of Pakistan might be wondering as to why the Hikmat of
staying with the mainstream is not paying its dividends. Rapids of the stream
are pushing it onto the banks. It is being treated like surf, the waste product of
the torrents.
They must have also realized that honeybees of the West will no more
make a beeline to Islamabad. If at all a bee comes; it will not come to deposit
some honey. It will come to sting.
It is true that Bush offered to Musharraf a peanut of hybrid variety, yet it
remained a peanut. Some analysts say that party is over. Honeymoon with
America has ended. The rulers should know better that it is just half way
through. Only daylight schedule is over.
The slogans of death for Pakistan, destruction of Pakistan Embassy in
Kabul and Mulla Rabbanis statement were quite disheartening. He, while
asking his soldiers to exercise restraint, said that do not spare Pakistanis, kill
them. Peaceful co-existence is becoming difficult day by day.
Farhadi, Ambassador of Northern Alliance to UN, said that there should
be no Pakistani troops in multinational peace force to be deployed in
Afghanistan. UNSC later decided that Pakistani or Iranian troops will not be
included in peacekeepers. The doors to Afghanistan are gradually being shut in
the face of Pakistan.

88

Before the start of holy war, it was Pakistan, who desired that Indian
troops should not be employed in Afghanistan. Indian soldiers were already
working with Northern Alliance as advisors and they have remained there
throughout the war. Unfortunately, in the context of Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Taliban have been ruled out, not the Indians.
India and Iran find themselves better placed as compared to Pakistan.
Both are pleased on getting rid of Taliban. They have very cordial relations with
Northern Alliance, which is virtually working as de-facto government of
Afghanistan. Both countries are eager to contribute towards formulation of
interim government. Both have reasons to be in hurry to open their embassies in
Kabul.
The only right step taken by Pakistan was delivering of bold speech by
the President in UN General Assembly. He expressed the grievances of Muslim
World quite convincingly. It could not have been done more forthrightly.
All those who were addressed by him already knew the factual position.
His speech was merely a reminder, which unfortunately fell on deaf ears. They
have not responded to his call, as he would have liked them to do. They have
stuck to their line of action.
There is no change in their attitude. The holy war remains biased. State
terrorism is being unleashed with increased ferocity. Palestinian and Kashmiris
are being killed like flies. The civilized world does not see any violations of
human rights, because flies do not have such rights.
People of Pakistan are generally shocked and grieved over the conduct of
holy war. They are apprehensive about the future. Disappointments are
nothing new for them. They will recover soon and ask numerous questions from
rulers about their Hikmat.

CONCLUSION
America has moved closer to defeating Taliban and that too without
suffering any losses. According to a Punjabi quote, it is about to kill the snake
and save the stick as well. The might of its airpower has significantly
contributed towards its success.
The disunity of Muslim Ummah has also facilitated the victory of
America. The inter-state differences, racial prejudices, sectarian intolerance and
89

resultant enmities have been exploited by the civilized world. The worst is that
Muslim rulers have no remorse or regrets about it.
Northern Alliance was supported primarily to save soldiers of the
civilized world from suffering casualties. In the process terrorists of Alliance
have been employed against terrorists of al-Qaeda and Taliban. Thus it is no
more a war between angels and devils.
Prominent leaders of Taliban and al-Qaeda, including Omar and Osama,
will be ultimately eliminated. Their elimination will not mean the end of
terrorism. Dead Omar and Osama will keep haunting the civilized world as
Hitler did. Terrorism will continue as long as its causes are not addressed.
It is evident that Taliban have not been able to retain the requisite
strength for waging guerrilla war. They are not likely to re-emerge as a potent
threat to future rulers of Afghanistan. But the possibility of civil war between
Pushtoons and non-Pushtoons has increased.
Taliban and their guests may intrude into tribal areas of Pakistan. This
can lead to escalation of holy war. They may also manage to escape to other
countries. Therefore, Muslim World will remain under perpetual threat of
retribution.
America is convinced that war against terrorism may have to be carried
across Duran Line. Pakistan still remains blacklisted or at best treated as
suspect, graded Grey. It is for this reason that the civilized world has
declined to provide any military assistance to a front line state.
Difficult time for Pakistan is not over. It has yet to come. When it comes,
Pakistan will have nothing to depend upon except its own people. The
government must work for strengthening the national unity. The plans of
crackdowns should be deferred. Sedition cases should be withdrawn. Leaders of
all segments of the society should be taken into confidence.

19th November 2001

90

KUNDUZ AND KHANABAD

River Oxus acts as a natural inter-state boundary between Tajikistan and

Afghanistan. There are sandy plains on either side of the river. Southern plain is
part of Afghanistan. Kunduz is located in the centre of southern part of the
plain.
The village of Khanabad is situated a few miles east of Kunduz. Both are
linked with Mazar-e-Sharif and also with Kabul by a circuitous road passing
through difficult mountains of Hindukush range. Peaks occupied by Tajiks in
areas adjoining Panjshir Valley dominate road to Kabul.
The hills jutting out of Hindukush range gradually taper down to the edge
of the plain, facilitating attack on Kunduz and Khanabad from the south. The
cutting of road to Mazar-e-Sharif can help in isolating these localities.
Therefore, defending Kunduz and Khanabad is not an easy task.
Kunduz is located along the route leading into Tajikistan. Some invaders
had used this route in the past for entering into Central Asia. Most important of
these invaders was Alexander the Great, who entered Tajikistan from Kunduz.
Different ethnic groups inhibit Kunduz and its surrounding areas, but
Pushtoons out-number all of them. It is the only Pushtoon majority area north of
Hindukush. It is an island of Pushtoons in the sea of Tajiks and Uzbeks.
Pushtoons are single largest ethnic group in Afghanistan, but most of
them live in areas south of Hindukush. Pushtoons of Kunduz are separated by
difficult mountainous terrain from rest of their brethren. Militarily it has no
importance more than an outpost of the Pushtoons along Afghan-Tajik border.

BLUNDER OF TALIBAN
To understand the tragedy of Kunduz better, it is essential to keep in view
the military situation, which existed, prior to the start of holy war. Taliban at
that time were fighting against Northern Alliance. They had squeezed their
adversary into northeastern corner of Afghanistan.
Tajiks and Uzbeks were the main partners of Northern Alliance. They
were getting military aid from Russia through Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Taliban had to establish a strong line of defence along the borders of these
neighbouring countries to check inflow of military aid to their adversaries.

91

Taliban developed a line of defence around fortresses of Mazar-e-Sharif

and Kunduz. The operational environments of that time, dictated that this line
must be held strongly. Therefore, the decision to hold it at all costs was
correct.
These fortresses also acted as firm and secure bases for launching
offensive against Northern Alliance forces. The plan worked quite effectively.
Northern Alliance remained confined to Panjsher Valley and Taliban controlled
entire area from Herat to Badkhshan.
This plan should have been reconsidered when attack by America had
become imminent. Strength and strategy of new enemy, particularly its
airpower, dictated major modifications in the plan. Apparently Taliban carried
out some minor adjustments, but generally stuck to their original plan. They
decided to hold this line, as long as they could and then withdraw to some
intermediate position.
By sticking to this plan they committed a mistake similar to the one
committed in East Pakistan. Eastern Command too had developed strong
fortresses close to the border with a contingency plan to pull back from these to
fight the final battle around Dacca. The contingency plan could not be executed
under adverse air conditions and hostile environments.
The forward defence line of Mazar-e-Sharif and Kunduz should have
been thinned out before America attacked Afghanistan, or at least it should have
been done immediately after the start of war. These positions should have been
held lightly for a very limited period. Foreign volunteers should have been
included in the thinning out plan. These highly motivated fighters could have
been used better in unconventional war.
Unfortunately Taliban reinforced their mistake by sending additional
troops to strengthen the forward line of defence. The reinforcements consisting
of lightly armed infantry soldiers could be of no use against incessant carpetbombing.
As expected Mazar-e-Sharif fell to Dostum on 9 th November. He entered
the town and killed all foreign fighters and many innocent Pushtoon civilians.
Taliban had unduly delayed their retreat from Mazar-e-Sharif and suffered
heavy losses.

92

Kunduz and Mazar-e-Sharif were vital for the forward defence. Both
fortresses mutually supported each other. These had to be held together and
abandoned simultaneously if the situation so warranted. It was not possible to
defend one after abandoning the other. Retreat from Mazar-e-Sharif alone was
another blunder.
It would have been better if Kunduz was vacated a day or two earlier than
Mazar-e-Sharif, because it was located on the flank. Unfortunately it happened
the other way round. Resultantly Kunduz was completely cut off and isolated.
Defence of this fortress became matter of a do or die.
The mistake was further compounded as some of troops retreating from
Mazar-e-Sharif went to Kunduz. Perhaps for psychological reasons as moving
into an area of Pushtoon majority provided them sense of security, which
subsequently proved to be false.
Similarly, Taliban and foreign fighters, who had been operating in
Northern provinces, must have fallen back to Kunduz. Some civilian Pushtoons
of adjoining areas might have also taken refuge in Kunduz and Khanabad.
Did it happen due to mistake of Taliban or the Coalition had planned it
that way? It does not appear to be a planned manoeuvre of the Coalition. Apart
from the mistake of Taliban, it happened because Uzbeks led by Dostum were
keener in capturing Mazar-e-Sharif than Tajiks were in laying their hands on
Kunduz.
Dostum wanted to establish a link with Uzbekistan as early as possible.
The Coalition supported the keener contestant and concentrated its air support
against this fortress. The heavy bombing ultimately provided a free run to
Dostum.
Tajiks were looking southward to enter into Kabul. They did not want
their resources to be consumed elsewhere. Thus the expediencies of different
factions of Northern Alliance accidentally contributed towards building of the
tragedy and the Coalition decided to take full advantage of the opportunity.
In war situations, which cannot be anticipated in advance by either side,
do arise. Despite having elaborate contingency plans the opposing sides still
encounter such situations due to unpredictable nature of war. The tragedy of
Kunduz belonged to this category.

93

Taliban valiantly fought for more than six weeks and then decided to give
up the resistance for two reasons. The first and the most important was heavy
carpet-bombing by the Coalition. They had no means to withstand the vertical
onslaught.
Secondly, Kunduz had been completely isolated, as entire Northern
Afghanistan had fallen in hands of Northern Alliance. In the absence of any
hope of help from outside, they couldnt defend Kunduz any more. They were
forced to hand over Kunduz on terms dictated by their adversaries.
Taliban would have given up their resistance earlier, but the attitude of
Northern Alliance came in their way. Its soldiers resorted to revenge killings
after the fall of Mazar-e-Sharif. They spared no foreigner. Therefore, the
foreigners in Kunduz were reluctant to surrender, and rightly so.

ENGINEERED MASSACRE
Six weeks after the start war, reports of surrender started trickling from
the garrison of Kunduz. Initially Taliban refuted these reports. First authentic
news was about pro-Taliban Governors contact with Dostum. He desired to
hand over the control to UN. He also agreed that he would support UN
sponsored setup for Afghanistan. United Nations did not respond.
Rumsfeld responded promptly. He said that foreign terrorists whether
they are Chechen or Arab or from other countries should not be allowed to
leave Afghanistan, because they will then terrorize the world from elsewhere.
He continued that they should surrender or be killed.
The chief engineer spelled out the outline of master plan. He was the one
who masterminded the holy war. It had to be conducted the way he wanted.
He had clearly conveyed to his military commanders all that he wanted.
Foreign fighters besieged in Kunduz were mostly Arabs, Pakistanis and
Chechens. Where could these terrorists go after their extradition, except
Palestine, Kashmir (Pakistan) and Chechnya. Whom they would have
terrorized? Obviously they were Israel, India and Russia. Two out of three
beneficiaries were those whom Pakistan did not want to be part of the Coalition.
It also implied that Rumsfeld declared the freedom struggles of
Palestinians, Kashmiris and Chechens as terrorism. The interests of Israel and

94

India were being looked after earnestly. It was American way to vindicate
Hikmat of Pakistans decision to remain with the mainstream.
On receipt of instructions from the chief, the senior engineer on the site
rushed to Kabul. Tommy met leaders of Northern Alliance at Bagram airfield
and briefed them in detail. He must have instructed them about treatment to be
meted out to the fighters holed up in Kunduz.
Rumsfeld had provided the guidelines for butchering foreign fighters.
Tommy sorted out the details of the ensuing massacre. The warlords of
Northern Alliance had abundant experience in executing such plans.
Despite coordinating in detail, the Coalition did not leave this important
task to be accomplished by the Alliance alone. When negotiations for surrender
were on, the Coalition intensified bombing with the intentions of killing as
many terrorists as possible, lest the Alliance faltered in accomplishing the
assigned task.
It was apprehended that Dostum might strike an unacceptable
agreement with defenders of Kunduz. The Coalition was quite confident about
UN that it would not act against the wishes of America. It will be seen little
later that confidence in UN was not unfounded.
Once the negotiations for surrender started, continuation of bombing
could not be justified. It was also against the noble aim of the holy war.
Osama and Omar were the main targets and both of them were hundreds of
miles away from Kunduz.
Pakistani Media and some journalists expressed their concern about the
fate of defenders of Kunduz. They urged UN to uphold the spirit of its
Resolution. ICRC was also asked to abide by the charter of its duties. But both
showed their inability to do anything for saving lives of those who were willing
to surrender.
United Nations came out with a lame excuse that it had no presence on
ground. It does not take much time to arrange such presence. Unfortunately
UN can place its feet on ground only when allowed by America. The world
body confessed indirectly that it couldnt do anything against the wishes of
America.

95

Despite its limitations, UN drew attention of warring sides towards their

obligation to respect human rights. Its representative asked them to exercise
utmost restraint and desist from retributions. He being one from the civilized
world could not say that the war in itself was nothing but a hateful retribution.
The civilized world did not exercise any restraint in starting and conducting
the war.
Taliban commander observed these developments and held a meeting
with Dostum. A partial evacuation or surrender was agreed upon. Tajik warlords
reacted quickly. They blamed Taliban for firing and thus violating the
agreement. They decided to launch an attack in retaliation. Ironically bombing
by the Coalition was not considered a violation.
The fighting was being forced upon an enemy who was willing to
surrender. Later on Dostum blamed Daud for attacking Khanabad when talks
were in progress. In fact it was the Alliance, not Taliban, who violated the truce.
Daud must have done it on instructions of his superiors sitting in Kabul, who in
turn had received the directions from their superiors. The violation of a truce
has never been a matter of shame for Americans.
Tajiks launched attack from east and south. The aim was to take Kunduz
by force and in the process kill maximum Taliban, particularly the foreign
fighters. Referring to the hunting party mentioned earlier, it could be said that
time for big haul had come. The beaters, the Alliance, had been granted the
permission to shoot.
Americans had engineered the brutal massacre of 21st Century very
cunningly. By giving license to kill to the Alliance they had arranged to absolve
themselves from any blame. In case of any criticism, the Alliance could be
accused of over-killing. Americans know the art of passing the buck.
The American intentions and rivalry of Tajiks and Uzbeks resulted in race
for capturing of territory and the booty of weapons surrendered by Taliban.
Dostum performed better in this race, not because of his superior manoeuvre,
but by courtesy of Taliban.
Taliban preferred to lay arms before an Uzbek warlord, rather than
surrendering to a Tajik commander. Tajiks and Pushtoons have deep-rooted
enmity, which had been further deepened after the assassination of Ahmed Shah
Masood. Taliban rightly feared them for revenge. They guided the troops of
96

Dostum into Kunduz. Tajik local commanders attacked from south and east and
took control of Khanabad. Majority of Taliban surrendered to Dostum.
This nearly undermined the plan of the devil. But the Coalition was alert
to the developments on ground. It promptly reacted to rectify the mistakes
committed by their agents. Incidents of sporadic fighting were arranged to
mar the surrender. These incidents were engineered. The aim was to kill as
many of them as possible before the formality of surrender was performed.
The number of Taliban killed in sporadic fighting will never be known.
The fact that Tajiks captured very few prisoners proves the point. Contrarily
Dostum was able to capture large number of foreign fighters. They were
transported to Jangi Fort near Mazar-e-Sharif. This was a clear deviation from
the master plan envisaged by the chief engineer.
Within two days there was a revolt in Jangi Fort. These men had
willingly surrendered only a couple of days earlier. When they were armed they
decided to give up fighting and after having been unarmed voluntarily they
opted to fight. Why did they consider it necessary to fight after laying down
their arms? What were the circumstances, which led them to revolt?
The presence of one or two soldiers of the Coalition in Jangi Fort has
been confirmed. It can be said that they were information collectors, the persons
responsible for interrogating prisoners. In war it is important to interrogate
prisoners soon after their capture.
The information so collected is useful for ascertaining the latest
dispositions of the enemy in the sector from which they are captured. This
could not true in case of prisoners of Jangi, as they had been captured in the last
battle of Taliban north of Hindukush. The Coalition no more needed any
information about this sector and the prisoners could provide no information
about Osama and Omar.
The information collectors were there for some mischief. They must have
tried to segregate some prisoners. The captives must have suspected that
segregated persons would be executed. They must have resisted the segregation.
In the ensuing scuffle some captives must have been fired upon. The prisoners
must have reacted, snatched weapons of their guards and retaliated.

97

It is said that the incident was immediately reported to the Coalition, as if

it did not know already. The Alliance requested for air support and it was
provided promptly. The bombing killed almost all the prisoners. A visible
success was achieved.
The use of combat air support against prisoners inside a small fort of mud
walls is an outstanding example of exercising restraint. The incident remains
shrouded in mystery. When Americans call it a mystery others dare not solve
it.
Nobody, particularly the media, was allowed to enter premises of the fort,
lest the world had a look at the horrendous crime committed under auspices of
the civilized world. ICRC felt the need for an inquiry to establish the facts.
The Coalition rebuked ICRC saying that it was not a massacre. They were
killed in a battle. What a battle it was?

FALLOUT ON PAKISTAN
Fall of Mazar-e-Sharif on 9th November was a warning for the ensuing
catastrophe as Kunduz had been isolated and surrounded. Writing on the wall
could be read the day Mazar-e-Sharif fell. The besieged Taliban, including
foreign fighters, were doomed. Pakistans print media was the first to anticipate
and warn about the tragedy of Kunduz
The President talked to Blair and Powell about foreign fighters in
Kunduz. He asked that they should be treated in accordance with the resolution
of the UNSC. He should have foreseen and acted earlier than he actually did.
The response of Blair and Powell to request of the President remains
secret. They must have told the President that the Coalition had not come to
Afghanistan for a picnic. In politer words he must have been advised to relax,
as was Saudi Prince told during Gulf War. We know what to do and how to do.
It is also possible that he might have been rebuked, by curtly telling him to
watch what happens to them.
The appeal of the President, though late, was essential for reasons other
than averting the massacre. The Government of Pakistan knew that its appeal
would fall on deaf ears, yet it had to be made to satisfy the people of Pakistan
that their government was doing a lot while remaining in the mainstream.

98

Next day some politicians and journalists of Islamabad visited UN office

and submitted a memorandum. They showed their concern about the gravity of
the situation in Kunduz. They asked UN to play its role and ensure safety of
those who were willing to give up fighting.
The matter was also brought to the notice of America through Bilgrami of
PTV, who asked a question from US Ambassador on the subject while
interviewing her. She said that the warring sides should ensure the safety of
innocent civilians. She indirectly conveyed that Taliban and foreign fighters
were not innocent. Similarly during the visit of Straw, Foreign Minister of
Pakistan stressed upon the need for abiding by the Resolution of the UNSC.
Straw did not say anything on the subject.
In brief, the Coalition was not prepared to listen to any appeal, not even
on humanitarian grounds. Its leaders were still in the same frame of mind,
which they had at the start of holy war. The time for dialogue was over. It was
time for action.
India acted in time in the context of situation building up in Kunduz by
sending a mission to Kabul. This mission and the advisors already working with
Northern Alliance must have urged them to make full use of the opportunity.
India would have loved to see that all foreign fighters, particularly Pakistanis,
were annihilated.
Incident of Kunduz has clearly revealed the attitude of the civilized
world towards freedom movement in Kashmir and Pakistans moral support to
their right of self-determination. The following indicate that this movement has
been practically dubbed as terrorism:

Rumsfeld said that foreigners couldnt be allowed to escape and

perpetrate terrorism elsewhere.

US Ambassador to India said that India and America have joined hands
to eliminate all forms of terrorism. No support or training from outside
will be allowed.

Straw in his press conference said, we are willing to help if both sides
invite us. The pre-eleventh September stand remains unchanged. It
implied that they would do what India wanted.

99

Indian Defence Minister has blamed Pakistan for playing double. The
presence of Pakistanis in Kunduz has been quoted as proof.

Benazir suggested that Pakistan and India should normalize their

relations bypassing the issue of Kashmir.

Taking lead from America, India has intensified counter insurgency

operations in IHK. The West has quietly approved Indian action.

With the quiet consent of the civilized world, India has resorted to
firing across the Line of Control. It has also been encouraged by Pakistans
inability to influence the conduct of holy war. Therefore, it has decided to
crush the cross border terrorism, while Pakistan was left at the mercy of the
rapids of the mainstream.
The presence of a large number of Pakistanis in Kunduz has been
criticized, not only by outsiders, but also by many from within Pakistan. The
critics have raised a relevant question. Why these Pakistanis were there?
However, while answering this pertinent question some irrelevant inferences
were drawn.
Many intellectuals and politicians have squarely blamed Madrassas and
their Mullas for sending them to Afghanistan for fighting. They said that these
Pakistanis were mostly the spoiled children of Madrassas. Mullas had spoiled
them for their vested interests.
It is true that Mullas have played a significant role in motivating them,
but they cannot be made escape-goats for all the failings in this regard. The
subject of Mullas and Madrassas is very sensitive, which merits an elaborate
discussion.
It would suffice to say here that if the contention of the critics was
accepted then what about thousands of Arabs, Chechens, Uzbeks and others.
They were not the spoiled children of Pakistani Madrassas. It must be accepted
that they were there to do something which governments of all the Muslim
countries were afraid of doing.
Most of Pakistanis belonged to tribal areas of Pakistan. They have blood
relationship with Pushtoons living in Afghanistan. Many of them would have
still gone to Kunduz even if there were not a single Madrassa in Pakistan.

100

CONCLUSION
The incident of 11th September was a violent protest against excesses
committed against Muslims. Prior to that fateful day, the civilized world
suppressed Muslims, but refrained from making it too obvious. Since then it has
resorted to open aggression.
The massacre after the battle of Kunduz was engineered without fear of
any repercussions. Unarmed prisoners were slaughtered to pay the price of
crime supposedly committed by Osama. This genocide must have helped
America in quelling the fire of revenge.
The massacre has exposed helplessness of the rulers of Muslim World.
They remained deaf to war cries of the civilized world. They remained blind
to observe the tragedy that loomed large on Kunduz. They remained dumb and
did not utter a word when thousands of their brethren were butchered after the
fall of Kunduz.
They were courteous enough to accept the invitation of Bush and enjoyed
Iftar-dinner party in Washington. At Islamabad they relished Chhola Chaat in
the sweet company of Lady Chamberlain. Why should not they enjoy? Many of
the rulers of Muslim countries, from Nile to Indus, must have been pleased on
getting rid of so many disgruntled citizens of their respective countries.
Edhi Amin while discussing the humanitarian aspect said that response of
the Muslim World was very poor. He continued, their apathy towards
Afghanistan was reflective of their general attitude. He opined, contemporary
Muslims devote only some of their time for performing their duties towards
Allah. The duties towards fellow human beings are altogether ignored. He then
concluded, they are not Muslims.
The fact is that before holy war they feared America, but Afghan war
has terrorized them. The Muslim rulers have been rendered completely blind,
deaf and dumb. They have lost the abilities to see, hear and speak. While the
rulers fear America, the people have been subjected to the curse of hunger or
poverty. Hunger and fear are the worst curses of Allah. The Ummah has been
blessed with both of them.
The present state of Muslim countries has encouraged their enemies to
maul them one by one. Their enemies need not fear any retaliation, not even

101

resistance. The rulers of Islamic World have buried their heads in sand like
ostriches. Anyone can move forward and catch them from the tail. Having them
caught they can either ride or slaughter them.
The holy war has targeted Afghanistan and the freedom movements of
the oppressed Muslims in its first phase. The scope of war will keep expanding.
More than fifty countries of Islamic World provide a wide choice to the
adventures of holy warriors.

27th November 2001

102

MADRASSA AND MULLA

The first news of massacre of Pakistanis at large scale came after the fall
of Mazar-e-Sharif. When the Alliance troops entered Kabul the hateful
retribution against Pakistanis was reported. It was followed by the worst of all.
The Coalition and the Alliance joined hands in massacring the foreign fighters
after the fall of Kunduz.
The news of merciless killing of prisoners was received in Pakistan with
grief and anger. The presence of so many Pakistanis inside Afghanistan became
the focus of criticism. Who was responsible for sending them to Afghanistan?
Mullas running various Madrassas in Pakistan were blamed.
Mullas have already been accused of supporting Taliban. They had
opposed attack on Afghanistan and plan to topple Taliban. The government and
its like-minded targeted them for opposing Pakistans decision to join the war
against terrorism.
After the massacre of foreigners in Afghanistan, Mullas were squarely
blamed for killing of Pakistanis. They were accused of training, motivating and
sending thousands of Pakistanis to fight along Taliban. They were responsible
for getting these ill-trained and ill-equipped fighters killed in an aimless war.
The militant Mullas were alleged for using their Madrassas as camps of
military training. The government was constrained to contemplate taking
corrective measures. Many politicians and intellectuals urged the government to
initiate punitive action immediately.
It is not fair to blame Mullas and their Madrassas for everything that has
gone wrong. Their services to the people of Pakistan cannot be ignored. The
problem has to be looked at in entirety.

ISLAM AND MADRASSA

Madrassa has been an important institution of a Muslim society. Mosque
was the first Madrassa of Islam. The Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, was the
first teacher, who taught his Companions in the Mosque.
With the spreading of Islam, Mosque alone could not cope with
increasing requirement of teaching. The fresh converts had to learn everything
about this all-encompassing religion. Therefore, some Mosques were provided

103

separate compounds for teaching. The adjoining compound of a Mosque was

named as Madrassa.
Many of these Madrassas became famous because of the Mullas who
taught there. They were renowned religious scholars and the students of Islam
came from far-flung areas to benefit from the knowledge of these learned
teachers.
The students who came from distant places added to the management
problems of a Madrassa. They had to be accommodated as resident students.
The compound of a Madrassa was extended to provide boarding and lodging
facilities.
Some of these Madrassas were so large that thousands of students studied
there at a time. Teaching, boarding and lodging of these students could not be
arranged without a guaranteed source of income. Who provided the financial
support?
The rulers of Islamic states generously supported these Madrassas.
Mullas never felt the shortage of funds for running their institutions. The
financial hardships were never felt because the rulers were the Patrons-in-Chief.
The Mullas were highly respected by the rulers. Many of them were
appointed as Qazis. The judiciary in an Islamic state was generally recruited
from teachers of these Madrassas. The judges were not only equipped with
knowledge, but also displayed exceptional moral integrity.
These qualities earned the trust of respective rulers. The judiciary
enjoyed independence more than it today enjoys in some parts of the civilized
world. There were numerous instances when a Qazi summoned a King or a
Governor or an Amir to the court. They were punished if found guilty. Qazis
verdict was implemented with complete disregard to the social status of the
convict. Seldom had a convict shown any resentment. The judges enjoyed
unflinching respect.
These Mullas, appointed as Qazis, were men of outstanding knowledge
and extraordinary character. They strictly followed the dictates of religion and
upheld the demands of justice. They could not be coerced or intimidated.
Mullas also carried out research work along with laborious job of
teaching. They sifted authentic religious knowledge from heaps of ambiguous
104

hearsay. This knowledge was compiled and preserved by them for the future
generations.
Apart from teaching, research and compilation, Mullas took the
responsibility of preaching Islam. During the course of teaching they selected
the outstanding students for this difficult assignment. On successful completion
of the learning, they were assigned specific areas for preaching Islam.
Muslims of Indian Subcontinent should be grateful to the students of
Madrassas of Central Asia, Iran and Iraq. They came here and devoted their
lives in preaching not only through word of mouth, but also by setting personal
examples. Half a billion Muslims of the Subcontinent owe a lot to them in
gratitude.
These preachers of Islam were followers of different Masliks, but they
never indulged in breeding sectarian prejudices. They differed with each other,
not on the basics, but on finer points, which were encountered only after
gaining advanced knowledge.
They followed their respective Masliks strictly, but never involved
common people in finer differences. They were not only accommodating and
tolerant to others thoughts and beliefs, but respected them. It was for this
reason that two main sects of Islam, Shia and Sunni had cordially adjusted with
each other.
It is evident from the foregoing that like their teachers the students of
Madrassas were also not the ordinary people. The cream of the society came to
learn from Mullas of their times. The ruling elite, including Kings, sent their
sons to Madrassas for education. Mullas were seldom summoned to the palaces
for teaching the princes. When a ruler did ask a Mulla to do so, he was not
obliged.
The expansion of Muslim Empire dictated the need to increase academic
curricula. Many Madrassas started teaching other disciplines of knowledge.
Academic activities of Madrassas were no more restricted to teaching of
religion only. The students of these institutions excelled in fields of science, art
and humanities.

105

NEGLECT OF MADRASSA
Neglect of Madrassa began with the political decline of Muslims. With
the subjugation of Muslim World, Madrassa lost patronage of the rulers. This
institution could not be run efficiently with dwindling financial resources.
In the Subcontinent it started with the demise of Moghul Empire. The
new rulers, the British, had no interest in such non-productive institutions.
They had come to India for economic gains. They did not want to spend a
penny on religious activities, which promised no returns. If at all they had some
interest in religion, it could not be Islam.
Due to non-availability of requisite funds, Madrassas could no longer
maintain high standards of the past. Muslim philanthropists helped them, but
their donations were not adequate. Resultantly, Mullas resorted to collection of
charities for keeping the institution alive. Thus, a Madrassa acquired semblance
of an orphanage.
The British introduced a discriminatory education system in India.
English medium institutions were meant for the ruling class. Vernacular schools
produced clerks for managing the routine work of the British colony. The
leftovers went to Madrassas.
Then Pakistan came into being and Muslims had a chance to undo the
damage caused to this institution. The change of rulers should have had positive
effects on the deplorable state of Madrassas. It did not happen, because new
rulers continued with policies of their predecessors.
They neither met the financial needs of religious institutions, nor did they
evolve a suitable education system for Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The
continuous neglect of an important institution of an Islamic society led to the
problems faced today.
For more than half a century, Madrassas in Pakistan have been looked
after by individuals, who cared for religious education. They felt this need,
because the education system left behind by the British did not adequately cater
for the important requirement of a Muslim society.
It is a matter of shame for a country, which came into being in the name
of Islam that religious education of its citizens, is being looked after through

106

collection of charity. At the same time it is to the credit of Mullas that

Madrassas are still surviving.
Charity alone could not help in maintaining the standards worthy of these
sacred institutions. Overall conditions and teaching environments of Madrassas
degenerated. The deterioration was all encompassing. Today classrooms of
most Madrassas have nothing more than straw mats. Living conditions of
resident students are deplorable. Food is prepared in poor hygienic conditions
of Langars.
This is not the place where the best of the society would like to send
their children as students or teachers. It is meant for the down trodden. The poor
send their children for want of free food and education. The middle class
prefers English medium schools over Madrassas. The elite wouldnt even like to
visit such a place. Their pets live in better conditions.
During war of Afghanistan, some Madrassas actively participated in
Jihad against the Soviets. In this protracted war the Mullas established contacts
with some agencies of foreign countries, which were actively supporting
Afghans.
These countries started providing funds to them. Initially these were
given to acquire services of spirited men for fighting against Soviet infidels.
This was not done for the love of Islam. Apparently it was given for Jihad, but
actually it was meant for promoting vested political interests of the donors.
Because of the generous provision of funds many greedy people wore the
garb of a Mulla. They had nothing to do with Madrassas. Most of the funds
were pocketed by these individuals and very little trickled down to Madrassas.
The condition of these institutions remained unchanged.
The flow of foreign money did not end with defeat of the Soviets. It kept
pouring in with much sinister designs of supporting organizations of favourite
religious sects. This money resulted in promotion of sectarianism in Pakistan.
The process continues to date unchecked.

CRITICISM
The Mullas in Pakistan have been criticized since the days of Pakistan
Movement. Undoubtedly the Mullas have invited most of criticism by their act
or neglect. They have faltered, as they do not belong to the class of Mullas of
107

earlier days. But their mistakes grant no licence to criticize them, particularly to
those who have very little knowledge of religion.
Criticism is the prerogative of the learned people. Even they should avoid
generalized criticism. It must focus on specifics. It should also remain within
limits of decency and not spill over to the premises of ridicule. Above all it
must be constructive, identify the problem areas and suggest practical solutions.
Most critics of Mullas unfortunately belong to the modernized or
westernized class of the society. Most of them do not like the bearded face and
clumsy get-up of a Mulla. If a Mulla is to be judged from his physical
appearance, then a well-dressed critic, who is fond of western life style, will
find nothing admirable in him.
His feet in a pair of unpolished Chappals or sandals; his Shalwar cut
inches above ankles; a dirty waist coat; long beard and oily hairs; a colourful
scarf triangularly folded and spread over his shoulders; an unwieldy turban or a
cap and lavish use of an offensive scent cannot impress his critics. A Mulla,
from head to toe, is a different person from his critics.
The list of accusations is long, but generally lacks credibility. They are
accused of fundamentalism, extremism, and fanaticism. The critics ignore the
fact that all religions stress upon adherence to the fundamentals. Islam forbids
any compromise in this regard, as it amounts to distortion of basic teaching.
One cannot be dubbed as an extremist or a fanatic just for following the tenets
of Islam strictly.
He who is selective in following the teaching of a religion cannot be
called a moderate. One cannot practice a part of the Faith and ignore the
remaining. It is also wrong to practice it as long as worldly interests are served
and disregard it when it comes to sacrifice, which is generally considered as
worldly loss. One cannot pretend to be a Faithful. It would be hypocrisy.
The terms like extremism, fundamentalism, moderation and liberalism
have no place in any religion. These are used with mala fide intentions. The
point can be explained in lighter vein. He, who leads the Eid Prayer and tells
others how to say it, is an extremist. One, who follows the correct sequence of
Takbirs as explained by the Imam, may be called fundamentalist; one, who
still mixes up the sequence, is a moderate. He, who does not care for the

108

instructions of a Mulla, is a liberal. No. In religion there is only one of doing

the things correctly.
If moderation can make the practice of religion questionable, then
liberalism means an outright rejection of Faith. Those who claim to be liberal
might also be regretting at times, that they were born to Muslim parentage.
It is alleged that Mullas do not teach Islam, but Masliks. This is not
criticism, but a sweeping statement. Recitation of Quraan, Nazra or Qiraat, and
knowledge of Hadith and Sunnah is part of all Masliks. In any case Masliks are
very much part of todays Islam. No Maslik prohibits following of basic tenets
of Islam.
Mullas are accused of encroachment of the exclusive domain of
politicians. They poke their greasy noses in clean politics of Pakistan.
Political parties despise them, because they mislead their voters in the name of
religion. They mix religion with politics. Why should politics be forbidden
for Mullas? It is fundamental constitutional right of all adult Pakistanis. The
people have no objection to their participation in politics. So should be the
Government of Pakistan. There are no legal or moral grounds for objecting to
their participation in politics.
Mullas cannot be barred from politics to satisfy some politicians who are
concerned about preservation of their vote bank. Politicians should not feel
unduly scared of nuisance value of the religious parties. If politicians really
care for democracy, then they must welcome Mullas in politics.
As regards secularism, it has no place in an Islamic State. In Islamic
Republic of Pakistan the Church and King cannot be considered as two
separate entities. In fact both of them do not exist in Islam.
Secularism is not practiced anywhere in the world. Even secular
democracies use it as political ploy. Pakistan is an ideological state. Its ideology
is Islam, which is a complete code of life. It covers all aspects of individual and
collective dealings. How can religion be segregated from governance of a state?
Mullas have also been accused of creating law and order problems. They
often call for strikes, organize rallies and resort to agitation disrupting the
normalcy and causing economic losses. The critics conveniently forget that
strikes and rallies are not the real cause of Pakistans economic decline.

109

Their protests have never been so damaging as publicized. Most harmful

strikes and rallies, in short history of Pakistan, have been organized, for or
against, by so-called charismatic politicians. Protests of politicians, not of
Mullas, have damaged not only economic interests of Pakistan, but also its
territorial and ideological integrity.
Mullas and Madrassas are also criticized for religious and sectarian
intolerance. Some of them have been rightly blamed for sectarian killings. The
people of Pakistan have widely condemned these incidents. The government
has also vowed to hunt and punish the persons involved in these heinous
crimes. No Mulla would object to punishing of these criminals.
Some of the criminals of sectarian killings had taken refuge in
Afghanistan ruled by Taliban. Pakistan approached Mulla Omar for their
extradition, but he did not oblige. This became a major irritant in Pak-Afghan
relations for which some Mullas of Pakistan were held responsible indirectly.
Those who want to keep Mullas away from politics coined a frightening
term of Talibanization. The circumstances, which led Afghanistan to its
Talibanization, do not exist in Pakistan. The term was concocted to scare the
government and the civilized world so that both react against Mullas rashly.
Why should civilized world act against Mullas of Pakistan? During
Afghan War some Mullas played significant role in defeating the Soviets. After
Soviet withdrawal these groups supported freedom movement in Kashmir. The
Coalition is fully conscious of their capabilities. Mullas and Madrassas have
been taken seriously as potent threat to holy warriors. Therefore, these Jehadi
groups are treated as terrorist organizations.
People of Pakistan do not disapprove them, but the government has its
reservations on this issue primarily because of the pressure of the civilized
world. In the wake of holy war the government has been forced to take
certain measures to control undesirable activities of Mullas, lest they create
problems for the smooth conduct of holy war.
After the incident of 11th September, Mullas opposed the decision of the
government to support America in its war against terrorism. This provided an
opportunity to the critics to be more aggressive. Their criticism was generally
aimed at either pleasing the government or America.

110

Many people from different walks of life have opposed and criticized
American stance on terrorism. It is unfair to condemn only Mullas for their
opposition to the holy war. Who knows that the long-term losses of Pakistan
and Muslim Ummah, as feared by the critics of war, may overshadow the shortterm gains?
The allegations enumerated above lead the critics to conclude that
Mullas have given nothing to Pakistan, whereas the poor nation has given them
so much. What has been given to them? It is nothing more than some meager
amounts of charity, a few goatskins once a year and occasional provision of a
cauldron of mutton curry or Chana Pullao. All this is donated as a very
profitable bargain. A donor seeks forgiveness for all his sins for a cauldron of
ordinary food. The food that is often a leftover of some lavishly arranged feasts.
Mullas have given a lot, provided the critics are prepared to accept their
contributions. Without their services there would have been no Pakistani who
could recite Quraan correctly. They lead daily prayers and perform religious
rites on birth and death of almost everyone. They solemnize all the matrimonial
ties, barring those critics who prefer court marriages. An Americanized critic
would reject these petty contributions saying, no big deal.
They have indeed not taken more than what they have given to this
nation. Their contribution cannot be calculated in monetary terms. Even those
who strictly go by the monetary figures would agree that annual budget of all
the Madrassas of Pakistan is much less than the amount pocketed by a corrupt
politician or a bureaucrat in a single white collar crime.

REAL PROBLEM AREAS

The foregoing mostly covered the frivolous part of criticism showered on
Mullas and their Madrassas. The most of it has no constructive value. It does
not mean that they are free all evils. These institutions and their patrons are part
of Pakistani society. They have their share of immoral and illegal practices,
which have become deep-rooted due to prolonged neglect.
The problems of Madrassas are innumerable. The important ones in brief
are:

The government has never provided any financial assistance to this

important institution of an Islamic State.
111

The existing sources of income of Madrassas remain undeclared. Income

and expenditure have never been formally scrutinized.

Some Madrassas receive financial support from foreign countries. This

has serious implications.

The scope of education imparted by these Madrassas is restricted. It does

not equip students to avail the job opportunities, which is very essential
in a developing country.

Some Mullas fan sectarian differences promoting intolerance and

militancy.

Organization of Jehadi groups and collection of donations for this

purpose has never been scrutinized.

Government should finance these institutions of religious education.

Financial support should not be provided as remedial measure; instead it must
be accepted as binding obligation. Therefore, the budget allocations should be
made whole-heartedly. These funds can be earmarked in annual budget of
Ministry of Education and Ministry of Religious Affairs.
This will be the best use of the limited financial resources, because
infrastructure already exists on ground. The government will save colossal
initial investment, required for establishment of such a large network of
education. The funds should primarily be used for improving the scope and
quality of education. It can also be utilized for improvement of general
conditions of Madrassas.
Madrassas must declare their sources of income. Records of income and
expenditure must be maintained according to the system in vogue. The accounts
should be subjected to strict scrutiny and audited annually.
The sources of income and heads of expenditure should not be unduly
questioned for proving their legitimacy. The principal of a Madrassa must be
empowered to sanction any expenditure. The audit should only aim at guarding
against misappropriation.
Madrassas should be prohibited to receive any aid directly from foreign
countries. These countries should also be requested to refrain from direct
dealings. The countries keen to help these Madrassas must make all transactions
through official channels.
112

The government has already planned to enlarge the scope of education

imparted in these institutions through introduction of additional subjects.
Minimum essential teaching staff should be inducted for science and technical
subjects. Teachers for social sciences must be selected from qualified Mullas.
The existing administrative arrangements should not be disturbed. These
should be enhanced where required. The reformation should aim at
improvement of the institution and not to push the camel into the small tent of
a Mulla. His authority should not be undermined, but strengthened.
Any sermon, which agitates sectarian feelings, must be prohibited. Hate
talks should be curbed. It is not permitted in Islam. It is the prerogative of the
civilized world. Anybody who violates the code of conduct should face strict
disciplinary action.
While ensuring the above, the government must not temper with
sectarian identity of different Madrassas. These should be allowed to preserve
their identity. There is nothing wrong with teachings of various Masliks. These
are different ways to reach the same destination.
Jihad is a sensitive subject, because it is an important pillar of Islam. It is
a unique concept, which distinguishes Islam from all other religions. It provides
an enormous strength to Muslim Ummah, particularly in times when they are
out-classed and out-gunned by the military might of their enemy.
The enemy fears this concept more than nuclear deterrence. The
civilized world is bent upon dubbing it as terrorism. Some Jehadi
organizations have already been targeted, because of their support for freedom
movements in Kashmir, Palestine and elsewhere.
The government should not take any hasty decision and action, which
could lead to violent reaction and serious damage. It must be remembered that
during British rule efforts were made to negate the justification of Jihad.
Intentions of the civilized world remain the same as of Imperial British.
Jihad, however, remains the sole responsibility of the government of an
Islamic State. It cannot be vested in an individual or a group of individuals.
Mullas have to be convinced on this point on the strength of argument and not
by threat of or use of force.

113

Once an amicable agreement is reached, Jehadi organizations should be

gradually disbanded. Madrassas should also be discouraged from imparting
military training. However these must be encouraged to impart physical
training, which should not be suspected as military training.

CONCLUSION
Madrassas and Mullas are not something to be ashamed of; instead the
people and Government of Pakistan should be proud of them. If in their present
state they are not considered worthy of taking pride in them, the matter should
not end with cribbing against them.
The government should help them in overcoming their shortcomings,
rather than contemplating clean-up operations or crackdowns. Implementing
well thought out plan should reform these. The Mullas should be involved in
formulation of the plan with a view to having their willing cooperation to
facilitate implementation.
Government has an option to open parallel institutions of religious
education, which should be models for privately run Madrassas. This option,
however, has quite a few snags. Firstly, it will be time consuming. Secondly, the
size of initial investment will be prohibiting. Lastly, the model may fall well
short of the expectations due to inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy. In Pakistan
very seldom an institution has ever been organized and run perfectly in public
sector.
Ideally the reformation should start with selected Madrassas. The
criterion for selection of Madrassas for reformation should be willingness of the
authorities responsible for managing those at present. The selected Madrassas
should be reorganized to set high standards of education and administration.
The standards set should be so high that remaining Madrassas should look
towards these with envy.
Once it is achieved, many of the existing Madrassas will be tempted to
approach the government for guidance and help. Additional Madrassas can then
be included in the reformation plan. The process of enlargement of the scope of
reformation should continue after completion of each academic year.
The federal and provincial governments should desist from dissipating
their limited resources by trying to do too much too soon. The status of smaller
114

Madrassas should remain unchanged, but these must be inspected to provide

guidance, assistance and some funds, where required.
In the plan of devolution of power the District Government has been
made responsible for education. It should also be made responsible for
reformation of smaller Madrassas. It will surely be able to perform this task
better than federal or provincial governments, because of its intimate
knowledge of local problems.

3rd December 2001

115

BRAHIMI AT BONN

Toppling of Taliban and installation of a broad-based government was an

important political aim of the holy war. The substitute political set-up could
not be formulated with the fall of Kabul. The decision of Taliban, to vacate the
capital without fight, helped military commanders of the Coalition to out-pace
those responsible for political campaign.
The military commanders found the cart intact well before the politicians
and diplomats could find the horse. As and when the horse will be brought it
will find its place at the wrong end. The immediate problem of the horse will be
whether to pull or push the cart.
The search for horse was hampered by various factors. Firstly, America
had abandoned Afghanistan after withdrawal of the Soviets. It had no contacts
with anyone who mattered in the context of Afghanistan. This communication
gap hindered the accomplishment of political task.
The intelligence agencies could not come up to the expectations of
politicians. CIA and ISI found it extremely difficult to subvert the loyalties of
Taliban leaders. It became more difficult after Pakistan severed all its contacts
with Taliban.
Forced by the circumstances, America decided to project Northern
Alliance as the main political contender for replacing Taliban. The decision was
the outcome of its military strategy in which the Alliance troops performed the
role of ground forces of the Coalition.
In an interim set-up the Alliance will be well poised to play pivotal role.
Within the Alliance Tajiks enjoyed dominating position. Pushtoons were bound
to be marginalized. They have been given nominal representation, thereby
rendering them quite ineffective in shaping the future of their country.

REACHING THE AGREEMENT

Americans started with Rome Option. It was pursued for some time, but
abandoned. Zahir Shah did not impress the active players in the game of
Afghanistan. This option failed to materialize, because Zahir Shah and his men
had remained oblivious to the plight of Afghans for more than two decades.

116

The Cyprus Option was even worse than Rome Option. Its members
had also bid farewell to Afghanistan since long. Moreover, it did not have even
an obsolete king, who could be installed as head of the state. The so-called
Peshawar Option was worst of all.
The idea of six plus two, for finding a solution of the problem, had been
lobbied since long, but utterly failed in making any headway. It was not
expected to make any positive contribution, because in the changed scenario
six had become redundant and only two mattered.
To keep pace with the military campaign, America decided to reward the
Alliance for its contribution in military operations. After all it had helped in
saving precious cultured blood. Northern Alliance provided the base to interim
political set-up. Other ethnic groups were fixed around it to broaden the base.
In all fairness Pushtoons should have provided the base. They represent
the largest single ethnic group in Afghanistan. Tajiks, Uzbeks and others should
have been used to broaden it. But Pushtoons had to pay the price for not
meeting the demands Americans.
Nevertheless America tried to conceal its intentions of favouring the
Alliance. It ordered Chef, who had already been appointed, to prepare an
omelet. The Alliance was to be used as main ingredient, the eggs. Other ethnic
groups could be used as additional ingredients to make it as palatable as
possible.
Americans knew it well that this recipe would not be to the taste of many.
Despite that they were quite determined, not only to serve it, but also to ensure
its consumption. To this end the interim set-up has to be backed fully. America
will provide it the required political and military support. In the presence of
strong military support, nobody would dare express his disliking or disgust.
Under the cover of UN and in compliance with the instructions of
America, Brahimi summoned the delegations of all the four groups to report at
Bonn. These groups were:

The most important delegation represented Northern Alliance. This

delegation consisted of playing members of the winning team. It was
expected to play dominating role, gaining strength from the presence of

117

its troops in Kabul and from its backing by Russia, America, India and
host of other countries.

The Rome delegation represented ex-king Zahir Shah. This team

comprised of players who had retired twenty years ago and left the
playground. It had only two members who could speak Pashto. The
Kings delegation was supported by democratic world led by America.

The Cyprus Group was primarily supported by Iran, which did not
support Zahir Shah.

The Peshawar Group had quiet consent of Pakistan. It was the only
delegation expected to fight for the interests of Pushtoons.

The delegations were instructed to include some women representatives.

The instructions were complied with as Afghans realized that they could no
longer escape from being civilized. This could augur well for the emancipation
of Afghan women. They must, however, remember that journey from Burqa to
Bikini is long and arduous. It cannot be covered in one go.
As a precaution, all the neighbouring countries, the famous or notorious
six, were told to stay away. The neighbours had acted as spoilers in the past;
therefore, they had to be kept at bay. It also helped Afghans to fix and layout the
furniture as per plan of the interior decorator.
The journalists were also told not to bother the delegates. This
precautionary measure was necessary, because they have the habit of sniffing
around and peeping over the walls. They are worse than many politicians and
diplomats in spoiling the parleys.
The delegates reported at Bonn as ordered. They were provided free
boarding and lodging. Brahimi guided them to the work place and briefed them
about the task in hand. He told them that they would be set free only after
completion of the task.
The talks progressed to the liking of the conductor, except that these over
shot the stipulated schedule of five days. Brahimi lost his patience and told the
participants on fifth day that they must finish their assignment by midnight. It
was to remind them that there was no way to escape from the duty.
During the talks Qadeer, a delegate from Peshawar Group, staged a
walked-out. He alleged that interests of Pushtoons were not being voiced
118

properly. His concern was justified, but nobody cared about his walkout. He
soon realized that an agreement would be finalized in his absence. He wisely
decided to return to the talks well before the signing ceremony.
The spokesman of UN briefed the press after participants signed the
agreement. He was asked that whether all the signatories of the agreement are
equal or some are more equal. He did not hesitate in borrowing the words from
the book titled Animal Farm. In that book the pigs proclaimed that all
animals are equal, but some are more equal. The answer amply clarified that
which particular group represented the pigs.

THE AGREEMENT
Post-Taliban interim government will be installed with effect from 22 nd
December in accordance with Bonn Agreement. The salient features of the
agreement were:

Installation of Interim Authority from 22nd December, which will consist

of:

An Interim Administration composed of a Chairman, five Vice

Chairmen and 23 members.

A Special Independent Commission for the convening of Emergency

Loya Jirga.

A Supreme Court of Afghanistan as well as such other courts as may

be established by the Interim Administration.

An early deployment of the UN mandated peacekeeping force with the

approval of UNSC.

Overall supervisory role of the Special Representative of the Secretary

General of the UN.

The Interim Administration chaired by Karzai will be responsible for

governance of Afghanistan for six months as under:

Day to day conduct of the state including peace, order and good
governance.

Chairman will lay down the policy guidelines and coordinate the work of
the Administration.
119

Members will ensure implementation of policies within the realm of their

respective responsibilities.

Establish a Judicial Commission with the assistance and participation of

the UN.

Establish State Bank of Afghanistan with the assistance of the UN.

Establish an independent Civil Service Commission under the guidance

of the UN.

With the assistance and participation of the UN establish a commission

for refugees and a human rights commission.

Abide by the Code of Conduct as elaborated by the UN, those existing in

other countries and expressed by the participants of the UN talks.

Two-third majority of the Administration shall suspend any member who

violates the Code of Conduct.

The functions and powers of members will be further elaborated with the
assistance of the UN.

The Special Independent Commission for the convening of the

Emergency Loya Jirga will work for providing a constitution for Afghanistan. It
will be done as under:

It will be established within one month and consist of twenty-one

members.

The members should have expertise in constitutional and customary law

and have arranged for or participated in previous Loya Jirga.

The members will be selected from lists of candidates provided by the

participants in the UN talks as well as from Afghan professional and civil
society groups.

The UN will assist establishment and functioning of the Commission.

The Commission will have the final authority for determining the
procedures for and the number of people who will participate in the
Emergency Loya Jirga.

The Commission will draft rules and procedures specifying:

120

The criteria for allocation of seats to the settled and nomadic

population residing in the country.

The criteria for allocation of seats to the Afghans living outside the
country.

Representation of all segments of the society, including women and

the minorities.

The rules and procedures will be published and disseminated ten weeks
before the Jirga is convened.

Ensure that election or selection of nominees of the Jirga is fair.

The commission will have the authority to reject a candidate and also
specify rules for arbitration.

The Emergency Loya Jirga will elect a Head of State for the Transitional
Administration.

The Jirga may adopt a modified version of the Constitution of 1963.

The Transitional Administration will convene a Constitutional Loya Jirga

within 18 months of its establishment. The Jirga will adopt a new constitution
for Afghanistan, under which the Government of Afghanistan will be elected.
The Supreme Court and the courts established by the Administration will
provide judicial system for Afghanistan. The Constitution of 1963 will be
applied except its those provisions, which are contrary to the agreement.
In addition to the above some general provisions have been included in
Part-V of the agreement:

All Afghan armed forces and armed groups shall come under the
command and control of the Interim Authority, pending their dissolution
and disarmament or their integration into Afghan security forces,
established with the assistance of the UN.

The Interim Authority shall act in accordance with basic principles and
provisions of human rights contained in international instruments and
international law.

121

The participation of women as well as ethnic and religious minorities in

the Interim Administration and the Emergency Loya Jirga will be
ensured.

The Interim Authority shall not grant amnesty from prosecution to

persons who have committed serious violations of international
humanitarian law or crimes against humanity.

All actions taken by the Interim Authority shall be consistent with UNSC
resolutions relating to Afghanistan.

Rules of procedures for the organs established under the Interim

Authority will be elaborated as appropriate with the assistance of the UN.

The provisions regarding International Security Force were attached as

Annex to the agreement. These were:

Afghans will be responsible to ensure security for all the UN and other
personnel of international governmental and NGOs deployed in
Afghanistan.

For the above responsibility, the participants request the international

community in helping the new Afghan authorities in the establishment
and training of new Afghan security forces.

Till such time that Afghan security forces are established the participants
request the UNSC to consider authorizing the early deployment to
Afghanistan of the UN mandated force.

This security force will help in maintaining law and order in Kabul and
surrounding areas. It can be progressively expanded to other urban
centres and other areas.

All armed units from Kabul and other urban centres or other areas in
which the UN mandated force is deployed will help in disarmament of
the former combatants.

As if the UN authority had not been sufficiently imposed in the text of

the agreement, an Annex was attached specifying the UN role:

The Special Representative of the Secretary General will be responsible

for all aspects of the UN work in Afghanistan.

122

He shall monitor and assist in the implementation of all aspects of the

agreement.

The UN will pay special attention to holding of Emergency Loya Jirga so

that it is held in free and fair conditions.

Representative of the UN will be invited to all meetings related to the

Jirga.

The UN will help in resolution of any impasse related to holding of the

Jirga.

The UN shall have the right to investigate human rights violations and,
where necessary, recommend corrective action.

It will also be responsible for the development and implementation of a

programme of human rights education to promote respect for and
understanding of human rights.

The agreement was followed by the formulation of Interim

Administration. Karzai headed thirty-member cabinet. He is pro-Zahir Shah as
he belongs to Durrani Tribe. The Alliance filled eighteen slots, eleven went to
Rome Group and Peshawar Group got only one. Important posts of defence,
foreign and internal affairs were awarded to more equals.

FUTURE PROSPECTS
Glancing at the contents of the agreement and the list of members of
Interim Administration, it may be observed that:

The groups, which participated in talks, were not treated as equals. The
Alliance has been favoured, Rome Group has been inducted and
Pushtoons have been marginalized.

The contents have not been drafted by the participants, but dictated by
the sponsor. It is not an agreement between the groups of Afghans;
instead it could be called as an undertaking by the Interim Authority to
abide by the instructions of someone else dictated through the UN.

Authority of the UN has been imposed on all the important clauses of the
agreement. Future role of the UN has been ensured for indefinite period.

123

In view the subservient attitude of the United Nations, one should read
US for UN wherever it appears in the text. American writ in the region
has been established.

The sovereignty of Afghanistan has been encroached upon to great

extent.

Mulla Zaeef viewed the agreement as an insult to Afghan people. He

said that we do not accept this agreement, because it serves interests of
Americans and Russians. Although views of vanquished Taliban were of no
significance, yet his feelings as representative of Pushtoons could not be
ignored.
In his first reaction Dostum also disapproved the agreement. He was not
happy about the representation given to his faction. Later on he stepped back.
The participants representing Peshawar Group have also murmured their
dissatisfaction about the outcome of Bonn talks. All Pushtoons have
reservations on the agreement, but the most disappointed person was a Tajik,
Mulla Rabbani.
He has been denied to play any significant role in interim arrangements.
He may blame Pakistan for it, but he must accept his own failings. In his
present appearance he could not get approval of the 'civilized world. His beard
is much longer than that of Mulla Omar and thicker than Osamas.
To be in the reckoning he should have utilized the services of a barber the
day he landed in Kabul. There were so many of them trimming, cutting or
shaving the beards. Anyone of them would have been pleased to render his
services free. Or he could have asked the BBC correspondent to find one. He
would have arranged the ceremony with live coverage the world over. He
missed the opportunity and burnt his boats.
The success and failure of the agreement will be dictated by various
factors. The factors likely to impede the success are:

Inadequate and ineffective representation of Pushtoons. They might

resent or even retaliate against unfair sharing of the power.

The existing enmity between Pushtoons and the Alliance and the
pronounced differences within the groups.

124

Disarmament of numerous factions will not be easy. Complete

disarmament will be impossible and partial disarmament will not serve
the purpose. The Alliance has already opposed demilitarization of Kabul.
It will oppose disarmament more vehemently.

Non-existence of government institutions, particularly the law enforcing

agencies.

Karzai might run into difficulties in finding willing cooperation of his

team members. He might become a hostage or victim of the arrogance of
the Alliance.
The factors, which are likely to enhance the chances of success, are:

The Afghans are at the verge of exhaustion. Due to fatigue various ethnic
groups may opt for peaceful co-existence.

Northern Alliance has become militarily quite strong with the support of
Russia, America, India and other countries. The Pushtoons may submit to
it for the time being.

The UN determination and in that American will to enforce the

agreement irrespective of the feelings of Pushtoons.

It is understood that America will do everything to make it a success. If

Afghans do not implement the agreement willingly, it will be imposed upon
them. The matter will not end there. They will also be given guidelines for
future constitution and government of Afghanistan.
Pakistan has been praised for its unstinted support during Bonn talks.
This generous appreciation was not for making any worthwhile contribution,
but for keeping shut and accepting the outcome of talks. Pakistan has once
again acted boldly in changing its stance on Northern Alliance.
Pakistan intends reopening its embassy in Kabul immediately after the
installation of Interim Administration. But for that it has to renovate its
building, request unknown persons to vacate the residence of the ambassador
and seek some sureties for the security of its staff.
Pakistan has to be mindful of the fact that India has already close
relationship with Kabul. Hindko speaking ambassador has been nominated and

125

Jaswant Singh plans to attend the installation ceremony. Above all it cannot
afford to ignore the warnings issued by Qanooni during his visit to New Delhi.

CONCLUSION
Irrespective of the letters and the spirit of the agreement, the Afghans
should avail this opportunity for their own good. Their homeland is in
shambles. The destruction is far more horrifying than what is visible on ground.
Everything has been brought to the level of Zero Point. Government
and people of Afghanistan have to start afresh. This, in a way, could prove a
blessing for those who are determined to rebuild Afghanistan to their liking.
Rebuilding a county, which had been subjected to destruction for more
than twenty years, is not an easy task. The Interim Authority can make a sincere
beginning, remembering that well begun is half done.
It must concentrate on preparing the ground for future governments of
Afghanistan. It must draft a workable constitution to guarantee legitimacy and
stability of the governments to follow. It must also ensure that comprehensive
reconstruction of Afghanistan starts as quickly as possible. To achieve these
aims, the Interim Authority must restore peace on priority and take measures for
the unity of Afghans.

11th December 2001

126

KANDAHAR AND KARZAI

Kandahar could be called as hometown of Mulla Omar. The city is
located on banks of a small river by the name of Arghandab, which is a
tributary of River Helmand. Because of the availability of water there are
numerous orchards around the city. People of Pakistan know Kandahar for its
pomegranates.
Kandahar is situated at a point where mountains of Hindukush range
taper down and end. It is connected with Quetta by road via Spin Boldak and
Chaman. Another road follows northeasterly direction and leads to Kabul via
Ghazni. Third important road goes to Farah in the west from where it turns
north towards Herat.
The road Farah-Kandahar acts as demarcating line between mountains
and the desert. North of road lies the low hills of Hindukush range. South of it
is a vast desert which extends up to the border with Pakistan. It is commonly
known as Dasht.
Kandahar is the place where mushroom growth of Taliban started about
seven years ago. The rule of Mulla Omar began with the capture of this city. He
chose it for fighting his last battle against America.

THE BATTLE
After abandoning Kabul, Taliban decided to hand over the charge of
various provinces to local Pushtoon commanders whom they had defeated six
years ago. Deals were struck quickly. Taliban relinquished the power and
merged with Pushtoon population.
Mulla Omar and Osama decided to continue the war. But compelled by
the circumstances they split into two distinct groups and separated their ways.
Mulla Omar along with senior leaders of Taliban concentrated in and around
Kandahar.
Here they had a chance for putting up some resistance as they still
enjoyed support of the locals. In case of a defeat, which they must have
anticipated, they could melt into local population as was done in other

provinces. Osama and al-Qaeda fighters could not adopt this tactics. They went
to Spin Ghar Mountain or Koh-i-Safed.
Kandahar was developed into a fortress and some strong outposts were
established along roads to Spin Boldak and Farah. Mulla Omar and his troops
were set to fight their last battle.

In addition to round the clock aerial bombing by the Coalition, Taliban

were pitched against a host of local warlords. Some of them worth mention are
Amir Lalay, Haji Abdullah, Haji Bashar, Ustad Abdul Halim, Ahmed
Akhundzada and Habibullah. The most important opponents were Mulla
Naqibullah, Gul Agha and Hamid Karzai.
Mulla Naqibullah was Corps Commander of Kandahar when Taliban
captured the city in 1994. He did not fight the Taliban and quietly retired to his
village in Arghandab District. Taliban allowed him to retain armed personal
guard. He maintained good relations with Taliban through out their rule of
Afghanistan. He belongs to Rabbanis Jamait-i-Islami.
Gul Agha Sherzai was Governor of Kandahar in 1994. Taliban ousted
him. He is now equipped and backed by America. Karzai is the most prominent
anti-Taliban commander. A day before the end of battle of Kandahar he was
appointed as head of the Interim Administration formulated as result of Bonn
Agreement.
He belongs to Durrani tribe of Kandahar. He has spent more than half of
his life in Quetta. His family has well-established business of Afghan food
restaurants in America. They have their houses in Quetta, Peshawar and
Islamabad.
He is considered as moderate Afghan, because he has been seldom seen
offering prayers or fasting. He became an obvious choice of America. Apart
from active military support of America he also enjoys political and military
backing of Pakistan.
The battle of Kandahar was no different from those fought in Mazar-eSharif and Kunduz. The entrenched Taliban were subjected to relentless aerial
bombing without any military or moral considerations for selective targeting.

The ground forces of the Coalition comprising anti-Taliban groups kept

waiting and avoided close-quarter fighting. They did not launch any attack
worth mention except the one on Kandahar airport. This attack achieved some
success and the next day anti-Taliban troops pulled back to their original
positions.
Aerial bombing took the heavy toll, particularly in terms of civilian
casualties and destruction of non-military assets. These losses pressurized
Taliban to negotiate a suitable deal as quickly as possible. Most of Taliban
leaders agreed to abandon Kandahar. Mufti Masoom Afghani was the only
prominent Taliban leader who opposed and wanted to continue the fighting.
Mulla Omar agreed with the majority.

THE DEAL
Taliban had learnt from the experience of the war fought so far, that:

They had no defence against air power of the Coalition. Its indiscriminate
use was resulting in casualties of innocent civilians.

Northern Alliance, with support of the Coalition, was well poised to play
a dominating political and military role in Afghanistan.

The tables had been turned. Keeping that in view there was need to
rearrange the priorities. Safeguarding the interests of Pushtoons had
become more important than those of Taliban.

To this end the leftover manpower of Taliban must be saved to fight for
Pushtoon cause when so required.

While falling back to Kandahar, Taliban shrewdly followed the strategy

of preservation. Mulla Omar directed his commanders to surrender power to
local warlords while ensuring immunity to his supporters. In pursuance of his
instructions:

Maulvi Khair Muhammad had personally welcomed Ismail Khan in

Herat.

The Governors of Jawzjan and Samangan had negotiated similar deals

with Ismail Khan.

Mulla Abdul Kabir had handed over Nangarhar to Haji Qadeer with the
surety of safety of all Taliban.

The dissolution of Taliban in southeastern provinces had also followed

similar pattern.

The time had come for striking a deal with opponents for the remaining
four provinces. The decision was taken in the last week of November and
Naqibullah was contacted. The final settlement was perhaps delayed in waiting
for the outcome of Bonn talks.
A day after the Bonn Agreement, the deal was finalized. But prior to the
handing over of Kandahar, Mulla Naqibullah had already given safe passage to
Mulla Omar; his interior and defence ministers and many others heavily armed
Taliban.
On 7th December the implementation of deal was completed. Karzai was
quite magnanimous in granting general amnesty to all Taliban in Kandahar and
its surrounding area. Mulla Omar was also assured the security, but he had to
denounce the terrorism. Taliban surrendered in a unique manner. They were
allowed to go home with their weapons and vehicles.
Pakistan hailed the Kandahar deal, but Rumsfeld did not approve of it.
He said that Mulla Omar couldnt be pardoned. He forgot that if Americans
could be clever enough in saving blood of their soldiers, then why not Afghans
could do the same. Afghans proved their shrewdness by saving the blood of
their brethren.
Rumsfeld promptly rejected the grant of any amnesty to Mulla Omar. He
said, we will turn south from such agreement. Those who support such deal
will not get American support. He continued, I do not think there will be a
negotiated end to the situation thats unacceptable to the United States.
The moderate Afghan did not remember that every word in language of
the civilized word has two meanings, literal and practical. He did not consult
the holy warriors about which particular meaning of the word moderation he
had to follow in this case.
Karzai was also not aware of the text of the Bonn Agreement. Under the
heading of Final Provisions, this agreement prohibited the Interim

Administration from granting an amnesty to a person from prosecution who

have committed serious violations of International Humanitarian Law.
He was quick to realize his mistake. He announced that Mulla Omar is
not traceable. He will be arrested as soon as his whereabouts are known. He
asked his commanders to capture Omar and Osama so that the requirements of
International Justice were met.
America had visualized that in the absence of troops of the Alliance,
Taliban of Kandahar might be treated differently from those of Mazar-e-Sharif
and Kunduz. The military commanders were directed to take necessary
measures for administration of infinite justice.
The Coalition continued bombing areas around Kandahar even after
occupation of the city by anti-Taliban forces. The aim was to kill every body
leaving Kandahar. Reportedly many civilians were killed in surrounding
villages.
Tommy justified the bombing by saying that the Coalition was attacking
only those who are armed. In next breath he contradicted his statement. He
said that there was no evidence of any large scale Taliban escapes from
Kandahar.
At last bloodthirsty US Marines were able to find something to justify the
figures of twin towers and 9/11 stenciled on their weapons. They saw a
vehicle load of Afghans, suspected them as Taliban and killed seven of them.
They could well be some civilians fleeing Kandahar, but Marines accomplished
a feat to write back home.
These achievements were essential to show American taxpayers the
active participation of US troops in ground operations. However, Rumsfeld did
not feel satisfied, because Omar and Osama along with their key-men were still
at large.
The capture of Mulla Omar and Osama, dead or alive, is the ultimate aim
of America. Its leaders know that Pushtoons will not cooperate in apprehending
them. It has to be done using own troops. Therefore, America decided to
consolidate its military position in southern Afghanistan. For this purpose the
Marines conquered Kandahar airfield to establish a base for future operations.

Americans can feel proud of defeating Mulla Omar in a war spread over
two months. Kandahar deal marked the end of Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
In this war Taliban suffered casualties and lost their heavy weapons, but the list
of their losses ends there.
Mulla Omar and his top leaders have been able to protect their human
assets with the cooperation of Pushtoon warlords. In entire war not a single
prominent leader of Taliban was reported killed or arrested or defected, with the
exception of Mulla Khaksar, who was the lone defector.
Taliban continue surviving, because they enjoy the security of friendly
environments of Pushtoon areas. The people of these areas have not harmed
any Taliban, which implicitly proves that:

The transfer of power in these areas was the result of mutually agreed
upon strategy.

The common Afghan does not hate Taliban as has been propagated by
the Western Media and other vested interests.

The understanding between Taliban and Pushtoons is not confined to

Afghanistan. It certainly spreads over to tribal areas of Pakistan. Many Taliban
reported or not reported, have taken refuge in tribal belt of Pakistan. They could
be those people who feared harm in Afghanistan due to personal enmities.
Taliban also continue enjoying the support of Mosque and Madrassa. The
clergy remains inclined towards them as compared to various warlords. The
future rulers of Afghanistan cannot afford to ignore this important factor.
Despite these realities, there are remote chances of reemergence of
Taliban in foreseeable future. Nevertheless they will definitely play significant
role in struggle of Pushtoons against dominance of Northern Alliance.
In post-Taliban era Afghans are bound to experience return of some of
the evils of the past. There will be chaos, lawlessness and insecurity, because
the same lot of warlords, who was defeated by Taliban, has come back in
power.
Highwaymen are back in business. There have been reports of looting of
passengers, particularly on Road Kandahar-Herat. Taliban had effectively
checked this menace by imposing Shariat. Limbs of thieves and looters were

chopped off. Many critics of Taliban will still argue that looting is lesser evil
than award of chopping of the limbs of the criminals.
Inflow of humanitarian aid has faced problems, whereas Taliban had
ensured the security during transportation and distribution of aid. According to
the UN programme director for Afghanistan, the situation has drastically
changed. He said, now you have local commanders looking to take advantage
of the collapse. You also have bandits thinking they have more freedom to
operate.
Fierce fighting between two factions of Northern Alliance in the capital
of Baghlan province has also been reported. Troops of Mansoor Naderi, an
Ismaili warlord, inflicted heavy casualties on Tajik soldiers, before
reinforcements sent by Fahim could reach the garrison.
Kandahar also experienced the fighting between anti-Taliban factions.
This could have happened in the heat of battle. The Pushtoons should be wise to
check this menace, because political and military environments are quite
unfavourable to them as compared to those of the past.
Karzai swiftly acted in resolving the dispute between Mulla Naqibullah
and Gul Agha, who had vowed to take control of Kandahar. He displayed
political acumen and accommodated both of them. He was mindful of Pushtoon
interests and his own precarious position.
He, while pledging to root out terrorism from Afghanistan, warned US
not to desert Afghanistan again. He said this after toppling of Taliban regime.
While saying this he surely had some terrorists in his mind other than Taliban
and al-Qaeda.

EFFECTS ON PAKISTAN
The prevalent internal turmoil and war-like conditions are not new for
Afghans. This has become a way of life for them. They have learnt to live in
such situation. It is Pakistan, which would be facing the unusual difficulties in
times to come.
Pakistan has consumed quite few Afghan onions sine start of the war:

Northern Alliance got lions share in terms of political and military gains
and Pakistan had to reconcile with it.

Inclusion of India in the Coalition was opposed, but Indian military

advisors continuously remained with the Alliance.

Northern Alliance occupied Kabul, contrary to the assurances of Bush

and Blair.

Pakistan pleaded for mercy for the foreigners besieged in Kunduz, but
each one of them was brutally massacred.
The effects of over eating have started appearing:

After Bonn Agreement, Qannuni dashed to Delhi to meet his family and
from there he warned Pakistan to refrain from interfering in internal
affairs of Afghanistan and India. He said that this policy failed in
Afghanistan and will also fail elsewhere. He then advised Pakistan to
review the strategy of the past.

Indian understanding with Northern Alliance is far deeper than Pakistan

had with Taliban at any given point of time. India also has plans to reach
out to the Pushtoon element of the leadership at the highest level.

Tajik ministers of Interim Administration have approached Indian

Government for assistance in almost all spheres of reconstruction and
rehabilitation.

India will try for inclusion of its troops in peacekeeping force. It may be
manoeuvred in such a manner that its friends in Interim Administration
would demand it.

The above developments have taken place before the formal installation
of Interim Administration. Pakistan can hope that things might change for better
after 22nd December. The experience of last three months however negates this
possibility. The wishes of Pakistan have not proved to be the horses.
Pakistan has publicly resented the scandalous statements of Qannuni.
The UN and Karzai have been conveyed that Pakistan forcefully rejects the
allegations of Qannuni. The resentments and forceful rejections seldom prove
to be effective as well.
Qannuni has only advised Pakistan to change its policy. America through
the UN has already embarked upon moulding the policy to its liking. The UN
has asked Pakistan to submit a report on measures taken to ban the collection of

funds for terrorist organizations, freezing of their funds and arrests of terrorists,
etc.
The deeper mutual understanding and high profile presence of India in
Afghanistan do not augur well for Pakistan. Musharraf can accuse India for
using Kabul against interests of Pakistan. The determined enemy is never
deterred by the accusations.
India may not succeed in securing its participation in peacekeeping force.
Its exclusion will not be due to Pakistans pressure, but for reasons other than
that. India will still be able to exert sufficient influence on Afghanistan to make
the peaceful coexistence very difficult for Pakistan.
Pakistan has been looking forward to earn few bucks during
reconstruction phase of the holy war, but failed in appreciating the essential
pre-requisite of such earning. In the absence of close contacts with Interim
Administration, Pakistan can only hope against the hope. After all no one, not
even a super power can impose sanctions on day dreaming.
India is well poised to make profitable contribution during
reconstruction phase. Ministers belonging to Northern Alliance would like to
pay back India for its unflinching support during critical period of its struggle
for power. Pakistan has failed in matching the fast track policy of India aimed
at high profile presence in Afghanistan.
America also owes a lot to India, because it actively participated in the
holy war in more than one way, despite not being a member of the Coalition.
Pakistan has also done a lot, but its participation has been generally passive in
nature.
The events took a serious turn. The parliament building in New Delhi
was attacked by five unidentified terrorists, which provided India an
opportunity to deal with Pakistan directly rather than doing it through
Afghanistan. The fast track policy was about to be accelerated further.
Vajpayee immediately pledged to fight a do or die battle against
terrorism. He said that the attack was not on the parliament, it was on the entire
nation. He used the same language, which was used by American leaders after
11th September.

Advani followed the footsteps of Rumsfeld. He announced that the

cabinet in an emergency session has vowed to liquidate terrorists and their
sponsors whoever and wherever they may be. The use of word sponsor
clearly implicated Pakistan. Indians were learning fast to speak the language of
a super power.
President of Pakistan promptly sympathized with Vajpayee saying that he
was shocked to learn about the attack. But he took no chance and alerted his
armed forces telling India that it will be made to pay the price of any
misadventure. APHC also condemned the attack and asked for an
investigation of the issue so that ugly faces are unmasked forever.
India at last found an excuse to do what America and Israel were doing in
Afghanistan and Palestine. Vajpayee however declared that India needed time to
respond to attack on parliament. Surely India has to deliberate on following
points:

India has been acting as bully, but only against Bhutan and Nepal. It has
not yet attained the status of America to bully a country of the size of
Pakistan.

Apart from its size Pakistan also has large armed forces and nuclear
capability. It could not be treated like Afghanistan or Palestine.

Most importantly, should India risk a war just to suppress freedom

movement in Kashmir, when the civilized world has already provided
sufficient freedom of action to India in this context?

India while taking cognizance of the above realities, decided not to allow
the opportunity to go by. It blamed Lashkar-e-Tayyaba for the attack, and
demanded action against that group. The spokesman of Foreign Office of
Pakistan rejected the charge and said that Pakistan has never allowed its soil to
be used for terrorism.
America has not yet played its cards in this deal. In regular briefing the
spokesman of White House was asked by an Indian journalist whether he
thought India should do the same as Israel. The spokesman refrained from
commenting. US Ambassador to India drew his own conclusions and said, the
attack was no different in its objective from the terror attacks in the US on
September 11. He was doing in Rome as Romans do.

America has intentionally avoided making premature commitment. War

in Afghanistan will end soon, after which the next sponsor of terrorism will be
targeted. Loud thinking about possible targets has already started, but the final
selection may surprise many. Afghanistan was not in the list of countries
sponsoring terrorism, yet it was attacked. This time it could be a friend found
guilty of cheating.
The only good news during the period came from Paris Club. Pakistan
was granted $ 12.5 billion relief in repayment of official bilateral debts. This
will help Pakistan in saving $ 2.7 billion in next three years, but it has to repay
in full subsequently. The relief was only time-related.

CONCLUSION
Remarks of Rumsfeld about the deal struck during battle of Kandahar
clearly indicated the unquenched thirst of Americans for blood. It also revealed
the importance they give to negotiated solutions.
Afghanistan is almost conquered, but Osama and Omar are still at large.
America will not give up its claim on them. The search will continue till they
are killed or captured. That is how the Americans plan to dispense justice by
waging holy war.
Afghans will start their journey towards democracy as envisaged in
Bonn agreement. Their neighbours will remain on their toes during the year
2002. Pakistan, in particular, will keep encountering delicate situations. It will
be required to take difficult decisions for shaping its future relations with
Afghanistan.
Situation on eastern border has also become quite precarious. India may
not resort to an open war, but it may violate the Line of Control. Pakistan has to
be very careful in pursuing the Kashmir cause. Prudence and precaution should
help in extricating itself from the ensuing difficulties.

17th December 2001

TUNNELS OF TORA BORA

Tora Bora means black dust. It is the name of a small village located
about 40 kilometers south of Jalalabad on northern slopes of Spin Ghar or Kohi-Safed or White Mountain. River Kabul separates this mountain range from
Hindukush. Road Kabul-Jalalabad-Landi Kotal runs along River Kabul.
This range starts from southwest of Kabul and runs eastward till it enters
into Pakistan. Tirah Valley is locked inside eastern part of Koh-i-Safed. It is
inhibited by Afridis. Jarobi is the largest village of the valley.
Parachinar and Landi Kotal are located on either side of eastern Koh-iSafed. The hilly area in between is divided between two Tribal Agencies, i.e.
Kurram and Khyber. Tirah Valley is part of Khyber Agency and area south of it
is under Kurram Agency.
The range continues sprawling eastward and joins Murree hills. In NWFP
it is called Chirat hills, in Attock District it is known as Kala Chitta range and
north of Islamabad it becomes Margalla.
The mountainous terrain restricts cross-country movement. The lay of
valleys and numerous narrow passes permit limited movement from west to
east and vice versa. The Durand Line cuts across these passes from north to
south. Movement from north to south is almost impossible.
Tirah Valley is a closed territory like all other Federally Administrated
Tribal Areas, commonly known as FATA. Provincial Government has no
jurisdiction on FATA and its police cannot enter any tribal area. Even Army,
which comes under Federal Government, has never entered these areas since
creation of Pakistan.
The tribesmen take advantage of the peculiar status of tribal areas and
freely indulge in smuggling and providing sanctuaries to proclaimed offenders.
Under these conditions it is extremely difficult to seal Pak-Afghan border. But
during the battle of Tora Bora Pakistan could no more escape this duty under
pressure of the Coalition.

BATTLE OF TORA BORA

After the fall of Kabul, the top leadership of al-Qaeda and most of its
foreign fighters decided to separate themselves from Taliban. This was
necessary, because in case of reverses Taliban could give up fighting and melt
into Pushtoon population. The foreigners could not do this.
They selected Tora Bora for the do or die battle for following reasons:

Tora Bora has an elaborate network of under ground tunnels, which were
constructed during war against the Soviets. Tunnels provided protection
against the air threat.

Most of Arab fighters were well conversant with the area, as they had
participated in war against the Soviets.

The area is accessible only from north; therefore it is easy to defend.

Mountains in the south are covered by forests, which provided a suitable

fallback position.

In case of retreat the defenders could move eastward through narrow

valleys and escape into Pakistan.

America was fully conscious of the above realities. It had the capability
to crack the hard nut of Tora Bora with the help of local commanders, but the
escape routes could not be sealed without explicit support of Pakistan.
CIA chief visited Pakistan during first week of December. He sought
Pakistans help for:

Tracking down Osama and agents of al-Qaeda, which implied sealing of

Pak-Afghan border effectively.

Establishing through interrogation of two arrested scientists, whether alQaeda has acquired nuclear capability or not.

In compliance of the instructions given by America, Pakistan ventured

upon securing access to tribal areas. The government approached tribal leaders
and was able to convince them about the gravity of the situation.
Pakistan reinforced border posts and increased patrolling in those areas,
which could be traversed on foot. The remaining border was watched through
air surveillance. The armed helicopters were used for preventing entry into

Pakistan. The surveillance was restricted to daylight hours, because helicopters

had limited night capability.
Reportedly America provided support to Pakistan for sealing the border.
The extent of support has not been disclosed, presumably that was in terms of
sharing relevant information and provision of technical assistance.
Despite the consent of tribesmen, the difficult mountainous terrain did
not permit deployment of large force. Therefore, airtight sealing of an extended
frontage in mountainous terrain could never be achieved. Pakistan could also
not afford committing of large force along its western border taxing resources
meant for eastern border.
The determined intruders could still manage to cross the border. In view
of this Pakistan decided to carry out house to house search in suspected tribal
areas. So far only Parchamzai and Mosazai tribes have consented to allow such
search.
The Coalition spokesman in Islamabad applauded the efforts put in by
Pakistan in closing its border. In turn Pakistan should have also thanked
America for pressing it too hard and enabling it securing of access to tribal
areas. American threat must have softened the tribesmen to great extent.
Despite these arrangements America took no chance in preventing the
escape of foreign fighters. The search was even extended to Arabian Sea. US
sailors approached about hundred merchant ships per week, some of which
were searched for al-Qaeda men.
The Coalition brought no change in its strategy or tactics for the final
battle to be fought in Afghanistan. The Eastern Shoora was asked to provide
ground forces. The local commanders led their respective Lashkars, out of
whom Haji Zaman and Hazarat Ali were prominent.
America did not commit its Special Forces on ground. Less than a
hundred men took part in the fighting. Most of them must have been employed
for directing aerial bombing. They did not even perform the basic role of
tracking and sniping for which they had been trained and equipped. Instead they
wore Afghan dress to avoid being spotted and sniped.
America mainly relied on its lethal air power. Tora Bora tunnels were
subjected to heavy bombardment for weeks. The bunker-busters did the job

effectively and defences became untenable for al-Qaeda men. Once again the
static defence showed its fragility against the might of air power.
Tora Bora underground tunnels were captured, but al-Qaeda fighters were
not encountered. Osama and his men had vacated the strong point and vanished
into forested mountains. They were now to be searched, located and captured or
killed.
US warplanes started targeting villages and vehicles carrying civilians.
Hundreds of civilians were killed or wounded. As the collateral damage
increased, the people left their homes in panic. More than three hundred
thousand residents of this area were displaced. Keeping in mind that area was
sparsely populated, it could be said that entire population had abandoned their
homes.
On 19th December the battle fizzled out in a manner that the winner
couldnt celebrate the victory. The Afghan fighters searched the caves and came
back with bundles of documents and some prisoners. The US airplanes kept
flying through out the day, but could not find a target on which they could offload their ordnance.
Osama was not traceable. Hazarat Ali lost the chance to pocket prize
money worth $ 25 million despite winning the match. Where had Osama gone?
Nobody knew his whereabouts for sure. He vanished into oblivion leaving
everybody guessing.
Haji Zaman said with confidence that Osama Bin Laden was not in
Afghanistan. He speculated in general terms. Fahim had reasons to be specific.
He knew that all his men have been scattered. Osama Bin Laden along with a
small group of followers has disappeared--- presumably he might have entered
Pakistan.
Yusufzai, who has met Osama twice in the course of his duty, was certain
that he would never venture to enter Pakistan and risk being caught. He most
likely was still in Afghanistan even though there were reports to the contrary.
Disappearance of Osama has been a disappointment for Rumsfeld. He
was constrained to confess that the task is still ahead of us. He opined that its
going to be tough, dirty, hard work. The manner in which he has conducted this

war shows that he is quite competent to perform such tasks, particularly the
middle one.
The exact number of casualties suffered by al-Qaeda fighters will never
be known. Reportedly the strength of al-Qaeda men in Tora Bora was less than
a thousand. About a hundred of them have been captured and those many might
have been killed. Pakistan has arrested about two hundred intruders and the rest
have been lost on either side of Durand Line.
It was alleged that hundreds of foreign fighters have escaped with the
connivance of senior Afghan tribal leaders. The Eastern Shoora met in
Jalalabad, discussed the reported escape and rebuked two senior tribal leaders,
without dilating on the nature and extent of their act or neglect.

STILL IN SEARCH OF LEGITIMACY

America fought Afghan war without convincing the large majority of the
world about its legitimacy. The evidence implicating Osama was kept secret,
which added to the dubiousness of its justification. American leadership was
aware of this moral inadequacy in the cause of holy war.
They kept searching for something credible, which could help in
justifying the war against Afghanistan. They had to produce it, not for
consoling the ever-complacent Ummah, but for soothing the pricked conscience
of the civilized world.
At last America found it from the rubbles of Afghanistan. Videotape was
recovered from a building used by al-Qaeda leaders. It showed Osama taking
credit for attacks of 11th September. America released the videotape as proof his
involvement.
The Arab World and family members of Osama questioned the
authenticity of the tape. Qatars al-Sharq wrote, if the US is confident of the
evidence contained in the tape, it should have presented it to the courts instead
of airing it on television. Ad-Diyar of Beirut opined that it has been released to
justify its intention to kill him and intimate that his end is near.
Bush said that it was not doctored. Then he indirectly threatened those
who considered it to be a farce or fake. He said that they are hoping for the
best about an evil man. It amounted to telling the same what Pakistan was told
in the beginning, either you are with us or against us.

America thought it appropriate to release skeptical evidence found in

mysterious circumstances. It raised two important questions. Why was this tape
prepared by al-Qaeda and then left behind to fall in the hands of their enemy?
Why America did not release the evidence collected earlier by its investigating
agencies?
It was argued that some leaders want all their activities to be recorded.
One analyst from the civilized world quoted examples from history. In one
particular case a king desired that his morning excretion should be kept in glass
jars and taken through the streets. Very wisely he avoided specifying that whose
shit was represented by this tape.
He said that Osama belonged to that category. If that was true then
hundreds of tapes must have been prepared. Many of those must have been
recovered and those must have contained plenty of information to attract the
interest of general public. Where have those gone?
An Egyptian lawyer answered the second question. He said that the tape,
found in Afghanistan in November, shows that the US had no evidence
whatsoever when it blamed bin Laden hours after the September 11 attacks and
when it launched its air raids on Afghanistan killing people and destroying
homes. The tape was nothing more than an unconvincing argument for the
justification of the war.
Marine spokesman at Kandahar, where an interrogation cell has been
established, has supported the above viewpoint inadvertently. He said that apart
from other information, they were seeking information about the September 11
terrorist attacks in the US.
He tape also raised doubts about the evidence collected by investigators
and shown to Pakistan as justification of attack on Afghanistan. Had it been as
convincing as evidence contained in this questionable tape, it would not have
been kept secret.
Only a Saudi Prince was convinced about the authenticity of the tape. He
opined that the tape unveiled murderous face of the man. He did not say this,
because of the authenticity of evidence produced by America. The Prince
would have said the same even if there were no tape.

EFFORTS FOR NEGOTIATED SURRENDER

Eastern Shoora served two ultimatums to the foreign fighters. The
Shoora had demanded that the surrender would be accepted only if some top
leaders of al-Qaeda, including Osama, also turned up. On both occasions the
deadlines expired without any response from the fighters.
The Shoora made the final attempt for a negotiated surrender. When talks
were in progress, Commander Hazarat Ali resumed the fighting. He violated the
temporary cease-fire, because he wanted to negotiate the surrender himself. To
his dislike the Arab fighters had contacted Haji Zaman.
The head-money must have caused the loss of patience of Mr. Hazarat.
He is an interesting person. While attacking Tora Bora he stated that in a day or
two we will martyr Osama. The warring sides often use word martyr for their
soldiers killed in action, but it is not used for the enemy. May be this gentleman
was convinced about the righteousness of the cause of his enemy and yet he
was fighting against him.
During negotiations the Arabs demanded that they will surrender arms in
presence of a UN representative and that they will conduct a survey about the
nationality of resisting foreigners to ask for the presence of diplomats belonging
to that particular country when their nationals decide to surrender. Nothing was
drastically wrong with their demand.
They also made it clear to Haji Zaman that they will not surrender to
Americans, because they are not trustworthy. They feared that they would be
killed like those who surrendered in Mazar-e-Sharif and Kunduz. They
repeatedly mentioned about Jangi Fort. Their apprehensions were justified.
America showed no interest in holding talks with these Arabs and was
rather in favour of annihilating them. Rumsfeld reasserted the goal of ongoing
operation, which was to capture or kill all the foreign fighters. Bush renewed
his pledge about Osama in these words, I do not care, dead or alive---either
way. It doesnt matter to me. I do not know whether were going to get him
tomorrow or a month from now or a year from now. I dont really know. But
were going to get him.
It was for this reason that the UN did not make any move to meet the
only pre-condition for the surrender. In Kunduz the absence of its officials on

ground was made an excuse, but in case of Tora Bora the presence could be
arranged easily. The real hitch was that the boss had not given them the green
signal.
To uphold the spirit of its charter, the UN should have responded to the
situation, particularly in view of the willingness of Saudi Government to accept
its nationals. Saudi Foreign Minister in his interview to Washington Post said
that his country would not only accept them, but also punish those who are
criminally involved.
Anticipating the possibility of surrender, the Amnesty International
appealed to international organizations and the Coalition forces to take
appropriate measures for those laying down their arms. The appeal clashed with
the ideas of Bush and Rumsfeld and yet it was made. Amnesty International
knew it well that the surrender ceremony might never take place. Its appeal only
aimed at conveying that the civilized world does care for the human values.
Despite the rhetoric of Bush and his companions, America would not
have resorted to indiscriminate slaughtering of the captives as was done after
the battle of Kunduz. It would have refrained from massacring those who
surrendered, not for human considerations, but for the compelling requirement
of having some important al-Qaeda men alive.
America would have liked to extract useful information from them about
their agents operating in other countries. This could have helped in drawing
valid conclusions for selection of the sanctuaries to be targeted next by the
holy warriors.

GIVES AND TAKES OF PAKISTAN

Pakistans role in the last battle of Afghan War has been commendable.
Its troops made significant contribution in cordoning the last abode of al-Qaeda
fighters. Pleased by its performance, America told India to refrain from
heightening tension in the region in the wake of attack on its Parliament
Building. But Pakistan must note that America has not denied India the right
of self-defence, it has only asked India not to act in haste.
Pakistani troops have captured hundreds of foreign fighters, who tried to
cross the border. Equal number, if not more, might have escaped. Those who
have escaped can create following problems:

At some stage Pakistan may be blamed for their escape by act or neglect.

Tribal areas of Pakistan will draw more attention of the Coalition in the
context of manhunt.

Pakistan may be asked to arrest these fugitives and get involved in an

unending task.

Those who remain at large, sooner or later, may commit terrorist acts in
Pakistan.
The arrest of al-Qaeda men has following connotations:

Handling of these hardened fighters can create serious problems like the
one experienced while transporting them from Parachinar to Kohat. In
that Pakistan suffered as many casualties as the Coalition suffered in the
entire war.

After their identification America will demand extradition of the

important ones. Their extradition will be resented and criticized.

The countries of their origin may not accept the less important detainees.
Their prolonged detention can cause problems including retaliation by alQaeda.

The terrorists have become the most sought after commodity. Mostly
they were sought for elimination. Interestingly there was one customer who
wanted them for promotion of terrorism. Reportedly India has purchased about
hundred of them with the aim of proving Pakistans involvement in perpetration
of terrorism against largest democracy of the world.
The second task assigned to Pakistan by CIA Chief was accomplished
quite satisfactorily as confirmed by the Coalition spokesman in Islamabad.
When asked whether al-Qaeda has acquired nuclear capability or not, he
replied, there is no evidence that has been recovered as far as we know that
would indicate that Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network actually has
acquired weapons of mass destruction.
In fact America knew for granted that al-Qaeda does not have this
capability. The ambiguity was created by design to keep Pakistan under
constant pressure. Resultantly America was kind enough to issue NOC for

release of two nuclear scientists arrested in this connection. But they were
prohibited from talking to reporters and from making public speeches.

CONCLUSION
Al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan have been mostly scattered, killed, or
captured, but Mulla Omar and Osama remain at large. Al-Qaeda has lost the
safe heaven of Afghanistan for good, but many of its men have escaped to other
countries. The survival of the two leaders and forced dispersal of their men
would mean continuation of military operations in and outside Afghanistan.
The war has caused no damage to al-Qaeda network, which exists in
other countries. Despite choking of the sources of funding, it retains the
capability to strike back. Reportedly Abu Zubaiyada, a former resident of Gaza
Strip, is now heading the al-Qaedas international operations. In the absence of
Osama and al-Zahrawai he is likely to head al-Qaeda.
It is bit too early to talk about succession. Osama may be deliberately
kept alive as Saddam was kept in 1991. The hunting party may guide him to
next sanctuary through planned and well coordinated beating and cordoning.
As long as he lives the continuation of holy war is automatically justified.
Speculations, rumors and allegations about presence of al-Qaeda agents
in tribal areas of Pakistan will increase. This will result in subjecting Pakistan to
enormous pressure. Conduct of operations inside Pakistan will become
inevitable.
India will surely embark upon exploitation of the situation. Taliban of
Pakistani brand procured from Northern Alliance may be used for concocting
evidence, as and when required. After next incident of terrorism in India, its
government may agree to the demand of neutral investigation.

21st December 2001

ITS CRUSADES
The Crusades is an equivalent of Jihad for the Christians. Jihad is a
Divine Decree. It means to fight against enemies of Allah; irrespective of
which particular faith they follow. They can even be Muslims. The first Caliph
fought against Muslims who refused to pay Zakat. The Crusades is not a
Divine Decree. It was coined by the Christians to grant holiness to their war
against Muslims.
The clash between two great religions took place immediately after the
emergence of Islam. Muslims defeated the Romans in battle of Yarmuk marking
the beginning of end of Christian rule in Asia and Northern Africa. Soon after
that, the city of Jerusalem became part of Muslim Empire.
It is a holy city for followers of both the religions as well as for the
Jews. The war for regaining control of the holy city was named as Crusades
by the Christians. It was considered holy war against the evil of Islam. That
war has been continuing through centuries with varying intensity.

A PERPETUAL WAR
Soon after the emergence of Islam the Christians were squeezed into the
Continent of Europe. The ordeal of the Christians did not end there. The
Muslims also stepped on to the European soil. The squeezing continued till the
Muslim rulers lost interest in further conquests.
The cornered Christians were ultimately urged by the Church to get back
their lost lands. They responded to the call and achieved the first visible
success in Spain. The Muslims, who ruled the country for about eight centuries
were not only defeated, but the evil of Islam was also banished from the
sacred soil of Christian Spain.
The Church also urged the rulers of Europe to combine their forces to
evict Muslims from the Holy Land. The war for gaining the control of
Jerusalem was named as Crusades. It was considered a religious duty and was
fought as such during the period of Richard the Lion and Salah-ud-Din.
With the departure of these great warriors the Crusades lost its religious
glamour, but continued in its degenerated form. The victory in Spain and war

for regaining control of Jerusalem were not enough for ending the siege the
Christian World. It still remained cordoned by the Muslim Empire extending
from Morocco to Central Asia.
Perforce the Christians of Europe started concentrating on exploring the
sea routes for access to rest of the world. The experience gained through
increased activity in seas helped them in developing their naval power. The
explorations led them to discover new routes and lands, including America.
While crisscrossing the oceans they also found out that they were the
unchallenged masters of high seas. Other nations, including Muslims, were not
aware of the strategic importance of waters around them. Using their Maritime
strength they decided to envelop the Muslim World by going round the
Continent of Africa.
The envelopment of Muslim World began in 18 th Century. British, French
and Dutch led the campaign and reached the countries of West Africa, South
Asia and Far East. They entered these countries as traders but within a century
many of them were colonized.
The Czars of Russia launched the offensive from the north and conquered
whole of Central Asia. Imam Shamel, who put up the last resistance, was exiled
to Turkey. The final blow was delivered in the beginning of twentieth century.
Ottoman Empire, the last stronghold of Muslims was undone with the help of
Arabs. The Ottoman Empire was reduced into Modern Turkey.
When Europe was reaping the fruits of colonizing most of the world,
Hitler emerged into power in Germany. He ventured to do the same to European
countries, which these had done to others. He dragged them into Second World
War and drained the strength of Imperial powers of Europe to the extent that it
became difficult for them to rule their respective colonies. Immediately after the
war, many colonies were granted independence.
The Muslims got rid of the foreign rulers through courtesy of Hitler, but
the departing masters made sure that benefits of freedom remain out of their
reach for long time to come. They fragmented the Muslim World by dividing it
into numerous states. Boundaries of these states were so drawn that almost
every state inherited territorial disputes with its neighbours.

The division of Muslim World was not sufficient for the satisfaction of
the outgoing Crusaders. They worked out a plan to have permanent base in oilrich Arab World. The state of Israel was created in the heart of Arab World. The
Arabs got befitting reward for their support to the Crusaders against the last
Muslim Empire.
Before the start of Second World War the Communists had dethroned the
Czars. Russia had become the Soviet Union in which the practice of any
religion, Islam or Christianity was forbidden. The Christian World had not liked
the non-believers replacing the Christian rulers. Although these non-believers
had joined hands with Europe and America in defeating Hitler, yet at the end of
war the differences resurfaced.
No sooner the Hot war was over the Cold one started. America and
Europe seduced many Muslim countries to join various attractive military
pacts. Muslims failed to read the intentions of the West.
The Soviet Union committed the mistake of military occupation of
Afghanistan. It helped America in rallying the support of Muslim countries. The
believers of two great religions helped Afghans in defeating the Soviets. The
Cold War ended with disintegration of the Soviet Union.
The Christian World, which by then had become self-acclaimed civilized
world, came out with the idea of clash of civilizations. There was nothing
new in this idea, except that it reflected the old desire to be pursued in refined
manner.
The civilized world did not waste time in waiting for the opportunity. It
had to be created. The country that was likely to pose threat to their forward
base was selected as an objective of the Crusades. Iraq was first seduced to
attack Kuwait and then blamed for occupying a member state of the UN.
Iraq was defeated and its forces were thrown out of Kuwait, but Saddam
was spared. He was retained as ready-made justification for future adventures
of the Crusaders in oil-rich Arab World. Thus the Iraq War marked the
beginning of the new phase of the Crusades.
The incident of 11th September has added to the strength of justification
for the Crusades. It no more required the cover name of clash of civilizations.
It has now become a holy war against the evil of terrorism. The Muslims,

irrespective of their grievances, represent the evil forces and the Christians with
the help of other enemies of Islam are crusading against them. Thus the
perpetual war has gained unprecedented impetus.

A COMPREHENSIVE WAR
The holy war against the Muslims is all encompassing. It is being
waged on military, political and economic fronts using all means at the disposal
of civilized world. Media provides support to offensives launched on these
fronts.
On military front the Crusaders resort to direct confrontation only after
trying indirect methods and proxy war.
Direct application of military
means is avoided as far as possible, not because the Crusaders fear Muslims,
but for want of legitimacy.
The holy war has to have some grounds for its justification. Once the
requirement of legitimacy is met, the Crusaders show no hesitation in resorting
to open hostilities. Western Media renders its services to justify the use of force.
At times even a petty excuse is portrayed as sound reason.
The limited military action can be carried out at any time against any
country, with or without approval of the UN. Though acquisition of the consent
of UN has never been a problem, yet at times it has been ignored to save time.
Limited actions were taken against Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc in the
recent past.
The requirement of direct confrontation demands that the Crusaders must
possess unmatched military strength and maintain state of readiness at all times.
Recent withdrawal from ABM treaty and expansion of NATO has been carried
out for this purpose.
America withdrew from ABM treaty announcing that it was a roadblock
to mounting a US defence against missile attack. America seriously considers
that it could be subjected to missile attack in future. Therefore, its territorial
defence must be made impregnable, so that the Crusades continue elsewhere
without fear of retaliation.
NATO is part of the state of readiness plan. It has been expanded since
the end of Cold War. Many countries of Eastern Europe have become its
members. Inclusion of Russia has also been considered, because it is regaining

the Christian identity. Russia can be of great help in checking the resurrection
of Islam in Central Asia.
Despite its expansion NATO cannot reach all parts of the world, because
it is confined to Europe. This shortcoming is taken care of by having military
bases in Diego Garcia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Australia, and South Korea and so
on, not to mention the two important watchdogs of Israel and India.
In fact the term watchdog has become redundant. It does not convey
true extent of roles of Israel and India in the Crusades. They have practically
attained the status of partners. Without formalizing their partnership through a
treaty, they are extensively used for waging proxy war.
While the Crusaders are preparing for attack on next target, Israel has
been encouraged and supported to continue the proxy war in Middle East.
Similarly India has been urged to suppress terrorism in South Asia following
the precedence set by America.
Both speak and act like partners of the Crusaders. Sharon said, we in
Israel are in a war against terrorists, the same war America is fighting.
Vajpayee said in London, both our countries have been familiar with the ugly
face of terrorism long before September 11. He continued, we have to go
beyond al-Qaeda in our war against terrorism and target all sponsors who
finance, train, equip and harbour terrorists.
Israel and India have intensified the proxy war against the evil of
terrorism. Both of them, like the Crusaders, do not care avoiding the collateral
damage. Human rights are violated at will, except that they do not indulge in
gender discrimination while eliminating the terrorists.
Israel is contributing a lot for the Crusades by keeping the oil-rich Arab
World preoccupied. India is making an equally important contribution by
suppressing Muslims of South Asia, which constitute one-third of total Muslim
population. Oil and manpower are two main assets of Muslim World, which
have been exposed to threats through proxy war.
In view of Indias excellent performance, US have decided to enhance
defence ties with India. In the recently concluded talks the two countries have
agreed to:

Increase overall strategic cooperation.

Carry out joint training of Special Forces.

Hold exercises of small unit groups.

Organize training of combined special operations.

Hold exercises for combined humanitarian airlift.

Cooperate in counter-terrorism initiatives.

Coordinate joint counter-proliferation efforts.

All the avenues of cooperation lead towards Muslim World. The last one
is specially meant for Pakistan. America and India are worried about mass
destruction weapons in general and safety of Pakistans nuclear arsenal in
particular.
American Ambassador in Pakistan was asked to comment on
implications of this agreement. She avoided answering the question saying that
both are important for America. She deliberately did not say anything about
its implications for Pakistan.
Israel is doing a commendable job by making the Muslims bleed
profusely. It is really hurting the enemies of the Crusaders as could be judged
from their loud and pathetic screams of Muslims in general and Arabs in
particular.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais has narrated the nature of their screams quite
realistically. What is happening today in Palestine is the worst form of
oppression, while the Western community of nations and hapless Islamic
countries cannot raise finger against the Israeli barbarity. It is shocking how the
international media has turned absolutely biased in reporting events from there.
All Palestinians, and of course all Muslims fighting wars of resistance against
the occupiers and tormentors have been branded as terrorists while Israeli
forces are just securing the legitimate interests of the state.
The indirect methods are applied through auspices of UN. The attractive
slogan of peace is used as ploy. Proliferation of mass destruction weapons and
means of their delivery are considered threat to world peace. In reality the
slogan of peace is used to deny the acquisition of military strength to opponents
of the Crusaders.

The Crusaders also encourage dissentions in Muslim countries. The

dissentions are legitimized through UN and supported by supplying weapons
and money. If needed direct military support is provided under the cover of
peacekeeping.
On political front the main aim of offensive is to impede unity of the
Muslims at all costs so that the dream of Pan-Islamism remains a fantasy. To
this end the Crusaders:

Concentrate on preserving the existing division of Muslim World, which

has been carried out on the basis of Nation Theory.

Territorial disputes, ethnic rivalries and sectarian differences are aired

and supported.

The slogan of democracy is used selectively, only to pressurize those,

who act against the supreme interests of the civilized world. As long as
kings and dictators of Muslim countries tow the line of the Crusaders,
values of democracy are ignored. These are also shunned when an elected
government is likely to act against their interests.

Some scare-crows and ghosts like Saddam are kept intact by design.
They help in mustering the support of sparrow-hearted Muslim rulers.

Contrarily, the political unity of the Christian World is being

strengthened. The barriers of race, language and geographic boundaries, which
are the bases of Western theory of nationhood, are being removed fast. The
Europe has come close to becoming a confederation.
On economic front the holy war has been extremely devastating as
compared to other fronts. The methods applied are:

Most Muslim countries are being strangulated with the use of so-called
debt-traps. Once trapped, the victims are dictated terms beyond the scope
of the subject of economy.

Trade imbalances are created through skillful use of tools of antidumping, quota, quality control, ISOs and so on.

Economic sanctions are imposed to achieve political and military

objectives. Even humanitarian aid is provided with political motives.

Economic disparity is not only maintained, but measures are also taken
for its further aggravation.

The psychological war is waged with the help of its media. Muslim
countries have no means to counter this onslaught. The Media war is primarily
aimed at tarnishing the image of Islam. Its followers are portrayed as ugly
villains of the Crusading heroes.
Those who preach Jihad are termed as Islamist terrorists. Jehadis resort
to militancy, compelling the Crusaders to use military means. Those killed in
twin-towers were victims of brutal terrorist act, but killing of innocent people
during holy war in Afghanistan was justified as inescapable collateral
damage.
Some intellectuals of the civilized world allege that the Quraan
contains extremist views. The concept of Jihad encourages militancy.
Authentication of Hadith is questionable. The men like Rushedi, who try to
tarnish the image of Islam, are not protected without reason.
It implies that Islam in its original form is not acceptable to the civilized
world. To be acceptable, the originality of Islam must be tempered like that of
Christianity and Judaism. Islam minus Quraan and Hadith will be quite
acceptable to the civilized world, as it will not preach extremism.
The second aim of putting mask over the face of Islam is defensive in
nature. Out of the four major religions of the world only two are active in
preaching, i.e. Islam and Christianity. The Christian priests are converting
followers of many religions, but they have not succeeded in making a
breakthrough against Islam. On the other hand Islam has made in-roads into
Christian World. This offensive launched by Tablighis can only be checked if
somehow Islam is made to look ugly.

THE PROOF
The attack of 11th September provided a justification to America to
launch the Crusades. Afghanistan became the first victim of direct
confrontation. Nevertheless America tried not to make the Crusades too
obvious.
Soon after 11th September, India was itching to join America in its war
against terrorism. By accepting the Indian offer, America could have killed two

birds, Pakistan and Afghanistan, with one stone. The offer was rejected to dispel
the impression of clash of civilizations. Instead America shrewdly seduced
Muslims to fight against Muslims.
America took numerous precautionary measures to keep the reality of the
Crusades concealed from Muslims. Some of these were:

Not to mention ever again the word of crusade after the mistake
committed by Bush.

The theory of clash of civilizations was vehemently denounced.

Bush and Blair visited Islamic Centres and Mosques in their respective
countries.

Hosting of Iftar parties, fasting and an affectionate kiss of Bush on the

cheek of a Muslim lady were all parts of the same scheme.

The cover plan was necessitated by the fact that the followers of
Christianity and Islam have mingled into each other inextricably. Every Muslim
country has sizeable population of Christian minority and vice versa. Some
socio-economic interests of both the communities have become inseparable,
which forbids trumpeting of the Crusades.
As the war progressed, the intentions of America became clearer. The
cover plan could hide nothing from the discerning eyes. It was nothing but the
Crusades unleashed against followers of Islam, because:

The necessity of concealing the real intentions is in itself a proof that the
war against Afghanistan constituted first phase of the Crusades.

The causes of terrorism have been ignored altogether. The mother of all
evils, the state terrorism, has been spared, but its off springs are being
crushed.

While Afghanistan was subjected to direct aggression, the freedom

movements of Muslims were targeted through other means.

Ruthless conduct of war was not only the outcome of American

vengeance, but also of hatred of the Crusaders for Muslims.

After the landing of Marines near Kandahar an American General said,

we now own a piece of land of Afghanistan. Anti-Terrorist fighters

should have no interest in a piece of land. These were the words of a

Crusader.

The war in Afghanistan was still on when America started looking for the
next target. The tentative target list includes Muslim countries only.

Anti-Islam propaganda has gained momentum, which focused on Jehadis.

After attack on Parliament Building, more organizations were added to
the ever-increasing list of terrorist organizations.

Despite Pakistans unflinching support, military aid is still being denied.

Instead its nuclear deterrence capability is considered hazardous for
world peace.

As the drama on centre stage neared the drop scene, tempo of sideshow
has been raised.

Last, but not the least is the incident of 11th September, which was clearly
the outcome of ongoing clash of civilizations. If attack on Pearl
Harbour could be avenged at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the attack on
World Trade Centre and Pentagon must also be avenged.

The causes of terrorism were deliberately ignored. No American leader

ever talked about these, because the causes relate to grievances of Muslims
only. Mention of these was avoided even on coaxing. In this context US
Ambassador was asked as to why so many people hate America so strongly. She
opined that the deprived people are jealous of the prosperity of American
people. To her the jealousy was the root cause of terrorism.
Her attention was drawn to the fact that none of the persons involved in
11th September attack were poor. All of them were rich, well educated and
young with promising future. She ducked even lower and said that we are
trying to choke the means at their disposal. She could not be more irrelevant
than she were in answering the question. She, like most American leaders,
lacked the moral courage to accept the fault that lied on their shoulders.
About the conduct of war Gary Younge has summed it up in these words,
to every action there should be an unequal and disproportionate reaction.
Rational path of diplomacy, dialogue and mediation, has been virtually
discarded. The use of force and elimination of those who refuse to accept
American supremacy has been preferred.

Blair urged his people to keep the fire of hatred ablaze by frequently
remembering the incident of 11th September. Marines were told the same during
motivation talks. Rumsfeld wanted Omar and Osama at all costs no matter how
many innocent people were buried under the debris of collateral damage.
The war began on high note of morality. Bush claimed it to be a holy
war against evil forces. The conduct of war has belied his claim. In this holy
war America:

Used the destructive firepower excessively, which was far more than that
dictated by military considerations.

Applied the firepower indiscriminately, which resulted in killing

civilians, including women and children.

Allowed transportation of prisoners of war in sealed shipping containers

over a three-day journey, allowed them to be set on fire, drowned in cold
water and bombed unarmed prisoners.

Attacked the convoy of Pushtoon elders, who were going to Kabul to

participate in installation ceremony.

The foregoing amply proves that attack on Afghanistan was first phase of
the Crusades of 21st Century. It has not been claimed as such, because the
civilized Crusaders of modern times have not declared their intentions as
forthrightly as Richard the Lion did.
Most rulers of Muslim World are reluctant to accept the reality for their
own reasons. The Gulf War of 1991 provided the proof, but no cognizance was
taken. Afghan War has proved it beyond any doubt; still they prefer to keep
their eyes closed. They are trying to seek solace in believing that talk of clash
of civilizations is nothing more than academic discourse. Why?
The acceptance of the reality would mean acceptance of the challenge.
That would make the call for Jihad mandatory. They are afraid of doing it. That
is why they have not even condemned the media campaign aimed at tarnishing
the image of Islam.
They dare not mention the grievances of Muslims who have been denied
justice by the civilized word or with its connivance. Instead the leaders of
Muslim World have tried to win the sympathies of the Crusaders by blaming
extremists for the incident of 11th September.

They failed to react even against proxy crusaders. In words of Shireen

Mazari, they watched it in shameless silence. Shamelessness is not a character
trait by itself. It is an expression of the deep-rooted fear or cowardice. They are
scared of them as well, as they are agents of the Crusaders. Muslim rulers can
dare not act against them.
The cowardice is an unwanted child of weakness. The rulers are directly
responsible for political, economic and military weaknesses of Ummah.
Through perpetual mismanagement and immoral practices they have turned
Ummah into a bunch of beggars. The beggars have no shame and the shameless
will never accept the challenge.

LET UP IS UNLIKELY
The Crusaders are now in search of next target. Bush revealed his
intentions about future designs of the Crusaders by hinting that America will
soon turn to those who possess weapons of mass destruction: nuclear, chemical
or biological.
He was not at all referring to the weapons possessed by France or Britain
and not even those possessed by China and Russia. Without saying it he
referred to the weapons held by the evil forces, which exist only in Islamic
World.
His agent, Annan suggested a pause in the Crusades. He opposed attack
on Iraq. His advice related to the timings of attack. Not today, he said.
Escalation of war at this stage was not recommended; instead he suggested
waiting for the right moment.
Some members of Blairs team are apparently running short of esteem or
steam or both. Admiral Boyce has warned against escalation of anti-terrorist
war. We will have to decide soon whether we make a commitment to a broader
campaign or make a long-term commitment to Afghanistan, he said. The
disagreement is only on continuation of the conquest and consolidation of the
victory. In fact he too suggested a pause in the language of a soldier.
The Crusades will continue. The suggestions for pause will also be
considered discreetly. There will be a pause in the Crusades, but only on
military front. Operations on other fronts will continue. While the next target

goes through selection process, military resources will be regrouped and

repositioned.
There will be no let in Anti-Islam propaganda. It will continue unabated,
because it facilitates achievement of goals set-forth for the Crusaders fighting
on other fronts. It is important, because Muslim World has no defence against
Media offensive.
India has resorted to over-acting to attract attention for the sideshow. It
has amassed troops along Pakistans border. The presence of American forces in
the region has not deterred India, which means that Indians expect no harm
from their presence. India is confident that at worst America will remain
neutral. Possibly America may avail the opportunity to destroy unsafe and
insecure nuclear assets of Pakistan.
The Christian World led by America enjoys the freedom of action to
select and crush the Muslims at will. Muslim leaders are prepared to tolerate all
the injustice without a squeak. Therefore, America is at liberty to tighten the
noose as hard as it deems necessary.

REVIEW OF CRUSADES FIRST PHASE

The Crusades in Afghanistan were not fought the way Richard and Salahud-Din did. The opposing armies were not lined-up facing each other. There
was no spectacle of duels fought on no-mans land in front of the opposing
soldiers.
It was even devoid of duels of the Wild West, as opponents lacked
the courage to face each other and try their skills of sharp shooting.
The entire war failed to present a single act of gallantry on the part of the
Crusaders. The war was fought by applying modern techniques and tactics. In
modern war the fighters are even deprived of the satisfaction of seeing the face
of their victim.
It was war of treachery, as Afghans were seduced to fight with each other.
Brutality was the hallmark of the conduct of war. There was no military strategy
at play. As somebody remarked about battle of al-Amin that Montgomery found
a mechanical solution of a military problem. In case of Afghanistan it was a
high-tech solution of a military problem.
Who has won or lost in this war? The losers in this holy war are many
and their losses are numerous. The winner is only one, the state terrorism. In

that context America, India and Israel are the clear winners. In geo-strategic
terms Pakistan is the lonely loser. Russia, India and Iran are the winners, that
too without being part of the Coalition. India is the only country, whose name
appears in both categories.
What were the contributory factors, which made the victory possible?
Was it high-tech military might of the Crusaders? Yes, to some extent. This was
used primarily for destruction. Was it Northern Alliance? No. It only helped the
Coalition in saving casualties. Was it disunity of Muslim Ummah? Yes, to great
extent.
America has also paid the price in this holy war. By supporting
Northern Alliance, it has brought Russian influence back to Afghanistan. All
that was achieved during eighties has been undone in mad pursuit of tackling
terrorism through military option.
Yet, America can claim to be the victor in Afghan War. If that were so,
then what was the golden strand of its winning strategy? It was clever
exploitation of Afghan differences, which helped America in saving the
casualties.
America is still in search of visible victory against terrorism. Somebody
has aptly compared Afghan War with cartoons of Tom and Jerry. Tom,
however, has used his mind, for a change. He has conserved own energy
employing the Alliance for catching the Jerry. Jerry has out-witted both of them
and escaped. Tommy is still searching for the Jerry.
The mission of eliminating terrorism remains unaccomplished. Terrorism
will definitely subside temporarily. It will surely resurface again, as illegal
occupations, threats of military attacks, economic injustice, lack of interest in
dialogue and will of people not to be subdued without resistance continue
persisting.
Americans have been able to take revenge, but their personal liberty has
been encroached upon in many ways. America has acquired a semblance of
Nazi state, if not for all of its citizens, at least for certain communities.
In Afghanistan a ROBOT regime has been installed. This phrase has been
used, because Afghans hate the word puppet. The remote control, represented

by UN, is held in hands of the civilized world. Afghans would be made to

move around as per commands fed through the controlling device.
Muslims are unduly perturbed about the destruction of many Mosques
during aerial bombing. Judging from the number of Faithfuls visiting
Mosques, one finds them surplus to the requirement. Karzai too has been
seldom seen offering his prayers. Therefore, Interim Administration would be
better advised to discard reconstruction of Mosques and instead provide some
recreation facilities.
Pakistan gained nothing, except postponements as rescheduling of loans
means extending the rope which can be pulled back any time. Its nuclear assets
may become a liability. The Crusaders may take the deterrence as an
invitation for future adventures.
The Yankee friend has led Pakistan to the spot mentioned in the first
article. Pakistan is now in the sweet company of hostile neighbours. The
precedence set by its friend has encouraged India to threaten the territorial
integrity of Pakistan.
The Kashmir cause has received a fatal blow, as was evident from the
proceedings of the First Human Rights Day of 21 st Century held in Pakistan on
10th of December. Even certain Pakistani intellectuals disowned this cause.
They said everything on the subject, but failed to mention the violations
committed by Indian Armed Forces in IHK. It could not be an involuntary
omission. It was a deliberate attempt to sideline the issue.
In fact freedom movements of all the oppressed Muslims have suffered
seriously. These movements are being treated as terrorist organizations, whereas
terrorist states have joined the ranks of the Crusaders. The freedom movements
of oppressed Muslims may soon become threatened species.

CONCLUSION
Pak-US relations hinge on Musharraf. It is unfortunate that destiny of a
nation is tied to one person. People of Pakistan should pray that the man be
saved from all harms, so that he leaves the scene in natural way. His unnatural
exit may invite trouble for Pakistan.
It is alleged that Pakistan is in the habit of poking its nose in affairs of
other countries. Many countries have developed this habit. They all must refrain

from this counter productive recourse. Muslim countries in particular must

attend to their internal problems; sort out inter-state disputes and then march
towards unity of the Ummah.
There will be pause in the Crusades. Muslims should make use of this.
They must shed their petty differences emerging from sectarian, racial and
cultural diversity. They should evolve a strategy, not for confrontation, but to
put their act together.
The Muslims should not expect that the UN might help in safeguarding
the interests of Ummah. Muslim World needs an exclusive forum. They must
resuscitate OIC before it expires. Even the civilized world, whose interests are
amply protected by the UN, has its own forums like EU and NATO.
Manifestation of unity will require consistent effort. The beginning must
be made in the form of political unity, which could pave path leading towards
formulation of an economic block. The military alliance would automatically
become necessary and easier to achieve. Only then the Muslim leaders would
be able to give up the line of least resistance.
The people of Muslim World, particularly those, who are dubbed as
extremists, have an important role to play at this critical juncture. They are not
the only persons, who feel hurt by the gross injustice dispensed to many
Muslims all over the world. Everyone feels hurt. Chins of many leaders must
also be touching their chests in shame.
There is nothing wrong in fighting for justice. It is good to tread the path
of Jihad and seek Shahadat. It is undoubtedly a supreme form of sacrifice. But
they must remember that sacrifice of even an animal, which is sick, wounded or
handicapped, is not acceptable to Allah.
They should realize that there is no wisdom in acting rashly and then not
be able to face the reaction of the opponent. Afghan War has very clearly
brought out this lesson. It is time to eradicate own weaknesses and then fight
for justice in befitting manner.
They must set their own house right. Put the soul into the body of
Ummah, as advised by Iqbal. It may require years or even decades, but keep
waiting till the body has a soul. Patience is great virtue. Then let the enemy feel
the need of carrying out suicide missions.

All these are long term measures. Muslim leaders, however, have an
immediate responsibility to shoulder. After Iraq War America decided to extend
its stay in Middle East. The same can happen in case of Afghanistan, despite
Karzais claim that terrorism in Afghanistan has been defeated.
OIC must seek withdrawal of American troops from all Muslim
countries. It should be done using all the diplomatic prudence at its disposal. It
should be done with urgency, before it is too late.

26th December 2001 PROXY CRUSADES

Taliban government in Afghanistan has been toppled and US-backed
Interim Administration has been installed. Immediate aim of the Crusades has
been achieved, but not the real aim. Leaders of Taliban and al-Qaeda along with
most of their fighters are at large.
Where have they gone? Barring a few most Taliban have melted into
Pushtoon population. Al-Qaeda fighters and some Taliban have fled from
Afghanistan. Most of them have gone to Pakistan to seek refuge till they escape
to other countries.
The pursuit of terrorists must continue. Therefore, extension of the
Crusades to territorial limits of Pakistan is warranted. But it wont be fair to
extend military operations to a friendly, which is partner of the Crusaders.
America is already accused of practicing double standards and considered as
unreliable partner.
Under prevalent circumstances the only way out is to launch proxy
crusades. Indias enmity with Pakistan should be used to promote the cause of
the holy war. India had already shown its desire to join the war on terror. It
would love to carry the war inside Pakistan.
The world too will not doubt American intentions, as India and Pakistan
are known for fighting with each other. However, at this stage of the Crusades a
fully-scale war is not desirable. Efforts have to be made to get the job done by
employing all means short of war, failing which it could be supported to impose
war on Pakistan.

INDIAN GOALS AND DESIGN

The world has numerous trouble spots. The territorial, political or
economic disputes in most of these areas keep simmering and only a few of
them lead to military confrontation. However, two of these have remained
active for more than fifty years, resulting in wars, three times each.
These trouble spots are Palestine and Kashmir. But unlike Palestine,
which has been the lone cause of Arab-Israel conflict, Kashmir is not the only
reason of rift between India and Pakistan. India also harbours a grudge on

account of division of the Subcontinent and considers Pakistan as roadblock in

its journey towards attaining the status of a world power.
Indian ill will of the past and its aspirations for the future have made the
present of both the nations unenviable. Guided by the feeling of smoldering
grudge and burning desires, India imposed three wars on Pakistan. In the last
war India was able to cut Pakistan to size.
Disintegration of Pakistan has not satisfied India. It has been
continuously working to weaken the remaining Pakistan. India strongly feels
that the prevailing situation provides a golden opportunity to remove the
roadblock.
Since September 11, India has been restless for fulfilling its earnest
desire to sort out the Pakistan problem. The Crusaders decided to exploit
Indian desires to serve their interests. India was encouraged to carry out
unprecedented mobilization of its armed forces on very flimsy grounds. The
world has overlooked Indias disproportionate reaction to an incident the kind
of which has been occurring in the Subcontinent since long. Assessment of the
Crusaders proved correct.
What does India want to achieve by treading the dangerous path of
military confrontation? The answer lies in Indian hegemonic aspirations. India
wants to establish its authority in the region and in the same stride settle the
Kashmir issue to its liking.
Within the scope of this all-encompassing aim, the list of its goals could
be very lengthy. Some of the possible goals could be:

One. Resuscitate its campaign for declaring Pakistan a terrorist state. The
campaign had received setback due to Pakistans inclusion in the
Coalition against terrorism.

Two. Redraw attention of the world community and at the same time
minimize the undue importance given to Pakistan as front line state in
war against terrorism.

Three. Pressurize Pakistan to take action against such organizations,

which support freedom movement in Kashmir so that situation in the
Valley tilts in its favour.

Four. Force Pakistan to thin out troops from western border, providing an
excuse to America to extend its military operations into Pakistan.

Five. Intensify operations against freedom fighters in occupied Kashmir,

while attention of the world would be diverted towards international
border.

Six. Cause damage to Pakistans economy by posing war threats on its

either side.

Seven. Capture selected areas of AJK, to overcome its vulnerabilities and

at the same time aggravate vulnerabilities of the adversary.

Eight. Or grab maximum AJK territory making it difficult for Pakistan to

defend the rest of it.

Nine. In case of all-out war, capture sizeable chunk of Pakistani territory

to dictate terms.

Ten. In the course of war deliver a decisive blow on Pakistans nuclear

assets.

Eleven. Solve the Pakistan problem for good.

All the goals relate to Pakistans four major concerns often mentioned by
the President. India would love to achieve all the above, but it cannot do so in
one go. Therefore, the present mobilization may be aimed at achieving
maximum of these.
The most likely course of action could be to take advantage of the
prevalent situation and achieve maximum goals by exerting pressure through
mobilization, failing which increase pressure by carrying out hot-pursuit
operations. By doing so India will hope to achieve eight of the eleven goals
listed above. To this end, the Indian design appears to be as follows:

Threaten and intimidate Pakistan with extensive mobilization and achieve

the first six goals.

If situation permits, carryout limited offensive in AJK with a view to

achieving the first eight goals. The hypothesis of limited offensive is
based on the premise that Pakistan in its existing defensive mode would
not risk retaliating along international border.

In case of all out war India would like to accomplish all its sinister
designs.

PROSPECTS FOR INDIA

India has not given up its efforts to get Pakistan declared as terrorist state.
It has worked hard on this theme almost for a decade and would like to bring it
to logical conclusion. The civilized world seems to be listening attentively.
The Crusaders are targeting the freedom movements of oppressed
Muslims all over the world. India hopes that freedom movement of Kahmiris
would also be treated as cross-border terrorism.
In last four months quite a few fake terrorist attacks were engineered by
India to implicate Pakistan. The present mobilization is projected as reaction to
these attacks. India expects that the world would buy its idea and its aggression
would be legitimized. If need be, it may plan and execute more fake terrorist
attacks employing recently purchased Pakistanis from Afghanistan.
India could not digest the favours showered on Pakistan, despite the fact
that it knew well that kind attention of the civilized world wont last for long.
It did not like even a temporary tilt in favour of Pakistan. It wanted the tables to
be turned sooner the better.
The mobilization has helped India in drawing attention of the world. The
world leaders have started talking to Vajpayee first and Musharraf later. Though
this attention cannot be termed as an appreciation, as was in case of Pakistan,
yet India wont mind to be the focus of attention. The message that India cannot
be ignored, even temporarily, has been received and responded.
Pakistan has taken quite a few actions under pressure, which created an
impression that the Kashmir cause was being disowned:

Accounts of some organizations have been frozen. As a result of latest

Indian allegations, two more organizations have been targeted.

Hundreds of workers of these organizations, including leaders, have been

arrested. Detention of Qazi has also been extended.

Pakistan has disallowed Jehadi operations to originate from its soil.

Pakistan has also decided to de-link ISI from Kashmir struggle.

India has appreciated the beginning made by Pakistan. Jaswant urged on

by saying that Pakistan needs time to curb terrorism. Vajpayee insisted that
Pakistan must end terrorism. India increased pressure by demanding
extradition of twenty terrorists. Its demands are likely to increase depending
upon the response.
Reportedly Pakistan has started thinning out its troops from western
border. Rumsfeld termed it as an unfortunate development. The remaining
aims of mobilization are yet to be achieved.
Indian military operations against freedom fighters in occupied Kashmir
increased considerably after the start of Afghan War. Ten to fifteen Kashmiris
were killed every day. There was no further increase in intensity and frequency
of counter insurgency operations. Perhaps the troops were doing the maximum
they could. However, India has resorted to violating Line of Control more
frequently to punish Pakistan by inflicting casualties across it.
The negative effects of mobilization and tension on Pakistans economy
will be in terms of discouragement of foreign investors, flight of capital,
increase in defence expenditure and decrease in exports. Pakistan will not be
able to benefit from the concessions made by EU and US.
In addition to the goals in relation to Pakistan, Indian Government also
expected to gain political mileage for elections in UP, facilitation of passage of
POTO bill and dissipation of opposition to reinstatement of Defence Minister.
These will be the fringe benefits.
In case violations of Line of Control do not work, India may launch
limited offensive to capture such areas, which are important in the context of
infiltration. Whatever areas India may grab, it would like to retain those, unlike
Pakistan, which vacated Kargil heights. India will annex those on the basis of
precedence set in last war at the end of which the cease-fire line was converted
into Line of Control.
India will avoid initiating war along international border; despite the
fact that it has worked hard for increasing tension and mobilization of troops.
India would like to force Pakistan to start war along international border and get
the blame, as was done in 1971.

In case of all out war, India has the ability to capture sensitive and
sizeable Pakistani territory to dictate terms. During the course of war, India will
attempt to destroy Pakistans nuclear assets, with or without support of the
Crusaders. The civilized world will definitely appreciate Indias spectacular
achievement.
Some hawks in India have coined a new phrase Pakistan is the real
problem as an equivalent of the one very frequently used by Pakistan, i.e.
Kashmir is the real problem. But molestation of territorial integrity of Pakistan
is nothing more than a wish. It cannot be a considered design of military or
political leaders of India. They know that this will not fit in the timetable of the
Crusades.

LIKELY WORLD RESPONSE

The reaction of the world community has to be assessed on basis of the
past experience and the present realities. In three wars of the past, no country
supported Pakistan, except some Muslim countries, which helped Pakistan in
1965.
Presently India has edge over Pakistan in its relations with world
community as may be seen from the following:

The civilized world holds India in very high esteem for maintaining the
balance of power in Asia. In other words, India is important for
containment of China.

India is an active partner in the on-going Crusades. The Christian World

needs it to check the resurgence of uncivilized Muslims.

For developed world, India offers a market seven times larger than
Pakistan.

India has very cordial relations with Russia and Iran. Other countries in
this Region, except China, are of little significance. China, as a matter of
policy, avoids indulging in affairs of others.

Indian voice reaches farther, because of its electronic media, which is

much more developed and effective than that of Pakistan. India has also
invested considerably in other channels, including BBC. The ban on

Indian and Star TV channels indicates that Pakistan is feeling the

pressure of media offensive.

In diplomacy India is far more aggressive. Pakistan has only been

reacting to the moves made by India.

Last but not the least, is the issue of terrorism. The civilized world still
considers Pakistan as hub of militant organizations.

The prevalent conditions rule out optimism of any kind. Pakistan cannot
even hope for the best while facing the worst. In view of the ground realities
the possible reaction of the world community would be:

America has been denied a justification for direct military action against
Pakistan, because it joined the Coalition right at the outset. Perforce,
America had to launch proxy war through India. India was kept under
control during Afghan War, but the moment it neared the end, India was
told to go ahead with its plans. Since America is the sponsor of proxy
war, its reaction to Indo-Pak confrontation will be dictated by the aims of
Crusades. Therefore, it will:

Keep advising for restraint, thereby encouraging India, as is done in

case of Israel. However, it may not provide physical support to India
to that extent, hoping that India would do the job on its own.

Impose sanctions on warring countries notwithstanding, which

country initiated the aggression. Nature of sanctions will be biased as
it has been in the past. The effects of sanctions will be more harmful
to Pakistan as compared to India.

Through diplomatic pressure, force Pakistan to take stern action

against the so-called extremist organizations. Bush wanted
Musharraf to make clear statement on crackdown against terrorists.
The Crusaders want that Jehadis and Islamists should be targeted.

The presence of US troops in and around Pakistan would be quite

helpful in exerting psychological pressure.

Europe will follow the master. Bush represents Richard the Lion in the
Crusades of 21st Century. The Christian World will follow him. Europe
has strong forums of EU and NATO to provide collective support.

Britain through Blair will remain the most active player in proxy
crusades. He has fully supported Indian stance on Kashmir as was
evident from the joint declaration issued at the end of his visit to New
Delhi and from his statements:

The declaration said, we condemn all those who support terrorism:

those that finance, train or provide support for terrorists share their
guilt.

The declaration urged, those responsible for these crimes must be

delivered to justice.

About dialogue on Kashmir he repeated Indian pre-condition,

provided that this threat is over, I believe that India is prepared for
dialogue.

He also agreed with India on the issue of mediation, but it is

something that Pakistan and India have to decide.

Russian stance will have a touch of neutrality, but it will provide political
and diplomatic support to India. Military hardware will keep flowing. It
may also encourage Afghans to exert pressure on Pakistan, as it has not
forgotten the war of eighties.

China will only provide diplomatic and moral support to Pakistan.

OIC is an ineffective organization. Its support or opposition is of no

consequence. It is incapable of influencing the events in any way.

Present regime of Afghanistan would like to oblige India and Russia by

taking such actions as they may desire. However, Afghans are not in
position to exert physical pressure on western border.

LIMITATIONS OF PAKISTAN
Pakistan has been hostage of the events since September 11, as on that
day it stood completely isolated. Since then there has not been a single event,
which was influenced by Pakistan. Till December 13 Pakistan acted to the
wishes of the civilized world under enormous pressure. After attack on Indian
Parliament Building Pakistan has been reacting to Indian moves.

This trend is likely to continue, because Pakistan seems to be completely

convinced that its survival lies in pursuit of peace. It wants peace at all costs
for following reasons:

Indian moves are part of the pressure tactics employed by the Crusaders.

The presence of the Crusaders in and around Pakistan, who are in search
of next target. A section of Western Media has claimed that war has
already been extended to Pakistan.

While Northern Alliance is in power in Afghanistan, Pakistan has hostile

neighbours on either side. It cannot afford to neglect western border,
despite non-existence of any material threat.

Pakistan lacks internal stability. The governments decision to surrender

to the will of America is disapproved quietly by many and vocally by
some religious parties. The actions against Jehadis and Islamists have
further antagonized these elements.

Pakistan does not have a representative government. The issue of

democracy can be raised any time to proceed against Musharraf.

Militarily Pakistan has been weakened through imposition of sanctions

on various pretexts. India on the other hand has accumulated military
hardware through purchases and indigenous production. Overall military
balance has tilted in favour of India.

Pakistans nuclear deterrence at this moment is virtually neutralized. It

cannot take the risk of using this option, because the Crusaders will react
violently to destroy Pakistans nuclear assets. Pakistan has already
declared that it would not use nuclear weapons.

India knows that Musharrafs claim that Pakistan is ready to accept the
challenge lacks the will for the reasons mentioned above. In this context the
handshake by Musharraf will be taken as a weakness and not as a gesture of
goodwill. India is aware that peace is need of the hour for Pakistan, for which it
is willing to pay the price. Therefore, India has decided to extract the
maximum out of Pakistan with the support of Crusaders.
America wants that pressure on Pakistan should be maintained till goals
of the Crusades are achieved. Presently it is concentrating on terrorism, but

Pakistan can be asked to roll back its nuclear programme at some later stage
when a plausible excuse is found.
America will work on Pakistan for a longer period. For this purpose US
Administration is considering to nominate a mediator for India and Pakistan.
If it happens, the mediation will be no different from the Middle East. It is clear
that Pakistan will be treated as Palestine and India will be favoured like Israel.
Pakistan has tried its best to defuse tension. India has acted other way
round. Even interaction of handshake during SAARC Summit meeting has not
helped in reducing the tension. How long the tension will prevail? It all depends
upon India and its sponsors.
In terms of time-frame India and America are in complete agreement. It
is not a game of days or weeks. Pakistan will remain under pressure for quite
long. Nerves of Pakistani leaders will be tested to their limits.
Pakistans decision to seek peace is quite prudent, but it must keep the
count of price it is paying for it. The price paid in seeking peace should not
exceed the price likely to be paid in case of war. This kind of peace will not
serve the interests of Pakistan.

CONCLUSION
At the end of his visit to Islamabad, Blair said that we agreed to fight
against all forms of terrorism. Pakistan may hope that the word all included
state terrorism as well. Blair, as representative of the Crusaders, was sure that
this word included all freedom movements of Muslims, but not the state
terrorism.
There is no doubt that the Crusaders consider all such movements as
terrorism. Crushing of these is their foremost aim. Therefore they want that
Pakistan should accept Indian contention on Kashmir issue, i.e. stop
perpetrating cross-border terrorism.
The settlement of Kashmir dispute in accordance with UNSC resolutions
is of no significance to them. Their ultimate aim, in the context of Pakistan, is
the safety of its nuclear assets.
Pakistan had opted for onions right at the beginning. The Crusaders
hoped that time would come when Pakistan would be reluctant to eat no more

onions. Pakistan however has surprised them by accepting their demands no

matter how unfair those were.
The Crusaders adopted Indian option with the hope that in relation to
India, the possibility of refusal by Pakistan to eat no more onions would
considerably increase. This is what they want. The refusal will provide an
excuse to blame Pakistan for supporting the terrorism. It will then be used as
justification to proceed against Pakistan to achieve the ultimate aim.
7th January 2002

SUCCUMBED SUDDENLY
An American Senator visiting Pakistan broke the news of Presidents
address to the nation. While breaking the news, he claimed that the speech
would change the course of history. The announcement about the address of
head of a sovereign state came through unusual channels. It surely dented the
pride of Pakistanis.
The Senator knew the contents of speech. These contents were either
discussed with the visitor or the text of speech was shown to him. This could
not have been done for any reason, except for its vetting by the representative
of the boss. Once approved, the President read out the speech on 12th January
2002. The Senator was not wrong in his assessment. It should surely change
the course of history to the liking of the Crusaders.
In his speech the President vowed to eradicate extremism from the soil of
Pakistan. He banned certain religious and Jehadi organizations declaring that
nobody would be allowed to perpetrate terrorism in the name of Islam. After
having announced the measures to curb terrorism, he stressed upon importance
of negotiated solution of disputes with India. He requested America to help in
settlement of Kashmir dispute.
With the advice of sanity, he cautioned Vajpayee that if India still
preferred the use of military means then Pakistan would respond with all the
force at its disposal. He indirectly warned India about dire consequences of any
unscrupulous adventure. He served the warning only after taking measures,
which he thought, would surely cool down India.

TOWARDS HISTORIC DECISION

The menace of sectarian extremism and intolerance has existed in
Pakistan for about two decades. It has harmed Pakistan in many ways:

Peace and harmony of Pakistani society have been completely disturbed.

Thousands of valuable lives have been lost.

Feeling of insecurity prevails in all corners of Pakistan. Insecurity has

hampered economic progress, particularly in the context of foreign
investment.

Attacks on places of worship tarnished the image of Islam and Pakistan.

These incidents provided strength to the argument of the civilized world
that Pakis were intolerant people.

Jehadi organizations provided India an excuse of cross border terrorism,

which was exploited to pressurize Pakistan.

As result of three and four above Pakistan constantly faced the threat of
being declared as a terrorist state.

While alleging Pakistan for cross border terrorism, India exploited the
existence of extremist organizations by penetrating them and perpetrated
terrorism in Pakistan.

The successive governments in Pakistan were fully aware of harms

caused by the intolerant elements of the society, but none of them took any
steps to solve the problem. The hesitation in taking action was primarily due to
inherent complacence.
Some of the extremist organizations raised Lashkars and Jaishes in the
name of Jihad. Only a few of them practically helped the freedom movement in
Kashmir and others indulged in sectarian killings. But the name of Jihad was
used by all and sundry, as it facilitated the collection of donations.
These organizations and the Government of Pakistan supported Kashmiri
freedom fighters in haphazard manner. Their support was dubbed as cross
border terrorism by India. Pakistan denied the allegation, but continued
supporting Kashmiris in an incoherent manner. No action was taken to control
the activities of militant organizations. Consequently their activities became
harmful for the Kashmir cause in the wake of war on terror and Indian
propaganda.
Attack of 13th December was equated with the attack of 11th September.
Militant organizations of Pakistan were blamed for the terrorist attack.
Thereafter, India moved in American style; list of suspects was provided to
Pakistan with the demand of their extradition. When Pakistan asked for the
evidence, India responded by mobilizing its armed forces.
On completion of the mobilization, Advani moved from Delhi to
Washington to ensure that maximum diplomatic pressure was exerted on

Pakistan. The civilized word fully obliged India as can be seen from the
following:

Powell contacted Musharraf quite frequently. These contacts were not for
defusing tension, but to pressurize Pakistan to accept Indian demands.
For defusing of tension he should have contacted his Indian counter-part.

On observing reluctance on the part of Pakistan, Bush served a warning

on 8th January. He declared that there was no certainty that the war can
be averted. Next day America categorically told Pakistan to move
against militants and urged action on Indian list.

Advani confirmed that America has assured to further press Pakistan. The
same day Blair and Putin asked Pakistan to launch crackdown on
militants.

Finally Indian Army Chief announced the possibility of limited war.

Powell urged India to be patient as Pakistan had shown signs of
willingness.

Bush made the final gesture to exert pressure on Pakistan by showing his
keenness to hear the speech.

Advani remained in Washington till the speech was broadcast. The

diplomatic offensive of India, supported by the Crusaders, bore the desired
results. Within less than a month after the incident of 13 th December, Pakistan
agreed to meet the demands. The President announced to launch a crackdown
on terrorist organizations that existed within the territorial limits of Pakistan.
The action against extremism in Pakistan was essential for the peace and
harmony of its people. It should have been taken much earlier and voluntarily.
Unfortunately this good decision lost the charm, because of its timings. It
came as a result of Pakistan succumbing to pressure of the Crusaders exerted
through India.

INDIAN RESPONSE
India took time to react to the speech made by Musharraf. A cabinet
meeting was held to formulate response to Pakistans decision to ban religious
and Jehadi organizations. Jaswant then announced the Indian reaction as under:

Pakistan has only stated its intention. Let it first walk the talk. Id like to
give all the time for effective implementation of what General Musharraf
has announced.

We welcome the now declared commitment of the Government of

Pakistan not to support or permit anymore the use of its territory for
terrorism anywhere in the world, including in the Indian state of Jammu
and Kashmir.

Consequently we expect Pakistan to cooperate with India in stopping all

infiltration across the international border and the Line of Control.

The lessening of tension on the border is entirely dependent on the steps

taken by Pakistan on operationalizing Musharrafs measures announced
in his speech. You cant expect as soon as a speech is made, (military) deescalation should start.

There is no scope for any third party involvement in Kashmir dispute in

near, middle or distant future.

We believe the steps taken by India have made the change in Pakistani
Presidents attitude.

He was disappointed on Pakistans inaction on the list of terrorists

provided by India.

Indian response is quite similar to that of a schoolteacher, who tells a

naughty boy on his promise of good conduct, that I shall watch and expect a
definite improvement in your behaviour. The naughty boy, Pakistan, has to
come up to the expectations of the schoolteacher to earn a good character
certificate.
The formal diplomatic response of India indicated no change in its
attitude towards Pakistan. India continued insisting that:

Pakistan is involved in cross border terrorism. The freedom movement

in Kashmir is nothing but terrorism.

Pakistan, particularly Musharraf, is not trustworthy. His actions do not

commensurate with his words. Every word has to be proved with prompt
follow up action.

State of Jammu and Kashmir is part of India, therefore third party

mediation is ruled out.

Dialogue between India and Pakistan will start only after India feels
satisfied over good conduct of Pakistan.

The most significant response was expressed in second last excerpt of

Jaswants statement. According to him the change in Pakistans policy came as
result of Indian actions. This was a dangerous inference drawn by India, which
can have serious implications:

De-mobilization may not take place in near future, despite temporary

defusing of tension, because India thinks that its actions are bearing the
desired results.

Indian attitude towards Pakistan will become more arrogant, because of

its belief that bullying has worked in intimidating Pakistan.

In future India will be tempted to resort to military means more

frequently, discarding the peaceful course of dialogue.

The Crusaders will continue supporting India. Resultantly India will keep
insisting on its demands. It has already asked for action on the list of 20 and
reportedly Pakistan was considering action on the list under American
pressure.
Although Pakistan has tried to counter this demand by preparing a similar
list of terrorists alleged for attacks inside Pakistan, yet it might agree to hand
over non-Pakistanis. The only factor, which might cause hesitation, is that such
action could encourage India to send more lists.
Reportedly, India has asked Pakistan to provide the list of fighters
operating in occupied Kashmir. Pakistan had obliged India in the past by
providing lists of Sikh separatists. India has demanded the list of Kashmiris on
basis of that precedence.

EFFECTS ON PAKISTAN
Indian partnership with the Crusaders has been strengthened. The
civilized world has played key role in establishing Indian authority in the
region and Pakistan has practically accepted India as regional bully.

Pakistan seems to be convinced that it cannot resolve Kashmir dispute

without explicit help of the West. The President begged America for the
settlement. This request was made to forestall criticism of the people of
Pakistan and Kashmir, rather than hoping that America would mediate.
Pakistan has virtually surrendered the Kashmir cause, because:

Pakistan has realized that due to overwhelming military superiority of

India, the dispute cannot be settled through military means.

Freedom struggle is not likely to succeed, as all means of support to

freedom fighters have been choked under pressure of the Crusaders.
Jehadi groups have been declared as terrorist organizations.

Peaceful solution through dialogue is not possible due to persistent

refusal of India to talk to Pakistan till its demands are met. Demands will
never end.

Negotiated solution through mediation has become a far-fetched idea in

view of apathy of the UN and the Crusaders. India too is allergic to third
party role for obvious reasons.

In view of the above the support to Kashmiris has been curtailed to

requests and mercy appeals. Nevertheless, Pakistan will continue talking about
Kashmir for face-saving and to silence the militant elements that have
remained emotionally involved with freedom of Kashmiri people for more than
half a century.
There is a remote possibility that Pakistan might have been assured help
in resolution of Kashmir dispute, provided it restricted its efforts to diplomatic
means. If so then Pakistan will find it extremely difficult to first stall the
diplomatic offensive of India and then launch the counter offensive
successfully. Pakistan should not negate the history. It must remember that the
assurances have seldom materialized when it comes to redressing grievances of
the Muslims.
With the decision of crackdown, Pakistan has accepted the existence of
terrorist organizations operating from within its territorial limits. Although the
civilized world has appreciated the actions taken against these elements, yet it
will never issue an NOC to Pakistan. The Crusaders will keep suspecting

Pakistanis for extremism or militancy or terrorism. A suspect can be termed as

accused anytime, because necessity of evidence has been made irrelevant.
Pakistan has taken this historic decision primarily to avert war. It has
been averted but only temporarily. India has refused to talk about demobilization. The tension can be mounted again as and when desired by India.
An insignificant terrorist act can provide the justification.
Mosque and Madrassa are synonymous to Islam. These have been
subjected to crackdown. The number of such Mosques and Madrassas may be
nominal, but the action can create wrong impression of militancy in Islam.
The banned organizations are bound to react sooner or later. They may
focus on destabilizing the government. If these elements are not handled
prudently, then internal security of Pakistan will be at stake. In case the plan is
executed fairly it would be a great service to the nation. Positive effects will be:

Elimination of intolerance will help in maintaining peace and tranquility.

Integration of various sectarian organizations and institutions into the

mainstream will strengthen national unity.

The tolerance so displayed will help in restoring the image of Pakistan

abroad.

Economic activities will be revived and foreign investors may be

encouraged to invest in Pakistan.

CRUSADERS AIM
The Crusaders and their partner India have applied the tactics of coercion
and brinkmanship quite successfully. India mobilized its armed forces and the
Crusaders exerted the diplomatic pressure. The combined effect of both became
unbearable for the rulers of Pakistan.
The gravity of situation compelled Pakistan to forget about its concerns.
It remembered only one thing; the necessity of averting the war. Pakistan
wanted peace and its enemies dictated the price. Interests of the Crusaders have
been served well by the crackdown against Muslim extremists. Indian
accusations of cross border terrorism have been vindicated. India is now better
placed to crush the freedom movement in occupied Kashmir.

The retreat of Pakistan, in search of peace, will strengthen the arrogance

of India. It will exert pressure on Pakistan more vigorously, with a view to
reducing the obstacle value of Pakistan in fulfillment of its hegemonic
designs. The Crusaders on the other hand realize that Pakistan has eaten
onions to its capacity. Musharraf cannot be expected to do more than what he
has already done. Therefore, they may reconsider their strategy.
Their ultimate aim will however remain at place. They know that this aim
cannot be achieved by asking Musharraf, or any other Pakistani leader, to do it
voluntarily. Therefore, presence of Musharraf on the scene may be considered
as an obstacle in achieving the final goal. The circumstances can lead him to a
place where Zia-ul-Haq found himself after withdrawal of the Soviets from
Afghanistan. He was no more needed by the civilized world and he lost his
life in an air crash.
The Crusaders have used the man to the extent they wanted. His
elimination from the scene can become necessary. It will be done in a manner
that must lead Pakistan to chaos. The Crusaders will then move to save
Pakistans nuclear assets from falling into the hands of extremists.
The sectarian intolerance and resultant terrorist attacks inside Pakistan do
no harm to the civilized world. This menace is not a matter of concern for
them; instead it pleases them as it may provide them justification to denude
Pakistan from its nuclear capability.

CONCLUSION
The decision to eliminate extremism from the society is commendable
barring its timing and naming it as crackdown. Ideally it should have been
taken at least a decade ago. In that case India would not have claimed that
Pakistan has moved under pressure of its military threat. Had it been taken
timely, the people of Pakistan would have accepted it with pride.
To call reformation of religious institutions in an Islamic state as
crackdown is absolutely wrong. It undermines the spirit of this bold and noble
action. Any name, which alienates Mullas and Madrassas, must be shunned.
The reformation must aim at their integration with the society. Closing of
religious institutions must be avoided. The existing infrastructure of Madrassas

should be utilized for the betterment of everybody as discussed in a preceding

article.
It is unfortunate that only religious institutions are being targeted. There
is need to reform entire education system in Pakistan. The government and the
people of Pakistan must devote their energies to perform this duty with the
spirit of Jihad.
In view of the future designs of the Crusaders, the revival of political
process in Pakistan has become extremely essential. Elections must be held to
grant legitimacy to rulers of the country. It will help in preempting offensive of
the Crusaders against Pakistans nuclear capability.

20th January 2002

PRESSURE PERPETUATED
The Crusaders and the proxy crusaders must have been surprised by the
immediate retreat of Pakistan. They could never expect that Pakistan would so
easily disown freedom struggle of Kashmiris for which it has been fighting for
more than half a century.
They were heartened by the initial success in game of brinkmanship.
They saw their strategy working, but so far their adversary had only declared
his intention. To ensure that the commitment made by him materializes, they
decided to keep pressing hard.
America exerted pressure in friendly manner. FBI vowed to help
Pakistan (and India) in fighting against terrorism. A team surveyed availability
of logistic facilities and resultantly secured US rights to use Karachi airport.
Meeting of US Marine commander with DG JSHQ and an announcement that
US will not withdraw troops from Pakistan followed it.
On the other hand the assistance provided to India was not aimed at
securing foothold on its territory. It was to back India in exerting pressure on
Pakistan. Myers during his visit to India said that US would not step in IndoPak face-off.
This carried contrasting but clear messages for India and Pakistan. India
was urged on to maintain pressure and Pakistan was threatened to meet their
demands. It must move against militants with urgency failing which the war
would be inevitable. India obliged the Crusaders and both combined their
efforts to perpetuate the pressure.

INTENT AND EXTENT

The daily News of Pakistan dated 22nd January 2002 reported, India and
US planned roadmap to fight terrorism. The news item raised a very pertinent
question. What kind of terrorism was that for which America needed bilateral
cooperation with India despite having a formidable coalition to fight against
this evil?

This question can have many answers, but all of them will have one thing
in common. The roadmap prepared by Indo-US collaboration is meant to fight
against terrorism originating or supported or financed from within territorial
limits of Pakistan.
Like roadmap of America and India, the roadmap of militant
organizations operating in Pakistan leads towards Kashmir. Therefore, by
virtue of existence of these organizations within its territorial limits Pakistan is
heading towards direct confrontation with India and the Crusaders.
It also confirms the conclusion drawn earlier about Indias active
participation in the Crusades. India enjoys the same status in South Asia, which
Israel has in Middle East. Some of the recent events further corroborated this
contention.
An Indian Army General was removed from command for committing a
tactical error. He had moved his troops beyond certain line. This mistake was
detected by American satellite and reported to New Delhi. Indian Government
promptly dealt with the culprit General.
It implied that India and America had agreed not to move troops beyond
a mutually agreed upon line. It would have been considered essential to avoid
undesirable reaction from Pakistan, which could jeopardize the intended aims
of brinkmanship. India had to take serious cognizance of the mistake.
An American team visited India to sell radars meant for ground
surveillance. These could be deployed in occupied Kashmir to check infiltration
across Line of Control and to detect movement of freedom fighters within the
Valley.
Myers, head of US armed forces, desired to have strong military ties with
India. Military cooperation between India and America is growing faster than
ever before. Whereas Pak-US defence group revived during Musharrafs visit to
Washington, is not likely to meet before April. America is deliberately pursuing
go-slow policy regarding its military relations with Pakistan.
Pakistan and its friend China are aware of this reality, although both have
avoided mentioning their concerns about Indo-US collaboration. China sought
American support for Pakistans peace efforts during visit of Bush, which
meant that China was fully conscious the role of America in creation of tension

in the Subcontinent. Similarly, Musharraf also kept requesting America for

easing border tension.
The aim of the game of brinkmanship can be understood bearing in mind
the US war against terrorism or the Crusades, i.e. annihilation of all freedom
fighters belonging to Muslim World. Therefore, India and America are helping
each other in crushing the terrorism perpetrated by Jehadi organizations
operating from Pakistan. Both want that Pakistan should not only disown the
freedom struggle of Kashmiris, but also take stern action against these
organizations.
To this end America urged Pakistan to severe all kinds of support and
contacts of government agencies with militant organizations. Pakistan
followed the instructions. New York Times has reported that ISI ties with
militants have been severed.
Mr. Dam visited Pakistan to discuss measures for choking flow of funds
to these organizations. The focus was on drug money and transfer of money
through Hawala system. America has asked for legislation to control these
evil practices and demanded strict action against the violators.
America wanted to inculcate moderation and tolerance in Pakistani
society. Reportedly it has pressed for repeal of anti-Ahmadi and blasphemy
laws. It has also sought assurance that measures already taken would be
implemented in letter and spirit. President of Pakistan has assured them.
Musharrafs crackdown on militant organizations has not impressed
India, because it did not see any decrease in cross-border terrorism. It
warranted exertion of more pressure. India resorted to violations of Line of
Control. Indian shelling in different areas of AJK resulted in killing of innocent
civilians, including a government official.
Concurrently India intensified counter-insurgency operations in occupied
Kashmir. The rate of casualties inflicted on freedom fighters has increased. The
punitive operations against innocent Kashmiris have been carried out with
reinvigorated brutality.
The brutal actions of India were ignored by the civilized world. It made
Indian leaders more arrogant. Vajpayee declared that Pakistan would never get
Kashmir and ruled out ceding any Kashmir part for peace or for conversion of

Line of Control into international border. Instead India sought key areas along
Line of Control in exchange of de-escalation. He asked Pakistan to quit Azad
Kashmir and announced that return of AJK would be at the top of agenda in
future dialogue.
Despite Musharrafs pledge to suppress militants perpetrating terrorism
in the name of Islam, India continued alleging Pakistan for sponsoring
terrorism. Vajpayee claimed that Pakistan was still a haven for terrorists and
India saw no let-up in cross-border terrorism. India frequently claimed killing
Pakistanis fighting in Kashmir.
India expressed its dissatisfaction on steps taken by Musharraf. Mishra
reiterated his call for concrete anti-terror steps by Pakistan. Indian Government
gave a fresh list of 8 most wanted persons to US apart from repeatedly
demanding action on list of 20 men. Encouraged by the results of pressure
tactics, Advani vowed to win proxy war.
On 22nd January 2002 some miscreants attacked police guard posted at
US Centre in Kolkata, killing four policemen and injuring twenty. India blamed
Pakistan-based group for carrying out this terrorist act. Bush too termed this
attack as an act of terror.
This was one of the most baseless accusations to pressurize Pakistan.
Subsequently India tried to shift the blame on Bangladesh, but earned a prompt
and firm snub from Bangladeshi Government. Pakistan has lot to learn from
Bangladesh about dealing with India.
Indian arrogance kept increasing. It threatened to terminate Indus Water
Treaty. After negotiating billion-dollar arms deal with Russia it blamed Pakistan
for arms race. It also showed concern about Pakistani nukes. America as
leader of the Crusades already had similar worries. It repeatedly expressed the
desire to have a pact with Pakistan and India on nuclear devices.
Indian pressure on Pakistan is generally based on Chankias principle of
hate thy neighbour. Every move of India originates from its hatred for
Pakistan. Like love, the parameters of hatred are also too vast to be demarcated.
All moves have been carried out like serving of show cause notice. The
Executive, India, on behalf of the board of Governors, the Crusaders, has

performed well. Pakistan has been submitting timely explanations to every

notice, but none of these has been accepted so far.
The spate accusations and allegations has forced Pakistan to forget about
the key-issue. It has stopped talking about everything, except de-escalation.
Almost every day Pakistan made offers for reduction of tension and resumption
of dialogue. India rejected all offers instantly. Vajpayee and his ministers ruled
out withdrawal of troops more frequently than it was proposed.
Pakistans response to Indian moves has been defensive in nature. Its
offers for dialogue have been rejected by India with firm and laud NO.
Appeals to the civilized world for reduction of tension in the Subcontinent
have earned no response.
During his visit to Washington, Musharraf declared that bilateralism for
resolution of Kashmir dispute has failed and he pleaded for third party
mediation. The civilized world showed no interest in mediation and resultantly
India flatly refused to talk on this issue. His call for ending repression in
occupied Kashmir resulted in intensification of operations against freedom
fighters.
Musharraf vowed not to bow to Indias demand for extradition of 20
wanted men. Pakistan tried to counter Indian demand by including Advanis
name in a list of most wanted criminals. Counter allegations always complicate
the issue.
President of Pakistan, referring to measures taken by him against militant
organizations, said that it was Indias turn to respond. He indirectly suggested
de-escalation. In turn Vajpayee blamed Pakistan for border standoff.
Occasional warnings of serious consequences of adventurism have not
deterred India. His advice to Vajpayee for giving up brinkmanship has been
responded by carrying out air exercises near Pakistan border. At the same time
Indian President pledged for tough action against fighters in Kashmir, while
maintaining troops buildup.
Ironically, despite creating unprecedented tension in the region, the
Bania mentality of Indian Government felt the pinch of suspension of
lucrative exchange of freight trains. Pakistans NO to resumption of goods
trains was one of the few firm steps taken by it.

Another NO pertains to Pakistans nuclear capability. Mala fide

intentions working behind the proposed Indo-Pak pact on nuclear devices have
been identified correctly. Foreign Office rejected the proposal by saying that
Pakistan would not rollback under duress.

PRESSURE FROM WITHIN

Pakistan was also subjected to pressure by actions or reactions of the
organizations targeted by the government. On 24th January a bomb went off
outside British High Commission. The rockets placed near Karachi airport were
found on 18th February. US plane was fired at in Jacobabad on 26th and on the
same day sectarian violence re-emerged killing ten people in a mosque in
Rawalpindi.
The worst incident in terms of its effects took place on 23 rd January. Pearl
of Wall Street Journal was abducted in Karachi. He had come to Pakistan to
prepare an investigative report about some terrorist organizations based in
Pakistan. He became casualty of his inquisitiveness. The kidnapped journalist
was definitely in touch with unknown persons of some terrorist organization, if
not al-Qaeda. Without establishing a contact he could not think of compiling an
investigative report.
Soon after his abduction a shadowy group demanded release of
Pakistani Taliban, Mulla Zaeef and F-16s. The kidnappers threatened to kill US
reporter in 24 hours. Their demands were rejected, while Powell raised the issue
with Musharraf.
CNN was the first to claim that Pearl was dead. Wall Street Journal
promptly refuted this report. The claims about his death, as well as its rejection,
were not based on any evidence. CNN claim was based on logic. The man, who
had gone or had been drawn so deep into the terrorist network, was not likely to
be spared. Wall Street Journal hoped for survival of its man.
The mystery of abduction thickened with the arrest of each suspect. All
leads led the investigators to the dead end. Expansion of search proved futile.
Wall Street Journal pleaded for dialogue. Moin ruled out any talks with
abductors, but he appealed for Pearls release.
The appeal of Interior Minister of Pakistan indicated that investigation
teams had failed in making any headway and he was clearly worried about

Pearls safety. Pakistan and America could only hope that the newsman was
still alive.
The arrest of Omar revived the hopes of breakthrough. Reportedly he
admitted kidnapping Pearl, identified key go-between and claimed that Pearl
was alive. But the defiant Omar gave no clue about Pearl. The investigations
again reached the dead end.
A month after the abduction US Consulate in Karachi received videotape
confirming the worst that had been claimed by CNN much earlier. The
videotape contained the evidence about Pearls execution. The Wall Street
Journal called it an act of barbarism and undoubtedly it was. In civilized world
this view however holds good only to the slaying of its citizens.
Musharraf promptly phoned Bush who was visiting China. Bush
condemned the death of Pearl and announced that Americas resolve to fight
against terrorism has been strengthened. Musharraf also resolved to move
against terrorism with all force and ordered arrest of Pearls killers.
Pakistani press was the first to report about possible Indian connection in
abduction of the newsman. Later on the government sources also started
murmuring about Indian linkage. Finally the Foreign Minister, who was visiting
Germany, formally announced in a press conference that a suspected kidnapper
was in contact with senior government officials of India. New Delhi rejected the
claim calling it as ridiculous.
During his visit to America Musharraf said that India may have hand in
Pearls abduction. Vajpayee criticized his statement, but America agreed that
India based group might be involved in abduction. Thus the possibility of
Indian linkage was not completely ruled out.
Omars confessions, which was leaked out to press included his
admission of strikes inside India. The government did not bother about taking
action against the person who disclosed this information, but immediately
denied the claim of strikes attributed to Omar.
India demanded extradition of the accused. Pakistan rejected Indian
demand. In turn India came out with a logical conclusion that Pakistan had
something to hide. The leakage of information, which ordinarily should have
been restricted to investigators, added to the pressure exerted on Pakistan.

Two FBI agents had constantly remained with investigation team. Only
they could be suspected of passing such controversial information to the public
midway through the investigations. It was a deliberate act of pressurizing
Pakistan. America had been tracking Omar prior to the abduction of Pearl in
connection with killing of its citizen in Kashmir. The convergence of Indian and
American interests in Pearls case was quite obvious.
America desired extradition of Omar and its ambassador met Musharraf
in this connection. Extradition had never been a burden on the conscience of
Pakistani leaders, particularly when it was desired by America. Moin however
declared that US might not need extradition of Omar.
His statement was quite meaningful. One can draw number of inferences,
including the ultimate end of Omar, which primarily is the exclusive
prerogative of a court of justice. He forgot that American interest in Omar was
far beyond the award of punishment.
Pearls death and subsequent warnings of killers to the investigators,
reflect fury of the extremists against anti-terrorist war perpetrated by members
of the Coalition. It is true that the incident will not serve any interest of Islamic
groups, but at the same time it proved that war on terror has failed in
achieving its goals. The conduct of war also remains questionable.
The crackdown launched by Pakistan is part of the war on terror. This
has not been received well by various segments of the society. Indiscriminate
arrests and hurried amendments in laws to deal with terrorism have earned
harsh criticism.
Ulema have vowed to resist secularism moves, despite assurance by the
government that it has no plan to repeal blasphemy law. Nawabzada Nasrullah
has flayed the curb on Jehadi outfits. Jehadi outfits, having renamed
themselves, have declared Pakistan as Dar-ul-Kufar. Lawyers have challenged
ATA amendment and superior courts have accepted their petitions.

UNFOUNDED OPTIMISM
Pakistan was ally of America in its war against Soviet Union and since
September 11 it is part of the Coalition against terrorism. Despite that the
senior partner has been subjecting it to enormous pressure. Pakistan tried hard
to seek relief, but without success. The government expectantly looked forward

to two important visits, i.e. Annans visit to Pakistan and Musharrafs visit to
Washington.
Annan came to Pakistan at the end of January. He lauded Musharraf for
his action against extremists and called for Indo-Pak dialogue, but declined to
intervene. To him an isolated incident in Kolkata was more worrying than the
routine carnage of innocent Kashmiris.
The disappointing results of his visit did not discourage the
government. It knew that the honourable Secretary General of UN could not
do anything without prior approval of the President of America. The outcome of
this visit was quite indicative of the prospects of Musharrafs visit to
Washington, yet the optimists kept their hopes high. The indicators as
enumerated below encouraged them:

Dam predicted that there would be a US package for Pakistan soon.

Bush sought funds for aid to Pakistan, though amount of $ 305 million
was considered quite meager.

Following the suit of EU, US may lift sanctions on textile quota.

President while departing for US visit saw greater Pak-US military ties.

The government claimed that Pak-US misperceptions have been

removed.

The security men in Washington welcomed Pakistani entourage. The

members of the delegation led by head of a friendly state were subjected to
insulting security checks. An official statement that democracy in Pakistan
was high priority for US welcomed the delegation led by a military leader.
During his visit Musharraf promised to fulfill responsibilities in war
against terrorism. He expressed his optimism about Pearl by being reasonably
sure that he was alive. He also assured that Pak-India nuclear war was
unthinkable.
Bush reciprocated his guests overtures. He said that US would help
Pakistan and India in resolution of Kashmir dispute. He reiterated that
friendship with Pakistan would last longer than a dancing party.
The outcome of the visit fell well short of the expectations. America
promised to facilitate settlement of Kashmir dispute and provide $ 200 million

to clear $ 1 billion debt. No tariff reduction on imports from Pakistan was

granted. Defence cooperation was restricted to revival of consultative group.
WB and IMF however assured economic support to Pakistan.
On return from America Musharraf claimed that Pak-US ties have gained
depth, but some pessimists opined that US aid might hit snags. Next day
Pakistan sent $ 300 million bill to US for services rendered for war against
terrorism and Finance Minister exhorted OIC to pool sources for human
development. These reports fathomed the depth of ties.

CONCLUSION
The Crusaders appreciate Musharraf for his resolve to fight against
Islamic militant organizations. However his resolve is taken as proof of the
existence of extremism and militancy in Pakistan, which is considered
terrorism by the Crusaders. Therefore, Pakistan is practically being treated as
a terrorist nation and dealt with accordingly.
Pakistan was subjected to extreme pressure during the month of January.
Pakistan yielded to the pressure therefore, the game of brinkmanship is likely
to continue. However the stresses of prolonged tension may also start telling
upon the other party.
India has started reaping the fruits of poison tree. On 27 th February a
mob attacked a train in Indian State of Gujarat killing 57 Hindu extremists
returning from Ayodhya. The incident was the result of a brawl between
passengers and vendors, but Hindu wrath was diverted towards hapless
Muslims.
The hatred for Pakistan has obscured the vision of Indian Government.
Hating Pakistan means hating Muslims. Indian rulers have forgotten that they
cannot afford to hate 140 million Muslims living in their country and still hope
for SHAANTI (peace) for BHARAT MATA.
Pakistan must maintain its composure and recuperate its strength and
stamina. To this end it must revert back to democratic rule. Luckily, the
military ruler is still following the roadmap to democracy, despite having the
feeling that his stay is vital for country.
The people of Pakistan expect that politicians, at least for once, will keep
the national interests dearer to all other interests. They should not do anything

to undermine the forthcoming elections and must participate in these wholeheartedly.

The increase in seats of assemblies and the Senate, resultant delimitation
of constituencies, constitutional amendments and introduction of checks and
balances should not be made bones of contention. Politicians must participate
with the sole aim of restoration of democracy.
The war in Afghanistan has softened the attitude of tribesmen. The
government should avail this opportunity to extend its writ to Federally
Administered Tribal Areas. These must also be brought into the mainstream by
holding local, provincial and national elections.
Election Commission should endeavour to hold fair elections. It must
oppose any interference of government agencies aimed at manipulating the
results. It must also check interference from outside under the cover of
suggestions for political reforms, training of political parties in electioneering
and suggestions regarding criterion for eligibility of candidates.

28th February 2002AXIS

OF EVIL

In his State of the Union address the supreme commander of Crusaders

came out with a newly coined phrase. He declared Iran, Iraq and North Korea
as Axis of Evil.
Evil represents the Devil. Hence Bush thinks that Iran, Iraq and North
Korea represent the work force of the Devil. It also implies that he considers
America as an angel working on behalf of the Divine Authority. Therefore,
America in its partnership with Israel and India forms the Trinity of Angels.
Bush and his men like Rumsfeld have been quite vocal about expanding
the war on terror. However after the fall of Taliban in Afghanistan, America
ran short of justifications for extending military operations to other countries.
The world became apprehensive about American unilateralism in war
on terror. The conduct of war in Afghanistan was also criticized by many.
Killing of thousands of innocent people could not be justified in the name of
collateral damage. The massacre of captured prisoners of war was too heinous
a crime, to be covered under the blanket of any terminology or phraseology.
These acts were nothing but war crimes, which dissipated the enthusiasm
of those who supported America in its holy war. Even within the ranks of
Crusaders there are some reservations about the future conduct of holy war.
America wants support for its continuation and for that it had to strengthen its
argument. It talked about extending war to lawless states, blamed Iran for
allowing al-Qaeda men to escape and also working to destabilize Karzai
Government.
These overtures did not stir the desired response. Only Annan joined his
masters voice and cautioned Afghanistans neighbours to refrain from
interference. Khamenei urged Annan to rise against US and Rafsanjani
rebuked America saying that threats wont work with Iran.
Bush came out with the idea of Axis of Evil. He said, the war against
terrorism is far from over. He then declared that US can move against Hamas,
al-Jihad and Hizbullah. These targets had been selected right at the outset of
war on terror, but declaration was intentionally delayed.

THE REASONS
The evil states have not been selected at random. Their selection relates
to American security, its global interests and envisaged threats to both. How do
Iran, Iraq and North Korea pose threat to American interests and security?
America always felt secure from foreign military aggression, except
during the era of Cold War. With the demise of Soviet Union and normalization
of relations with Russia the ICBM threat subsided and the security environment
of America improved.
America was rudely shaken from its slumber on 11 th September 2001. Its
security planners had definitely considered possibilities of terrorist attacks
within territorial limits of US, but they failed in visualizing the magnitude of
attack that too with apparently innocuous means. Resultantly America has been
forced to re-evaluate its security plans.
Apart from the unconventional means, America can also be vulnerable to
missile attack. The possession of medium and long-range missiles is no more
restricted to the privileged few. Many nations have developed indigenous
capability. With the passage of time the magnitude of this threat will
considerably increase.
America can no more rely only on existing strategy to check proliferation
of missile technology. It has to physically guard against missile attack for which
it has revived anti-ICBM programme. In view of this necessity Bush has
sought massive military budget.
In the context of its global interests America visualizes a major threat
from extremist and militant Muslim organizations. It has already ventured
upon crushing militant elements through indiscriminate use of military means.
Afghanistan provides proof of the extent to which America can apply the force
to this end.
America fully understands that mere use of force cannot result in
elimination of terrorists. Their abodes should be destroyed and the sources of
their support must be choked. If some of the goals could be achieved through
coercion it should facilitate the accomplishment of the difficult task. Keeping
these security concerns and supreme national interests of America in view it is

easier to understand as to why Iran and Iraq have been labeled as evil states.
Both have the know-how of missile technology.
Iraq has experience of using missiles acquired from Russia. It had also
upgraded these missiles indigenously. Although much of its capability has been
rolled back through auspices of the UN inspectors, yet it retains the knowledge
and experience. Knowledge and experience can never be rolled back.
Iraq has been constantly hindering the UN inspectors in performing
their duty. America apprehends that a respite of longer duration can be availed
for reviving the lost capability. Using good offices of the UN, America wants
to make it certain that the rollback is complete, otherwise the use of military
option would be unavoidable.
Iran has also acquired limited missile capability. America blames China
and Korea for transfer of technology, but the fact remains that the capability has
been acquired through kind courtesy of reverse technology. Some countries
have mastered this art over the years.
This capability of Iran and Iraq is considered a threat to American
interests in the Middle East. Most important of these interests are oil and Israel.
America also does not rule out the possibility of these means of delivery falling
in the hands of terrorists.
Iran and Iraq have openly supported the freedom movement of
Palestinians. Hamas, al-Jihad and Hizbullah are the mainstay of the movement.
Israel has launched offensive against these organizations. Leader of the
Crusaders is morally bound to support Israel.
North Korea is the only non-Muslim country, which has been included in
the band of evil states. It has attained this status for two reasons. Firstly, it is
the only country in its region, which opposes American policies. Secondly, it is
accused of transferring missile technology to countries black-listed by
America.
America has declared in unequivocal terms that it earnestly desires to
continue the war it started on 7th October 2001. The remarks of Axis of Evil
confirm the existence of this desire. Does it indicate that extension of war is
imminent or the threat is part of brinkmanship or it is a hoax? American game
plan bears all three shades.

North Korea feels that Bush is close to declaration of war as US

warplanes carried out reconnaissance flights. Some experts opine that US may
launch attack on Iraq in May. The statements of American leaders and
diplomatic efforts also indicate Americas keenness for more action.
Powell said that anti-terrorism campaign would go on. Bush renewed
the threat of war to Iran and vowed to deal with Saddam. America has urged
NATO to join anti-terror fight. Dick Cheney has visited Middle East to muster
support of docile Arabs.
The most prominent is the shade of brinkmanship. Bush stated that all
options are open on Iraq, Iran and North Korea. In the game of brinkmanship
Iran is targeted quite conspicuously. Rumsfeld, the spearhead, has accused Iran
of helping al-Qaeda men and allowing them to flee. Powell suspected that Iran
is doing less to stop terrorism.
America is trying to intimidate North Korea by carrying out military
manoeuvres in the region. The brinkmanship is not restricted to three countries,
because America knows that many nations are engaged in covert operations.
Therefore, Bush has asserted to strengthen anti-terrorism coalition.
FBI feared that the terrorists might attack American interests in Yemen.
US plans to send more troops to Yemen followed this intelligence report.
Yemen reacted unfavourably and announced that it would limit the role of US
military experts already working there.
With enlargement of the canvas, the shades too were brightened. Bush
said that the war is entering new phase and dropping of American pledge of
not using nukes followed it. US military was told to prepare nuclear weapons.
A tentative list of targets was released. Dick Cheney created ambiguity by
saying that America was not targeting nukes on anyone.
All these statements and actions have the touch of brinkmanship. The
players of global and regional level understand the game. They share their
concerns as was evident from Jiangs action. Soon after the visit of Bush, he
briefed Putin and Musharraf. China and US failed to agree on missile
technology export, which meant that Chinese perception of brinkmanship was
quite clear.

To many the Axis of Evil remarks might look nothing but hoax. South
Korea ruled out US-North Korea standoff. Iran said that Axis of Evil was for
home audience. Some statements of US leaders corroborated this view.
Axis of Evil is no pretext for attack, said Powell. He repeated the same
in different words, US have no plans for another war. Bush declared, US will
not invade North Korea. Powell said, US has no plans to attack Iraq and Iran.
Why should a super power indulge in hoaxing? Is it scared of reaction
from any quarter? No. The reason is very simple. America and its partners are
already fully engaged in fighting the war on terror. They are in no hurry to
extend the war further, because of their existing engagements. These are:

Mopping up operations in Afghanistan still continue. These operations

are quite intense as is evident from the casualties suffered by US troops.

Iraq is subjected to occasional bombing for that the required resources

have to remain committed.

Philippines is being provided physical support for its anti-terrorists

operations. US experts are also employed in Yemen.

In the Subcontinent India has committed bulk of its armed forces against
Pakistan on behalf of the Crusaders. It requires requisite diplomatic
support of America.

Israeli Army, Navy and Air force are busy in destroying terrorist
abodes. Their efforts have to be backed up.

When so much is happening at so many places, there is no wisdom in

extending the war. However there is need to divert the attention of others to
conceal the intensity of war already raging in many parts of the world. Herein
fits the hoax of Axis of Evil, but it in no way it prohibits America from
embarking upon military action.

REACTIONS
All the three evil states promptly denounced the charges. Iran and North
Korea reacted more vehemently as compared to Iraq. Threat of war was not
something new for Iraq as it was already being subjected to bombing since
1991.

Nevertheless, Iraq declared that its armed forces were ready to face
American attack. At the same time it urged Arab countries to refrain America
from any aggression. The Arab brothers obliged and asked America not to plan
military action against Iraq.
Iran spurned US criticism and resolved to meet the challenge. Iranian
Foreign Minister cancelled his scheduled visit to New York. Iran threatened to
disrupt the flow of oil through the Gulf. Khamenei accused Bush for being
thirsty for human blood and blasted America for its war on terror. Iranian
clerics and politicians heaped scorn on Bush. Rafsanjani warned US against the
consequences of attack on Iran. Khatami slammed excessive US military
budget.
North Korea resorted to counter allegations and dubbed US as an empire
of the devil. Its media called US a rogue state. Foreign Ministry termed US
President as politically backward child seeking pretext to invade DPRK. US
offer for talks was rejected, but doors for dialogue with South were kept open.
Muslim groups condemned US threats. Arab League warned against
attack on Iraq. Prince Abdullah advised America not to plan attack on Iraq or
Iran. Saudi Media flayed Bush speech. Qatar announced that Wests view of
terrorism was biased. Even Musharraf had reservations on the remarks of Axis
of Evil. He opined that the statement evoked negative response.
China disapproved Axis of Evil comments. During his visit to China,
Jiang urged Bush to be patient in war on terror. China rejected US plea for
curbing arms export to certain countries. After return of Bush, America issued
a target list for nuclear weapons. China was dismayed to find itself in that list.
Russia rejected US charges for lack of evidence. Putin criticized Bush for
Axis of Evil remarks and asked America to focus on real dangers rather than
imaginary ones. Russia also warned US not to go alone on Iraq. These
differences however pertained to the priorities.
The World Social Forum blasted US policy of war on terror. Asia forum
also slammed US for taking unilateral decisions. Japan, who has been generally
supporting the West, disagreed with Bush on his remarks of Axis of Evil.

More significantly Bush earned criticism from within the ranks of

Crusaders. France distanced itself from the Yankee styled rash approach and
warned America against unilateral approach. European Union advised US to
curb the tendency of unilateralism. Germany suggested not to go alone. Even
Albright felt that Bush made a mistake.
Britain faithfully supported America. Blair stressed upon the world to
redouble efforts to root out terrorism. A British lady residing in Pakistan rightly
called him an unpaid ambassador of America. Commonwealth leaders
responded to Blairs call and vowed to wipe out terrorism for the pleasure of
aging Queen.
The above reactions are theoretical in nature. The element of hoax in
remarks of Axis of Evil has worked to some extent. For a while the world
attention has been diverted from all that is happening elsewhere. The
brinkmanship has borne results particularly in case of Iran.
Iran has denied charges of harbouring al-Qaeda men or holding Taliban
supporters and accordingly informed European envoys about foreigners.
Hikmatyar was expelled and his offices in Iran were closed. Iran reiterated its
support for Afghan peace efforts.
Even Saudi Arabia has frozen four suspected accounts and Malaysia
denied existence of al-Qaeda cells on its territory. It has been counterproductive only in case of North Korea, which threatened to end nuclear accord
and set tough conditions for talks with America.

DOUBLE STANDARDS
America has been always accused of following double standards on
values cherished by the civilized world, i.e. democracy, peace and justice. The
practice has become more pronounced in dealing with evils of terrorism,
lawlessness, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missile
technology.
These are the evils publicized by America. Its partners in the Crusades,
India and Israel, have all the above mentioned evil qualities. America has taken
no notice of these. Both countries are quietly permitted to practice these evils
for their self-defence.

Proliferation of missile technology is one of the major concerns of

America. It requested India for not testing Pirthvi missile and next day India
test-fired new version of a missile to boost its national security. It was Agni
not Pirthvi. America and its allies condemned Indian missile test. India paid
no heed to their protests. Five days later it tested naval version of Trishul
missile and vowed to conduct more tests. The civilized world did not talk of
imposing sanctions.
Instead Pakistan was pressurized under the cover of US concern over
nuclear situation in the Subcontinent and France invited Pakistan and India to
anti-missile moot. Pakistans Foreign Office had to deny about Chinese aid
and Musharraf had to reassure his nation that the deterrence remained in
place.
The last day of February 2002 marked the beginning of one of the worst
riots in history of India. Hindu extremists attacked Muslim houses and shops,
set those on fire burning the owners alive. Police alleged that ruling party
leaders led anti-Muslim riots. The people accused police for deliberately
abstaining from controlling the rioters.
The conscientious Indians organized protest rallies against killing of
innocent people. Indian opposition in the parliament demanded resignations
from Advani and Chief Minister of Gujarat, holding them directly responsible
for the bloodshed.
The Prime Minister of India too had no shame in accepting that violence
was a blot on nations reputation. He promised to uphold court ruling on Babri
mosque, the main cause of Hindu-Muslim tension. The court banned Hindu
prayers at Ayodhya. Hindu extremists refused to accept the court verdict.
Vajpayee government had to prevent them from violating court order to
salvage reputation of its party.
The reaction of civilized world to riots in Gujarat was no different from
the reaction to killings in Palestine and Kashmir. The day riots in India started
America sent a draft MoU on terrorism to Pakistan, which was followed by
issue of a report declaring that human rights situation in Pakistan, was poor.
Russia too considered it as right time to ask Pakistan to stop fleeing terrorists.
India shamelessly announced to probe alleged Pakistani link to riots in
Gujarat. It tortured officials of Pakistan High Commission and then expelled

two of them. Jaswant sought abolition of nuclear weapons to prevent them

from falling into clutches of terrorist groups. He ignored the fact that similar
weapons were already in hands of Hindu extremists.
Pakistan drew attention of the United Nations towards excesses
committed in India. The President also directly asked India to protect
minorities. The appeals merited no response from any quarter. Anti-Muslim
riots in India continued.
India undoubtedly qualifies as one of the two top terrorist states in the
world on the analogies brought forth by America. It indulges in proliferation of
missiles and weapons of mass destruction. Lawlessness in India is at rampage.
The state terrorism perpetrated by Indian armed forces in occupied Kashmir and
terrorist attacks of Hindu extremists in Gujarat have no parallels.
The world waited for America to talk about some punitive action against
India. The wait will never be over, because Indian actions commensurate with
aims of the Crusades. By virtue of targeting Muslims, India qualifies as partner
of the Crusaders. Nobody takes punitive action against partners.
America has also encouraged the other partner to force Palestinians to
pay the price for perpetrating their version of terrorism. Nobody could be
better suited than Sharon to extract handsome price from Palestinians. He
launched the offensive targeting refugee camps, residential areas, offices and
such like places, dubbing these as strongholds of terrorists.
These could not be taken lightly and had to be attacked and destroyed
using force indiscreetly taking lesson from American military strategy applied
successfully in Afghanistan. Israel resorted to massive use of force. Tanks, F16s, gunship helicopters, missiles and naval vessels were employed for
destruction of strongholds of terrorists.
Israel did not have to worry about collateral damage, because damage
caused to Palestinians was justified. It had the approval of the civilized
world. In this spirit of righteousness Israelis even attacked funeral
processions.
Israel occupied Palestinian territories and planned to retain those as long
as required. Apathy of world community in general and that of the Muslim and

Arab countries in particular encouraged Israel. It talked about occupying more

Palestinian land and setting up buffer zones.
Palestinians defied Israeli aggression despite being no match to Israels
military might. Their main weapon had been the human bombs. Suicide
bombers hit inside Israeli territories, as deep as Sharons house, inflicting
casualties and making Israelis insecure.
Suicide attacks were not the only form of resistance against Israeli
aggression. Car bombs were used for blasts in Israel. Two Israeli tanks were
knocked down. A mob was successful in freeing militants from Bethlehem
jail. Khamenei urged Palestinians to carry on Intifada. Arafat vowed to raise
Palestinian flag on Jerusalem.
America had to provide full support to Israel by exerting pressure on
Palestinians. Bush asked Arafat to do better job. He was denied to move
around within his own territory, while Sharon was invited for a meeting with
him in Washington.
The brute terrorism perpetrated by Sharon could not be digested for long.
As the flag-bearers of justice kept quiet, the world was forced to express its
concerns:

European Union announced that creation of Palestinian State was the

only solution. French minister said that Sharons policy of oppression
was a failure.

Saudi Arabia called Israeli aggression unforgivable and rest of the

Arabs protested against killings.

Turkey called for peace talks. Pakistan condemned Israeli aggression.

Iran termed the conflict a threat to world peace.

Japanese held protest rally outside Israeli embassy.

For a change Security Council was also alarmed over violence in the
Middle East. Annan rapped Israel for shelling Gaza and urged Sharon and
Arafat to avoid disaster.

Saudi Arabia floated a peace plan. The plan envisaged full withdrawal
from all the occupied territories, in accord with UN resolutions, including in

Jerusalem, for full normalization of relations. In turn all Arab states would
recognize Israel. Arab League chief urged Israel to consider Saudi offer.
Saudi initiative was setting to become pan-Arab plan. Entire Muslim
World, except Libya supported it. The West also praised it. The widespread
support encouraged Saudi Arabia to take tough stand against Israel.
The surge in unrest irked US. The Crusaders made fresh moves to
undermine the gains of Intifada and to defuse increasing criticism of Israel.
Bush sent Zinni to work out a truce, instead of a solution. To save itself from
the accusation of bias America also threatened to block new aid for Israel.
The United Nations and US endorsed Palestinian State. America sought
cease-fire and Israel vacated Ramallah. Restrictions on Arafats movement were
lifted. Zinni hailed the results of talks with Israeli leaders and Arafat.
America launched this diplomatic manoeuvre with a view to saving Israel
from criticism, impede impetus of Intifada and subvert Saudi peace plan. Once
these immediate aims are fulfilled, Israel would be again told to restart holy
war against terrorism perpetrated by Palestinians.

CONCLUSION
The aim of war on terror is to impose American will. The phrase of
Axis of Evil has been coined for this purpose. America is least interested in
elimination of terrorism. If it were, then the causes of terrorism should have
been addressed on priority. Bush and his companions have paid no heed to the
appeals or suggestions made for resolution of the disputes, which form the main
causes of terrorism all over the world. Why?
The settlement of disputes will pacify extremism and militancy. If it
happens, America would be deprived of legitimate excuses for applying
military means to deal with its opponents. Legitimacy has to be preserved.
The need for prompt and potent application of force demands military
presence in and around possible targets. Iraq War of 1991 and recent war on
terror have helped America in positioning its forces in Asia, which will be the
hub of American military activities in future.
This is worrisome for most of the countries. China has flayed US global
military expansion. Ex-Soviet leaders have shown their concern about US

military presence. It has been reported that Riyadh might ask US to leave Saudi
bases.
America shunned the idea and announced that US forces would stay in
Gulf for long term. In addition to US military expansion, the change in
American nuclear policy has caused grave concern to these countries. It has
worried Beijing. Russia has been intrigued by US nukes plan. Khatami
considered it as threat to humanity.
Khamenei felt that American unilateralism was doomed to failure.
Osama thought that US would lead Americans into hell. Presently the wishes of
those who are at the receiving end do not appear to be materializing. Instead
America is poised to consolidate its global hegemony into global
dictatorship. To this end America is further strengthening its military prowess
for crushing those who may find courage to challenge its authority.
16th March 2002

MIDTERM OF INTERIM
In accordance with Bonn Agreement, Hamid Karzai was sworn in as head
of Interim Government on 22nd December 2001. Dostum and Rabbani attended
the installation ceremony in which Ahmed Shah Masood was portrayed as
national hero.
Only Foreign Minister of Iran addressed the ceremony apart from
representatives of the United Nation and EU. Foreign Minister of Pakistan was
present on the occasion and President of Pakistan felicitated the installation by
announcing aid of Rupees six billion for reconstruction of Afghanistan.
Next day Afghan cabinet held a meeting in Kabul and embarked upon
tackling Herculean task assigned to it. Karzai took first political decision and
accommodated Dostum by making him deputy defense minister.
Politics is not the real issue. The problem lies in restoration of peace,
rehabilitation and reconstruction. In addition the Coalition forces in Afghanistan
wanted to continue the man hunt and expected support from Interim
Government.
Interim Administration completed half of its tenure on 21 st March. It is
too short a period to pass any judgment on its performance. The succeeding
account is merely an assessment of the progress it has made in accomplishing
the difficult task.

RESTORATION OF PEACE
Restoration of peace in a country where war has become a way of life is
not an easy task. Ethnic prejudices, rivalries of warlords, proliferation of
weapons, absence of a framework for governance, and above all non-existence
of an impartial central authority complicate it further and these problems had
been identified and given due importance at the time of Bonn Accord.
The requirement of deployment of peacekeeping force in Kabul under
auspices of the United Nations was included in the Accord. Peacekeeping
agreement was inked on 31st December 2001. The United Nations carried out
hectic lobbying for mustering troops from various countries, because no one
except Britain showed any keenness. The force mustered has a look of Euro-

army. De-miners were rushed to clear bases of peacekeepers. First contingent

arrived in Kabul on 24th January 2002.
Afghans have not liked the presence of foreign troops, even in
peacekeeping role. British troops were fired upon thrice in the month of
February. One of the incidents took place due to mistake. Two British
peacekeepers were sent home for killing a young man.
Blairs best in the world must have found a way to end their
homesickness. Kill an Afghan and you will be back in sweet home. The
pragmatics felt that the shooting incidents showed force effectiveness. They
do not consider these as beginning of Jihad against ISAF.
The presence of foreign troops on Afghan soil, in whatever role they
might be, has semblance of military occupation. Reaction of freedom loving
Afghans is quite natural. The French or Germans wont have reacted differently
if Afghans were sent to Paris or Berlin for peacekeeping.
The situation undoubtedly justified deployment peacekeepers. Annan
pleaded for extension of force mandate. Ex-king and Human Rights Watch
supported expansion of ISAF beyond Kabul. The Interim Government surely
required it for maintaining order at least in the capital.
The participants of peacekeeping have their reservations. France ruled
out expansion of ISAF as envisaged in Bonn Agreement. Schroeder was also
against expanding peacekeeping force beyond Kabul. Rumsfeld said that
expansion was unlikely and his words should be taken as final.
The peace cannot return to Afghanistan without achieving the national
reconciliation as urged by Karzai. The solution lies in redressing the grievances
of Pushtoons, who are being subjected to murder, beating, sexual violence,
abductions, looting and extortion. Even BBC has confirmed their harassment.
Official sources have also admitted excesses committed against them.
The persecution of Pushtoons in northern Afghanistan is more
pronounced; resultantly the victims are fleeing their homes. Brahimi expressed
his fears over abuses against Pushtoons in Northern Afghanistan. These
incidents will increase ethnic friction.
Karzai is convinced that Zahir Shah can play an important role in
national reconciliation. He is trying hard to bring him back. The ex-king also

hopes that his return would bring unity. The fact remains that the situation will
not improve until all ethnic groups are treated fairly.
A minor disagreement can lead to serious incident as it happened in
case of Aviation Minister. The culprits and their motive have not been
established as yet, but the government admitted that mistakes led to the
lynching of the minister. The Interior Minister, Abdullah announced that there
was no plot behind the killing. The deceased must have indulged in
favourtism or discrimination in transportation of Hajis. The persons being
wronged took the matter into their hands and thrashed the wrong doer to
death.
The killings resulting from ethnic prejudices and fighting amongst
warlords cannot be stopped without disarming all and sundry. Ex-king has
called for disarming the warlords. The Interim Government has achieved very
little in this regard. Fighting between warlords has raged in eastern and northern
Afghanistan. In Paktia Rabbanis man took control of the provincial capital
from the one appointed by Kabul. Karzai met the delegates of opposing factions
and blamed Bacha Khan for Gardez clashes.
Karzais decisions of appointing governors have apparently lacked
prudence and authority to enforce those. Paktia Governor has threatened more
bloodshed in the province. Paktia Council and Khost elders have rejected the
man nominated by Karzai and warned of trouble over the issue. On 10 th March
gunmen killed four people outside governors house.
Clashes between Tajiks and Uzbeks continued in northern Afghanistan
inflicting heavy casualties on each other. The warlords ultimately agreed on
new security plan around Mazar-i-Sharif. But Dostum moved into a rival
village and later his forces captured a district from rival group.
Interior Minister claimed that the era of warlords was over. The reality
on ground refuted his claim. The fighting has been going on unhindered. The
United Nations has warned about more to come as reports of re-arming by
warlords kept pouring in.
In view of the continuation of armed clashes, an ex-minister felt that
Karzai was incapable of keeping peace. His remarks were bit harsh. Overall
security conditions may not be ideal, but are better than what many had feared
at the beginning.

REHABLITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Afghanistan has suffered from continuous destruction for more than two
decades. The final blow was delivered by those who now talk about its
reconstruction. The gigantic task of rehabilitation and reconstruction cannot
start without revival of public institutions and restoration of peace.
Police and army are two strong arms of a state, which provide internal
and external security. Bush declared on 28 th January that United States would
train Afghan police and army. An American General held talks with Karzai and
Fahim for new army and warlords held a meeting on 6 th March. The outcome of
these meetings has not appeared on ground.
Probably they bogged down in contentious issue of size and
composition of the forces. It will not be easy to have consensus on this point in
short time. The statement of ISAF chief corroborated this inference. He said,
creation of army may take years.
There was some progress regarding raising of police force. A conference
on building Afghan police was held in Berlin on 13th February and subsequently
personnel of German police were sent to Kabul for imparting training.
The institution responsible for administration of justice is not yet
effective and the crime rate is plummeting as admitted by Interior Ministry.
Afghan chief justice announced that adulterers would be stoned to death and
thieves would have their hands cut. Things were moving backward rather than
moving forward.
The instrument for exercising fiscal control is missing. Interim
Government was unable to manage monetary matters in the absence of
established banking system. Reportedly tons of money was grabbed by
Northern Alliance, which was being transported to Kabul from Russia after
printing. The currency plunged amid rumours of stopping of its printing.
Resultantly the donors provided special funds to keep the government going.
The constitutional work has yet to take off. The UN formed 21-member
Loya Jirga Commission. The people were urged to nominate fair men and the
chief planned to include 200 women in Loya Jirga. Rest of the work is
pending.

Interim Government did not have sufficient funds to revive these

institutions and the donors were doing very little to help it as observed by the
UN. An Afghan minister slammed the slow arrival of aid donations.
Some relief was provided by lifting previously imposed sanctions.
Restrictions against Afghan airline were removed and frozen Afghan assets
worth $ 221 million were returned. This was too little; therefore Karzai had to
urge the world to write off previous debts.
He made moving appeal for aid a day before the meeting held in Japan.
The donors pledged $ 3.9 billion for Afghan reconstruction as against the
estimate of $ 5 billion. American interest in Afghanistan has dissipated after
toppling of Taliban and killing of some suspected terrorists.
International organizations responsible for relief works have shown no
urgency. Only Islamic Relief chief reached Kandahar, but others stayed away.
These organizations feared threats and extortion and suspended ongoing work.
Afghan refugees started trickling back to their homes after installation of
Interim Government. UNHCR observed that refugees movement was
increasing. Pakistan started concentrating refugees for their organized
repatriation.
The reports about serious displacement in central Afghanistan, fighting in
some provinces adjacent to Pakistan and bureaucratic approach of UNHCR
have been the main causes of delay in repatriation. Governor NWFP blamed
that refugee problem was due to wrangling of world community.
The differences between UNHCR and Pakistan were finally resolved and
voluntary repatriation got under way on 1st March 2002. It gained some
momentum and by 15th March more than 45 thousand refugees went back from
Pakistan, but UNHCR again suspended the repatriation for its own reasons.
Pakistan is likely to bear the burden of refugees for at least three more
years, provided nothing goes wrong seriously. The beginning of return journey
is heartening. Its slow speed should not discourage any one.
The recent return of refugees is not because of the efforts of the United
Nations or the Coalition or Interim Government. The United Nations never
cared for human, social, political and security aspects of the refugees problem

faced by Pakistan for more than twenty years. The incentive for going back
home has come from Mother Nature. Afghanistan had rains and snows this
winter after a long drought.
The war has turned Afghanistan into a heap of rubble. Millions of mines
and tons of cluster bombs are dangerous part of the debris. Rehabilitation work
cannot be undertaken without getting rid of the menace of mines and cluster
bombs. De-mining plan has also suffering due to shortage of funds.
Reconstruction can at best start concurrently with rehabilitation if not a
little afterwards. Many countries have sought membership of Afghan Support
Group, including Pakistan, India, Iran, Turkey and South Korea. These
countries eyed at profits more than the necessity of Afghans.
Interim Government has tried to contribute towards reconstruction by
making efforts to bring back Afghan workers. Kandahar Group is trying to end
womens isolation; perhaps after receiving reports that hundreds of women
gathered in Kabul for jobs and young girls were sold for 100-kg wheat.
Afghans are still awaiting bright future. The United Nations has come
out with a million-dollar advice, give militiamen jobs, not guns. It has not
bothered to answer equally important question. How?

MAN-HUNT
The big game for which hunting party had come to the wilds of
Afghanistan is still eluding. It has no clues about Osama. Lack of information
has led to speculations and frustration. Everyone has been guessing:

Musharraf thought that Osama was dead. When asked to verify, he said,
Osama is most probably dead. The desire concealed in his assessment
was quite clear. He meant, enough is enough, please finish it.

Afghan ministers belonging to Northern Alliance claimed that Osama

was alive. One of them speculated that he was with Omar. Another said
that he was in Peshawar. All of them were guiding the hunting party
towards Taliban and Pakistan.

The Coalition presumed that Osama could be dead and in next breath it
refuted this assumption saying that he was still alive. These
contradictory statements were given to avoid confessing, we knew not.

His wife believed that Osama was still alive. His brother was firmer in
his belief as he said that Osama was alive and well. They were simply
wishing the man well.

The experts following the events opined that Osama, Zawahri and Omar
were still alive. Messages of Osama and Omar continued appearing on website.
Website posting of these messages has been located in Malaysia. Despite these
news and views Bin Ladens whereabouts remained mystery.
America has been frustrated by the mystery. It has offered $ 5 million for
clues. Al-Qaeda detainees have been grilled for information. Even the rumours
about his movements were taken seriously and Pakistan had to deny such
reports repeatedly.
Taliban have been equally eluding. Soon after the installation of Interim
Government, America issued a list of wanted Taliban leaders. Nobody could say
for sure that the wanted individuals were dead or alive. Like Americans, Afghan
families were also trying to trace out thousands of missing Taliban, but with
different motives.
Three Taliban ministers surrendered on persuasion of local elders and
officials. Talks were held on Omars fate as his supporters showed their
willingness to hand him over. He managed to escape during surrender talks.
Thus the search for Osama and Omar continues to date.
Bush started the New Year with the hope that Osama would be caught
soon. Hunt for Taliban fugitives was intensified. US planes rained dollars on
Afghanistan to seduce locals. The people, who despised Taliban rule, continue
hiding them from those who freed them from their shackles.
US have bombed camps and hideouts of al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists
on receiving slightest of clues. Former al-Qaeda bases and Jalalabad hills were
flushed with the help of bombs. War on terrorism was extended to hospitals.
American and local troops stormed Kandahar hospital and killed six sick and
wounded Arabs. CIA had its own shots at Osama network.
US carried out two major operations in Khost and Gardez. Both the
operations were claimed to be against al-Qaeda men. The events, which led to
these operations, suggested that both were spillovers of the feuds between
warlords.

The local commanders of these areas defied the instructions of Interim

Government. They must have persuaded some Taliban and al-Qaeda men to join
hands with them though both of them were not in position to resort to
conventional fighting.
American planes bombed tribes in Khost. US troops raided a house and
arrested four Afghans. Local fighters claimed killing of 15 al-Qaeda men.
Americans believed that a top al-Qaeda man was killed in missile attack.
Second operation took place in hills near Gardez in which US ground
forces were exposed to danger. Thermo baric bombs were used in targeting
caves located at high altitude. French warplanes also joined the battle, but a few
days later refused to hit targets set by America. Everybody does not have the
heart to use brute force without sickening effects. Only Americans have
mastered this art through continuous practice.
Afghan and US forces took control of Shahi Kot on 12 th March.
Americans confirmed killing of 14 people in Gardez and believed that core of
al-Qaeda men was wiped out. Karzai claimed that Gardez operation was
successful. American soldiers will however remember for long the al-Qaeda
men laughing at enemy in fierce battle.
General Franks announced that Operation Anaconda has ended, but
fighting would continue. America believed that al-Qaeda fighters were still
there in Paktia and Arma Mountains. Therefore, more operations were required
to root out al-Qaeda.
US bombed villages during operations against strongholds of terrorists
and inflicted the usual collateral damage. The incidents reported are:

Twenty-five villagers were killed in Paktia on 27 th December 2001.

Myers announced that civilian killings were part of war, holy war to be
precise.

Villages were again bombed on 29th and 30th December and thirteen
civilians were killed.

On 31st December more than 100 people were killed in eastern

Afghanistan.

On 7th January 2002 three civilians were killed in US missile attack in

Khost.

Thirty people died near Pakistan border on 9th March.

The world reaction to indiscriminate bombing has been negligible. Only

Russia has asked for end to US bombing in Afghanistan and a British lawmaker
has demanded inquiry into death of civilians in bombing. Americans however
believe that all killings were unavoidable. The bereaved families are
convinced that Americans kill innocent people deliberately.
America has adamantly refused to give prisoners of war status to
hardened fighters imprisoned in Guantanamo. It is not prepared to listen
anything in this regard. The accusations of torture have been refuted, as they
are interrogated using scientific techniques which minimize the need for
physical torture.
Honourable judge of a US court had no hesitation in rejecting the petition
of al-Qaeda prisoners. Amnesty International may say that prisoners are kept in
harsh conditions, but Americans are quite satisfied about their handling. Critics
should appreciate that they have been allowed to wear the turbans.
Some analysts have drawn wrong inferences from fighting in Paktia and
Khost and attack on Kandahar airport. They thought that these incidents mark
the beginning of unconventional war. The claim of a commander that its time
now for Afghan style war provided strength to these inferences.
It is too early to expect such actions from the battered forces of Taliban
and al-Qaeda. Both have been rendered ineffective for long time to come. The
resistance through unconventional war will however come from Pushtoons, if
they are continued to be treated unjustly.
Despite the absence of unconventional war Americans are having the feel
of their stay in Afghanistan. They are now shedding their blood, which they
were able to save during war in the north. The rate of US casualties has
increased:

On 9th January ten US soldiers died when a C-130 crashed sixteen more
were injured in a helicopter crash ten days later.

One US soldier was killed and eight were injured in two accidents on 13 th
February.

Two US soldiers were hurt in Kandahar airbase due to firing by unknown

persons.

On 17th February one Australian soldier was killed in mine blast.

On 4th March a US helicopter was shot down near Shahi Kot killing nine
soldiers.

Five peacekeepers died in Kabul in a blast on 6th March.

Americans expected substantial assistance from Interim Government in

hunting the men of Osama and Omar. Its contribution has been well short of the
expectations. So far only Muttawakil and an adviser to Omar have been arrested
and handed over to America.
Nevertheless, Karzai vowed to hunt down Omar, but issue of Taliban
remained a dilemma for him. He, like any other Pushtoon tribal leader cannot
afford to annoy his own tribesmen. For this reason Americans accused tribal
rivals for misleading. Tajik ministers urged Karzai for action as according to
them Taliban were regrouping to topple Interim Government. As regards alQaeda, Karzai said that it was not government job to chase Osama.
Americans had similar expectations from Pakistan and there were no
serious disappointments, because:

Pakistani troops deployed along Afghan border were not withdrawn

despite concentration of Indian troops on eastern borders.

Hundreds of fleeing Taliban and al-Qaeda men were arrested and handed
over to US on demand, in a manner considered quite humiliating by
some.

Mulla Zaeef was arrested and shifted to Peshawar. An official of former

Taliban Embassy and Ex-governor of Herat were also arrested.

Allied forces were provided the required logistic facilities.

America is very demanding boss, not easily impressed by the

subordinates. Pakistan has been trying to improve its performance by
employing extra army units to hunt and nab fleeing al-Qaeda men. America
boss was not pleased and threatened to use own troops to hunt al-Qaeda men in
Pakistan.
How long the game will continue? Americans have declared their
intentions clearly. America has planned longer stay in the region, despite
declaring Afghanistan Taliban-free and Karzais claim that terrorism has been

defeated in Afghanistan. But the stay has to be legitimized for which there is no
dearth of excuses:

US troops will stay till end of terrorists. Rumsfeld said it in different

words, US to complete Afghan mission. Bush expected a lot more
fighting in Afghanistan.

Finding of Uranium from al-Qaeda base near Kandahar added new

dimension to the war on terror. FBI alerted allies on al-Qaedas nuclear
plans.

Al-Qaeda can hit back, apprehended the Coalition. New York Times
supported this apprehension by reporting that new al-Qaeda leader was
planning more raids.

CIA warned that Afghanistan could again fall into chaos. Black turbans
are reappearing, revealed a report. The agency then alerted American
leaders saying that US interests were at high risk of al-Qaeda attacks.

Internet e-mails indicated that al-Qaeda men were regrouping.

The prolonged stay of foreign troops is neither in the interest of

Afghanistan nor its neighbours. People like ex-king and Hizb leader are right to
have their reservations on this account, but they are not capable of giving them
marching order. Hence Blair called for more international troops and planned
to send 1,700 troops to Afghanistan.

RELATIONS WITH NEIGHBOURS

The biggest failure of Taliban Regime was loss of contacts with
international community. Afghanistan was completely isolated when Karzai
took the charge. He accepted it as challenge and worked hard to re-establish the
lost contacts. His achievements are commendable.
The success or failure of Afghan foreign policy is reflected in its relations
with Pakistan. Reappearance of Northern Alliance in Afghanistan had
threatened good neighbourly relations. The reports that Karzai was known to
have anti-Pakistan feelings added to the gloom.
Karzai belied all apprehensions and vowed to have better ties with
neighbours. During his visit to Pakistan, he and Musharraf decided to bury the
past. Pakistan assured all out support to Afghanistan. Karzai sought time for

refugees repatriation. He promised that innocent Pakistanis would be sent back

home.
Some positive developments, which took place in last three months,
were:

Pakistan allowed 20 new items for export to Afghanistan.

Pakistan reopened its embassy in Kabul and Afghanistan reciprocated.

Kabul has responded positively on Pakistani prisoners. Pak-Afghan body

will examine prisoners cases.

On 15th January Afghan administration handed over an alleged kidnapper

to Pakistan.

On 17th February Karzai phoned Musharraf for help in transportation of

Hajis and Pakistan promptly responded.

Chitralis have been allowed to travel through Kunar province of

Afghanistan.

Shoukat Aziz visited Kabul and discussed matters related to

reconstruction.

There are two issues, which need resolution urgently, i.e. release of
prisoners held in Afghan jails and provision of transit trade facilities by
Pakistan. There are no major irritants other than these. Accusation of VOA that
Pakistan and Iran were trying to influence Loya Jirga was nothing but
frivolous.
Amid reports that Iran was trying to destabilize Interim Government,
Karzai visited Tehran and lauded Irans role against terrorists and urged Tehran
to cooperate in Afghan reconstruction. Iran responded generously. Their
relations have not been marred by incidents like Khalili being at odds with
Tehran over al-Qaeda, summoning of Iranian Envoy in Kabul over a blast report
and arrest of Iranians in Afghanistan for spying.
With Interim Government dominated by Northern Alliance, Indo-Afghan
relations are bound to flourish. Leaders of two countries were in close contact
well before Karzai appeared on the scene. The ties will be cemented further.
Russia staged a triumphant return to Afghanistan when Ivanov visited
Kabul on 4th February. His remarks that Kabul understands need for Russian

presence reflect Russian desire to have close inter-action with Afghanistan. In

the presence of Northern Alliance the relations will not to face any problem.
During reconstruction phase Russia may make further inroads into Afghanistan.
It has already pledged to rebuild Afghan army and to have undivided and
independent Afghanistan.
China does not interfere in internal affairs of any country. Its supreme
national interests are not sensitive to happenings elsewhere in the world. China
will surely help Afghans in rebuilding their ruined country. Karzais visit to
China has been useful in this regard.
The countries of Arabian Peninsula had established cordial relations with
Taliban. Therefore, re-establishment of meaningful diplomatic relations with
Saudi Arabia and UAE needed a concerted effort from Interim Government.
Karzai visited both the countries and succeeded in re-establishment of contacts.
Reportedly Afghan Interim Government was interacting with Israel.
Karzai might be tempted to do so under American influence. However he has to
move cautiously as it could result in alienating the Arabs. In that case losses
could outweigh his gains.

CONCLUSION
Karzai Government enjoys full political support of the civilized world.
The presence of foreign troops on Afghan soil provides him the strength to
tackle hoards of obstinate warlords. Despite this there have been incidents of
defiance of his authority in Khost, Gardez and Mazar-e-Sharif. All these
incidents have a common cause. The warlords in many provinces of
Afghanistan have not reconciled with the privileged position of Tajiks in
Interim Government.
Karzais ethnic origin would discourage him to take tough stance
against Pushtoons, which would not be to the liking of majority of his cabinet
members. In January local Pushtoon commanders released some Taliban and
Qanooni took an exception to this humane action.
Such actions, with or without the consent of Karzai, put him under
pressure. Tajiks blame him for not dealing with the culprits firmly. The

statement of a US Congressman that Karzai should remain in Afghan

Government indicates existence of threat to his position.
America has declared Afghanistan Taliban-free. It is true to the extent
that Taliban are no more in power, but Americans know it well that Taliban
have not been exterminated. Americans fear their re-emergence, despite its
remote possibility; even a shrine around graves of al-Qaeda fighters caused
concern.
Taliban have melted into Pushtoon majority. Action against them cannot
be taken in isolation. It would require handling of Pushtoons as a whole. The
reports like Afghan farmers restart growing poppy crop and drug trade
flourishes after Taliban can be used as an excuse to legitimize military action
against Pushtoons.
American commander claimed after completion of Operation Anaconda
that world has become safer place. The war on terror however has earned no
sympathies for America. According to a survey most residents of Muslim
countries dislike US. The milder word of dislike had to be used to obtain
public opinion.
America is deliberately keeping its troops involvement to the bare
minimum. It is performing only the essential task and has left the rest for
ISAF and Interim Government. The involvement is restricted to save its forces
from casualties.
26th March 2002

REQUIREMENT OF REFERENDUM
At the time of attack on America, Pakistan had a government, which
came into power as a result of a military coup. Persistent incompetence of
politicians provided yet another opportunity for military take-over. It was
grabbed.
Military rule is no remedy for political failings. At best it can provide
temporary relief. The political system should be revived in shortest possible
time. To this end Musharraf had prepared a roadmap for rehabilitation of
democracy.
Within the roadmap, devolution of power represented the highway to
democracy. Local bodys elections had been held and district governments were
in place. Formulation of local governments was merely theoretical in nature.
The steps to make them effective were still to be taken.
The political predecessors, in connivance with bureaucracy, had indulged
in corruption of all kinds. Public funds were plundered mercilessly. Plundered
wealth was transferred to safe and secure foreign accounts.
The evil of corruption could only be eradicated through an impartial and
durable system of accountability. The process of accountability had started. It
achieved a lot despite facing difficulties in investigating white-collar crimes.
The corruption and mismanagement had led Pakistan to the verge of
bankruptcy. It was not far from being declared as failed state. Foreign
investment had started its backward journey. The development and growth rate
were impaired. Political instability and economic decline provided fertile soil
for growth of all kinds evils. The worst of all the evils was intolerance.
Pakistan had supported Afghans in their war against the Soviets and
earned nothing in return, except problems. When Taliban established their rule
in Afghanistan, Pakistan recognized their government hoping for good
neighbourly relations. The relationship, however, became a liability.
Subsequently, Pakistan was compelled to take a U-turn.
The military offensive in Kargil and diplomatic offensive launched
during Agra Summit forced India to reconsider its foreign policy. It took tough

stance against Pakistan. India vehemently blamed Pakistan for cross-border

terrorism. In terrorist attack of 11th September India saw fulfillment of its
ambition of getting Pakistan declared as terrorist state.
Pakistan had no desire or time or resources to be involved in resolving a
complicated issue like terrorism, but it had to listen to America. Musharraf
accepted the offer and chose to stand with America. Declining the offer would
not have served his or Pakistans interests.

INDISPENSIBLE MUSHARRAF
After coming into power Musharraf had initiated certain actions to solve
internal problems of Pakistan. He has the conviction that:

Transfer of power at grass-root level will ensure universal participation

and help in refining democratic system.

Participation at national and provincial levels has to be enhanced by

increasing number of seats, particularly for women.

The democratic system cannot be refined without keeping the known

corrupt politicians out politics.

Revival of economy can be ensured through a stable economic policy.

The change in policy being implemented by him could reverse the
process of revival.

The image of Pakistani society can only be improved by making it

tolerant. This cannot be done without eliminating extremism of all kinds,
particularly sectarian.

His decision to join crusade against terrorism was applauded by the

civilized world. It also earned quiet support from within the country.
Applaud and support strengthened his belief in righteousness of his actions,
which led him to think that he was indispensable for Pakistan.
He felt that consolidation of quiet revolution was not possible without
prolonging his stay at the helm of affairs. Such feelings are common to all nondemocratic rulers. His continuation in power suited the Crusaders, but his stay
had to be legitimized.

In view of the foregoing, an overlay of referendum was spread over the

roadmap of democracy. Despite having no desire to remain president for 5
years, Musharraf opted for referendum before polls. Election Commission
fixed the date of 30th April.
Musharraf drew a dividing line to consolidate the reforms. He asked
people to step on to his side, because he has rebuilt nations confidence,
restored morale, strengthened federation, removed disharmony, restored
national cohesion, regained investors confidence, enforced merit policy,
enhanced foreign-exchange reserves and successfully negotiated rescheduling
of foreign debt.
He started his campaign with a public rally at Minar-i-Pakistan. All those,
who were in search of legitimacy for their political ambitions, had always used
this rendezvous. The rhetoric used by him in his campaign had nothing new to
offer. While condemning the leaders of the past, he promised bright future to
the people. He surpassed all politicians in painting the rosy picture for the
masses.
Musharraf predicted ushering of new era through consolidation of
reforms. He was generous in making promises. To win over rural population, he
promised loans to farmers; 33 percent cut in tube-well bills; lifting of all wheat
stocks at support price; allotment of land to land-less Haaris and no shortage of
water to Sindh.
Urban population was promised funds for uplift of various cities.
Electricity bills were waived of. Inhabitants of Katchiabadis were granted rights
of ownership. Establishment of information technology hubs were promised to
end unemployment.
Seats for the better half of the population were already increased. He
promised to enhance it to fifty percent. The Press was assured freedom. No
political party would be banned, he promised. He claimed that Kashmir cause
has not been compromised. He vowed to root out terrorism and assured that
Pakistani prisoners in Afghanistan would soon return.
He condemned the past leaders in unequivocal terms. Benazirs General
was blamed for creating Taliban. He vowed that war against looters like Benazir
and Nawaz would continue. He asked people to decide their future and went on
to suggest that old guards must bid goodbye.

OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT

The referendum was opposed by cross-section of the society for varying
reasons:

No politician likes a military General hanging on to political power.

The corrupt politicians saw no light at the end of tunnel. Continuation of

Musharrafs stay in power threatened political career of many.

Some politicians feared that Musharraf might indulge in favouritism or

victimization in forthcoming elections.

The plan of political refinement underscored the need for constitutional

amendments. The experts feared the dangerous consequences of
tempering the Constitution.

The regional political parties considered devolution of power as an

encroachment of provincial autonomy. To them the formulation of district
governments amounted to creation of provinces within a province.

The crackdown against Mullas and Madrassas antagonized many

religious parties and organizations, which had to oppose the man
responsible for it.

The decision to join war on terror had quiet support of the majority,
but there were many quiet reservations as well. The biased conduct of
the war had damaged the cause of freedom movements of Muslims and
Musharraf has to share the blame.

Pakistan Peoples Party opposed referendum, because the doors to power

were being shut in the face of its leader. The party threatened to mobilize
masses for boycott. The Nazims and councilors having affiliations with the
party were barred from participating in rallies held by Musharraf.
Nawaz Group of Pakistan Muslim League opposed for similar reasons.
As a result of the split of PML, this group had lost political standing; therefore
its opposition was limited to hailing Justice Tariq and condemning baton
charge of journalists.
Nasrullah has the knack of rallying support of those who have
grievances against the rulers. He held an APC on 27 th April at favourite venue

of Minar to have political consensus against referendum. Later on the

government disallowed holding of similar rally at Karachi.
A day before the rally, he claimed that APC would be the biggest moot
against referendum. ARD said no to referendum and appealed to people to
stay home on referendum day. Musharraf was asked to immediately hand over
power to neutral caretaker government. It also requested judiciary to rise to
the occasion.
According to Press ARD put up an impressive show and kicked off go
Musharraf campaign. Nasrullah said that peoples court has rejected
referendum. Benazir urged masses to boycott referendum. Raja asked people to
unite and claimed that masses were behind Nawaz, Benazir and Qazi.
Jamaat-e-Islami launched campaign against referendum. Government
reacted appropriately by besieging Mansoora, arresting party leaders, blocking
its caravan, detaining Qazi and then freeing him. Qazi too asked nation to stay
at home on 30th April.
Jamaat challenged Referendum Order in Supreme Court. The hearing
began on 22nd April. The counsel argued that Order violated Constitution;
Musharraf was destroying the system; Election Commission was not
empowered to hold referendum and termed Referendum Order a fraud. He
claimed that court ruling would change countrys fate.
Supreme Court decided the fate unanimously. The court preferred to stay
with history rather than changing it. In its short order it declared Referendum as
valid, termed questions raised by the counsel as hypothetical in nature and
opined that Referendum Order did not tantamount to amending Constitution or
converting parliamentary system into presidential form.
Qazi lost the legal battle. The Judgment shocked his counsel. Nasrullah
reversed the decision through Peoples Court. The optimists like Pirzada felt
that Judgment would ensure holding of polls. The decision of the Court
encouraged Musharraf and his government.
The public meeting held at Minar-e-Pakistan in connection with
electioneering had not impressed some journalists. They were blamed for
downplaying the public response. Enjoying the freedom of press the
journalists widely criticized Referendum Order.

The exuberant Governor of Punjab was annoyed and came down harshly
on Press. Journalists violently resented his remarks, which resulted in use of
batons in public meeting held at Faisalabad. Journalists staged a protest rally
against police torture and ultimately Musharraf had to say sorry.
The lawyers too opposed referendum. They held countrywide protests
and urged people to boycott. Regional parties of Balochistan launched antigovernment drive and religious parties slammed the government.
In the absence of any political party of his own, Musharraf tried to woo
different leaders. PML-QA and MQM teams met him. Qadri said that
referendum was not extra-constitutional. Minorities announced their support
for Musharraf. The real support was geared up with the help of government
agencies and of newly elected councilors of local bodies. In other words his
strength rested in power and devolution of power.
Election Commission facilitated casting of votes by making
identification easier. Government departments were instructed to provide
vehicles in addition to pounding of public transport by police. Nisar, the man in
charge of the campaign claimed that no state expenditure was incurred on
referendum rallies.
A night before the referendum Musharraf addressed the nation to mark
the end of his campaign. He pledged to accept the result while looking
confident of the outcome. He was sure of winning referendum.

THE RESULT
The referendum was held peacefully on 30 th April. ARD claimed that
turnout was not more than ten percent. Nasrullah was happy on the success of
boycott. Nusrat Javeed, who visited districts of Shikarpur and Jacobabad,
observed virtual indifference of people. The Information Minister observed
that turnout was beyond expectations. Election Commission estimated that it
was 56 percent. Musharraf was happy that people rejected the call for boycott.
The result was a foregone conclusion. One did not have to be an
astrologer to predict success of Musharraf. Interior Minister and Governor of
Punjab had already predicted victory in referendum. He got five years extension

by scoring 97.47 percent yes votes. Nasrullah and Qazi rejected the results.
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan called it a humiliating fraud.
The government rejected rigging charges and claimed that polling was
free, fair and transparent. Musharraf offered conciliation to those who opposed
referendum. ARD decided to devise post-referendum strategy on 4th May.
The world generally took little interest in referendum. Only a few
countries congratulated Musharraf on his landslide victory. Even America
made cautious comment. India preferred to remain quiet.
The referendum helped third Army General in prolonging his stay in
power in short history of Pakistan. He began his campaign addressing the rallies
in uniform. Wearing cool and comfortable DMS boots he gradually got into the
shoes of politicians. The new shoes may start pinching sooner or later. He was
fully conscious of this eventuality and for that reason he decided to retain
COAS slot after referendum. DMS boots should remain readily available.
The nation endorsed his quiet revolution, but there were many question
marks. Will the referendum end rumours as he claimed? Will the old guards
accept verdict of the peoples and court? How far will he go in amending the
Constitution to legitimize the changes brought by him? What will be the
consequences of tempering the Constitution? Will he not influence the
outcome of October elections? Will he treat the opponents and supporters
without prejudices and favours?

THE EFFECTS
It does not reflect well on a nation of 140 million people, in which a man
becomes indispensable for any earthly or heavenly reason. It means that entire
nation, less one man, is incapable of solving its problems.
The continuation of Musharraf on the helm of affairs in Pakistan suits
America. He has willingly participated in the Crusaders and so far he has not
disappointed them. This inference has been confirmed by a statement that
America considered referendum as internal affair of Pakistan.
As long as he remains useful for the Crusades he will be tolerated, no
matter how he handles the politics in Pakistan. In case of any problems, his rule
can be dubbed as undemocratic. It means that Musharraf and Pakistan are
likely to be subjected to more pressure in times to come.

The President has promised general elections in October before the

expiry of time limit given by the Supreme Court. But referendum
overshadowed the activities for October elections during the month of April.
However some developments related to elections have taken place:

The debate on graduation clause continued and reportedly CEC might

seek its withdrawal. The Commission has also received appeals on
delimitation.

NAB has recommended disqualification of 105 persons and Lahore High

Court has asked NAB to take action against 12 persons including three
ex-members of Parliament.

Efforts for political unification and reunification have been going on.
Opposition and support of referendum were primarily aimed at winning
support of the people or the government for forthcoming elections.

The shadow of referendum will loom over October elections much larger
than expectations of many. The reasons are:

Many political and religious parties have questioned the legitimacy of

referendum.

The conduct of referendum has made the landslide victory of the newly
elected President quite dubious. ARD and JI have vowed to issue white
papers on referendum.

Opponents of referendum will apprehend victimization and the

supporters will expect favours. Fair play in elections has become that
much difficult.

The secret missions being carried out in the context of war on terror
have become part of the mandate. This will provide strength to the
criticism of Musharraf.

The above will greatly influence voters decision. The possible adverse
effects of the referendum are:

Drawing of dividing line will make confrontation more ominous than

conciliation.

In atmosphere of confrontation, the political parties may resort to violent

campaigning. It will add to law and order problems.

The mandate includes the plan to keep Nawaz and Benazir out of politics.
This decision could be justified on moral grounds, but it can be
misinterpreted as political victimization.

In their absence no party will be able to win even simple majority. A

weak government will not help in bringing political stability.

Weakening of major political parties will encourage regionalism.

Provincial issues will overshadow the national issues. Inter-province
harmony will be disturbed.

The crackdown against extremism and sectarian violence is part of the

war on terror. Its conduct has added to the grievances of religious
organizations. They may gain some political mileage in elections.

The accusations of victimization and favoutism can be foreseen. These

will continue after the elections and the results may be disputed.

The mandate also precludes the need to amend the Constitution.

Repairing the Constitution with crude instrument of public debate will
amount to damaging it.

The President has announced that voter age would remain 18 years for
October polls, polling facilities of referendum would also stay. Democracy in
future will be based on Islamic values. Apart from the changes already
announced he intends bringing more before elections. These can lead to more
controversies.
It is true that the quiet revolution cannot be legitimized without amending
the Constitution. National Reconstruction Bureau has been tasked to prepare
essential constitutional changes for public debate. Public debates often succeed
in sorting out details, but seldom reach a consensus. Disagreements on
constitutional matters will weaken the federation.
The President seemed to be aware the above possibilities. He has already
extended the hand of conciliation, but reciprocation would depend upon those,
who stand on other side of the line. They may follow the precedence set by
Vajpayee. All Parties Conference has already decided to evolve strategy for
future. This strategy will not be aimed at conciliation, but to accept the
challenge and fight back. All opposition parties may rally on to one platform.

The Election Commission has assured the political parties that there
would be no interference in polls and delimitation would be fair and based on
latest census. It has proposed to hold national and provincial elections on the
same day. The Commission has assured that foreign observers would be
invited, it would be solely responsible for doing the entire work and NRB wont
have any role in election process.
Despite these assurances the conduct of referendum has undermined the
credibility of Election Commission. It has demonstrated the ability to hold
free polling, but its limitation to ensure fairness has been exposed. Taking
note of this America has stressed upon the need to have free, fair and
transparent elections in October.
One of the achievements of his regime, as claimed by the President, was
restoration of provincial harmony. In fact provincial harmony has not been put
to test during his tenure. The most contentious issue amongst the provinces is
distribution of irrigation water.
Inadequacies of storage facilities and persistent drought have aggravated
the situation drastically. Available meager quantity of water can satisfy none, no
matter how carefully and fairly it is distributed. It will keep prompting
unilateral action to persons like Noor Muhammad, IRSA Chief, who restored
1991 Water Accord of which Sindh is the main beneficiary. The affected parties
will keep objecting. Perforce the Centre will keep intervening and reversing
such decisions.
Frequent interventions by the Centre are likely to be interpreted as
favourtism. Big brother will be blamed for usurping the rights of smaller
brothers. These feelings will accentuate mistrust. Hence, the water shortage will
be the main cause of provincial disharmony in future. Musharraf, like Zia, has
done nothing to address this problem.
He cannot solve it by giving more fiscal powers to Provinces. The
leaders of regional parties will keep demanding more powers, not for the good
of respective people, but to serve their own interests. Even a party like MQM,
which ruined internal harmony of its province, has demanded provincial
autonomy.
The experience tells that this party can cross all limits in pressing its
demands. It has the capability to cripple the hub of economic activity. The

government had a feel of it during strike carried out as protest against killing of
its two leaders. Bombs went off on that day. Police arrested more than two
hundred MQM men and registered a case against Altaf for inciting violence.
Political confrontation resulting from the dividing line, grievances of
religious parties and resurfacing of regional prejudices can compound the
existing law and order problems, making it difficult for law enforcing agencies
to maintain order during campaigning and polling. The problem may linger on
in case the results are disputed.
Pakistan has been sharing intelligence information with FBI. Musharraf
has accepted involvement of US experts in raids conducted within territorial
limits of Pakistan. Political parties will try to gain political mileage by blaming
government for allowing encroachment of Pakistans sovereignty.
Religious parties have voiced their concern over operations in tribal
areas. There are others, who may incite tribesmen to react. Rocket fired at US
troops in Miranshah was meant to convey anti-US feelings of tribesmen.
Incidents like that can impede the process of integration of tribal areas.
Musharraf is conscious of possible violent reactions. He has pleaded to
America for exercising restraint in escalating the war on terror. He has told US
that al-Qaeda couldnt regroup in Pakistan and Osama was in Afghanistan,
dead or alive. It depends upon the Crusaders whether to believe him or not.

CONCLUSION
The margin of victory in referendum was so overwhelming that even
father of the nation would have felt proud of it, had he held a referendum during
his short tenure. However, he would have shown his disgust on the manner in
which it was conducted.
Irrespective of this futile exercise, the elections must be held. All parties
should participate in forthcoming elections despite their apprehensions.
Musharraf should now grant freedom to political leadership to avail options to
realign priorities. This is necessary to stop those who want to derail
democracy.
He must aim at securing political support of absolute majority through
fair means. It will help him in consolidating the quiet revolution. Political
support is essential for revival of economy, which according to ADB, is still at

crossroads. It will also provide him the strength and courage to tell
international and regional bullies that enough is enough.

5th May 2002

CRUSADES IN MIDDLE EAST

A Muslim boy was shot and killed by a White American Christian of the
same age. The killer hated Muslims and he could not bear the sight of one
strolling on sacred soil of America. He must have been instigated or motivated
by discussions he heard at home or on TV or both.
In either case the elders of the civilized world had programmed his
computer-crazy mind. He did what his elders wanted him to do. He could not be
accused of committing a barbaric act. A son of the civilized world cannot
commit such crime. At worst, his act constituted an ordinary hate crime.
Another boy was killed, because he was namesake of a wanted criminal.
This killer committed no crime. How could murder of an Osama be considered
a crime in the civilized world? In fact the killer of Osama deserved nomination
for some gallantry award.
On 26th April an expelled student killed eighteen of his schoolmates in
Germany. He too committed no act of terrorism. He simply tried to redress his
grievances. Driven by his emotions he could not find a better course to salvage
his self-respect.
A student of civilized world with a feeling of having been wronged can
resort to taking an extreme step, yet he cannot be blamed for perpetrating
terrorism. Only Muslims in general and Palestinians and Kashmiris in particular
commit terrorist acts.
They perpetrate terrorism, because they are primitive, extremist and
barbaric. They have no right to resent killing of their children, raping of their
women and burning or blasting of their homes, because these acts conform to
the life-style of primitive and barbaric people.
They unnecessarily make death, destruction and rape as excuses for
carrying out suicide missions against peace loving Israelis. They have no right
to behave like schoolboys of the civilized world. Only the people having
self-respect can do this.

Irrespective of their grievances, they must restrict their resentment to the

limits laid down by the civilized world for uncivilized people. If they dont,
the Crusaders have reasons to treat these barbarians in the manner they know
well. No matter how serious their grievances might be.
They must understand that demanding own homeland back from illegal
occupants is against the norms of justice. It has to be so; otherwise all whites of
America, Australia and Africa could be asked to go back to Europe. Therefore,
all struggles for self-determination or self-rule are nothing, but terrorism. These
are part of the Axis of Evil. State terrorism perpetrated against Muslims in
Palestine and Kashmir has to be baptized as Crusades.

SHARON THE CRUSADER

With Sharon coming into power the aggression against Palestinians was
intensified. Americas ruthlessness as demonstrated in Afghanistan strengthened
his resolve to crush Palestinians demanding independent homeland. With that
the war on terror revealed its real intent.
Israel attacked almost every Palestinian town to counter suicide bombing
carried out as part of Intifada. In exercise of self-defence Sharon committed all
kinds of war crimes. Morality has been rendered redundant in war on terror.
Israeli forces have been raiding Palestinian towns, villages and camps to chase
and kill terrorists and terrorists to be.
Sharon, the proxy crusader, has been on the rampage against Palestinians.
The ferocity of Israeli aggression can be judged from the following:

Israeli forces occupied Tulkarem and twenty-one Palestinians were killed

on 1st April. Heavy fighting continued in Bethlehem and other towns next
day in which nine Palestinians were killed and more than 1,100 were
arrested.

Seven Palestinians were killed on 4th April and fifty-four more were killed
in deadly West Bank battles and more than 1,500 were held two days
later.

Next day fifty Palestinians were killed in bloody encounters. Tel Aviv
claimed killing of 200 Palestinians since March 29.

Five Palestinians including chiefs of Al-Qassam Brigade and Islamic

Jihad were killed on 10th April and over 4,000 had been arrested by that
date.

On 13th April eight dead bodies were found and Arafats aide was arrested
on 15th April.

Three Palestinians were killed on 18th April and next day ten died in
violence and Fatah activist was also shot dead.

Seven Palestinians were killed on 25th April in Israeli raid on Hebron and
nine more were killed on April 29.

Five Palestinians, including a child, were killed on Chicago Day. One

more was killed in Bethlehem shooting on the following day.

Between 3rd and 5th May Israeli commandos attacked Hamas hideout,
tanks raided a Palestinian town and killed two and in Tulkarem four
including two children were killed. Israeli troops killed four more in Gaza
on 6th May.

In addition to dispensation of death and destruction, Israel restricted

movement of Arafat. He was then squeezed to middle floor of his Headquarters.
Israelis however were considerate in caring for his daily needs. They sent
packets of food to the detainee.
Israeli troops clashed with guards of Arafat. His personal safety was
threatened. Russian parliamentarians asked their government to evacuate
Arafat. Americans responded by assuring safety of the captive. Sharon
proposed exile for Arafat and change in Palestinian leadership. An Israeli
minister suggested reformation of Palestinian authority.
Arafat was not only stopped from attending Arab Summit, but all the
means of contact with outside world were also severed. In this state of solitary
confinement he was asked to check terrorist activities of Palestinians.
Anybody asking that could only be joking.
The pressure on Arafat was increased to force him to hand over
criminals accused of committing acts of terrorism. Israel continued attacking,
capturing, destroying and then pulling back from Palestinian towns, camps and

villages. Even peace protesters were tear-gassed and the siege of Palestinians
holed up in a church continued.
Sharon proceeded to America on 5th May, probably to press upon above
agenda. During his stay in Washington, he wont be asked about Israeli
aggression or squabbling of his soldiers over confiscated Palestinian cars.
Palestinians are no-match to Israelis, who have been armed to teeth by
their sponsors. Despite that they have defied Israeli aggression and put up some
resistance. They have suffered heavily in the process, but have been able to
extract some price from Israelis in the same coin. Suicide bombing has been
the main stay of their retaliation:

Seven Israelis were killed in suicide bombing in a bus on 20 th March.

Three more were killed next day in an attack in Jerusalem.

On 27th March fifteen Israelis were killed in a suicide attack. Next day a
Palestinian gunman killed three Israelis.

A woman suicide bomber killed two in Jerusalem on 29th March and next
day a suicide bomber hit Tel Aviv.

On 31st March a suicide bomber killed fifteen in Israel and on the

following day Palestinian gunmen executed eleven collaborators on 1 st
April.

Thirteen Israeli troops were killed in Jenin on 9 th April. Next day eight
Israelis were killed in Haifa bus blast and Hizbollah captured Sheba
Farms post.

On 12th April a woman suicide bomber killed six in Jerusalem and a

suicide bomber blew up a car a week later.

On 20th April an Israeli soldier was shot dead and a Palestinian blew
himself up. Seven days later four Jewish settlers were shot dead in West
Bank.

Palestinians have refused to submit to Israel. They are determined to

continue their struggle. Hamas has vowed that Palestinians would not yield to
US pressure. Israeli aggression has made the Palestinians to bleed, but it has
not added to the security of its own citizens.

In the absence of any support from outside, Palestinians have started

losing ground to Israelis. The momentum of Intifada is dissipating, despite
pledges of Hamas to continue suicide attacks. Palestinians have rejected Israeli
offer to exile persons holed up in church, but they knew for sure, that time was
running out for ensuring safety of these men.
A Palestinian court sentenced the killers of Israeli tourism minister on 25 th
April. It was a move to secure freedom for Arafat, but Israelis pressed on their
demand for handing them over. Ultimately the accused persons were transferred
to neutral party for further disposal. Israel granted bail to Arafat and he came
out of the captivity quite angry.

THE WORLD RESPONSE

America is often accused of double standards. This accusation in the
context of Middle East is quite baseless. America has always stood firmly by the
side of Israel and provided unflinching support at all forums. Every act of Israel
has an explicit approval of White House.
America is the sponsor of state terrorism perpetrated by Israel. Therefore,
its actions and reactions have greater influence on the events that take place in
Middle East. Israeli attacks are condemned shrewdly with the intention of
condoning. When thousands of people protested in Washington, White House
showed the desire to balance pressure in Middle East.
Zinnis mission for working out an accord was nothing more than
eyewash. It had to hit roadblock of mistrust. US advice for withdrawal had to
fall on deaf ears of defiant Sharon. Arafat had to be admonished and asked to
stop violence. All these moves were essential, because Israel and US believe
that Palestinians have alliance with Iran.
White House announced that US was working very closely. The party
with which it was working was also clear. It had to be Sharon, who had declared
PLO chief as enemy of the free world. Therefore, the calls of UN and US for
withdrawal had to be spurned by him.
Powell was sent to Middle East, not for stopping Israeli aggression, but to
pacify Arabs. He met Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian and other Arab leaders.
Despite claiming progress in talks, his peace mission actually failed. He

came back empty-handed on pullout and there was no truce as result of

Powell-Arafat talks, because final authority in this context rested with Sharon.
The US House showed its magnanimity by delaying action on anti-Arafat
move. At the same time it displayed its determination to fight against terror by
backing military action of Israel. America also took Europe into confidence in
EU-US Summit.
The determination of Sharon to crush Palestinian brand of terrorism must
have pleased the Crusaders. His ruthless aggression moved some sections of the
civilized world. Nobel Committee has regretted awarding Peace Prize for
Peres. These reactions were could not cause any worry. The Committee can
reconsider its decision. UK and US will be pleased to award highest gallantry
award to Sharon.
When Israel was fighting on behalf of the Crusaders, America was
working hard to muster support for attacking Iraq. Cheney met Saudi Crown
Prince, Emir of Kuwait and other leaders of Arab countries. CIA supported
Cheneys mission by claiming that Iraq has had links with al-Qaeda. He on his
part asserted that US would stop Iraq from getting nuclear weapons.
The world has learnt to live with problem of Middle East. It never
stepped beyond showing concern, because nobody has the means or courage to
challenge US authority. Russia can discuss Iraq in London, fall apart from US
over sanctions on Iraq and show its worries over Middle East violence, but it
had to agree on joint peace efforts and form new anti-terror body to work with
NATO.
China can condemn Israels barbarous invasion and accuse US of nuclear
blackmail, but it is incapable of initiating any move against American interests.
The same is true for the august world body headed by Annan.
Muslim World has failed in reaching consensus on US led war on terror.
OIC Foreign Ministers met on 31 st March to define terrorism, but could not do
so. They showed some courage to warn about all-out war in Middle East and
reject terror label on Iraq.
Individually, Pakistan slated Israeli aggression and asked Israel to quit
Palestinian areas. Iran has rejected US terrorism accusation, blasted US for
backing Sharon and accused US of plunging Middle East into abyss.

Unexpectedly, Mahathir considered the use of terror against terror as

legitimate.
People of Muslim countries have been more vocal and explicit in
expressing their concerns, but like their leaders, they too were helpless. Some
Indonesian groups have vowed to send fighters to Middle East. Jakarta promptly
warned them against rushing to fight in Palestine.
The Arabs for a change have shown some solidarity in opposing US
attack on Iraq. Cheney failed to get support even from close allies. Iraq
pledged in writing never to invade Kuwait again. Saudi peace plan was
endorsed in Beirut declaration and Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands was
urged. America had to hail the declaration. Israel termed it as unacceptable
and rejected.
Arab League hailed Intifada, rejected biased stance of America and held
Israel responsible for violence. Mubarak criticized Israel for aggression and an
Egyptian Mufti declared suicide attacks as highest level of martyrdom.
Jordanian King warned against escalation of war.
Palestinians asked Arabs to break ties with Israel. Iraq urged Arabs to
strike at US interests and use oil against Israel. Response to the idea of using
oil weapon lacked enthusiasm. It had to. Arabs cannot think of doing so with all
their wealth lying in banks of the civilized world. They cannot risk its
freezing.
The Arabs are bearing the brunt of the Crusades launched by Israel. They
can cope with the situation, provided they make deliberate and concerted efforts
collectively; but some how they have abstained from adopting such a
dangerous course. Saudi Arabia led the charge.
They restricted their counter offensive to verbal bouts. They pretended to
be more civilized than the civilized. Riyadh observed that US credibility was
collapsing and warned America about the damage. Americans were criticized
for their bias towards Israel. Saudi Press blasted Powell for acting like a Jewish
rabbi.
Saudis also took some punitive measures against Israel. Israeli mobile
phones were confiscated. Saudi troops were massed on border with Jordan. It is

not difficult to understand the effects of this so-called bold move in presence
of American soldiers on Saudi soil.
Jordan rated US credibility near zero. Abdullah advised US to mend
pro-Israeli policy. He wanted speedy resolution of Middle East conflict,
because his kingdom lies in immediate vicinity. The King has issued the decree
as if all concerned were waiting for it to act with urgency. While expressing his
desire, he forgot that his country and Egypt were incapacitated at Camp David.
Both of them had surrendered their right to express their views on the issue.
Syrian Press criticized UN and US for bias and asked them to act fairly
on Middle East policy. Arab League and Syria rejected Sharons peace plan.
Saddam declared that suicide bombing was legitimate.
Arabs were not just quarrelling. They were fighting against Israel by
pouring millions into Palestinian cause by drawing a fraction of their wealth
lying in banks of the civilized world. The bulk of it is left therein to be the
hostage of their enemies. That was why Walid considered that boycott of US
goods was not feasible.
Under the circumstances the only course that remains open is to agree
with the super power. New York Times has reported that Riyadh and US have
agreed on Middle East strategy. Israel and Arafat welcomed US Plan for
moot. America reciprocated and ruled out sidelining Arafat. Agreement was
also reached on church standoff.
Easiest to be fooled in the world is the lot of Muslim leaders. They
cherish living in paradise, may it be the domain of fools. Their weakness has
deprived them of sobriety. They are incapable of playing any sensible and sober
role. Therefore, they seek solace only in attire of clowns.
They flay, like Pakistan, the massacre of 150 Palestinians and want
probe into their killing. They blame radical warmongers for driving US
Middle East policy like Khatami. They advise for restraint on Lebanon-Israel
border like Iran. But at the end of the day they all rush to America to tell Bush
about Muslim anger. People of Muslim World can call for holy war against
Israel, but the leaders will warn them of the consequences.
Mahathir has summed up the helplessness of Ummah in following
words:

It is shameful and unislamic that all we Muslims can do when the

Israelis massacred the Palestinians in Jenin is to appeal to others for pity
and for help. They have killed so many people in Jenin and refuse to
allow the UN to inspect the camp.

Muslims have not been doing anything to change their helplessness and
they do not deserve to be helped by Allah. To be very crude, the fate of
the Muslims today is of their own making.

A lot of us talk of Islamic brotherhood and then we kill each other. We

can make strong statements but people will still ignore us because we are
not united.

Today the anger is much greater than after September 11 because Israel
took the opportunity to attack Palestinians on the excuse that they are
terrorists.

The Secretary General of the United Nations felt the pressure on his
conscience and made two proposals. The first proposal pertained to sending a
peace force. Pakistan urged for immediate deployment of UN force. UNSC
debated on it, but failed to take decision.
The second proposal of sending fact finding team to Jenin was Okayed.
Israel first delayed and then banned UN Jenin mission. Tel Aviv ultimately
threatened to declare UN envoy as persona non-Greta. The will of Israel
prevailed and the honourable Secretary General was made to swallow his
proposal. Saudi Arabia and Syria condemned UN and US for this. The
condemnation made no material difference.
UK cautioned Israel about loss of international support. European Union
called for halting Israeli attacks. It threatened to suspend pact with Israel and
considered imposition of trade curbs. The Union never meant to implement any
of its threats.

EXPANSION OF WAR
The proxy crusades being fought in Middle East is part of the war on
terror. Britain and America are supporting Israel by exerting pressure on
Arafat. The experts of both the countries are advising on how to guard against

Palestinian militants. This does not mean that the Crusades on other fronts can
be slowed down. They have the resources to fight the enemy on all fronts.
The war in Afghanistan is far from over. America has discussed with
Russia the need to keep its troops in Central Asia. It has been extended to
Pakistan and the territorial sovereignty of an ally is being molested with due
care with the help of India. America has increased military support to
Philippines war against terror.
America and its partners are still crying of more wolves. CIA has claimed
that next terror attack was unavoidable. Britain agreed with it by saying that
terrorism was still a big threat. These cries were necessary to legitimize the
continuation of war on terror.
Muslims in general and Arabs in particular have been pleading to
America for stopping Israeli aggression; whereas Yankees have held secret talks
with Kurds to deal with Iraq. America is trying to incite Kurds to join hands in
anti-Saddam strike. The unexpected response of the Arabs forced Bush to
remain undecided on Iraq. It does not mean that plans for extending the holy
war have been abandoned. America has decided to wait for a year or so.
Meanwhile efforts were made to achieve some goals through
brinkmanship and through good offices of the United Nations. All these goals
relate to the singular aim of softening Muslim World by crushing all pockets of
resistance, particularly the freedom movements.
The scope of the war demanded that strength of the Crusaders must be
enhanced. To this end America has favoured enlargement of NATO. The
countries other than those, which have not joined the Coalition, were
encouraged to fight against terrorism. Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines have
signed anti-terror pact. China has held first anti-terrorism talks with India.
Nevertheless, many nations have criticized the biased conduct of the war
on terror. Iran and China rejected US view on terrorism, because it was
motivated by the hegemonic designs and both the countries pledged to expand
bilateral relations. Khamenei accused US of bullying other nations. Khatami
opined that US policies were endangering world peace. Some US intellectuals
also opposed the war. The responsibility of defending the cause of holy war
has been assigned to Blair.

The war on terror has been going on well for the last seven months.
Besides causing colossal collateral damage it has toppled Taliban Regime,
disarrayed al-Qaeda, forced Pakistan to disown Kashmir cause and delivered a
crushing blow on resistance movement of Palestinians.
The extent of collateral damage has tarnished the glamour of visible
successes of the war. It can prove to be self-defeating, because it has not made
the world a safer place than it was before the start of war. Some unexpressed
interests of US might have been served, but common Americans have been
exposed to multiple threats. Threats like mail bombs or pipe bombs will keep
sparking fear. Their allies in Asia have been rendered even more vulnerable.
Their vulnerability will keep compelling the Americans to thin out diplomatic
staff and tighten security in countries like Pakistan and Yemen.
The holy war has added to the arrogance of America. It strongly opposed
the constitution of International Criminal Court. The opposition however did not
deter the countries working for it. The Court was constituted. America
denounced the treaty, despite harping hoarse about the value of justice. Perhaps,
administration of justice has become exclusive prerogative of the Yankees.

CONCLUSION
Fahid said that Israel was no longer interested in peace. He was right.
Why should Israel be interested in peace? Israel, with the support of the
civilized world, is strong enough to thrash all Arabs at will. It ought to be
Arabs, who should be interested in peace and if they are; they must beg for it.
Saudi scholars called Israel and US as an Axis of Evil. The ground
reality is that evil forces of Muslims in general and Arabs in particular, are
being crushed by the Crusaders. The Heavens have cursed them. The Arabs
have not been pardoned as yet of their act of undoing Ottoman Empire in
connivance with the Crusaders.
Muslims are guilty of being weak. Their weaknesses have been
completely exposed. Muslim leaders have submitted to the will of the Crusaders
and after having done it they begged for mercy and hope like fools that their
appeals would be heard sympathetically. They have closed their eyes lest they
do not read the writing on the wall. Many of their enemies are eager to follow
the precedence set by Israel. In the context of Pakistan it is India.

Contrary to the submissive attitude of their leaders, the people of Muslim

World, particularly the oppressed people, will never submit to the will of the
Crusaders. They will continue fighting for their rights making best use of means
at their disposal. In words of the civilized people, they will continue
perpetrating terrorism. Thus the Crusades will go on.
It is high time that rulers of Muslim World take cognizance of the gravity
of situation. The manner in which the Crusaders and proxy crusaders are
carrying out the war on terror should caution them about consequences of
complacency. The people fighting for just causes of oppressed Muslims must
not be left at the mercy of Crusaders and their collaborators.
The rulers must recollect that Allah has advised them about one and a
half-millenium ago that Jews and Christians cannot be friends of the Muslims.
They must stop seeking their friendship. It will never happen. The Divine
decree cannot be belied. They must start looking inward for gathering strength
rather than looking towards others for help.
8th May 2002

CRUSADES IN THE SUBCONTINENT

Indo-Pak standoff lingers on. America asked Pakistan and India to end it
with the same intent with which it has been asking Israel and Palestine. India
ruled out the pullout of troops, because conditions for talks were not right.
Straw told Pakistan to hand over 20 suspects to India to make the conditions
conducive for dialogue.
Creating and sustaining tension is no problem for India. It has mastered
this art over the years. A diplomat can be arrested, tortured and expelled on any
flimsy grounds. India knows that Pakistan will invariably react in similar
manner and it will serve the purpose.
If a calculated step fails in creating the desired effect, then war-games
can be conducted in the vicinity of border. Musharraf has to feel concerned
over Indian exercises. India knows that as long as it enjoys the support of the
Crusaders it will not be subjected to any pressure from any quarters.
To retain the support of Crusaders India has to be mindful of only one
thing. It must continuously exert pressure on Pakistan to achieve the goals of
war on terror. The standoff along international border should be so sustained
that it must force Pakistan to continue crushing Islamic militants. To this end
India may also carry out occasional terrorist attacks in Pakistan to emphasize
the existence of militancy.
At the same time India can solve its problems by intensifying counterinsurgency operations in Kashmir and by carrying out ethnic cleansing in
Gujarat. It is at liberty to wage war of terror in the name of war on terror.

STANDOFF SUSTAINED
The Crusaders have collaborated with India to defeat terrorism
originating from Pakistan. Indo-American collaboration has worked quite
effectively. Therefore, Pakistan was not provided any respite in the game of
brinkmanship. India maintained the pressure on Pakistan by:

Persistently refusing to talk and consistently talking about possibility of

war with Pakistan.

Frequently talking of existence of tension along Indo-Pak border, refusing

to pull back troops and resorting to unprovoked firing across Line of
Control.

Stressing upon extradition of 20 most wanted men along with advice to

give up terrorism.

Marring further the already marred diplomatic relations by first

mistreating diplomatic officials and then expelling them.

Intensifying diplomatic pressure in concert with its Western allies. As a

result of Indian lobbying Russia too has urged Pakistan to wipe out
extremists.

The Crusaders fully supported India to enhance chances of success.

Military cooperation with India for combating terrorism has been increased.
Indian and American troops conducted joint combat exercises near Agra. All
such exercises are usually meant for testing plans and improving combat skills
and readiness of the troops. The enemy for which these plans were tested was
quite obvious.
America provided radar worth $ 146 million to India. Pakistan
apprehended that the deal would make India more belligerent. Rocca has been
visiting India quite frequently. Her recent visit was aimed at securing Indian
support to check Russian moves in Central Asia. The cooperation was also
extended to other fields of common interests. India and US have held talks to
combat cyber attacks.
To forestall Pakistans apprehensions UK and US refused to declare Hizb
as terrorist group. It was to tell Pakistan that America was only helping India
and Pakistan on Kashmir. Similarly America was also working for Indo-Pak
meeting on nuclear security.
On 14th May three fighters of al-Mansoorian Group attacked a military
camp near Jammu and killed 34 people, including 22 soldiers. India accused
outlawed Jaish for this attack and Advani claimed that victims were all civilians.
Once again the attack coincided with visit of an American dignitary to
India. Rocca was present in New Delhi to be told in person by Jaswant that no

pull back of Indian troops was possible. She was given a message to be
conveyed at her next destination, Islamabad.
Showing respect to the concerns of both the countries and urging for
reduction in Indo-Pak tension, Rocca advised Pakistan that militants
infiltration into India must stop. Otherwise a spark can lead to unintended
conflict. Bush provided strength to her argument by condemning Kashmir
attack as an act of terrorism. America was all out to support India.
Genocide of more than two thousand Muslims in Gujarat, including
women and children, was no terrorism. Nothing was wrong with forced
conversion of survivors to Hinduism. Killing of Kashmiris was also legitimate,
because they were trying to revive an issue already declared dead by the
civilized world.
India threatened that it would have to retaliate. Indian army chief
advocated action. Vajpayee weighed response to Kashmir raid. The steps to
be taken by India were discussed. Patience of Omar Abdullah with Islamabad
also ran out thin. Fernandes however exercised unusual restraint by stating
that there was no plan to attack Pakistan. Qazi had reasons to suspect the
statement of this Indian hawk and warned about sudden Indian attack on
Pakistan.
Britain called for restraint between Pakistan and India. India fully
understood the connotations of this call as well as the requirements of
Crusaders. Maintenance of pressure was necessary, because Vajpayee felt that
war on terrorism was at decisive stage. He also observed that due to positive
impact of Pakistans policies the situation on border was not bad.
Pakistan however has to be kept guessing about the true extent of IndoAmerican collaboration. American leaders continued urging India and Pakistan
to reduce tension and making moves to defuse tension over Kashmir. Pakistan
was shown some carrots of bilateral cooperation while swirling the stick of
Indo-Pak war.

CRUSADES WITHIN PAKISTAN

Pakistan appealed for reduction of tension. Foreign Minister said that
any country as mediator would be acceptable. Musharraf offered troops

withdrawal and lifting of ban on Indian airlines. He urged the world to help in
ending Pak-India row. Pakistan expressed its willingness to sign extradition
treaty with India. Pakistan stuck to the policy of restraint. China, despite
knowing well that Pakistan could do nothing else, appreciated that.
Pakistan rejected Indian allegation, slated killings in Jammu and called
for probe. The logic behind rejection of allegation and call for probe was
understood, but slating of killing was misplaced. Did it mean that Pakistan
denies the right of self-defence to Kashmiris whose mothers and sisters were
being gang raped by the valiant soldiers of Bharat Mata?
However, there were some indications that Pakistan has not yet totally
submitted to Indian dictations. Musharraf claimed that Pakistan had done
enough to curb terrorism and vowed that Pakistan was prepared to keep troops
on border for five years. Pakistan repeatedly mentioned Kashmir dispute as
root cause of Pak-India tension and rejected polls in the Valley.
The Crusaders were able to extract cooperation of Pakistan in their war
against terrorism. The war, which started in Afghanistan, has spilled over to
Pakistan. It was visualized by many during battle of Tora Bora that smoked out
terrorists would create problems for Pakistan. That has come true. America
pressed for conduct of anti-terror operations inside Pakistan.
The aim of Indo- Pak standoff, to take the war to the interior of Pakistan
without initiating military action along the border, has been fulfilled. This is
amalgamation of Indo-American aims. India is interested in waging war of
terror and the Crusaders are eager to extend war on terror into the territorial
limits of Pakistan.
FBI was able to establish presence of al-Qaeda men in Faisalabad,
including top leaders. A raid was planned to apprehend the smoked out
fugitives. Pakistan was not trusted for execution of the plan at its own;
therefore FBI supervised the operation to ensure that the job was done to their
satisfaction.
The raid was carried out on 28th March. Two persons were killed and
more than fifty were arrested. Osamas second-in-command, Abu Zubayda, was
held. Reportedly, Osama had left Faisalabad before the raid. The government

denied participation of American troops in this operation. It was a routine

denial.
The Crusaders, must have told Pakistan to do it or we come. In view of
the expected reaction of the people, Pakistan volunteered to accomplish the
task. Once again they were saved from suffering casualties. This time Elite
Force performed the role of Northern Alliance. Americans are the real elite;
their blood is very precious and it has to be saved.
Pakistan was also told to carry out operations in tribal areas, where the
going has not been as smooth as was in case of Faisalabad. The only success
was the arrest of former teacher of American Taliban, John Walker, in a joint
operation. Is he a terrorist? Has he sponsored or supported terrorism? People of
the area have answered both the questions in negative.
Americans will say yes to either question. To many intellectuals of the
West, the Quraan preaches violence. Mulla Iltimas taught Quraan to a young
man of the civilized world. Therefore, he was guilty of motivating a man of
the civilized world for committing acts of terrorism.
Lindhs former teacher was later released. Probably American
interrogators must have recollected Lindhs confession that he was motivated to
embrace Islam during his stay in US. Mulla had nothing to do with his
conversion. Iltimas only taught him what he wanted to be taught.
The people opposed conduct of US operations in tribal areas and resented
the arrest of respected teacher. Tribal elders rejected Pakistans support to
America. The tribesmen targeted two positions of US troops in Miranshah with
missiles. The attacks failed to inflict any casualties but have served warnings to
the concerned quarters. They may gradually start opposing the war on terror
more vehemently. Tribesmen have threatened to carry out suicide attacks
against US forces.
JUI-F has assured political support to tribesmen. The party staged rallies
against arrest of religious scholars and conduct of operations in tribal areas.
Tanzeemul Ulema and Ajmal also flayed the presence of US commandos in
tribal areas.
Pakistan joined hands with America to eliminate terrorism perpetrated by
Islamic extremists, but it wanted to accomplish this noble task employing its

own resources. The government understands that presence of US troops in

Pakistan can lead to occurrence of untoward incidents. In view of this,
Musharraf repeatedly pledged to wipe out terrorism from Pakistan at his own
and assured America that Osama was not in Pakistan.
Pledges and assurances have not satisfied Americans, who are obsessed
with al-Qaeda. For them the time to act has not yet expired. Washington Post
alleged that Pakistan was reluctant to attack al-Qaeda. Pakistan denied the
allegation. Wendy met President to discuss Pak-US cooperation. The blast in
Karachi made it easier for America to get willing cooperation for joint
operations inside Pakistan to root out terror network.
Pakistan moved its forces close to Shawal forests and planned to station
an army brigade at Wana. Raids on tribesmen accused of sheltering Taliban and
al-Qaeda men were carried out. The tribesmen were barred from carrying
weapons as precautionary measure.
A weapon is part of tribesmans dress. The restriction of not carrying a
weapon has the same, perhaps more serious, implications than prohibiting a
tribesman from wearing turban or Shalwar. Arms ban can increase tension in
Waziristan if enforced too strictly.
America realized that the aim of hunting hardened terrorists cannot be
achieved without improving anti-terrorist capabilities of Pakistani forces. Moin
visited America primarily for this purpose. Pakistan also agreed to conduct war
games with US troops.
Tackling of terrorists other than al-Qaeda has been left to India. Its
intelligence agencies have carried out terrorist attacks in Pakistan in the past.
There is no reason for India to stop perpetrating terrorism now. In fact the
situation demands that such attacks should be conducted more frequently.
Terrorist attacks will help in alleging Pakistanis for intolerance and existence of
terrorist organizations inside Pakistan.
India knows that Musharrafs crackdown has antagonized religious and
Jehadi organizations. Influx of fugitive Taliban and al-Qaeda has added to the
number of terrorists present in Pakistan. India wanted to capitalize on the
situation, as men of these organizations could be blamed for every terrorist

attack carried out by its intelligence agencies. Pakistan will be forced to act
against them.
India has established contacts with many sectarian, linguistic and
separatist organizations. These can be used to destabilize Pakistan. If need be
India can seek help of Northern Alliance, as infiltration across western border is
much easier. Fahim and Advani have lot of experience in perpetration of
terrorism.
These factors contributed towards rise in terrorist attacks in Pakistan.
Serial killing of doctors, blasts in Bhakkar and Karachi, rockets fired on grid
station and occasional incidents of sectarian terrorism could be termed as
indigenous, but killing of Dr. Ghulam Murtaza in Lahore and attacks on a
church in Islamabad and French engineers in Karachi bear signatures of foreign
involvement.
After the last incident Moin visited America. He might not have been
asked about Dr. Malik, as he was not as precious to Americans as Pearl, but they
must have talked about French citizens and the church. They must have shown
their concern about terrorist networks operating in Pakistan. Who-so-ever the
killers were they definitely provided the pretext to pressurize Pakistan.
The attack of 17th March drew the attention of civilized world. It had to,
because it related to a church. The sanctity of a church is more important than
the sanctity of dozens of mosques in Afghanistan, Palestine and India.
A lone terrorist entered a church in Islamabad during congregation,
lobbed grenades and made his escape good. Five persons including two
Americans were killed and 40 were hurt. Musharraf was outraged, top police
officials were removed, a special probe team was set up for swift action and
US was assured action against attacker.
General Franks arrived and Rocca dashed to Pakistan from India. The
dash was so abrupt that even Government of Pakistan knew nothing about her
arrival. Bush strongly condemned the attack and the world joined him. He and
Powell talked to Musharraf on phone and US offered help to hunt church
attacker.
Pakistan planned to set up anti-terrorist units. President ordered
revamping of intelligence bodies. Government agencies claimed unearthing four

terrorist groups. Six Harkat men were arrested in AJK and 21 were held in
Mansehra.
The suicide attack of 8th May resulted in killing of eleven Frenchmen and
injuring ten more. This gruesome incident earned severe criticism and
condemnations. Chirac assailed attack and sent his Defence Minister to
Pakistan. America considered it as attack on its two allies. Blair and Powell
phoned Musharraf to condemn the blast. Cricket team of Kiwis cancelled tour
of Pakistan.
Benazir observed that blast would affect countrys image. Qazi and Sami
condemned bomb attack. Fazl shared grief of French Government and ruled out
involvement of religious activists in blast. Musharraf assured Chirac of action.
Some experts thought that evidence linked to local group. Nisar saw
international linkage. National Security Council thought that India was behind
terrorist act. None of these views have been substantiated. Investigations of
such incidents in the past have seldom been conclusive; therefore, the
government sought foreign help to probe the incident right from the outset.
FBI and French officials promptly joined hands in grilling the suspects.
Hundreds of suspects were held in countrywide swoop. Interior secretary
clarified that there were no random arrests like in the past. The government
sources promised that innocent people would be released after questioning. If
that were so, then what was the wisdom in arresting them?
The government has announced a reward of Rupees two million on
information about bombers. Rewards are generally announced when
investigators run short of the leads. It meant that investigation was making little
progress. So far only the experts have reconstructed the face of suspected
suicide bomber.
The suicide attack of 8th May, like execution of Pearl, has put Pakistan on
the back foot. It can have following effects:

Musharraf said that attack was a bid to weaken defence and economy of
Pakistan. The Stock Exchanges in Pakistan amply reflected the effects of
the blast on economy.

France resolved to continue Submarine project, but future cooperation

will be subjected to strict scrutiny.

Blast has exposed limitations of Pakistans security forces. It will

encourage those who have been hesitant so far. The terrorist attacks may
increase in future. Fazl has rightly said that Pakistan was at the receiving
end.

The VIPs in Pakistan will feel unsafe and import of bulletproof

Mercedes cars will increase.

Musharraf served displeasure over dismal performance of law

enforcement agencies. The government sought public support to deal with
terrorism. Crackdown against illegal aliens was launched. Hundreds of illegal
immigrants were arrested. Setting up of special investigation cell in FIA was
planned. These could be taken as positive effects of the attack.
The US led war on terror has provided no respite to government from
terrorist attacks. Apart from hunting al-Qaeda men and chasing terrorists it has
been busy in fighting legal battles. It faced difficulties in proceeding against
those hauled up during crackdown. Lahore High Court remarked that
government blindly arrested Jehadis.
Perforce the government re-examined cases of 2,060 arrested Jehadis and
809 activists of banned outfits were released including Fazl-ur-Rehman. Court
ordered release of Hafiz Saeed. Qazi was acquitted in incitement case on 30 th
March. Illegal detentions of released persons caused no embarrassment to
anyone in the government.
The government also faced difficulties in promulgation of laws for
dealing with terrorism. Amendments in ATA were challenged in Supreme Court.
The Pearl case caused problems of its own. Wife of Omar moved Sindh High
Court against extradition of her husband. Lack of evidence marred the trial.
The only good news was that Sharon ordered Mossad to pursue killers of
Pearl.
The Crusaders were generally satisfied with performance of Musharraf.
US lawmakers hailed Pakistans role in fighting terrorism. Pakistans
contribution in capture of Abu Zubayda, handing over of al-Qaeda suspects,
detention of Sudanese trainee pilots, joining of Coalition Village, allowing FBI
set-ups in Pakistan, helping US in probe of al-Qaeda suspects in Cuba and

above all digesting the insult showered on invitee officials were no mean
contributions.
Appreciation does not mean that Pakistani nation has been absolved from
the accusation of terrorism. The US senators still consider it necessary to stress
upon Pakistan to stop al-Qaeda men fleeing. To cater for untoward
eventualities, America felt that it was important to have joint training with
Indian forces in Alaska.

CRUSADES BY INDIA
Crusades launched by India can be divided into two categories. In
Kashmir more than half a million troops are engaged in suppressing the freedom
movement since early eighties. Military men would like to call it counterinsurgency. Indian Government however terms it as war against cross-border
terrorism. Hindu extremists with the support of BJP government conduct the
second kind of Crusades, which is officially dubbed as communal riots. Some
civilized people may call it as ethnic cleansing. In reality this too is part of
Crusades.
The intensity of state terrorism perpetrated by Indian armed forces
baptized as Crusades can be judged from reports of last five weeks:

Eighteen people including three kids were killed in the Valley clashes on
10th April. Next day a woman was killed and fourteen were hurt as a
result of Indian shelling across Line of Control.

On 12th April the Valley was crippled by strike and nine Kashmiris were
killed. A day later twenty Kashmiris including a leader of freedom
fighters were killed.

Five were killed and thirty-nine hurt in violence on 15 th April. Next day
three more were killed and twenty-seven injured.

On 21st April an Indian major was among seventeen killed in the Valley
and eight more were killed in a blast and encounters on 25th April.

Fifteen persons were killed in clashes on 26th April and Geelani was
arrested. Two persons died in Azad Kashmir due to Indian shelling. Next
day eleven more were killed in Indian Held Kashmir.

On 28th April seventeen Kashmiris were shot dead in the Valley and three
girls died in AJK due to Indian shelling. Fourteen more were killed and
twenty-three injured next day.

May Day was celebrated by killing fourteen Kashmiris and on 4 th May

eighteen more were killed. Eight fighters were among twelve killed in
next twenty-four hours.

Eight persons were killed on 6th May, nine on 7th and eleven 9th May.

Indian troops killed six Kashmiris on 10th May and nineteen more were
gunned in next two days.

Twelve Kashmiris were killed on 15th May and one person died as a result
of Indian firing across Line of Control. Next day fifteen more were killed
in the Valley.

The above figures are based on reports received and published by the
press in Pakistan. Pakistani print media has no presence in the Valley and it has
little knowledge of the clandestine operations carried out by Indian troops.
Therefore, the actual situation should be much graver than the one reported.
The pressure on Pakistan allowed India the freedom of action. Pakistan
was forced to stop movement of Mujahideen across Line of Control. India
capitalized on the situation by going all out to defeat cross-border terrorism. It
also helped Indian Government in pushing through the adoption of stringent
anti-terrorist law, despite strong criticism by the opposition. The law too is
meant for Muslims in general and Kashmiris in particular.
Pakistan has surrendered the Kashmir cause. Probably this has been done
in the light of a military quote that a General, who tries to defend everything,
defends nothing. Pakistan is trying to save the remaining three out of its four
major concerns. Occasional lip service to the abandoned cause however
continues. Sattar rejected third option on Kashmir and Shaukat asked India to
resolve Kashmir dispute.
Mobilization of Indian armed forces was part of the game of
brinkmanship, but the absence of real action did not satisfy the bloodthirsty
Hindu extremists. They finally found an excuse by blaming Muslims of Gujarat

for burning a train. The need for having evidence to implicate them was
disregarded. They were smoked out and killed at random to pay the price.
Although the worst is perhaps over, yet sporadic anti-Muslim riots
continue. Killing of Muslims has become a routine. The rioters defied curfew
repeatedly, went on rampage and torched mosques and houses of Muslims. The
employment of regular troops too failed in controlling the violence against
hapless Muslims as could be seen from the reports of last four weeks:

Three persons died on 17th April and on 20th one more was killed. Next
day twelve persons were killed and 71 injured.

Nine Muslims were killed in police firing on 22 nd April and curfew was
imposed in Ahmedabad. Seven more were killed on the following day.

On 25th April one person was killed and two injured. Next day three more
were killed and thirty injured.

On 28th April nine were killed and 25 hurt in Ahmedabad riots. Four more
were killed on the following day.

Four people were killed in Ahmedabad on 5th May and next day, ten more
were killed in violent riots.

Nine persons were killed on 7 th May and twenty-five more were killed in
next 48 hours.

On 10th May five persons were killed in riots. One person was stabbed to
death in Ahmedabad a day after.

Riots spread to Maharashtra on 13th May and four persons were killed.

The figures of killed and injured do not reflect the true extent of
genocide. The horrifying nature of the atrocities committed can only be
understood by going into details of manner in which the killings were carried
out. The property of Muslims was plundered at will. Burning destroyed that,
which could not be looted. Setting on fire or throwing them live into wells
killed the men. Women were raped and then stabbed.
Radical Hindus forced Muslims to leave Gujarat. The expelled Muslims
took refuge in camps established for displaced persons. Of late the government

has closed these camps leaving displaced Muslims at the mercy of Hindu
extremists.
Thirty-four NGOs have confirmed committing of these atrocities.
According to Human Rights Groups, Gujarat police joined hands with rioters in
targeting Muslims. Human Rights Watch claimed that BJP had approved the
police action.
Gujarat Chief Minister was responsible for controlling or conducting the
riots. The opposition accused him for his failure in controlling. When pressure
mounted he offered to resign. BJP in appreciation of his performance rejected
his resignation and promised to find out facts through a probe. Muslims had no
choice but to boycott such inquiry as they could foresee the outcome.
Vajpayee blamed Muslims for the riots by accusing them to be an
intolerant community. Opposition leader slated his remarks. Pakistan assailed
his unwarranted anti-Muslim statement. Like all good politicians, after having
said what he wanted to say, Vajpayee blamed others for misinterpreting his
remarks.
There was uproar in Indian Parliament and its proceedings remained
disrupted for a week. The opposition staged walkout. The Parliament however
put off vote on Gujarat riots and BJP government survived the censure motion.
Instead it passed a motion to quell riots. Upheavals in parliament and walkouts
were meant for showing the charming democratic side of Indian face while
covering the uglier side of Hindu extremism.
Vajpayee announced that there was no difference within coalition over
riots. Advani pledged that BJP would not stray from coalition agenda. He
accused Pakistan for encouraging religious insurgents and claimed that
Indias wanted men were planning to avenge Gujarat. New Delhi sent 2,000
anti-riot troops to Gujarat to meet the threat.
The genocide of Muslims in Gujarat has semblance of ethnic cleansing,
but so far India has aimed at ethnic softening only. The carnage was meant to
teach Muslims the principles of peaceful co-existence. They must learn to
tolerate Hindu extremism or perish.
The Crusaders pardoned all sins of India. Rocca termed communal riots
in India as horrible, but these were not too grave to merit initiation of any

action against India. As long as Muslims are at the receiving end, the horrible
is quite acceptable.
Pakistan Government remained somewhat indifferent to killings of
Muslims in India. A similar rioting against minorities in Pakistan would have
been exploited by India to mobilize world opinion against Pakistan. The
government confined its reaction to urging world to take notice of Muslims
killings and advising India to crackdown on Hindu extremists. India was
under no pressure to launch such crackdowns.

CONCLUSION
Indo-American collaboration is aimed at securing regional and global
interests of both the countries. Pakistan is considered as roadblock in fulfillment
of their common goals. Therefore, both will continue exerting pressure on
Pakistan. The aim is to weaken Pakistan at all costs.
India has been allowed to carry out tests of supersonic cruise missile, plan
construction of Baghliar Hydroelectric Project and advise Afghanistan for
construction of similar dam on River Kabul. In short, India will be encouraged
to take all possible actions, which add to the worries of Pakistan. At the same
time the donors will keep demanding cut in defence spending.
Pakistan has stopped infiltration into Indian Held Kashmir and helping
freedom fighters. Despite that the pressure will be maintained till apprehended
sabotage of Kashmir polls is prevented and Pakistan stops talking about
Kashmir dispute. America will demand more action from Pakistan against alQaeda men. It will keep asking extradition of wanted men while refusing the
same in the context of the looters wanted by Pakistan.
Pakistan may claim that its military has neutralized threat on borders
and that there was no threat from Indian war games, but it must bear in mind
that the game is not yet over. India and America have carried out joint exercises
from Alaska to Agra. The usefulness of these exercises has prompted them to
carry out more war games in future. Their collaboration will last much longer
than a dancing party.
It is not the time to have free trade with India, but to concentrate on
nefarious designs of India and the Crusaders. Musharraf has to keep the count of

two things. One, the number of onions eaten is nearing hundred. Once the count
is completed, he must tell the head of global village that he has done it. The
punishment should end.
Two, the war losses can only be avoided by sacrificing something for
peace. He must keep the count of that something. It must not exceed the count
of anticipated losses in case of war. In the counting system a villager living
along border or Line of Control should be considered as valuable as any other
asset of Pakistan.
America is keen to provide technical support to enhance Pakistans antiterrorist capabilities. The capabilities so enhanced should be employed against
terrorists like Riaz Basra. Even repeated elimination of such criminals through
fake encounters will help in improving internal security.
Formation of Indo-American axis demands that Pakistan must expand
cooperation with China. Pakistan should also make efforts to resuscitate Muslim
Ummah, despite the fact that to many it is presumably dead. Dead are its
leaders, not the Ummah.

17th May 2002

BUSH AND THE BANIA

India dubbed the attack of 14th May as an act of terrorism sponsored by
Pakistan. It provided an excuse to give impetus to the game of brinkmanship.
The frequency of moves and counter moves has considerably increased since
then.
India started moving briskly on the warpath. The appeals for exercising
restraint had no apparent sobering effects on belligerent Bania. Pakistan
prepared itself for war but continued working for peace. The civilized world
saw that war was imminent. It initiated precautionary measures to save its
people from harm. The whites were told to leave the Subcontinent and fall back
to the safety of their respective homelands.
Britain, France, Germany and America recalled non-essential staff from
Pakistan. European Union urged its nationals to stay away from India and
Pakistan. Australia asked its citizens to leave Pakistan and India. Americans
were warned to defer travel to the Subcontinent. The United Nations started
pulling back its staff and families from India and Pakistan.
Simultaneously with organized pullout, the fearful foreigners fled from
both the countries making their own arrangements. The rush warranted
requisitioning of additional flights. The pullout indicated that the civilized
world and India were working in complete coordination. With that Pakistans
concerns started transforming into worries. Those who were interested in
averting war had to do all they could.

BELLIGERANT BANIA
Indian reaction to Jammu attack amply revealed the belligerence of
Bania. Indian Parliament blamed Lashkar and Jaish for Jammu attack and
condemned Pakistan for sponsorship. Opposition pressurized Indian
Government for decisive action against Pakistan.
On 18th May India expelled Pakistani Envoy in New Delhi, which further
heightened the tension. Next day India deployed more troops. Paramilitary
forces and Coast Guards were placed under Army and Naval commands
respectively. Defence Minister of India and top brass surveyed Pakistan
border.
Vajpayee met Sonia Gandhi who supported government moves to deal
with Pakistan. India threatened to use Indus Treaty as strategic weapon. On 21st
May India moved troops from Gujarat to Pakistan border. Indian Navy stepped
up deployment and India vowed not to pullback under US pressure.

Vajpayee accused Pakistan of proxy war, called for decisive battle and
said, India will write new chapter of victory. Indian naval ships moved closer
to Pakistan. On 23rd May the courtesy call of Pakistani Envoy ended in a brawl.
On 1st June a Pakistani official was abducted in Delhi, alleging that an Indian
official has been abducted in Islamabad. These incidents clearly reflected Indian
belligerence.
While the world in general and Pakistan in particular contemplated about
possibilities of war, India initiated punitive actions against perpetrators of
cross-border terrorism. The punishments executed during the last fortnight
were:

In heavy exchange of firing across Line of Control on 17 th May twelve

persons were killed on both sides. Next day two more were killed and
twenty were gunned down in occupied Kashmir.

On 19th May twelve villagers died as India continued firing and fourteen
were killed in occupied Kashmir. Firing across Line of Control and
working boundary continued the following day.

On 21st May India targeted Pakistani civilians and killed four persons and
thirty more were killed in next 48 hours.

Indian shelling claimed two more lives in AJK on 24 th May and next day
eleven civilians died in Indian shelling. Fourteen more were martyred in
next two days.

Two more were killed in Indian firing across Line of Control on 28 th May
and thirteen died next day.

Indian firing across Line of Control claimed three lives on 1 st June and
four more were killed on 2nd June and a top fighter was gunned down in
occupied Kashmir.

While carrying out aggressive moves and taking punitive actions, India
successfully maintained the ambiguity about its intentions. Indian leaders kept
the pendulum swinging:

On 23rd May Vajpayee came out with weather report and said, sky is
clear of war clouds. Earlier he had expressed disappointment with
Musharraf and vowed not to include Pakistan in Kashmir talks.

Next day India denied the setting of deadline for war and a week later
Fernandes declared that situation was stable.

Within twenty-four hours he came back to square one and said, India
sees no resolution of standoff and Advani declared that Pakistans claim
on stemming militancy was unreliable.

On 2nd June India started preparing border villages for war and Fernandes
assured his people by dismissing fears of nuclear war.

India however remained firm on refusing any dialogue with Pakistan.

Putin, in consultation with Bush, ventured upon arranging talks between India
and Pakistan at Almaty. India foiled his efforts for face to face or tripartite or
indirect talks.
India was not only discourteous to its old ally, but also showed annoyance
at Russian initiative. It can be construed as diplomatic failing of India. In fact
in the changing global scenario, India has identified new allies, who are in
better position to serve its interests.
Vajpayee discussed the tension with Chirac and Chretien. He submitted
the report to Bush and Blair in writing. It was not to apprise them about the
situation, but to seek their appreciations. It must not have been disappointed.
India tried to appease Kashmiris by announcing a package worth $ 1.3
billion. APHC rejected the package, condemned murder of Lone and pledged to
continue the peace process, because it understood the motive behind New
Delhis peace plan. It was aimed at saving elections in Kashmir. Lone had
strongly opposed these during his recent visit to Dubai.

BULLYING BUSH
America and its allies supported India whole-heartedly. India was
encouraged to follow the steps of Israel by retaliating with brute force to each
untoward incident in occupied Kashmir. Pakistan was pressurized to accept
Indian demands:

On 18th May America warned that Pakistan has to watch its interests.
Powell again warned Pakistan on 24th May by declaring the situation
very dangerous.

Admiral Boyce of UK visited India to discuss matters of mutual interests

and US officials held defence talks with their Indian counter-parts.

European Union linked Pak-India tension to the United Nations

Resolution on terrorism.

On 25th May Bush asked Musharraf categorically to prevent cross-border

attacks and then in concert with Chirac he urged Pakistan to stop attacks
in Kashmir.

On 29th May America issued yet another warning over possibility of

war.

The most significant warning was the one served by political

commissioner of the EU. Patten asked Pakistan to turn off terrorist tap. He
believed that infiltration from Pakistan to India was not a trickle. It was flowing
freely like water from open tap of a filled water-tank.
It also meant that the freedom movement in Kashmir did not exist.
Everything that happened in IHK was because of Pakistan. For him the
implementation of UN resolution No 1373 was more important, because it
legitimized waging of the Crusades. He conveniently ignored the resolutions
regarding plebiscite in Kashmir, because these related to redress grievances of
a Muslim community.
The rudest of the threats came from the Texan Cowboy. Pointing towards
Musharraf he shouted that he must perform. Javed Jabbar dilated on these
remarks in his individual capacity. He gave vent to feelings of the masses,
known to Bush as Pakis. As he used the platform of PTV, it could also be
taken as an official reaction to remarks of indecent nature.
He concluded his talk by telling Bush that situation demanded that he
must perform. The decency prohibited him from crossing the limits. An average
Paki, having used the world moreover, would have made it easier for a
Cowboy to understand.
Bush and his company tried to create an impression of fair play in
handling Indo-Pak standoff. The cherished value of justice demanded that
America must act fairly and firmly. America tasked Armitage to cool the
tempers. The murder of Lone was assailed without alleging anyone for the
criminal act.
Wendy assured that America was working to calm Indo-Pak tensions.
She revealed that private talks were on to avert war. She did not say that
Musharraf was being told privately to meet the demands of India and the
Crusaders. Straw saw Musharrafs commitment as genuine, but US
responded carefully to his speech.

America urged India and Pakistan to pause, instead of asking the

aggressor to halt. America urged India and Pakistan to avoid nuclear
conflagration and quietly allowed India to use all other means of aggression. On
2nd June America offered its good offices to defuse Pak-India dispute.
Straw visited the Subcontinent and showed undue neutrality in his
exuberance to defuse the tension. India rebuked him for his irresponsible
remarks of talks only solution to Kashmir. He promptly retraced his steps by
declaring the issue as bilateral.
Despite his meritorious services to the war on terror, Musharraf earned
only qualified praise from US Press. His status has not been raised above that
of Jaswant. Powell always considered Musharraf at par with Jaswant. May be
Vajpayee lacks the status required for talking to Powell? Pakistan repeatedly
reminded India that it cannot be treated like Palestine. America responded to
this overture by treating Pakistan as a lesser entity than Palestine by sending
junior officials to Islamabad.
Rumsfeld, the architect of the war on terror, has been asked to visit the
region and sort out the problem in manner he knew well. Armitage has
announced to deploy logic in his peace mission. He however did not clarify
whether it would be the logic of belligerent Bania or bullying Bush. In either
case it would not augur well for Pakistan.
History bears two things about Pakistan very clearly. One, it has been
frequently poking its fingers in the same hole despite hearing loud rattles. Two,
it has been often deceived about belligerence of meek looking Bania. Is
Pakistan about to be bitten yet again by the rattlesnake? Is it being deceived
once again by cunning Bania?

THE ONION EATER

Pakistan, the onion eater, has been administered sufficient punishment for
his crimes of supporting Taliban regime; being too vocal about Islam and the
Ummah and seeking right of self-determination for Palestinians and Kashmiris.
The headman of the global village is not yet sure about the effectiveness of the
dose of punishment served. The watchman has been urging on the headman to
increase the dose.
The onion eater has been crying for mercy. It has tried its utmost to
arouse humane feelings of the villagers. The response to his cries has been quite
pathetic:

On 17th May Pakistan briefed envoys of EU on border situation. The

effects of this briefing were summed up by Spanish Envoy. He said that
it was quite informative, as if he knew nothing before the briefing.

Pakistan kept asking India to call back troops from borders. Indian
indifference continued.

On 20th May Pakistan requested the entire world to defuse tension. In

reply the majority kept murmuring about cross-border terrorism.

Sattar asked Annan to intervene and prevail on India to withdraw

troops. Both were incapable of influencing any event at their own. On
25th May the request was repeated through Akram with the same effect.

Musharraf asked Senegal to help avert war. A passer-by could do little

except consoling him.

Pakistan kept begging for peace untiringly for reasons mentioned in

preceding articles. Pakistans strength rested in nuclear deterrence, which has
been nullified by the prevalent geo-political environments. Effectiveness of
deterrence is in its surprise and first use. Pakistan has vowed not to do so.
The reason is that if Pakistan uses a nuclear device, even at tactical level,
the Crusaders would declare Pakistan an irresponsible country, unfit to possess
nuclear capability. In that case Pakistan will not be able to withstand reaction of
the civilized world. Inspections and restrictions imposed on Pakistan would be
stricter than those imposed on Iraq.
Pakistan has been disappointed with response of dwellers of global
village, particularly with that of its own clan. The Citadel of Islam was under
constant threat and no Muslim State uttered a single word. Expectation of action
amounted to asking for moon.
Iranian Foreign Minister, after his visit to both the countries, came out
with the advice that war can never solve any conflict. He showed his
willingness to mediate if both Pakistan and India asked to do so.
Muslim brothers were somewhat moved when Pakistan complained about
their apathy. Bangladesh urged for resumption of talks. Mahathir called for third
party intervention. UAE sought UN role. Saudi Arabia expressed concern. OIC
offered help to end the standoff.
Residents of global village, other than the BRATHERY of Pakistan,
showed mixed response. China realized the agony of the onion eater. It asked
the headman to encourage direct Pak-India negotiations. China kept pleading
Pakistans case for mitigation.
Japan sent an envoy to South Asia, who held discussions with Jaswant,
but failed to find a way out. Russia backed Indian demand and blamed groups
for Indo-Pak tension. France, Russia, Japan and Canada criticized missile tests

carried out by Pakistan. The United Nations showed only that much of concern
which did not annoy the headman.
Besides begging for mercy, Pakistan also rendered explanations and
promised good conduct in future:

Pakistan assured that its territory couldnt be allowed for use of terrorism.
No Pakistan based group will be allowed to indulge in terrorism.

Steps to rein in extremists were initiated. Government stopped funding

115 Madaris. President urged clerics to be tolerant.

Monitoring of cross border activity was offered on to check Indian charge

of terrorism. India rejected the proposal.

Sattar declared that Pakistan was for defusing the tension and military
commanders decided to take measures to ease tension by controlling
infiltration across Line of Control.

Foreign office vowed to continue working for normalization, even after

expulsion of its ambassador. On 30th May Musharraf announced that
Islamabad would not initiate war.

President, in his address on 28th May, announced two important steps to

avert war. Firstly, he intended to take strict action against banned groups. It
meant that he vindicated Indian contention that the measures announced on 12th
January were not implemented in letter and spirit. He now tried to reconcile the
difference in his words and his deeds.
Secondly, he decided to stop infiltration across Line of control. It meant
that he once again accepted Indian allegation of cross border terrorism. The hero
of Kargil was forced to confess, which he had been frequently denying in the
past.
Muslim Generals of 21st Century have learnt how to protect their national
interests without resorting to war. Do that what the Crusaders and their
collaborators want. It will save you and your interests from all harms.
The headman would have listened to the cries of onion eater, if he did not
have the bad habit of murmuring. Musharraf kept reiterating Pakistans stand on
Kashmir. He said that there wont be any compromise in pursuit of peace and
opined that Kashmir and Palestine were root cause of terrorism. Pakistan
renewed its pledges to provide moral, political and diplomatic support to
Kashmiris. The murmuring annoyed the headman.

Pakistan did not realize the futility of these utterances. After letting down
Kashmiri freedom fighters by stopping material support at vital stage of their
struggle, the talk of moral, diplomatic and political support became
meaningless. By joining the Crusaders against terrorism, Pakistan had
committed itself to work against interests of all freedom fighters.
Apart from crying and murmuring, Pakistan also indulged in grumbling.
It complained against watchman, who has been assigned the duty of
supervising the execution of punishment. The watchman has been unfair in
serving the onions of abnormal size and in keeping the count of consumption.
While grumbling, it also made threatening gestures against the watchman.
Pakistan vowed to take any action in defence. Its Finance Minister said that
all resources would be made available for defence. Qadeer claimed that
Pakistan was capable of thwarting foreign aggression. Munir clarified it
further and said, Pakistan wont rule out use of nukes if attacked.
Any limited strike against Pakistan would incite war. General Yusaf
threatened to take war into India. Musharraf threatened to unleash storm in
case of war. Pakistan artillery retaliated and pounded Indian positions in
Akhnoor, Rajouri and Poonch sectors and inflicted heavy casualties on Indian
soldiers deployed along the Line of Control.
Conducting a series of test-fires of missiles made the most threatening
gesture. Pakistan carried out four tests between 25 th and 28th May. Musharraf
said that tests demonstrated defence capability and Pakistan was not afraid of
war. Vajpayee, the watchman, was not impressed.
These gestures combined with the evidence collected in house search of
the culprit did not warrant defusing of tension. A group named Hizbullah
Alami claimed Karachi bombing, church blast and Pearls murder. Rockets
were found near Jacobabad base. Americans operating in Waziristan were again
subjected to rocket attacks. Above all America had the evidence that al-Qaeda
was seeking safe heaven in Pakistan and allied forces were told to group up for
operations in tribal areas.
The domestic conditions added to the difficulties of onion eater. Some
members of his family refused to rally behind him despite condemning the
belligerent attitude of the watchman. APC demanded caretaker set-up to face the
threat. It called for Musharrafs resignation while extending support to army.
Musharraf invited the leaders to muster their support and demonstrate
national unity. ARD, PPP, PML-N, JUI-F and JI declined the invitation. Nisar
was dismayed over politicians refusal. Qazi sought full time COAS and
Benazir wanted national government to avert war.

CONCLUSION
In his speech of 28th May Musharraf clearly told the headman and the
watchman that he has eaten all onions he was supposed to. It was hard for him
to consume anymore. The headman has to decide now whether to keep pressing
or go for the alternative means of administering the punishment.
Headman is not likely to pardon him. Despite enduring harsh punishment,
assuring good conduct in future and contributing towards war on terror, he is
likely to be punished more by America and India. At best he can hope for a
temporary respite.
The civilized world has paid no heed to roots of terrorism as advised
by Musharraf in his address in UN. They are ruthlessly pruning leafs and
branches of the poison tree. They are moving closer to the branch on which
Musharraf is nestling.
Pakistans name is no more mentioned in dispatches. Time for sending
bills for rendering services for Americas war on terror seems to be over.
Pakistan was never under consideration for award for rendering meritorious
services.
Immediately after 11th September, India had told America that Pakistan
was the real culprit of terrorism and suggested sorting it out along with Taliban.
America agreed with India but deferred the action till end of Afghan war. That
action has now reached at its peak. Time has come to take cognizance of its
failings and ask Pakistan to do more or pay the price.

4th June 2002

VICTORY WITHOUT WAR

Vajpayee claimed that India has won a great victory without fighting a
war. Many in Pakistan disagreed with him, simply for the reason that no patriot
would like to concede a victory to India that too without any action. The fact is
that his claim has a substance. Who has gained from the game of brinkmanship,
which started in December 2001? All gains belong to India and those are
glitteringly conspicuous.
Pakistan has pleaded guilty to Indian accusation of cross border terrorism.
It has gone a step farther by suggesting the punishment as well. Pakistan has
pledged to chop the hands of Jehadi organizations, which were extended to help
freedom movement in Kashmir. This was a long outstanding demand of India.
Pakistan has avoided a war, the possibility of which perhaps never
existed. If the possibility was there, then war has not been averted forever. At
best it has only been postponed. Pakistan has undoubtedly paid heavy price for
temporary peace.
It was claimed immediately after 11th September that a catastrophe was
averted by doing what America asked Pakistan to do. That too was a
postponement as has been proved by the events since then. The war on terror
is being fought inside Pakistan for the last six months.
Who wants to avert confrontation? It is always the weaker of the two.
Pakistan has accepted that it is no-match to the Indian giant, particularly when
it has backing of the Crusaders. Timidity shown by Pakistan in search of peace
will encourage the belligerent Bania to bully it time and again.

INDIAN GAME-PLAN
Indian plan for the game of brinkmanship was based on simple reasoning.
When your case is weak, the dialogue or mediation cannot serve your interests.
Avoid talks and mediation as long as you can.
The time gained by stalling the dialogue must be utilized to weaken the
case of the opponent. Diplomatic and media offensive should be launched to
distort the facts and create as many doubts as possible.
In the absence of moral and legal justifications, the threat to use force or
actually use it, is the best course to salvage something out of a case, which
cannot withstand the demands of justice. The chances become much brighter
when the adversary is weak or showing weakness due to some compulsions.
Keep pressing to gain the maximum.

Collaboration with the Crusaders made it easier for India to execute its
plan. India kept refusing to talk to Pakistan, directly or indirectly. No talks till
end of incursions said Vajpayee. In Almaty the two leaders avoided even the
eye contact. No chance of Pak-India summit announced Mishra. Advani ruled
out talks with Pakistan even after initiating action to reduce tension.
The refusal was justified by blaming Pakistan on one pretext or the other.
In his speech at Almaty, Musharraf mentioned the root cause and India blamed
that his speech would heighten tension. Next day India accused that three
thousand fighters were ready to enter IHK.
When measures to check infiltration were proposed, India opposed all the
suggestions. India rejected patrolling of Line of Control under UN. India also
rebuffed proposal for US troops deployment in Kashmir.
The best way to set aside proposals of others is to float one of your own.
Vajpayee proposed joint patrolling of Line of Control. Pakistan dubbed it as
non-serious. When the ploy did not work, India acknowledged drop in
infiltration, thereby denying the need of patrolling.
On 8th June Vajpayee called unscheduled meeting of his advisers and
decided to ease tension. Vajpayee declared that pledges of Pakistan have
helped in averting war. Delhi announced the plan to ease tensions.
India decided to increase diplomats in Islamabad, lift ban on use of
airspace and restore bus and train links. India ordered its warships to move
away from Pakistan and by 13th June twenty warships returned to Bombay.
Pakistan reacted cautiously. It thought that only those steps were being
taken, which would benefit India. Contrarily, India declared that steps to ease
tension are substantial. At the same time it announced that there would be no
troops pullback until October and that too would depend on Islamabad.
Musharraf opined that Pakistans nuclear deterrence caused stand down.
A day later Kalam expressed similar views and said, war averted due to nuclear
deterrent. India ignored the statement of its missile-man, but asked the
Crusaders to take note of the statement of the man possessing Islamic bomb.
Vajpayee claimed the victory in the game of brinkmanship. The victory
was the result of aggressive play. The aggression was displayed in the form of
punitive actions as can be seen from the reports of last fortnight:

Eight persons perished in Kashmir clashes on 4th June and next day
eleven fighters were among fifteen killed in the Valley.

Harkat chief was killed on 6th June and six more died in IHK clashes on
the following day. Two days later fourteen persons were killed in

Kashmir violence and seven were martyred in Indian firing across Line of
Control.

On 9th June Gilani was arrested under POTA, nine persons perished in
IHK and nine civilians were killed in Indian firing across Line of Control.

Teenage girl was killed in Indian firing on 10 th June. Two more civilians
were martyred a day later.

Three civilians were killed in Indian shelling on 13 th June and one was
killed in IHK and four more were killed next day.

Twenty-three persons died on 16th June as violence escalated in the Valley

and eight more were killed in next 24 hours.

A couple was among eight killed in the Valley on 18 th June. Four more
were killed the next day.

In addition to punishing Kashmiris and Pakistanis, India continued killing

Muslims of Gujarat as well; ironically the civilized world saw no extremism
or militancy or terrorism in all these killings. India was simply teaching the
Muslims the lessons of peaceful co-existence.
India is not satisfied with its victory. It wants to get into the habit of
winning. On 20th June Fernandes announced that infiltration of militants has
almost ended. Whatever infiltration would remain, that would also end, but
ground situation would remain unchanged.
He declared that India had no immediate plans to pull back troops from
the frontier with Pakistan. The ground situation had not changed as far as the
activities of the militants inside Kashmir were concerned. Make shift camps
were still there. If they (the Americans) wanted us to go there and capture them,
then it would take some time. But we have proof that theyre there, he
asserted.
Nerupama Rao further elaborated the point. She said, there is a lot more
that Pakistan has to do, (these) changes should be permanent, visible and to the
satisfaction of India. She explicitly spelled out the future plans of India.

PAKISTAN KEPT PARRYING

Pakistan adopted defensive policy against Indian aggression. While
ducking and parrying, Pakistan continuously shouted for rescue. It also made
promises of good conduct. At times it threatened and retaliated. At the end it
looked for rescue.

Pakistan kept crying for help. Poor response compelled it to cry louder.
Musharraf shouted, tension persists after summit and India is threatening
Pakistan. Leghari narrated the tale of Pakistans woes before Egyptian Prime
Minister and Arab League. Maleeha asked the world to play peace-making
role. Sattar asked India to keep up reversal process.
Pakistan urged that third party involvement should continue. It sought
the help of G-8 to ease tensions and called for troops pull back. Finally India
was directly asked to initiate talks on Kashmir.
Pakistan kept promising good conduct. It again favoured no-war pact
with India, vowed to do all to avoid war and claimed that nothing was
happening from its side at Line of Control. Musharraf assured Armitage that he
would work for permanent end to incursions. He also said, Pakistan has no
aggressive designs. APHC also supported Pakistans promises and offered to
broker truce with AJK fighters.
Pakistan enacted laws to change the curricula of 8,000 Madaris. Ghazi
assured that law to ban militancy would be enforced soon. Musharraf repeated
the call for de-nuclearization of South Asia. He reaffirmed the policy of
restraint. Pakistan offered to exempt duty on Indian goods.
Once you are thrown into an arena, cries and promises alone cannot save
you from the inevitable. Some threatening moves have to be made. Pakistan
declared that nuclear arms possession implied their use. Next day Karamat
repeated the threat. He said, Pakistan reserves the right to use nuclear arms.
Aziz claimed that defence capability of Pakistan had been strengthened and
Mushaf boasted that PAF was ready to act against enemy. After shooting down
of an Indian drone Qureshi hoped that India would learn a lesson.
Musharraf claimed that missile system results were matter of pride for
all. He vowed to defend Pakistan with all might if war was imposed. Pakistani
leaders also kept muttering rhetoric like denial of freedom bred extremism,
Kashmiris would never be abandoned and assured APHC of continuous
support.
The threatening gestures cannot bear the desired results unless reinforced
by retaliatory actions:

Eight Indian soldiers were killed in exchange of fire on 4 th June. Next day
Pakistan expelled Indian official on spying charge.

Two Indian troops were killed or injured on 6th June and next day PAF
shot down an Indian drone near Kasur and eighteen Indian soldiers were
killed along Line of Control.

Fifteen Indians were killed as a result of retaliation on 14 th June. Next day

Kashmiris also retaliated, but Farooq Abdullah escaped grenade attack.

Ten BSF men were killed in Pak-India exchange of fire on 19th June.

Having conceded to Indian demand to stop cross-border terrorism;

accepting the Crusaders requirement of crackdown on Jehadi organizations and
suffering losses worth billions in war on terror, Pakistan vainly looked for
some consolation. Musharraf claimed that India was rendered isolated at
Almaty and Pakistan gained diplomatically. Situation is changing in favour of
Pakistan, opined Nisar. Musharraf felt that the threat of war was minimal.
Pakistan found very little to salvage its pride, but there were plenty of
disappointments and surprises. Pakistan found that measures announced by New
Delhi were aimed at easing Indian problems. Musharraf waited for genuine
Indian steps. He had to eagerly watch the strip-tease of de-escalation in words
of M B Naqvi.
Soon after the announcement of measures, Advani made a mischievous
suggestion. He proposed confederation of India and Pakistan. He conveyed to
Pakistan that how much India cares for independence and sovereignty of its
neighbour. Pakistan could only slate his remarks.
Simultaneous with news of the start of de-escalation, the reports of
airlifting of Pakistani and Arab captives from Afghanistan were received. India
has tucked more up its sleeves, to be brought out at right moment. Contention of
Rumsfeld about presence of al-Qaeda in Kashmir could be proved correct,
sooner or later.
During the same period a Pakistani Ranger was seduced, captured and
killed by Indian BSF. No such incident occurred when tensions were at their
peak. It happened as part of the de-escalation process. Pakistan may move UN
against killing of soldier, who was alive when taken into custody. Nobody will
care.
The start of de-escalation also coincided with shooting down of an
unmanned Indian plane. The downed Indian UAV was made in Israel. India has
purchased about 100 of these. Mushaf claimed that it was being operated by
Israel for India. Some analysts take it as proof of Indo-Israel nexus.
This could be a surprise for some ignorant Pakistanis, but not for men in
uniform. The military cooperation between India and Israel is far more than
generally reported in the press. Above all this has the approval of America.

ROLES OF CRUSADERS AND OTHERS

The Crusaders played an important role in Indo-Pak standoff. Their
contribution has to be seen and assessed keeping in mind that they are partners
of India in the on-going war against evil forces of militant Muslims. The
reality of Trinity of Angels has to be kept in mind.
America tried to maintain superficial impartiality in Indo-Pak row. This
was necessary for saving the image of American values:

Armitage discussed situation in South Asia with Maleeha before

embarking on peace mission and America declared that Pakistan and
India realize dangers of nuclear war.

Bush phoned Musharraf and Vajpayee on 5 th June and on the following

day discussed Pak-India crisis with Putin.

Blair came out with British way of neutrality. He said that arms sale to
India and Pakistan was appropriate.

The neutrality could not be so over-stretched that it impeded the basic

aim of creating tension in the Subcontinent. Pressure had to be exerted on
Pakistan. The best way to do this, in the game of brinkmanship, was to create an
atmosphere of hope and despair for the adversary.
There was some improvement in situation declared UK and US. Powell
said that time was not ripe for Indo-Pak summit. Armitage was very heartened
by his talks in Islamabad. He observed that Pakistan was intent on avoiding
war. He saw that Indian steps would ease tension. Powell told Musharraf that
things were looking better. Infiltration has declined in Kashmir observed US.
America announced that efforts for Kashmir solution would go on and Powell
wanted permanent solution of Kashmir dispute.
Demonstration of impartiality was a moral compulsion, but not strong
enough to outweigh the supreme national interests of America. Pressure was
maintained to achieve the desired goals. America reiterated that al-Qaeda was
using Pakistan as base and vowed to eliminate al-Qaeda men in Pakistan.
Situation on ground has not changed declared Rumsfeld. He reminded
Pakistan that Pak-India situation was still tense. It would remain grim till
troops pull back. Rumsfeld praised Indian steps and urged restraint. He then
came out with the most unexpected news and disclosed that al-Qaeda was
operating in Kashmir. But he had no proof of al-Qaeda presence. Pakistan
rejected Rumsfeld remarks. It did not matter. India has already arranged the
proof from Afghanistan. European Union urged Pakistan to crackdown on

militants. Old accusation that China provided missile technology to Pakistan

was also repeated.
After Vajpayees decision to de-escalate Straw claimed that world
efforts helped ease tension. Blackwill thought that Indo-Pak conflict could
have led to nuclear war. Bush was pleased with Pak-India progress. Both had
done well. India exerted requisite pressure and Pakistan wisely met all the
demands of the Crusaders.
The fact is that America has decided to halt the offensive temporarily,
because the goals that could be achieved, without going to war, have been
achieved. In September 2001 India was advised to wait in December it was
told to go ahead and in June 2002 it has been asked to pause.
America and the entire civilized world have taken no notice of killing of
thousands of Muslims in Gujarat and Kashmir. This could be over looked,
because every Muslim, including women and children, is a potential terrorist.
India was justified in killing them.
The blind, deaf and dumb Muslim brothers could not see the
consequences of pressure exerted on Pakistan. The deaf could not hear the cries
of a brother. They had to be jolted to show some reaction. Iran and Turkey
offered mediation. How well a dumb can mediate, need not be explained.
Iran was moved by the expected consequences and showed its
willingness to accept Pak refugees in case of war. Bangladeshi Foreign
Minister visited Pakistan and India. Megawati called for Pak-India talks. Out
of the large family of Arabs, only Fahd and Zayed found some time to discuss
tensions with Annan and Musharraf. They repeated the call for Pak-India
restraint. Saudi Arabia renewed support to Pakistan.
The infidel China supported Pakistan far more than Muslim Ummah.
Jiang stressed upon the need for early settlement of regional issues. China
backed mediation in Pak-India disputes and welcomed Russian move in
South Asia, but preferred direct talks.
Russia tried but failed to arrange talks between the two leaders of South
Asia. Putin remained optimistic and hoped that the crisis can still be resolved.
Musharraf was invited to Moscow. Central Asian countries backed peace
moves and emphasized on peaceful resolution of disputes.
The United Nations displayed complete neutrality and kept quiet with the
hope that tension in South Asia will defuse. The UN Security Council ventured
upon holding private debate on Kashmir. It irked India, so nothing was heard
about it thereafter.

PRESSURE FROM WITHIN

Pakistans policy on war on terror has the quiet support, but it is also
opposed by many for following reasons:

Curbs imposed on Jehadi organizations will undermine the freedom

movement of Kashmiris.

The crackdown on religious institutions may be of some benefit, but it

has been launched on behest of the Crusaders.

Religious militants are blamed for every incident of terrorism in Pakistan,

whereas involvement of other forces is ignored.

Operations carried out inside Pakistan by US troops are compromising its

sovereignty.

Above all the war on terror is being fought without addressing the
causes of terrorism.

Jamaat warned against any deal on Kashmir and Qazi against Kashmir
sell out. Babar accused Musharraf of compromising on Kashmir. Pakistan
Muslim League questioned Foreign Office and Musharraf about their silence
on Vajpayees claim about Azad Kashmir.
Qazi rebuked America on its claim about presence of al-Qaeda men in
Kashmir. His party vowed to continue crossing of Line of Control. Religious
groups also pledged that Kashmir Jihad would go on. All these overtures
were contrary to the promises made by Musharraf with America and India.
The government denied allegations of compromise. Events belied the
government claim. If something was done or was being done behind the doors
that was not made public. Secrecy made the issue dubious. People of Pakistan
do not believe in any secrecy about Kashmir.
Registration of Madrassas has been made compulsory. Institutions of
religious education have been forbidden to accept aid from foreign sources
directly. There was nothing grossly wrong with the steps taken by the
government, but an impression has been created that Madrassas were breeding
places of terrorism; whereas no evidence has been found against any Madrassa
so far.
The government has permitted US troops to operate in tribal areas. They
continued hauling the suspects at random. On 10th June US commandos pick
up two Pakistani nationals. The government denied the report. The tribesmen
resented and retaliated against presence of US forces inside Pakistan. The

retaliations resulted in arrest of twenty-one tribal elders on 14th June in

connection with missile firing probe.
These incidents compelled Pakistan to deploy Army in Waziristan. It had
never happened in the past. Any misconduct of operation can cause serious
problems. For this reason Aurakzai stressed upon his soldiers to display high
standard of discipline. The tribesmen may not wait for an incident of
misconduct to show their disgust. They have already launched a missile attack
on camp of Shawal Rifles when NWFP Governor was visiting them.
Bugtis have added to the problems of the government. The issue of
royalties has always been the pain in the neck. Reportedly about three hundred
Bugti tribesmen were held on 17th June amid tension. Operations against alQaeda men have been going on in Karachi.
Terrorist attacks in Pakistan continued. On 14th June eleven persons were
killed in a blast outside US Consulate in Karachi. Al-Qanoon group claimed the
responsibility and warned of more attacks. US closed the Embassy and
Consulates. Bush said that those who wanted to intimidate, they did not know
America. Who was intimidating whom?
Qureshi thought that foreign agencies were trying to destabilize
Pakistan. Sindh police chief said that foreign hand in blast was not ruled out,
although India had promptly condemned the blast.
Earlier Musharraf had invited all political parties for consultation on the
standoff with India. Most were scrupulous enough to respond, but the more
scrupulous demanded fee of their valuable opinion. They did not realize that
Musharrafs survival did not depend on their prescriptions.

CONCLUSION
Is it correct to conclude that war has been averted? No. In fact the
timidity of Pakistan shown in the quest for peace has made it more certain.
Pakistan will remain under constant threat henceforth. However, it has been
postponed temporarily. There is disagreement amongst experts regarding the
factors contributing towards its postponement. The common view is that
nuclear specter has forced India and Pakistan to make peace.
The symbol of peaceful Buddha given to Indian nuclear capability has
proved to be right. It is not true. Indian nuclear arsenal is not meant for peace.
This muscle has been developed with the sole aim of flexing it on others. It is
for promotion of extra-territorial interests of India. As far as Buddha is
concerned, he along with his teachings was thrown out of the sacred soil of
Bharat Mata, soon after he talked of peace.

What will be the nature of postponement, i.e. the speed and extent of deescalation? The process of de-escalation will move forward slowly retaining the
ability to move backward briskly. It will be so slow that Pakistan will hardly
feel any relief.
The process of relief and reprisal will continue. Pakistan will be treated
like Palestine, although Pakistan considers itself far superior to that. Pakistans
self-assurance is good but not good enough.
Pakistan has over committed itself in war on terror. Amnesty
International has alleged that Pakistan was violating human rights in search of
al-Qaeda men. Pakistan is flouting its own laws by arresting and deporting
hundreds of people in pursuit of the US-led war on terrorism.
At the start of this war America pulled Pakistan towards its side. India
was politely told not to join the Crusades at that stage. As the time passed,
Pakistan has been pushed back and India has been affectionately embraced as an
important partner of the Crusaders.
Pakistan joined the war on terror with great expectations out of which
two were very important. Pakistan expected that the war would result in
financial boost. The budgetary review revealed that Rupees three billion have
been lost due to war on terror. Undocumented losses could be far more than
that.
Second expectation related to increase in military cooperation with
America and other western countries. The cooperation has been restricted to
joint operations in Pakistan against terrorists. Contrarily, Indo-US military
cooperation has gained extraordinary momentum. India-Israel missile deal has
also been cleared. Vajpayee is right in claiming a victory without war.

21st June 2002

MISERABLE MUSLIM UMMAH

The Muslims entered the new Millennium as downtrodden people of the
world. They represent untouchables in the global village and the people of
upper castes look upon them with contempt. They are so filthy that they

contaminate environments. Some of them are like beasts which threaten the
security of peace-loving communities.
They follow a regressive religion, which preaches Jihad. Jihad is nothing
but militancy. They are jealous of the prosperity of upper castes. Driven by
their militancy and jealousy they resort to terrorism. They have yet to learn the
ethics of peaceful co-existence.
These dirty primitives are not fit to live with civilized people of the
global village. At times cleansing of some parts of the village becomes
necessary because of their filth. Their abodes have to be bulldozed and burnt
and their corpses buried in deep holes, called mass graves, to preserve the
cleanliness of environments.
The cleansing has to be done with the spirit of crusade. They must be
chased and killed indiscriminately for the sake of peace. At times even a child
with Islamic name may have to be shot dead on sight. Use of brute force against
them is justified. Norms of justice are not applicable to them. They do not
deserve that. They must be punished with no mercy.
Why do the Muslims find themselves in this miserable state of perpetual
condemnation? Why does a Hindu tell them that they do not know the ethics of
co-existence? Why does an ordinary Japanese correspondent ridicule Islam by
asking Musharraf to explain as to how could he make a Muslim nation tolerant
and progressive?
Muslims may blame others, but the causes of their miseries lie within.
Passing remarks to these have been made in the preceding articles. In view of
the recent events these need to be recounted even at the cost of repetition.

DISUNITY
The existing Muslim States, except Pakistan, came into being on the basis
of western concept of nation state. This concept divides the humanity on the
basis of geography, which is considered natural, because the people living
within a geographic entity generally have common ethnic background and
culture.
Common ethnic background, the land and its weather grant uniformity to
their language, food habits, dress, occupations and recreational activities, which
practiced over extended period transform into traditions and customs. These in
turn start regulating their social inter-action. Some traditions and customs, the
utility of which is established, attain the status of social values.
Members of the society generally adhere to these values voluntarily. At
times the established utility of the values dictate the need for their strict

enforcement. It is achieved through enforcement of common will, often enacted

in the form of laws of the land.
Habits, traditions, customs, values and laws are nothing but various
reflections of the culture of a society. The uniformity of these reflections makes
the people of the land a homogeneous society. This is the criterion on which
western thinkers based their concept of nation state.
Islamic concept of nationhood does not refute the requirement of above
commonalties, but it does not restrict these to geographic boundaries or ethnic
descent. Islam, being a complete and refined code of life, regulates everything
that forms part of the culture by laying down exact parameters of social interaction. It spells out does and donts for all spheres of human activities. It not
only provides the laws, but also spells etiquettes. It even lays down manners of
conversation, irrespective of what language its followers speak.
The list of laws, rules and codes of conduct given by the great religion is
quite long and all these aim at homogenizing the followers of Islam. It is to
mesh them into a worthy nation or Ummah irrespective of their caste, creed and
colour. Therefore, the concept of nationhood in Islam is based on nothing else
but religion.
At the end of colonization, the imperial rulers divided the Muslim World
on geographic basis. The Muslims accepted this division in their eagerness to
secure independence. Nobody cared to note that division was carried out with
mala fide intention. In case of some countries even geographic realities were
disregarded to ensure fragmentation of Muslim Ummah. The disintegration so
caused has been the main hurdle in unity of Muslims.
Europe too had suffered because of the concept of nation state. Two great
wars were fought primarily due to the anomalies of this concept. Europeans
realized their folly. They are now trying to undo the damage by promoting interstate cooperation.
Through cooperation they have achieved economic, political and military
unification to great extent. Economic unity is allowing them to benefit from
each others achievements in various sectors. Joint ventures have become order
of the day.
The European Union was primarily formed for economic reasons, but it
could not go beyond certain point without cooperating in other fields. Political
unity became a necessity. Today EU has well-staffed political set-up, because
economic interests of the member states cannot be promoted without unified
efforts on political and diplomatic fronts.
European countries have practically abandoned this concept, because they
have seen its dangerous side through bitter experience. They have also observed

its usefulness when enforced on potential adversaries. For this reason they
want enforcement of this concept therein in letter and spirit.
They rush to support separatist movements that emerge in Muslim
countries. The forum of the United Nations is used to seek legitimacy for such
movements. The resolutions are passed with urgency and implemented with the
use of force, if so required.
Apparently it is done in the name of right of self-determination as
envisaged in the Charter of United Nations. Actually they simply want to
preserve and where possible further aggravate political disunity of Muslim
Ummah. This is part of the Crusades. It has nothing to do with much publicized
values of the civilized world.
The Muslims failed in recognizing the drawbacks of this alien political
concept. The rulers refuse to acknowledge the very existence of any drawbacks
to safeguard their vested interests. The masses have been blindfolded by the
passion of patriotism.
The most harmful drawback of this concept is that it breeds disunity. It
has divided Ummah into more than fifty entities. This figure is often quoted as
strength of Ummah. The number of Muslim countries has nothing to do with
strength of the Ummah. In fact the number symbolizes its weakness. Total sum
of any number of zeroes remains zero.
Muslim leaders prefer to keep their eyes closed, because political division
of Ummah may be a matter of concern for the Ummah, but it serves the interests
of so many rulers of Islamic states. They fail to notice that in the name of UN
Charter the Crusaders are trying to undermine the Charter spelled out by the
Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, during his last pilgrimage to Mecca.
The political division on unsustainable grounds has led to military
confrontation in many cases. Muslims living in two different geographic entities
have shed each others blood. This is a good enough reason for the Crusaders to
work for disunity of Ummah.
Whereas the separatist movements in Islamic World are propagated,
promoted and promulgated earnestly, the same is opposed when Muslims of a
non-Muslim country demand the right of self-determination. The double
standards are followed to achieve the singular aim of disunity of Ummah.

LACK OF GOOD GOVERNANCE

Muslim masses suffer because of lack of good governance in most
countries. Similar to the disintegration of Ummah, which is the outcome of
practice of western concept of nation state, the poor governance is the result of
the system by which the governors of these countries are selected.

Many Islamic countries have adopted western democracy. Democratic

system has been acclaimed as the best form of government. Universal franchise
is the only method to have a government of the people, by the people and for
the people.
The system has many virtues, but it delivers only when certain
prerequisites are met. These are:

Awareness of the people is essential and for that access to information is

mandatory.

Maximum number of voters must participate. Participation of less than

fifty percent cannot be termed as universal franchise.

Selection of candidates must be carried out through a system, which

brings the best to forefront and not the privileged few.

Mechanism of checks and balances and strong institutions of

accountability are must.

In a country where uneducated and unaware voters are herd like sheep to
the polling booths and the educated having a degree of awareness abstain from
voting, the usefulness of the system is compromised. Illiteracy and indifference
are the major impediments in accruing the benefits of this system.
The expenses involved in electioneering restrict the choice of candidates.
Politics have become a hobby of the privileged and profession of the greedier.
Hence, the candidates fielded in any elections are never the best a society can
offer.
The leaders of a party, winning absolute majority, tend to become
dictators. They disregard the need to have any checks and balances. The
democratically elected leaders with heavy mandates prove to be the worst
dictators. Hung parliaments produce weak governments. Weak governments can
never provide good governance as most of their time and efforts are spent in
horse-trading and in producing cheap commodities of Lotas.
In both the above-mentioned eventualities, national interests are
relegated. Party or personal interests take priority and for that good
governance is not necessary. In both cases the time limit of tenure results in a
spree of favouritism, nepotism, victimization and looting.
Corruption becomes order of the day. In case of hung parliament it is
necessitated by the weakness. In other case the power of absolute majority
corrupts the ruler. The corrupt can render no service to the people or the
country. They fail both of them.
The guilt of failing those who trusted them moulds the psyche of the
rulers. They start fearing the ruled and feel insecure amongst own people.

Insecurity dictates the need to have a sanctuary where they could seek refuge
when threatened.
The civilized world provides them the sanctuaries. The corrupt leaders
transfer the looted wealth to secure banks of the West and also purchase few
palaces and ranches to rest and recuperate during forced expulsion or self-exile.
The civilized world ensures that they and their wealth are safe from all
harms. They being a special breed draw special attention. They are cared and
used as readily available substitutes for those rulers who dare acting against
interests of the civilized world. They can be used for forming governments in
exile and at an opportune moment, can be installed after throwing away the
unwanted.
Islam gives little importance to the forms of government. Its emphasis is
on the quality of governance. The rulers, emerging through any process, must
provide good governance to the people. Prescription for good governance is
consultation: the mechanism of Shoora. Consultation has to be as frequent and
as widespread as possible. It can neither be restricted to the elected few nor can
be delayed for want of sessions of a parliament. Shoora is a continuous process.
Decision-making rests with the leader. It is not a prerogative of the
majority necessarily. Views of majority cannot make a wrong, a right, because
the majority can never be always right. Therefore, a leader may adopt a course
recommended by a minority.
The decision must conform to the conjunctions of Islam and be in the best
interest of the people. Once a decision is taken, the leader is responsible for its
effective implementation. Everyone must work for it wholeheartedly. No
reservations or disagreements are acceptable thereafter.
The leader remains subject to scrutiny during implementation and
accountable for any failings at the end. Accountability of a leader, as compared
to that of a common citizen, has always been stricter in an Islamic State. He
enjoys no privilege in this regard.
An ordinary citizen could question a Caliph about length and breadth of
his shirt. A Commander-in-Chief could be asked to justify his expenses in the
presence of his army. He could be dismissed once a minor charge like
extravagance was proved. He and his army accepted the verdict without a
squeak.
The system of western democracy cannot be practiced fruitfully by
nations who are unable to provide suitable environments. Without these the
system cannot guarantee provision of good governance. Absence of good
governance impedes progress.

Such nations are bound to fall below the poverty line and form bulk of
the third world. They remain dependent on the developed world. Dependence
makes dictations easier. This constitutes the incentive for the civilized world to
work diligently for promotion of democracy.

ECONOMIC WEAKNESS
Muslim states are mostly poor, except for a few born-rich. The born-rich
too do not fall in the category of developed countries, as potentials of these
countries have not been fully exploited and abundant natural resources have not
been harnessed.
The born-rich are unable to utilize their wealth profitably. They even face
difficulties in managing their wealth. As the wealth accumulates, the owners
become concerned about its security. They start fearing the risks of keeping it
in own country. In search of security it is transferred to the safe institutions of
the civilized world. It lands in hands of money-managers of the Wild West and
becomes their hostage. The asset becomes a liability.
They lose the right to use it for promotion of their interests, when so
required. In prevalent Middle East crisis the Arabs considered the use of oil as
weapon, but they couldnt implement the idea. In doing so they would have
exposed their wealth to the risk of freezing.
Economic standing of a country should not be determined by the wealth it
posses. It must be assessed on the basis of its ability to add to the value of
inherited assets. In that context the so-called wealthy countries also fall in the
category of poor. A country, which sells its resources without adding to their
value and then deposits its sale proceeds in institutions run by its enemy, is
poorest of the poor. So is the case of oil rich countries of Middle East.
Value addition largely depends on skills of the people. The skills
combined with constant research can ensure sustained development. The
education system of country must focus on skills and research. In absence of
these the development in industrial and agricultural sectors suffers from
retardation and stagnation. Resultantly the poor are doomed to remain poor.
The poor are forced by their needs to beg for alms from developed
countries. The alms given to them, in the form of humanitarian aid, are no more
than a glass of water and a plate of rice. Food and water are immediate
requirements of all hungry beggars. The beggars feel satisfied and obliged.
They accept the help or aid without bothering about the conditions on
which it is provided. In their hurry to receive and gulp, they do not see the
strings attached to it. They only notice generosity of the generous and hurry in
expressing their gratitude.

He, who has seen catching of a rooster, can only understand the
implications of the attached strings. The poor, like a rooster, accept the feed
ignoring the attached string. They ultimately land in the laps of the rooster
lovers.
The loans, soft or not so soft, are strings of the same web. The debt trap,
as they call it, is like a death trap of a spider. Once entangled in it, the spider
weaves more strings to preserve his prey. The prey is consumed according to the
appetite of the spider.
The entire game is devoid of morality. Those who are below poverty line
they stand below the line of morality. Rich are always above morality as Lord
Byron said it. In modern era the interests, particularly national interests, are
pursued quite shamelessly.
The poor have no shame in begging for alms. They forget that no aid
packages have ever solved the problem of a poor country on permanent basis.
Charity has never brought prosperity. The rich feel no shame in giving alms on
conditions. They even dictate terms to the addicts of aid like drug peddlers.
Wealth of rich Muslim countries has become hostage in the Wild West.
Most of the poor are like roosters in the laps of lovers of white meat. Others are
entangled in spider webs ready to be served for dinner. Some are like addicts
begging powder from the peddler at any price.

NEGLECTED DEFENCE
The European countries had colonized the Muslim World by the beginning
of the last Century. During colonization the management of defence related
matters was responsibility of the rulers. The ruled had no say in raising,
equipping and maintaining of defence forces.
The fighting abilities of the ruled were utilized according to the needs of a
ruler. The ruler told them as to when, where, how and against whom they were
to fight. They had no say in choosing the enemy or knowing about it. The
masters pointed towards enemy and they had to fight against him with whatever
was provided to them.
They remained subordinates for quite long and that resulted in rusting
their martial qualities. Prolonged subjugation dampened their passion for
military strength. They forgot the art of conducting war at higher levels, an art
they had once mastered.
Second World War marked the end of colonization. Muslims and many
countries of Third World owed their independence to Hitler. They got the
independence, but they had to acquire the requisite military strength to preserve
that.

Raising of defence forces was no problem as there was no dearth of

manpower; however, equipping them suitably was not easy. The newly freed
countries kept looking towards their old masters for military hardware. A
country, which depends on others for its defence requirements, cannot ensure its
security. An insecure country can never enjoy the fruits of independence.
None of the Muslim States tried to develop indigenous capabilities of
producing military hardware even for meeting the bare minimum requirements.
The talk of reducing the gap or achieving a degree of parity remained a farfetched idea.
The dependence of more than half a century has left them militarily weak,
insecure and helpless. They are too weak to defend their interests. They are
insecure against external threats. They are helpless in saving themselves from
foreign aggression.
The transition of war from technical to high-tech has left them lost in dust
and smokes raised by the advancing military technologies. They seem to have
lost the will to rise and stand against stampeding military might of their
enemies.
Today the military capability does not depend on the number of men in
uniform. In fact it has never been so. The quality of weapons and equipment
held by the armed forces outweighs all other tangible factors. The civilized
world paid special attention to this important aspect. Technologically they have
advanced from ground to sky, from sky to space and from space to stars. All this
has not been done for the defence of their territories, but to promote their
hegemonic interests around the globe.
While remaining pre-occupied in enhancing their military strength, they
showed no complacence in denying the same to their adversaries. Propagating
paradoxical and deceitful slogans of peace, development and disarmament did
the job.
They pledge to promote peace by piling up nuclear arsenals and by
developing means of their stealthy delivery. It is done for that peace, which
promotes their supreme national interests. Those who could endanger the
desirable peace are forbidden to possess such capabilities. A country that
indulges in development of such capability is forced to abandon its
programmes using political, economic and military means.
The civilized world earns billions of dollars by selling weapons to
selected customers to serve the cause of wanted peace. In the process they fill
up their coffers to further boost their already well-fed economies. Others are
advised not to spend even the bare minimum to meet their defence
requirements. The expenditure incurred on non-developmental activities is not

good for poor and developing countries. They should not spend their meager
resources on rearing the sacred cows. It could adversely effect their
development.
They pretend to be working for making the world a safer place through
disarmament; thereby telling others that even super powers have realized the
futility of arms race. They are reducing their holdings by destroying piles of
nuclear arms and means of their delivery.
Arms reduction is not aimed at making the world a safer place. It is to
save the expenditure incurred on storage and maintenance of the surpluses or to
get rid of those, which have become redundant in view of the Star-War
Programme. Overtly they are reducing the destructive capability of their
military power. Covertly they are enhancing it by implementing more
sophisticated programmes.
Ironically there are many peace lovers in Muslim World, who fall prey to
these absurd arguments. They condemn war because it brings destruction. They
want peace for progress and development. Peace and progress at all costs.
The requirement of military needs is determined by answering four
simple questions. These are:

Who is your enemy?

What is the nature of threat from him?

When and where do you expect him to confront?

What is your strategy to counter or defeat the threat?

Answers to these questions define parameters of the size of armed forces

to be raised and maintained; the type, quality and quantity of weapons and
equipment they must have; evolution of appropriate techniques, tactics and
doctrines; and perfection of all these through continuous process of testing and
training. Last but not the least, is the selection and propagation of themes for
psychological warfare.
The Ummah has yet to find the answer to first question. Muslim countries
have not bothered to identify their common enemy. The most unfortunate part of
their complacence is that the enemy has already challenged them by throwing
spanners of clash of civilizations and war on terror. The noise produced by
the falling spanners has failed to alert them.
They have closed their eyes like spellbound pigeons. Probably they are
trying to pose as doves. The civilized world loves doves as they symbolize
peace. For the sake of these doves the Crusades have launched the offensive to
eliminate evil forces of terrorism, so that the doves must rest in peace forever.

INCORRECT PERCEPTIONS
Allama Iqbal spent years in contemplating about the plight of Muslims.
He, blessed with vast knowledge, analytical mind and passionate heart,
identified all the causes of their decline. He hardly left any aspect untouched.
For in depth study of the subject one must refer to his works. Herein only a few
aspects are summarized.
The Originator has guaranteed the preservation of the text of His
message, the Quraan. The Book has retained its originality for more than
fourteen centuries and will do so for forever. It does not mean that possibility of
differences of opinion in Islam has been ruled out.
Islam encourages its followers to ponder, contemplate and formulate their
views. Therefore, difference of opinion is inevitable. Muslims have differed
with each other more than the followers of any other religion have, but only on
some peripheral issues or finer points.
The learned religious scholars of the past did not agreed on interpretation
of some verses of Quraan, but in doing so they always respected viewpoint of
others. None of them had ever desired that Ummah be divided on the basis of
their interpretations. The successors of these scholars, who did not match them
in knowledge, but outmatched them in exuberance, caused the undesirable
division.
The dynamic and progressive nature of Islam has been exploited to
undesirable limits. Resultantly the Ummah has been divided into airtight
compartments of religious sects. The rays of dynamism have been dimmed by
the dark clouds of the rigidity of sectarianism.
Rigidity has inherent drawbacks. It breeds intolerance as it precludes that
the views of others are incorrect. Those who are wrong must be opposed. This
leads to militancy against each other. Unfortunately it is more pronounced in
our part of the Muslim World.
When argument fails to win over the opponents, they either resort to use
of force or try to impress by glamourizing their sect by resorting to frivolous
practices. The former leads to bloodshed and the latter to distortion of the image
of a great religion.
Muslims know that indulgence in frivolities does not conform to the
teachings of Islam. In practice they indulge in all kinds of frivolous activities
even on religious occasions. When they run short of ingenuity, they borrow
some from other religions to add colour to their celebrations.
Irrespective of their sects, Muslims of our times generally suffer from
dichotomy in belief and practice. They believe that there is no god but Allah.

They believe in His benevolence. In practice they worship many worldly gods
and seek favours from them.
Muslims believe that Islam is a religion of peace, yet they commit
brutalities in the name of their faith. They believe that waging war is permitted
only against enemies of Allah. In practice they resort to bloodshed for worldly
interests, which they try to sanctify on religious pretexts.
Muslims believe that declaration of Jihad against enemies of Allah is
mandatory and it is the responsibility of the rulers of Ummah to declare Jihad
when situation so warrants. In practice the majority of rulers shy away from this
duty on flimsy grounds. On the other hand the self-acclaimed leaders take the
matter in their hands and declare Jihad on untenable grounds.
Muslims know that Jihad grants them unique distinction and greatest
reward from Allah. It provides them a motivation theme equivalent of which
does not exist in any other religion. It is the secret of their strength. In practice
many rulers and scholars try to disown the concept of Jihad to avoid labels of
militancy and terrorism or to show their desire of peaceful coexistence.
Contradictions in belief and practice, tendency to add fervour through
frivolities, resorting to aggression in despondency and desperation have
provided excuses to their adversaries to point fingers towards basic teachings of
Islam. They talk of the need to make Islam pragmatic and tolerant.
Modifying its basic teachings can do this; after all Christianity and Judaism
were modernized through this process.
Focus is on creating moderate Muslims as said by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal.
The new brand of Muslims would speak about the Quraan and the Prophet
(peace be upon him) and the message of Islam but they would choose to ignore
the part that calls for Jihad against oppression.
He added, the dominant thrust of the American academicians is now to
find, promote and cultivate moderate Islam. This version of Islam would have
all the verses about Jihad taken out of Quraan and the Prophets (peace be upon
him) tradition, or at least ignored, as Envir Sadaat did after Camp David.
In its endeavour to make Islam tolerant the civilized world is in not
prepared to tolerate any nonsense, even from those who have been denied
justice for centuries. This particular class of Muslims is considered quite
dangerous. They are terrorists.
One intellectual of the civilized world said, think of a small band of
terrorists developing a deadly virus, which can wipeout two-thirds of humanity
in less than a week. If we have to kill a few thousand to protect ourselves from
such an attack, we will do that and I think we will be justified. One of the

peculiarities of a civilized man is to have justifications ready for all his deeds,
right or wrong.
Muslims have been told that Ummah is like one living body. If one part is
hurt the whole body feels the pain and reacts. In practice they seldom feel any
pain and fail to react when Muslims are hurt in another part of the world. It has
happened quite frequently in the recent past.
Allah has warned Muslims that Jews and Christians can never be their
friends. The reason is very obvious. Islam has superceded both the religions.
Followers of superceded religions harbour grudge against Islam. Yet most
Muslim countries try to befriend them. They do befriend them, but only to be
harmed in the process.
Muslims believe that Ribaa, (interest) is forbidden in Islam. In practice
they are taking and giving it at all levels. The rulers keep their wealth in the
West for better returns and borrow for their needy nation on heavy interests.
Many of them are being crushed by the burden of debt servicing. The people
too deposit their wealth in banks for profits.
The Ummah suffers from yet another kind of division. The ruling elite in
most Muslim countries are generally enlightened by the western education and
culture. The rulers think differently from the masses about Islam and the
civilized world.
The elite tend to brush aside many teachings of Islam in their keenness to
be tolerant, liberal, accommodating and progressive. This speaks of their lack of
understanding of Islamic teachings as well as lack of correct comprehension of
meanings of above mentioned virtues for which they flout the teachings of
Islam.
The masses, who have not been enlightened by the values of the
civilized world practice Islam as interpreted and taught to them by Mullas.
These Mullas are dubbed as fundamentalist, extremist, intolerant and militant by
the Crusaders of the twenty first Century.
Resultantly, the rulers and the ruled think and act differently. The
divergence of thought and action adds to the weakness of Ummah. Convergence
can only be achieved if the effects of western propaganda as well as influence of
Mullas are minimized.

CONCLUSION
Muslims of today are quite different from what Islam wants its followers
to be. This particular breed of Muslims neither deserves the favours of Allah nor
His men. They have earned the curse of both by their acts and neglects. They
have been degraded to the lowest of the low.

Unity of Ummah is need of the hour. Unity will remain elusive as long as
Muslims continue practicing western concepts without scrutiny and essential
modifications. They can achieve it with half of the effort that is being put in by
their enemies for their disunity.
Without undoing the existing inter-state boundaries, Muslim countries
can do a lot for achieving unity. They can put their act together and give it right
direction to protect their common interests against the onslaught of their
common enemy. The onus lies squarely on the rulers of Muslim countries.
Similarly the provision of good governance and efficient management of
economies of Islamic countries are sacred responsibilities of the rulers. They
can harness the most valuable asset of manpower, which of late is being dubbed
as liability.
They must recognize the importance of possessing military strength, not
for pursuing any hegemonic designs, but to be able to defend them against
aggression. Mutual cooperation in the form of joint ventures is very important
in this field, though this has been forbidden by the Crusaders through biased
implementation of proliferation.
Incorrect perception and practice of the concept of Jihad has allowed the
civilized world to portray it as militancy or terrorism. All those who indulge in
Jihad are treated as evil forces. Conversely, the enemies of Allah have raised
themselves to high pedestal of nobility. They claim to be fighting a holy war
against Axis of Evil.
Eradication of religious misconceptions is responsibility of the State and
the religious scholars. Misconceptions and unfounded feelings of sectarian
righteousness should not be allowed to undermine the spirit of the faith and
unity of Ummah.

23rd June 2002

KARZAI CONTINUES
Interim Government was installed in Afghanistan under Bonn Accord to
provide good governance for six months. Under the umbrella of Coalition,
Karzai successfully completed his term on 21 st June 2002. A Special
Independent Commission had been constituted to convene Emergency Loya
Jirga for election of Transitional Government for next eighteen months and to
make arrangements for provision of Constitution.
The Emergency Loya Jirga was convened during second week of June.
The delegates participating in the Jirga deliberated for ten days and elected
Karzai to head the Transitional Government. He was given eighteen more
months to serve his people and the country.
The Jirga failed in having consensus regarding selection of parliament.
The delegates were also unable to do any constitutional work. The Jirga
however provided an opportunity to them to express their grievances and give
vent to their feelings.
Interim Government assisted by the Coalition forces and ISAF was able
to restore semblance of normalcy in Kabul. It also endeavoured to start

rehabilitation and reconstruction works, but could do little in this regard for
want of resources.
The Coalition forces meanwhile remained pre-occupied in hunting
Taliban and al-Qaeda men. Target acquisition however became difficult as most
of the wanted terrorists had been scattered into other countries.

EMERGENCY LOYA JIRGA

Jirga is an oldest institution of Shoora or consultation in Afghanistan. It is
an assembly of elders where issues of common interest are deliberated, debated
and decided with consensus. Despite its conservative outlook, the Jirga is a
radical institution. It guarantees decision making in democratic tradition.
Afghans consider it as the best forum to deal with matters of mutual
interest. The renowned historian Fida Yunas wrote, the Afghans, in general, are
of the firm belief that the panacea for all of the ills of Afghanistan, today and
tomorrow (is) the Loya Jirga.
Nature and scope of the problem to be deliberated dictate the size of a
Jirga. The problem may relate to the people of a village or a tribe or entire
country. Hence the size of Jirga can vary from few elders of a Killi (village) to
hundreds of delegates representing the entire country.
Eligibility for participating in a Jirga was always restricted to male elders.
The composition of Emergency Loya Jirga was however changed to make it
more dynamic and progressive. In all 1551 delegates were selected from 32
provinces out of which 160 seats were reserved for women.
Two thirds of delegates were chosen through district elections and the
organizing committee selected the remainders. The amalgamation of election
and selection of delegates was criticized, not because it was a deviation from
Afghan tradition, but for the reason that it resulted in favourtism.
Convening of a Jirga of national level in a war-torn country where
rivalries and enmities raged, was not an easy task to be accomplished. The
commission did well in convening the Jirga despite the death of commission
members in mine blast; threats to those attending Jirga; complaints about share
and selection of delegates; and warlords influence in selection of delegates.
The commission required financial assistance for convening an assembly
of such a large size. The problem was solved by donations. Brahimi appreciated,
the active role and financial assistance provided by Germany, Japan, US, UK,
EU, Norway and Prince Karim.
The Jirga was scheduled to start its proceedings on 10 th June. It was
delayed for 24 hours because the organizers required additional time for closed

door and open door lobbying. A UN official admitted that UK, UN, US and
others were in a meeting with the opposing sides and trying to work out a
solution. The solutions were being found out to facilitate the task of delegates.
There was resentment over the joint visit and address of Fahim, Rabbani,
Sayyaf, Khalili, Dostum and Ismail to the Jirga members a night before the start
of Jirga. Tajwar Kakar asked Fahim to leave the premises, as she held all the
former Mujahideen leaders responsible for the destruction of Afghanistan.
Some delegates felt that their right of selecting a new government had
been usurped by foreign powers and special interests. Sima Samar complained
that Jirga was being used as rubber stamp. Everything has already been decided
by the powerful ones. Asifi felt that it was an imposed settlement. I dont think
it was a good business for those who did this. He was pointing towards
Northern Alliance and America.
Tajiks opposed any role of the king. The enlightened women thought that
Loya Jirga was riddled with Taliban bandits. Human rights watchdogs felt that
warlords were making a power grab by brazenly manipulating the Loya Jirga
selection process. If they succeed, Afghans would again be denied the ability to
choose their own leaders and build civil society.
Once the lobbying was completed, Khalilzad, adviser to Bush, announced
that media was wrong in creating an impression that the king and Karzai were
rivals. The reports about the king showing interest in becoming the head of
new government were not true, which created confusion and problems to the
extent that the commission decided to delay the inaugural session for a day.
Khalilzad, who has emerged as kingmaker said, Zahir Shah has refused
to involve himself in political battles and will support Hamid Karzai. He also
declared that there would be changes in the cabinet, but I am not sure what
kind of changes that would be. Qanooni agreed to resign.
The delegates assembled on 11th June to start the proceedings. They were
told to leave their weapons at the door of the large canopy erected to serve as
Hujra or assembly hall. Zahir opened Loya Jirga and backed Karzai as had been
decided prior to the start of Jirga.
Karzai gave title of Baba-e-Millat to Zahir and assured that he would
retain the title in new Constitution. He said that the former king would open the
future national parliament and the constitutional commission, award titles and
medals and be allowed to move back into the royal palace where he lived
before. He promised to raise new army with full participation of all factions.
No one will be allowed to raise his private army.
The royalists were disappointed, as they believed that king was
pressurized to issue a statement in favour of Karzai. Pushtoons demanded that

Northern Alliance should hand over more key posts to ensure balanced
composition of Transitional Government.
More than 60 delegates felt frustrated over what they said was the lack of
a free vote over the countrys future and left the meeting on second day.
Yusufzai made the following comments:

Delegates wondered why the Loya Jirga had been formed and convened
when major decisions were taken even before it met in Kabul.

The announcement by Zahir Shah and Rabbani that they were not
candidates for office of the head of state appeared to be part of a deal
brokered by Khalilzad.

On 13th June Jirga delegates wrangled over voting procedures, but went
on to elect Karzai as head of Transitional Government. He got 1295 votes.
Woman candidate lost but caused a stir in Afghan politics. Loya Jirga ended in
an uproar over make-up of national assembly.
Loya Jirga headed towards collapse when one thousand delegates walked
out. The Jirga had yet to decide important issues as pointed out by Karzai,
these people should consider how to hold elections, how to elect members of
national council and decide how many sessions the council should hold.
Jirga confirmed new Afghan cabinet on 19th June. Fahim and Abdullah
were retained and Dostum went. Northern Alliance prevailed upon to safeguard
its interests. Only Qanooni was transferred to education ministry. Wardak and
Ashraf Ghani, both Pushtoons, were given interior and finance ministry
respectively.
About selection of cabinet Karzai said, we have more qualified people
than we have posts. I wish I could either increase the size of the cabinet or cut
down on the number of qualified people. Belgheis, a relation of Karzai said, I
can read between his jokes that Karzai is under lot of pressure. The cabinet is
being imposed on him because many warlords do not want to lose their grip on
power.
America wanted to check re-emergence of Taliban and their likes. The
best way to block their way was to install enemies of Taliban in power.
Therefore, Northern Alliance and warlords completely dominated the cabinet.
The West applauded the election of Karzai and renewed its support.
Russia hailed new political makeup, which hardly had anything new. Karzai
pledged to defend country against foreign aggression while the foreigners
ensured safety of his government and his person. He promised better life to
countrymen.

The manner in which the Transitional Government was formed could

make the going difficult for it. Apprehension of Pushtoons that Loya Jirga
would leave them as political outsiders has come true. Distrust developed
between supporters of the king and Karzai is a bad omen for the incoming
Transitional Government predicted Yusufzai.
Americans have successfully dictated the terms. They were able to force
the Pushtoons and NA to sit together without ending up fighting, but it wont
be easy for them to dictate terms in future, according to Yusufzai. The
impression that the government takes orders from Washington through
Khalilzad is dangerous. This could be the opportunity that the Taliban, former
Mujahideen and other Islamic groups were looking for to justify their
opposition to countrys US-backed interim rulers.
Fahim Dashti observed that America has gone for short-term gains.
Naturally the Afghans are against foreign troops. I think they agree with the
(presence of) American troops at the moment but not for a longtime. Rifts
between western educated technocrats and warlords and between secular
returnees from the West and conservative religious forces could surface.
Presence of supporters of Qanooni in interior ministry would cause
problems for new Pushtoon boss. Wardak was conscious of this and vowed to
resign if he failed to reform police. On the other hand Qanooni was unhappy
with his new job.

PEACE AND SECURITY

On 16th April Karzai went to Rome to bring Zahir back home. Ex-king
had earlier hoped to bring comfort to Afghans. Zahir landed in Kabul on 18 th
April amid tight security and declared: He is not interested in throne, instead
will work for Afghan unity.
Afghan Foreign Minister had similar feelings. Rabbani welcomed Shah,
but opposed monarchy. Pakistan welcomed kings return. His return satisfied the
civilized world as going back to kingship was considered far better than
having an Ameer-ul-Momineen sitting in Kabul.
The peace, the prerequisite for providing good governance in war-torn
country, however kept eluding. Tussle between warlords, personal and tribal
enmities, absence of law enforcing agencies and lack of resources were the
main impediments in restoration of peace. Following incidents of fighting
between warlords took place during the period:

On 13th April nine people were killed and twelve injured as warlords
fought in Wardak.

In Khost four persons perished in factional fighting on 24 th April. Three

more were killed in next 48 hours as warlords fought for control of Khost.

Two dozen were killed in Gardez infighting on 27 th April. Zahir Shah had
to intervene to end the bloodshed.

On 1st May six persons perished in fighting near Mazar-e-Sharif and six
persons were killed as fighting erupted in Kunduz on 23rd May.

Clashes also took place for control over Iranian trade route and between
rival militias near Kabul.

Warlords were accused of harassing citizens, pocketing huge money of

customs dues and abuse of human rights. Tensions rose as warlords standoff
continued. America intervened to prevent factional fighting, when it failed to
get any response, it threatened that Afghan warlords might not be allies
forever. Ex-king sent delegations to end fighting, but to no avail. Karzai could
only wish that warlords must disappear.
On 4th April Afghan Government unearthed a bombing plot and arrested
about three hundred people. Assassination of Fahim was attempted on 8 th April
in Jalalabad. Five persons were killed, but Fahim survived. Arrests as sequel to
bomb blast signaled return of old Afghan politics and attempt on Fahim
exposed ethnic-based warlordship according to Yusufzai.
Brother of a minister went missing and was feared kidnapped. Journalists
were attacked. Woman teacher was harassed after distribution of threatening
pamphlets. A young man hurled a grenade at video shop in Khost. Robbers
killed two currency dealers and looted Rupees 30 million in Spin Boldak. Crime
returned to Kandahar where Taliban had kept peace.
The United Nations urged Interim Government to uphold human rights.
That indicated the continuation of violations of rights. Pushtoons faced violence
and sexual abuse to the extent that even a minister had to express his concern
over their maltreatment.
The people, who suffered due to the process in which Karzai and his
colleagues were brought into power, worked for destabilizing Interim
Government. Rabbani warned that ignoring Islamic parties was dangerous.
Others felt that little had changed for better since ousting of Taliban. The
changes, if any, were to the liking of the civilized world.
Despite all these happenings, Karzai claimed that security inside
Afghanistan was satisfactory. A few days later, he contradicted his claim by
stressing upon the need of peace and stability. He said that these were vital for
reconstruction. The remedy lied in disarming all factions as Rabbani
suggested. Seizures of any amount of weapons would not bring the desired
change.

The contingent of 500 peacekeepers was able to enforce law and order in
Kabul. To begin with the command of this force rested with Britain. Turkey
agreed to assume command in June. ISAF trained 40 Afghan bodyguards for
personal security of Zahir Shah.
In view of its effectiveness, expansion of ISAF to entire country was
urged by Pakistan, Tajikistan, relief agencies and some elements from within
Afghanistan. France and US rejected expansion beyond Kabul. America
declined to accept any peacekeeping role on permanent basis. UN was asked to
extend ISAF mandate after June. Schroeder backed extension of tenure for
security force in Kabul. UN agreed on six months extension.
The peacekeepers were not prepared to expose themselves to any risks as
was evident from the statement of ISAF chief. Troops deployment beyond
Kabul could affect their security. It meant that restoration of peace in
Afghanistan was not the primary concern of UN and US. The peacekeepers
were there only to protect the installed government.
The presence of foreign troops in Kabul was disapproved and resented by
Afghans as was indicated by following incidents:

German troops came under fire while patrolling Kabul on 30 th March.

Next day British troops were attacked for second time in Kabul.

Two persons were held after shots were fired near German patrol on 2 nd
April and five days later ISAF compound was subjected to rocket attack.

On 9th April a British soldier was injured and four days later gunmen
again fired on peacekeepers.

Like most UN organizations working in Afghanistan, ISAF also felt

financial hardship. Brahimi appealed for funds for security forces. Turkey asked
Japan and US to provide aid and army equipment respectively for Afghan
peacekeeping mission.
Without establishing the writ of central authority through length and
breadth of Afghanistan, the provision of good governance could not be
ensured. Very little has been done in this regard. Karzais authority was
frequently challenged in many parts of the country.

REHABLITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Rehabilitation and reconstruction hinged on repatriation of Afghan
refugees. Repatriation gradually gained momentum. In March more than
110,000 refugees returned to Afghanistan. By 30th April 400,000 refugees had
returned. Reportedly over 1.1 million refugees were repatriated between
January and second week of June.

Repatriation from Pakistan was faster than expected. Ten percent

overseas refugees had also returned by 25th April. More than 100,000 returned
from Iran by 15th May. Refugees returning home from Australia had bitter
experience of the values of civilized world.
Repatriation could have been accelerated, provided UNHCR had not
faced certain problems. Repatriation was halted on 9 th April for want of funds
and a month later the plan to assist Internally Displaced Persons was halted for
the same reason. Fighting in Afghanistan also retarded the progress. The
Crusaders took little interest in repatriation of refugees.
Rehabilitation and reconstruction of Afghanistan was supposed to be part
of the plan of war on terror. The aim was to save Afghanistan from falling
back into the shackles of terrorists by developing it in a manner that qualitative
changes were brought in social, political and economic environments of
Afghans.
The donors however pursued the policy of wait and see. They perhaps
felt that conditions were not ripe for gearing up rehabilitation and reconstruction
works. European Union declared that aid depended on implementation of peace
accord discussed in Bonn. Hence the aid remained at the stages of assurances
and approvals.
So far the donors have generally failed in fulfilling their commitments.
They followed their principles so rigidly that even humanitarian works were
affected. Various UN organizations warned that relief works would be halted
unless more cash was found. The threats of starvation in Afghanistan and
epidemic in Kabul and Kandahar failed to move the civilized world.
The UN pointed out massive funding hole in budget of Afghan
Government. Representatives of the government reminded world of its aid
pledge and assured effective use of international aid. Reminders and
assurances could not produce the desired result.
Non-availability of funds and internal insecurity were the main reasons
for delay in the start of any worthwhile reconstruction projects, although the
start of large scale infrastructure projects after meeting of Loya Jirga was
expected. Similarly very little was done for raising, equipping and training of
Afghan Army and Police. France agreed to send instructors to train army.
Rumsfeld pledged support for training. The apprehensions of Pushtoons
regarding monopoly of Northern Alliance impeded the progress.
The neighbouring countries were keen for reconstruction of Afghanistan
primarily to earn some profits. A committee was set up on Afghan
reconstruction as a result of meeting in Tehran on 19th May, but all of them
remained quiet thereafter.

MANHUNT
The intensity of operations of war on terror decreased during the last
quarter. Some of the events that took place during this period were:

A-10 jets were deployed to wipe out al-Qaeda men. British commandos
were employed in a covert combat mission.

On 16th April US forces launched combat operation in eastern hills and

British commandos commenced operation against abodes of al-Qaeda.

US forces launched fresh offensive on 1 st May and the British a day after.
Marines found no foes. Operation Snipe achieved no success worth
mention.

Hekmatyar escaped CIA missile attack on 9 th May. It was first overt

action against non al-Qaeda. On 30th May Coalition forces also targeted
Hikmatyar unsuccessfully.

On 13th May US allies launched big operation in Khost and four days
later British and Australian troops battled with al-Qaeda and Taliban.

It was reported on 19th May that US was setting up a military base close
to Iran border and troops were hunting al-Qaeda men on mountains.

On 21st and 22nd May US jets bombed Pak-Afghan border areas to target
suspected al-Qaeda and Taliban forces.

British Marines were engaged in firefight in Khost region on 24 th May

and five days later UK troops were deployed on Pak-Afghan border.

Fresh search for Taliban and al-Qaeda men started on 2 nd June and ended
two days later.
The Crusaders inflicted following casualties on evil forces:

Radio Kabul reported on 29th March that American forces killed fifty alQaeda fighters. Major Bryan denied the report. On 12 th April more alQaeda terrorist suspects were held.

American troops claimed killing several al-Qaeda men in an attack on

14th April and nine persons were killed as US bombed Taliban bases three
days later.

Ex-Taliban commander was shot dead near Chaman on 24 th April and a

week later four al-Qaeda suspects were killed near Pakistan border.

In a raid conducted in area north of Kandahar on 13 th May five persons

were killed and 32 were arrested. Next day US claimed arresting

suspected al-Qaeda men in a raid. Number of persons captured was not

specified.

On 17th May US bombed a wedding party and ten persons were

reportedly killed. America denied the report. A week later one Afghan
was killed by US forces.

US troops killed three Afghans near their base in Gardez on 31 st May.

One more was killed three days later.

In addition Mulla Abdul Salam Rocketi was arrested. US commandos

also arrested Kunar commander, Jehandad, an active member of Eastern Shoora.
Whereas an ex-Taliban chief spy previously presumed dead, was reported alive.
Thirty-two captives were shifted to Guantanamo during the period. The element
of collateral damage remained quite pronounced in visible successes of the
Coalition forces. The trend of indiscriminate use of force continued.
The operations of US led troops resulted in some recoveries and
discoveries. Biological weapons laboratory was found in Afghanistan on 22 nd
March and four days later a large quantity of al-Qaeda weapons was recovered
from Shahi Kot.
During month of April US troops destroyed Afghan caves and collected
documents. BBC reported that IAEA has found radioactive material in Kabul.
British troops found evidence of Taliban in mountains, traces of al-Qaeda men
in Paktia and learnt that al-Qaeda was seeking radiological bomb.
In May British and Canadian troops found arms cache, caves filled with
arms, and another cache of 20 truckloads of arms. Coalition forces blew up
recovered arms and ammunition on 12th May and two days later it was reported
that destroyed arms belonged to allies.
Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Pushtoons were the three possible adversaries
from whom the resistance could be expected. None of them were in position to
put up coordinated resistance. Nevertheless some incidents of retaliation took
place:

On 4th April US-led troops were attacked in Shahi Kot Valley and
according to US sources al-Qaeda offered rewards for capturing allied
troops.

Mortar rounds exploded near US troops on 23rd April without causing any
damage. Three days later a US base in eastern Afghanistan came under
rocket-attack.

US troops were subjected to missile-attack in Khost on 2 nd May. UK and

US forces again came under attack on 5th and 6th May.

Two rockets were fired near US troops and one person was injured as
youth hurled a grenade at video shop in Khost on 13th May. A week later
three Americans were reportedly killed in Paktia ambush laid by Mewa
Khan Wazir.

Rockets were fired near Coalition base in Khost on 27 th May and three
persons were killed in a blast.

Coalition forces came under rocket-attack in Kandahar on 4th June and

US troops came under fire in southern Afghanistan on 13th.

On 16th June bomb blasts damaged gasoline tankers bound for US base in
Kandahar. Two days later rockets exploded near US embassy in Kabul.
Hekmatyar was blamed for this attack.

The casualties suffered by the Coalition forces as result of retaliatory

attacks were:

US soldier was killed near Kandahar on 28 th March and one Afghan and
two US soldiers were injured in grenade blast three days later.

Three persons were killed on 14th April in rocket attack in Kandahar. The
following day four US soldiers were killed in an explosion.

American soldier was shot at and injured in Kandahar on 17 th April.

Reportedly US lost fourteen troops four days later.

Four Americans were injured in attack on Khost airport on 3 rd May and a

week later four Afghans were injured in a rocket-attack.

Taliban claimed that they killed fifty US troops in Paktia during 17-19 th
June. Independent sources said only five were killed.

The Coalition forces also suffered due to accidents. Accidentally shot

British trooper expired on 10th April. Next day two US pilots were injured in
helicopter mishap. Three US soldiers were killed in Gardez crash in June. The
worst incident took place on 18th April when a bomb dropped by US plane killed
four Canadian troops near Kandahar. A Norwegian and a Canadian were injured
in landmine related accident. The best in the world suffered from dysentery and
eight of them were evacuated in May.
Most of the casualties were self inflicted through accidents and by
bombing friendly forces by mistake. In either case the casualties were
avoidable. Suffering the avoidable casualties reflected poorly on professional
competence of the combatants.
Till 23rd March America was indecisive on chasing al-Qaeda and Taliban
into Pakistan. The indecision was related to the timings only. Pakistan tried its

best to avert the inevitable by denying presence of Osama and Omar within its
territorial limits. Musharraf declared that war in Afghanistan was over.
Statements of Pakistani leaders did not amuse the Crusaders. America
never said that Osama was present in Pakistan, it only pressed for willing
cooperation. In mid April Sattar showed the first sign of willingness. He said,
US troops may be allowed to cross border. New York Times reported that US
has been allowed searching of tribal areas.
Monitoring of Durand Line has been going on since long and a
commander confirmed strikes inside Pakistan. Pressure on Pakistans eastern
border was increased, which forced reconsideration of shifting of troops from
Afghan border.
America declared that pullout of Pakistani troops could force US to
change tactics. Rumsfeld vowed that US-led forces would go after al-Qaeda
fighters. A day later US started building up forces on eastern Afghan border.
Pakistan ultimately succumbed to the pressure and US troops started operating
in Waziristan.
Interim Government did not have the resources to help the Coalition in
manhunt. Kandahar Governor did inform that Taliban were hiding in remote
areas and Karzai vowed to hunt down Osama. However, an already arrested
Taliban commander, Rahimullah of Noorzai tribe, was freed.
US planes rained money to buy cooperation of Afghans. Posters
warning of death to those aiding US troops countered the dollars. In fact
America was not sure whether Osama was alive or dead, but it has to consider
Osama alive until forensic evidence proves otherwise. Rumsfeld was of the
view that neutralizing Osama without capturing was better outcome.
Nevertheless the phantom of Osama kept haunting America:

On 10th April an Arab daily reported that Osama was alive and planning
new attacks. But Zubaydah, the fountain of knowledge, did not disclose
anything about Osamas terrorist networks.

Foreign Minister of Afghanistan claimed in mid April that Osama was

still alive.

Al-Jazeera aired fresh Osama video in which he claimed 11th September

attack as great victory. On 19th May new video showed that Osama was
still alive.

Americans were also not certain about Mulla Omar and Taliban. Mulla
too kept haunting the Crusaders though to lesser effect:

It was reported on 5th May that Taliban were regrouping in small

pockets. The same day Britain asked Russia to take action against arms
dealers.

The Coalition analyzed that gun battles suggested that Taliban leaders
were still around Kandahar. On 23rd May Mulla Omar claimed that he
and Osama were safe.

Taliban stickers warned US that they were coming back and an Afghan
minister believed that Mulla Omar was still alive. Reportedly Omar
was spotted in Helmand province on 4th June.

On 12th June he was reported claiming that Bin Laden was still alive and
four days later he said, US bombing cant hurt us.

The Crusaders feared resurgence of the evil of terrorism, despite

delivering a significant blow on al-Qaeda during Operation Snipe, as claimed
by Blair. Assessments carried out by the Coalition and reports from different
sources revealed that:

An al-Qaeda spokesman was hiding on Iran-Afghan border.

FBI foresaw walk-in suicide attacks in US. The Coalition forces warned
that al-Qaeda fighters can launch more suicide attacks.

Hekmatyar called for Jihad against UK and US. On 31 st May US claimed

that terror-storm worries world and Cohen saw a new terror threat.

Al-Qaeda asked US on 2nd June to get ready for attack; 9/11 attacks were
only a start. Reportedly substantial al-Qaeda men were still in
Afghanistan.

Since Talibans decision to disappear in wilds of Pushtoon tribal areas,

the Coalition forces met no significant success. They only created hype about
success in war opined an ex-minister of UK. The conduct of war on terror
was criticized in many ways. Indiscriminate use of brute force in general and
maltreatment of women earned condemnation. Amnesty lambasted US on
maltreatment of prisoners.
The combat efficiency of US forces was questioned. Washington Post
commented that Osama fled Tora Bora due to US mistake. A pilot was blamed
for not following the procedure causing death of four Canadians and injury to
eight more.
The fatigue from prolonged war has started telling. The best in the
world have suffered from dysentery and the Coalition troops were feeling
giddiness from high-altitude terrain. If the war lingered, the effects might
become more pronounced.

America considered Afghanistan and countries around it as bastion of

terrorism. It has plans to stay in the region for indefinite period as was evident
from various statements. Tommy announced that war on terror was not yet
over. On 10th April America announced that its troops in Afghanistan were for
long haul. A US commander said on 28 th April that war on terrorism could last
longer. New York Times reported that US hunt might last beyond summer.
America reiterated that US was committed to long war.
Some officials of Bush Administration and key Democrats differed on
expanding troops. Despite opposition US prepared to send more troops to
Afghanistan. Military commanders were told to draw contingency plans and
US Senate passed $ 31.5 billion anti terrorist bill.

FOREIGN RELATIONS
Interim Government led by Karzai did well in rehabilitating its relations
with all countries in general and with Pakistan in particular. Karzai tried to bury
the past and start afresh, but in a government dominated by Northern Alliance, it
was not easy for him to re-establish cordial relations with a country, which had
close contacts with Taliban. Bitterness of the past was bound to cause irritations.
Burying of the past amidst reports of demands of ransom for Pakistani
prisoners; their deaths in Afghan jails due to maltreatment; tales of miseries
narrated by repatriates were bound to make it difficult for Pakistan as well. In
addition demands for Pushtoons unification also started re-echoing. Afghans
belonging to NA, who had come to persuade tribesmen to join Afghan Army,
were arrested at Angura Post.
Both sides were wise enough to ignore the above in view of the
importance of having good neighbourly relations. They moved on to establish
close relationship. Musharraf and Karzai vowed to fight against terrorism. PakAfghan talks on prisoners were held. Repatriation started with release of thirty
prisoners on 25th April and by 11th May 176 prisoners were flown back to
Pakistan. Dostum pledged to release more prisoners out of more than one
thousand held in Afghanistan.
On 6th May Islamabad and Kabul agreed to reopen air link. Pakistan and
Afghanistan resumed commercial flights five days later and first flight of PIA
left for Kabul on 21st May. Pakistan revived Afghan transit trade and showed
willingness to extend transit to India-bound exports.
Pakistan donated two million tons of wheat in May. It offered to help
Afghanistan in communication sector and in construction of Afghan highways.
Afghan minister assured security to Pakistani investors. Niyazov, Karzai and
Musharraf signed gas pipeline agreement on 30th May. On 6th June Abdullah

ruled out taking side in Indo-Pak conflict. Musharraf greeted Karzai on his
election to head the Transitional Government. Both countries agreed to check
illegal crossings.
Interim Government had no problem in having cordial relations with
India. Donation of 25 buses and frequent visits of Afghan ministers to New
Delhi further cemented the friendly ties. Kabul-Delhi military cooperation and
proposed dam on River Kabul caused concern in Islamabad. The project could
dry Warsak Dam. One could only hope that certain circles in Pakistan would
oppose the project as strongly as they opposed Kalabagh Dam.
America has been accusing Iran for interfering in Afghanistan. US
Defence Secretary sought to counter Tehran influence in western Afghanistan.
Abdullah however rejected US charge of Irans interference. Iran hosted a moot
on Afghan reconstruction. Khatami accepted the invitation to visit Afghanistan.
Zahir assured Iran of good neighbourliness. Iran, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan
planned to construct joint highway.
Karzai considered China the most trustful friend and Zahir thought that
China was a great friend of Afghanistan. The civilized world as godfather of
present regime fostered and tutored the young Afghan regime. These countries
worked for creating an internationally acceptable image of the successors of
Taliban. The approach however was negative. They tried to earn fame for the
successors by defaming the predecessors; instead of improving the performance
of the former.
They probed into mass graves of Taliban. French art experts projected
cultural vandalism of Taliban. Karzai was motivated to restore Buddha statues
and advised to finish Talibans mosque projects. He showed due respect to the
tutors by listening intently and obeying obediently.
Common Afghan was not obliged to do so. Afghans were asked to control
poppy cultivation. Destruction of poppy fields began amid violent protests. It
was halted after killing of two government workers; thereafter farmers were
given dollars to destroy poppy crops. US committed $ 11.5 million for Afghan
poppy eradication and drought. Despite these efforts the poppy fields
bloomed. The defiance of Afghans may not remain confined to poppy fields.
Reportedly Kabul sought Israeli help to combat terrorism. Israel has
specialized in this field. India also learnt the use of terror against terror from
Israel. There was no harm in referring the case to a qualified specialist. Karzai
however has to bear in mind that Israel is a specialized surgeon with little
knowledge of medicine. Afghans may not consent to surgery.

CONCLUSION
The proceedings of Emergency Loya Jirga revealed that Afghans were
gradually recovering from the shock of terrifying war. They have started
speaking again and if others continue refusing to listen, they might decide to
give vent to their feelings through means other than the words of mouth. They
are not likely to take dictations without resistance in future as brought out by
Yusufzai.
Many Afghans believe that Russians, Taliban and US were responsible
for ruining Kabul. Russians and Taliban have gone. Only Americans are still
around. They are undoubtedly mightiest of the three, but they cannot take it for
granted that they will survive forever. They have to curb their habit of dragging
others along and instead start learning to move along others.
Repatriation of refugees could have been carried out much faster than it
actually happened. The civilized world took no interest in ending this human
catastrophe. Only Australia paid special attention to tackle refugees by
dubbing them as asylum seekers.
The Crusaders were not keen for repatriation for their own reasons. Twothirds of population leftover in Afghanistan was causing enough problems in
manhunt. Repatriation would increase the number and add to the problems. It
would be better if the refugees stay away as long as possible.
America said that war has scattered al-Qaeda to other countries. It is
difficult to establish whether it has been done by design or otherwise. In either
case their dispersion provides an excuse to America to spread their war on
terror in whichever county it wants to.

25th June 2002

CRUSADES IN MIDDLE EAST-II

Saudi Arabia proposed a plan for peaceful settlement of Arabs dispute
with Israel. America did not like Saudis or anybody else playing lead role in an
international dispute. It was the prerogative of the super power. Nevertheless
America praised the plan and condemned Israel. America then cleverly advised
Israel to calm down and invited Saudi Prince for discussions. After having
stalled the progress of Saudi Plan, Bush came out with a solution of the
problem.
The Bush Plan was not conceived by American leaders. It was a Zionist
Plan formulated at Tel Aviv. Sharon has been talking about this for the last few
months. The Sharon Plan was announced by the resident of White House.
The plan aimed at molding Palestinian Authority to the liking of Israel.
The civilized world would like it to be as submissive as Egypt and Jordan. If
two independent states could be tamed at Camp David, there was no reason as
to why Palestinians could not be tamed.
Muslim leaders, individually as well as collectively, utterly failed in
expressing the feelings of Ummah and in taking cognizance of the ongoing
Crusades. The outcome of ministerial conference held at Khartoum fell well
short of the expectations. Arabs lacked the courage to stand against America.
They opposed Bush Plan, but did very little to stop its implementation. America
seemed to be determined to implement it.

ISRAELI AGGRESSION
Aggression is the hallmark of Israeli method to deal with Palestinians. It
has the support of the Crusaders for its ruthless application. As soon the church
siege ended, Israel prepared for invasion of Gaza Strip. There was no let in state
terrorism perpetrated by Sharons government:

Two Palestinian intelligence officers were killed on 14 th May. Seven

Palestinians were killed in West Bank on 22nd and 23rd May.

Tulkarem, Gaza City, Bethlehem and Jenin were invaded between 24 th

and 28th May. Fourteen Palestinians were held in these incursions.

Israel reoccupied Nablus and hundreds of Palestinians were held in West

Bank. On 6th June Israelis destroyed buildings in Arafats Headquarters.

Five Palestinians were killed in Gaza Strip on 12 th June. Two more were
killed four days later.

Israeli forces occupied three West Bank towns on 20th June. Around 100
tanks again stormed Bethlehem, Tulkarem and Ramallah. In next two
days ten Palestinians were killed and eight were injured.

Israel widened the scope of military operations. West Bank towns were
retaken on 23rd June and next day seven Palestinians were killed as Israeli
tanks besieged Arafat. Four activists of Hamas perished in missile-attack
and Ahmed Yasin was put under house arrest.

Israeli troops stormed Palestinian Headquarters on 25th June and five PA

policemen were killed.

Israelis arrested more Palestinians in Hebron on 26 th June. In next two

days missiles were fired at Arafats Hebron office. Israeli army broke into
Palestinian Headquarters and arrested 54 persons.

On 29th June Israel blew up Arafats Headquarters and fifteen Palestinians

were killed.

Israel arrested nineteen Palestinians in raids carried on 5 th July and ten

Palestinians were killed in Gaza in next five days.

Five Palestinians were hurt in Israeli air raid on 14th July and three days
later a Palestinian was killed in gunfight.

On 23rd July fifteen Palestinians were killed in Israeli missile-attack.

Hamas leader and nine children were among dead.

Exerting political pressure reinforced military aggression. Likud Party

said no to Palestinian State. Israel threatened to occupy Palestinian territory
permanently. Jews warned to establish more settlements, as if 44 sites built
under Sharon government were not enough. Peres opposed the move, but
supported operations in Palestinian areas.
Liaison office in West Bank was dismantled. Unfreezing of PA funds was
mulled. Erection of fence was planned despite opposition. Israel threatened that
senior Palestinian leader would face civil trial. Israeli minister called for death
of Arafat.
Sharons strategy was based on the belief that use of indiscriminate force
can achieve complete submission of the Palestinians. The military might of
Israel, complemented by that of the civilized world, granted him the
confidence to accomplish it.
He and his sponsors were inclined to ignore the simple truth. Nobody can
be subdued forever by use of force alone. The use of force only multiplies the
enemies and intensifies their animosity. As and when the oppressed people
acquire the strength, they tend to pay back in the same coin. At that juncture the
regrets of the oppressor fail to save him.

Americans should know it better in the context of Niggers. They were

captured, transported, purchased and employed like animals, but could not be
kept as slaves for indefinite period. Today most Whites are scared of entering
the parts of towns inhibited by Blacks. The cause of fear does not lie in the
criminal psyche of Blacks, but in guilt of the crimes committed by the Whites
against them.
The world condemned Israel for brutality in Gaza. Israel came under fire
in Security Council. The gravity of the incident compelled Israel to feel the
need of appeasing Palestinians. The appeasement wont last long as Zionist
mentality is not likely to change in the absence of any worthwhile reformatory
move.

RETALIATION BY PALESTINIANS
The atrocities committed by Israelis warranted reaction from Palestinians.
Unfortunately they lacked the resources for appropriate retaliation, yet their
resistance continued:

Seventeen people were killed in Tel Aviv as result of suicide bombing on

8th May. Four days later a Jewish settler was killed in Gaza.

Palestinian suicide bomber killed two Israelis on 19 th May. Next day a

Palestinian blew himself up, but there were no casualties.

Two Israelis died in Tel Aviv as result of bomb blast on 22 nd May and two
more were killed in suicide bombing five days later.

On 5th June seventeen Israeli were killed in suicide attack and nineteen
were killed as suicide bomber blew up Israeli bus on 18th June.

A suicide bomber killed seven in Jerusalem on 19th June and on the

following day Palestinians killed four Jewish settlers.

Bomb hit a train near Tel Aviv on 30th June. Next day Hezbollah opened
fire on Israeli jets and an Israeli officer was killed on 10th July.

Seven were killed in West Bank in bus attack on 16 th July and next day an
Israeli soldier was killed in gunfight.

Bomb blast hit a train near Tel Aviv on 21st July. Four days later an Israeli
rabbi was killed in firing.

In the wake of Israeli aggression, Palestinians talked about revenge more

frequently. Hamas vowed to avenge their leaders killing and warned of sea of
blood. On 23rd July thirty thousand enraged Gaza dwellers attended funeral and
vowed to take revenge. Rockets were fired on southern Israel. These incidents

indicated that Arafats appeal for halt to suicide bombings was not likely to
make an impact.
Arafat tried to counter pressure for his removal by assuring overhaul of
PA and holding elections, but he linked polls to Israeli pullback. He reshuffled
the cabinet, Palestinian Authority announced elections timetable and on 7 th July
Palestinian provisional constitution went into effect.
Arafat had earlier toured West Bank and pledged for creating Palestine
State. Five weeks later he feared that Tel Aviv intended complete occupation
of Palestinian territory. Palestinian Authority flayed Israeli attacks and sought
world help.
Measures, appeals and pledges were not likely to save him, because of the
rift within PA. The incidents of clash between Gaza police and Hamas, report
about sacking of Intelligence boss and support of an Anti-Arafat group for
confederation with Israel indicated existence of rift. Americans and Israelis will
exploit these differences.

AMERICA SUPPORTED ISRAEL

America has been mediating between Arabs and Jews during second half
of the 20th Century. It has enjoyed respect of a mediator for fairly long period. It
still endeavoured to preserve the status of a respected mediator. To this end,
Bush has been sending his emissaries to Middle East quite frequently. Powell
met Arab ministers. America showed its willingness to work with appointees of
Arafat, whom it wanted no more at the helm of Palestinian affairs.
Tenet dashed to Middle East on 31st May on a secret mission. CIA chief
met Arafat on 1st June as Israel raided Jenin. Obviously the agenda of
discussion wont have included the need to rein in Sharon. The focus of
discussion must have been Palestinian operations against Israeli interests.
European countries followed America sincerely, yet telephonic contact with
Arab leaders was maintained.
Palestinians understood that America was not a neutral party in their
conflict with Israel. Arafats aide accused that US was giving Israel green light
for raids. America confirmed it through following actions:

On 10th June Bush dismissed Palestinian reforms and backed Israeli raids.

On 22nd June FBI warned of attacks on US and Jewish targets, thereby

declaring that their interests were common.

Powell announced that CIA was working on a plan to safeguard Israel.

America decided to oppose draft resolution in UNSC, in which Israel was

to be condemned for Gaza attack.

The peace plan announced by Bush should be viewed in the light of these
statements. This plan was prepared in consultation with and approval of Sharon,
who visited Washington more than once in the recent past. The basic aim of the
plan was the regime change.
The plan envisaged creation of Palestinian State within three years, but
Bush called for immediate removal of Arafat. He also desired that Israeli
occupation must end. Powell moved for implementation of the plan. He said
that decision to abandon Arafat was difficult, but America was determined to
freeze out Arafat. He asked Palestinians to overhaul leadership.
America not only approved the state terrorism perpetrated by Israel, but
also wanted to expand the scope of holy war. It saw no change in list of rogue
states as it detected enhanced threat of new attack. Bush claimed that war on
terror was bigger than bin Laden.
Libya was accused of acquisition of weapons. Iran was alleged as most
active supporter of terrorism and warned over videotaping NY waterfront.
Beirut was linked with al-Qaeda. Strangely a gentleman residing in White
House kept threatening all the rogues and the rogues obediently kept submitting
the clarifications.
Iraq received special attention of Sheriff of the global village. Cheney
forecast gathering danger in Iraq. CIA warned that Iraq would soon have
nuclear arms. Saddam was considered a threat to American and Israeli interests
in the region.
To safeguard the supreme interests of America, Bush approved the plan
to oust Saddam. Rumsfeld hoped that Saddam would be toppled during his
tenure. It implied that he would go before July 2004. Saddam had
rightly
feared that US plots against Iraq would intensify.
America increased the frequency of air attacks with a view to softening
the target:

On 20th May US warplanes struck southern Iraq injuring four people.

Three days later two civilians were killed in air raids.

On 28th May US warplanes attacked Iraqi air defences. The dose was
repeated during OIC conference.

Independence Day of America was celebrated by bombing Iraqi areas. On

23rd July US-British raids killed one and wounded twenty-two.

The intended goals could not be achieved by air raids alone. Straw
wanted that Iraq must be held to account. US planned massive attack on Iraq.
Rumsfeld ordered updating war plans. Blair granted the legitimacy by saying
that no UN resolution was needed for action and Australia also backed US
plan to attack Iraq.
Iraq could do no more than frowning on sanctions reform and accepting
new UN sanctions regime. It had no choice but to bow to new UN sanctions.
Saudi Arabian decision about reopening trade link with Iraq was no
consolation.
America was keen to open new fronts of war on terror. To that end it had
been working to improve upon the existing level of presence of US forces in
Asia. According to Powell US military presence was key to stability in Asia.
American has been following the strategy to strike before terrorists
attack. Bush said that war on terrorism would be preemptive. Operations short
of all out war will be carried out covertly for which CIA has formed secret hit
team for targeting terrorists abroad. Blocking of assets of entities linked to
terrorism will continue and supply of arms to rogues will be checked.
America had already imposed curbs on nine Chinese firms for selling arms to
Iran and Iraq.
The strategy will remain unchanged. America will resort to use of
military means as and when required. Collateral damage will remain
conspicuous part of all visible successes. Keeping this in view, America sought
immunity for American soldiers.
America threatened to pull out of UN Peacekeeping Operations over ICC
issue. It vetoed UNSC resolution on Bosnia. When worlds first war crimes
court officially came into effect without US, it offered new plan to save Bosnia
mission and subsequently climbed down from ICC immunity demand.
Ultimately UNSC and US reached agreement on ICC. US peacekeepers
were exempted for one year. It implied that America planned to achieve major
military goals by middle of the next year. During the days to come, US troops
are likely to commit more excesses.
America updated its plan for internal security and exercised strict
vigilance to check terrorist attacks. Panel to screen foreign students was
formed and tracking system for foreign students was launched. FBI stressed
upon exercising vigilance ahead of Independence Day. Americans working in
Asia were cautioned.
Despite these measures terror threat caused occasional panic in US. On
20 June White House was evacuated due to flying of an unidentified plane in
the vicinity. Due to fear of terrorist attack, 25,000 gas masks were ordered for
th

Washington. On 4th July two persons were killed and six injured in Los Angles
airport firing and plane crash. Gunman was an Egyptian native and Israel
termed it as terrorist attack.
The resolve of some countries of the civilized world seemed to be
dissipating. European countries, except Britain, began criticizing the conduct of
war on terror. Germans greeted Bush with protest rally in Berlin. European
Union reposed confidence in Arafat. Canada was dismayed over US Bosnia
mission veto. These differences led some experts to comment that USEuropean ties were at low ebb over ICC and ME. Blairs government denied
the existence of differences.
Russia and NATO agreed to combat common threats of terrorism. As
NATO moved closer to Moscows doorstep the relations between Russia and
US came out of doldrums. NATO and Russia signed historic accord and Putin
claimed that Russia-US ties would boost stability, not rivalry.
In view of the above Russia decided not to raise the issue of Arafats fate
at quartet meet. Russia however did not agree with idea of Axis of evil. It
urged Israeli restraint, rebuffed US concern over Irans nuclear threat, offered
help to Riyadh for Middle East crisis and opposed attack on Iraq.
Japan appealed to Israel to halt incursions. G-8 leaders pledged to help
end Israeli occupation and 120 countries opposed US stand on ICC. Beijing
endorsed OIC anti-terrorism call and discussed anti-terror war with Russia.
The differences enumerated above will not deter the Crusaders from
implementing their plans. UN will continue facilitating the accomplishment of
their task, because more than 160 countries have backed UN efforts to fight
terrorism.

ARABS AND MUSLIMS

Reaction of Arabs was a mixture of defiance and submission, which
amply reflected their indecisiveness. They were dismayed on being wronged
constantly, but remained incapable of securing justice. They tried to resist the
moves of Israel and America. Riyadh set conditions for ties with Tel Aviv.
Prince Abdullah rejected US plan against Arafat. Abdullah deplored
ignorance of American leaders and claimed that Bush was ill informed on
Middle East.
Egyptian Press blamed Likud for pirating vote against Palestine State.
Mubarak vowed to press US to support Palestine State. Syria rejected Israeli
proposal for peace moot, criticized US for its Middle East policy and blasted
coy US condemnation of Gaza attack.

Lebanon rejected Bush plan and Arabs unanimously called for Palestinian
State. Palestinians rejected Bush speech and Arafat went on offensive against
Bush. PLO stood defiant on Arafat and he refused to step down. Rawi
rebuked Bush and said that US was nobody to elect Iraqi president. Iraq
insisted on comprehensive settlement in talks with UN. Kuwait was hesitant
to serve as launch pad for US attack on Iraq.
The above statements bore the touch of overtures, but in reality these
were the cries of people, who were meted out brute treatment by the civilized
world. The Arabs were conscious of the fact that only America could remit their
punishment. The remission could be earned through good conduct.
Saudi Arabia banned its citizens from military activity abroad. Saudi
Envoy denied having any contact with Arabs flown to Libya to avoid any
aspersions on behaviour of his country. Saudi Arabia arrested eleven al-Qaeda
suspects and then went on to deny that foreigners wont probe them. Riyadh
also admitted that al-Qaeda terror network was active in the Kingdom and
vowed to strike terrorism with iron fist.
Arabs were unable to take any step other than appealing to Israel to stop
raids. Saudis welcomed Bush speech with caution. Their disagreement to
Bush Plan was restricted to seeking clarification on US Middle East policy.
Mubarak urged Arabs not to use oil as weapon. Kuwait moved ahead and
struck a defence deal with UK.
Arabs could do nothing to stop the destruction of Palestinian refugee
camps, but UAE was generous enough to give $ 27 million to UN to rebuild
Jenin camp. They failed in formulating an indigenous plan for the solution of
their problem. They were constrained to look towards America for mercy. In
words of Mubarak, America was key to reaching peace. King Abdullah dashed
to Paris, London and US for talks.
Muslims were as hapless as Arabs were. OIC urged Muslims should
unite to face challenges. OIC ministers discussed Bush speech and lashed out
at Israel and terrorism. They pledged support to Palestinians and dispersed.
Pakistan condemned Israeli attack on Arafats Headquarters, slated
occupation of West Bank, flayed blasting of Palestinian Authoritys
Headquarters and condemned Israeli attack on Gaza. Slamming, flaying and
condemning have been integral to the diplomatic effort of Pakistan since the day
it decided to be with the mainstream.
Iran was vocal in his protests. It condemned anti-Palestine vote and
accused US for promoting tension in Middle East. Iran firmly opposed any
military attack against Iraq and expressed its earnest desire to remove problems
with Iraq.

Iran alleged that US was steering world towards war. Iranian Defence
Minister stated that Bush thought he was a Sheriff. Thousands of Iranians
protested against American high-handedness. Iran warned that it would strike
back with force if attacked by US.
Malaysia felt that Israeli injustices fuelled al-Qaeda. Mahathir warned
of more terror attacks in case Middle East peace process failed. He opined that
US strike on Iraq would hit moderate Islam. Turkey, for a change, opposed
strike against Iraq and asked US to pay for damages suffered due to Iraq War of
1991.
The belligerent attitude of their leader prompted some lesser Crusaders to
embark upon military adventures. Spain recaptured an islet of Morocco.
Although the dispute has been settled for the time being, yet more incidents of
this nature could take place in future. Muslim countries will invariably be at the
receiving end.
Jews and Christians, with the help of media power continued tarnishing
the image of Islam, at least in their part of the world. An anti-Muslim graffiti
chalked by US agents while on duty spoke about their hatred for Islam. It read,
Islam is evil, Christianity is king.
By not using opposite word of evil for Christianity, the agents have said
all. Followers of Islam comprise evil forces and the Crusaders have ventured
upon cleansing the world from this dirt. The followers of Christianity are kings,
the symbol of strength and might. The Muslims are weak and downtrodden. The
king should encounter no difficulty in sorting out the Muslim peasants.
In this mindset the Crusaders will pursue the goals of holy war. On 19 th
May East Timor declared independence. Annan and Clinton praised brave East
Timorese as they had secured part of territory of a Muslim State, whereas
Muslims struggling for similar cause, elsewhere in the world, have been dubbed
as terrorists.

CONCLUSION
The leaders of Muslim Ummah have not understood, or perhaps do not
want to understand the designs of Crusaders. For the safety of their respective
regimes under the pretext of interests of their respective countries, they want
to be on the right side of the Crusaders. In doing so they tend to forget that all of
them are disposable.
American attitude towards Arafat carried a message for all the leaders of
Islamic World. Any Muslim leader can be declared persona non-Greta without

giving a show-cause notice. They are acceptable as long as they serve American
interests.
The line of least resistance adopted by their rulers could annoy Muslim
masses in general and the militant organizations in particular. They will start
targeting their own leaders, causing widespread destruction in affected
countries. This will fit well in scheme of the Crusaders.
The experience tells that Muslim leaders are immune to learning lessons.
Some of them may even request America and its allies for help and save their
legitimate regimes. The Crusaders will love it and enter these countries in
pursuit of cherished values of the civilized world.

26th July 2002

CRUSADES IN THE SUBCONTINENT-II

Entire world stressed upon de-escalation in the Subcontinent. India too
understood the importance of avoiding nuclear confrontation, particularly when
it had won a victory without a war. Yet it remained hesitant to de-escalate
tension. Why?
India has been aspiring to be world power. It has regional and global
interests. Presently these are in agreement with American interests. Therefore,
both countries have established strong partnership. Partnerships thrive on the
basis of equality.
At some later stage the interests of these partners may clash, but even in
that eventuality America will not be in position to dictate terms to India. It will
not be able to push or pull India, to this or that side, with one telephone call.
Both parties are fully conscious of this reality. Therefore, their dealings greatly

rely on conveying own viewpoint politely and accommodating concerns of the

partner.
America needs Indian cooperation for its war on terror. This places
India in an advantageous position. America will be compelled to accept some
nonsense from India and digest it. Indian contention on incidents like Godhra
and Chattisingpura has to be accepted and supported.
This has made India adamant. American compulsions will further add to
the arrogance of Bania. Pakistan will have to face this reality in times to come.
Vajpayee is wearing the shoes of Sharon. Musharraf should borrow a pair of
sandals from Arafat.

STANDOFF STRETCHED
Rumsfeld visited the Subcontinent to defuse tensions. He only prevented
ignition of the fuse. The explosive kept lying intact, properly fused and ready to
be ignited. Pakistan could see nothing more than minor de-escalation.
Cosmetic Indian steps did not lessen the worries of Musharraf.
Vajpayee ruled out war with Pakistan, but Indian troops would stay on
borders till October. This was essential to track insurgency till Kashmir polls.
There would be no more moves by India until Pakistan acts. Tension persisted,
because Advani wanted tough stand against Islamabad to continue. Pakistan
was frequently blamed for infiltration across Line of Control:

On 21st June Fernandes claimed that there were 3000 rebels in the Valley.
Infiltration was still on said Vajpayee two days later.

On 23rd June India asked Pakistan to end Line of Control incursions.

Pakistan was also blamed for funding Kashmiri groups.

On 3rd July India alleged that Pakistan had backed out on infiltration
vow. Musharrafs language has changed said Advani four days later and
he wanted to crush cross-border militancy.

On 8th July Fernandes said that Delhi was still ready for joint patrols. A
week later India accused Pakistan of breaking promises.

On 16th July Advani demanded that Pakistan should be declared terrorist

state. Next day Delhi threatened to raise the issue of incursions with
Powell and claimed that anti-India terrorist groups had infiltrated in six
countries.

Pakistan lacked positive attitude said India and was ready to convey
concern over Line of Control situation to US. Finally India told Powell
that infiltration continued.

Pakistan was disappointed over Delhis allegations and denied crossborder infiltration. Indian bid to fabricate infiltration was slated. Pakistan felt
that India was leveling allegations to avoid talks. Foreign Office blamed that
Indias intransigence caused insecurity. Musharraf vowed not to be
blackmailed. Inam regretted lack of response from India. Disappointments
and regrets were part of every statement issued by Pakistani leaders.
On 24th July India announced that it would seek more US pressure on
Pakistan. India frequently complained to the head of global village about
unbecoming behaviour of onion eater. The threat of lodging a complaint with
America was combined with test-fire of anti-tank missile and Russian made
rocket.
India also disclosed that it has developed radar for detecting infiltration
and nuclear shelters for troops. These announcements were to convey to
Pakistan that India was capable of checking infiltration and was also ready for
nuclear war.
Pakistan responded to threatening gestures of India, though not very
impressively:

Junejo ruled out provision of transit facility and Commerce Minister

said no to resumption of trade with India.

Pakistan refused to use Indian airspace and decided not to open its
airspace for India. Delhi was asked to withdraw troops first.

Pakistan vowed to teach India a lesson if it crossed Line of Control and

threatened to hit back if attacked. Musharraf reminded India about
Pakistans nuclear capability.

Armed forces held ten days war-games, which according to Musharraf

exposed weaknesses of Indian army.

Musharraf ultimately pledged to make no more concessions. It was

indirect confession of concessions already made, which were not
reciprocated. He accused India for vitiating situation.

Pakistan kept pleading for dialogue with India. It considered that talks
were the only way out. India ruled out resumption of dialogue with Pakistan till
ending of infiltration. It however showed willingness for talks with fighters and
APHC.
The refusal to talk meant that time for action was not yet over. Therefore,
operations inside Indian Held Kashmir and violations of Line of Control
continued. Indian army tried to suppress insurgency with a view to making the
conditions conducive for holding elections in October:

National Conference official was among seventeen killed on 21st June and
violence claimed six more lives next day.

Couple was among five killed on 25 th June. Next day twenty people were
killed and twenty-six injured. Dukhtran-e-Millat was banned under
POTA.

Three persons were killed on 28th June and five fighters were killed on the
following day.

Three Indian soldiers were among ten killed on 1 st July and next day a
National Conference activist was among ten killed.

On 3rd July eight persons were shot dead in violence and three soldiers
were among ten killed next day.

A Pro-India leader was among seven killed on 5th July and ten more were
killed and thirty-eight injured next day.

Two children were among five killed on 8th July and next day seven
persons died in violence. Editor and NC activist were shot and injured on
10th July.

Two top commanders were among fifteen killed on 11th July. Next day a
Major was among nine killed in Kashmir.

Unknown persons disguised as Hindu holy men shot twenty-four civilians

dead in Jammu on 13th July.

On 16th July eight persons were killed and twenty-four hurt in clashes and
grenade attacks. Next day a BSF commander was among seven killed.

Seven Indian troops were among nineteen killed on 16 th July. Next day
Indian troops killed eleven Kashmiris.

Three government employees were among seven killed on 20 th July. Five

persons were injured as police tried to break up a rally next day.

Five died and twenty-six were hurt in shootouts and blasts on 23 rd July
and three Indian troops were among five killed in next 24 hours.

On 25th July one person was killed and eighteen injured in grenade attack.
Next day three NC activists were among twelve shot dead in the Valley.

NC activist was among eight killed on 27 th July. Eight were killed on 28th
July and seven more were shot dead on the following day.

Reportedly more than nine hundred Kashmiri freedom fighters were

killed in last six months by Indian troops. In addition hundreds of innocent
civilians, including women and children were also killed. Vegetarian Bania
relished the taste of blood of Kashmiri Muslims.

Sporadic rioting in Gujarat also continued. The BJP Government having

borne the brunt of criticism prevented probe of massacre. Al-Jazeera
correspondent was told to pack up. Gujarat Chief Minister, who had resigned
over Hindu-Muslim riots, was retained in interim set-up.
India blamed Pakistan for attack carried out by disguised Hindu holy men
in Jammu. Pakistan condemned the attack and loss of lives. For a change
accusing Pakistan did not work. Opposition leader in Indian Parliament blamed
Indian Government for incompetence.
India continued violating Line of Control as part of punitive operations,
but intensity of firing across Line of Control noticeably decreased.
Nevertheless, sniper firing claimed ten lives in Neelum Valley on 21st June.
Pakistan sought probe into killing of its Ranger in Fort Abbas sector.
Indian Envoy was summoned and a formal protest was lodged. India denied
torturing of Pakistani soldier and that was the end of action against culprits of
this heinous crime.
The aim of prolonging the standoff was to hold elections in October and
thereafter try to sideline the issue of plebiscite by giving semblance of
autonomy to Kashmir. The reports from New Delhi confirmed that India was
willing to discuss autonomy for Kashmir with National Conference.
Polls cannot be substitute of plebiscite, which has been promised by the
United Nations in its resolutions. APHC rejected US plea to take part in polls,
but the Crusaders allowed India to go ahead with its plans and hold elections in
occupied Kashmir.
For these reasons some analysts in Pakistan feared that Kashmir was
another Palestine in the making. Pakistans reaffirmation of its stand on
Kashmir and Musharrafs pledge not to compromise on Kashmir will be of
little use. India will continue refusing to accept Kashmir as dispute.
Pakistans good-will gestures like allowing transportation of biscuits to
Afghanistan and release of 236 Indian fishermen couldnt win Indian
sympathies. India lost no opportunity to harm interests of Pakistan. Export of
Pakistani fruit to UAE was rejected by Indian influential.

PRESSURE FROM CRUSADERS

America believed that Osama was hiding in Pakistan and as long he was
alive its interests were threatened:

They clearly are dispersing having had to leave the sanctuary they were
in Osama is probably in Pakistan We dont have clue where he is.

It would be false assumption to conclude that al-Qaedas dispersal meant

it has lost its ability to conduct operations on a global level.

It is very flat organization, very compact, small cells. As long as cells

can operate with one or two people, they can continue to function.

Attack on Jewish synagogue in Tunisia killing seventeen, including

eleven German tourists, car bombing in Karachi and plot uncovered in
Morocco to attack US shipping in Gibraltar are attributed to al-Qaeda
groups.

Pakistan remained under constant pressure from the Crusaders to do

more and more in hunting of al-Qaeda men. It was also asked to stop
infiltration across Line of Control or in words of India to stop cross-border
terrorism. Lastly, Pakistan must maintain impetus of crackdown against
religious militancy.
America made sure that pressure was so maintained that Pakistan did not
falter in its resolve. On 19th July Rocca warned that possibility of Pak-India
confrontation still existed and America cautioned its nationals in Pakistan.
International Monetary Fund joined hand with America. It advised that
reduction of border tension was vital for Pakistans economy. The extent of
pressure from this quarter could be judged from the complaint of Governor of
State Bank. He questioned the intrusive role of IMF.
America regularly reviewed the effects of its pressure through feedback.
Frank visited Islamabad and discussed anti-terror campaign with Musharraf.
Powell sought clarification on Musharrafs interview to Newsweek in which he
had denied the promise made for permanent stoppage of incursions. Hoon too
discussed hunt for al-Qaeda militants with Musharraf. Based on feedback
America decided to enhance anti-terror capability of Pakistan. Five helicopters
were provided for border surveillance. America also agreed to sell six C-130
planes to Pakistan.
Pakistans performance earned occasional appreciation. US thanked
Pakistan for raids in tribal area. Pakistan was acclaimed as strong allay and not
a terrorist state. Musharrafs bold measures were lauded. Solana praised brave
steps taken by Musharraf and called for de-escalation in South Asia. The award
of Ambassador of the Year was bestowed on Maleeha. She could not have won
this coveted award by working only for Pakistans interests. She had to serve the
interests of civilized world to be nominated for such award.
Pak-US Defence Consulate Group was revived. Washington-Islamabad
military dialogue was resumed. Pakistan availed the opportunity and asked for
release of blocked defence items. Instead Pakistan was invited to attend antiterror moot. The Crusaders showed no warmth for strong ally:

132 illegal immigrants were flown back from US. The returnees reported
that US officials inhumanly tortured Pakistani detainees.

After meetings with Sinha and Mishra, Hoon said that continued
infiltration was of very great concern. We want to see a significant
reduction in infiltration. The word we was worth noting.

However, Straw said that India would be encouraged to improve human

rights record.

India and US held fresh round of anti-terror talks on 13 th July. On 19th

July Rocca gave green signal to elections in the Valley.

India and US planned to hold series of joint war-games. India wanted

more US pressure on Pakistan and backed long US stay in the region.

UK agreed to sell arms to India despite criticism of lawmakers. India

opposed US arms sale to Pakistan. This objection related to equipment
provided for Americas war on terror.

While siding with India in bullying, the Crusaders kept consoling

Pakistan and thereby urging for more. America observed decline in infiltration
and wanted India to de-escalate situation. Powell sought Pak-India
negotiations on Kashmir and hoped talks would be held soon. Leaders of EU
urged Pakistan and India to take more steps for peace. G-8 asked for resumption
of talks. Straw denounced Britains colonial role in Kashmir and called for
diplomatic solution of the dispute.
Although Pakistan was fully aware of American partiality, yet it had to
look towards US for help. Maleeha sought substantive US role in South Asia
and stressed upon need for addressing root causes of terrorism. She asked the
world to play role of peacemaker. Foreign Office conveyed to UK that arms sale
to India would raise tension. America was told that polls were no solution to
Kashmir issue.
Straw visited the Subcontinent in third week of July showing usual
impartiality. Musharraf for a change gave him a cold shoulder. The visitor held
talks with Inamul Haq. He discussed wide range of issues, but refused to
divulge details. Such statements are generally given when one has nothing
much to say.
On the eve of Powells visit Islamabad hoped that he would help in
easing tensions. But in New Delhi he got rebuff over Kashmir polls, got no
to talks with Pakistan and received complaint about Islamabad-Washington
ties.
America was constrained to ask India to do more. In Islamabad Powell
could only say that Kashmir was on US agenda. He had no specific proposals

for solving the dispute, but announced, Line of Control situation was being
monitored closely.

CRUSADES INSIDE PAKISTAN

India kept accusing Pakistan for cross-border terrorism and America
continued treating it as an old friend of Taliban and a breading ground for
terrorism. This was done with complete disregard to ground realities wherein
Pakistan had been a victim of terrorism since landing of first Soviet soldier in its
backyard.
Since 9/11 Pakistan Government stood firm on its resolve to fight
terrorism, despite the risks involved. Musharraf was determined to uproot
terrorism disregarding the threats of extremist groups to his life. Government
approved OIC convention against terrorism. Interior minister vowed to bring
terrorist networks before law to make Pakistan a secure place.
The main thrust of Pakistans effort against terrorism was directed against
remnants of al-Qaeda:

Two al-Qaeda suspects were held in NWFP on 21 st June. Ten Pakistani

troops and two Chechens, who were later identified as Uzbeks, were
killed in a clash in Waziristan.

Five foreigners were among eight arrested in Karachi on 27 th June. Next

day sixteen al-Qaeda men were held in search carried out by army. Six
were killed as police clashed with al-Qaeda Chechens on 3rd July.

Osamas financial adviser, Sheikh Ahmed Saleem, was arrested in

Karachi on 12th July and week later twelve al-Qaeda men were held in
Peshawar.

Pakistan remained steadfast against al-Qaeda; somehow it kept changing

its stance on Osama. It claimed that Osama was not in Pakistan. Nevertheless
the war on terror was conceived by Americans and it Pakistan as partner had to
fight it the way they wanted. Therefore, Pakistan pledged to nab Osama, if
found and sought public help to get him.
Tribal areas were the focus of operations against al-Qaeda. It had to be so,
because America believed that more than 1,000 al-Qaeda terrorists and their
leaders have been given sanctuary in these areas. Pakistan vowed to evict alQaeda suspects from this sanctuary.
Hunt for al-Qaeda was stepped up in Waziristan and US troops
accompanied the searchers. On 11th July US troops picked up three tribesmen
from South Waziristan. The government denied the reports. Neither the US

forces were taking part in operations nor were FBI men operating in
Waziristan.
The denial did not convince many. Tribesmen reacted against presence of
US troops in their area. The base of US troops was targeted with rockets and
missiles on 24th and 26th June. Fazl warned of more violence in case foreigners
prolonged their stay.
Yusufzai viewed that clashes with al-Qaeda presented a worrying
scenario. Imran opined that US was pitching tribesmen against army. His party
demanded end to military operation and presence of US troops in tribal area,
because it could harm the country. Jamaat-e-Islami asked for release of arrested
tribesmen.
Arrests of tribesmen and demolition of their houses during the operation
could cause hatred for army. Random hauling up of suspects, as was done in
case of seven Tablighis from Punjab and Sindh, could spread it all over the
country.
The hunt for al-Qaeda men continued in rest of the country as well. The
progress was however hampered due to lack of coordination between various
agencies, despite assistance and guidance provided by FBI.
The government despised the terrorists, but many people had different
feelings for them despite disagreeing with modus operandi of al-Qaeda. These
feelings compelled persons like Abrahim Paracha to demand dead bodies of alQaeda men for burial. His arrest might have helped in preventing law and order
problem, but it did not prevent people form holding these fugitives in high
esteem. Yusufzai reported that slain al-Qaeda fighters were revered as martyrs.
The people resented the reports about hunger strike by al-Qaeda men and
their deteriorating condition in Miranshah Jail. They did not expect Pakistan
Government to act like Americans. They wanted the authorities to treat the
captives humanely.
Apart from al-Qaeda, Pakistan was pitched against indigenous extremism
and militancy:

On 23rd June dozens were held in a swoop on SSP and LJ. Five LJ men
involved in murder of PSO chief were arrested on 1st July.

On 2nd July twelve terrorists were arrested in Rawalpindi. Police also

grabbed head money Naveed and Sharib.

An activist of LJ was held in Peshawar on 5 th July. Four days later two LJ

terrorists were apprehended in Multan.

Thirty Afghans and several extremists involved in grenade-attack on

church were held in Mansehra on 14th July. Four LJ terrorists linked to the
same case were also held.

On 21st July four Lashkar terrorists were arrested and one more was held
in Karachi bombing case on 24th July. Fourth suspect in US Consulate
blast was held next day.

On 26th July six alleged terrorists were arrested and one LJ activist was
arrested next day.

Four accused involved in attack on church in Bahawalpur and two aides

were killed in encounter on 28th July.

These arrests accounted for most of the culprits wanted in connection

with attack on Bahawalpur church, US Consulate blast and many incidents of
sectarian killings. During investigations two arrested terrorists revealed a plan
to blow up Presidents convoy in Karachi in April.
The judiciary also helped the government in tightening the noose around
terrorists necks. On 15th July Omar was awarded death sentence in Pearl case
and his co-accused got life term. The prosecutor was satisfied, because
according to him the requirement of law was met. Defence lawyer was unhappy
and claimed that decision was unjust.
Britain and US welcomed the verdict. JI and JUI slammed Omars
conviction and some analysts opined that retrial might win Omar a new life.
Qazi accused Musharraf for pleasing US at the cost of Muslims. JUI alleged
that government was following US agenda.
The government agencies, including judiciary, must not do everything
for the pleasure of America and its allies. Requirements of justice and fair play
must be met. The government agencies must exercise care in hunting and
disposing of terrorists.
Indiscriminate hunting of Arabs, who were not involved in terrorism,
could force many of them to leave Pakistan. Reportedly Arab nationals have
already started leaving Pakistan amidst FBI crackdown. This wont augur well
for Pakistans relations with Arabs.
The business of Hondi was specially targeted to choke the sources
funding terrorism. This benefited Pakistan, because expatriates were forced to
adopt proper channels for their remittances. The boom in remittances was
probably not anticipated by the Crusaders. It provided boost to Pakistans
foreign exchange reserves, more than all the aid packages and relief grants
could.

The government acted sensibly in releasing forty Jehadis in Lahore and

thirty-seven in NWFP. There was no justification for detaining those against
whom the government had no evidence. The grant of bail to Azim Tariq could
help in curtailing activities of Jhangvi Group.
Punitive actions were supplemented with reformatory measures. Moin
thought that religious groups were not preaching true Islamic spirit. He
claimed that the government took these steps to create religious harmony. To
this end the use of word Deeni with Madaris was banned, but no change in
curricula of Deeni Madaris was contemplated. His plan seemed to be allencompassing.
Religious groups protested against Madrassa Ordinance. Provinces felt
that their views were ignored. Imran blamed Musharraf for singling out
Madaris and called for uniform education system. Jamaat alleged that US
wanted to eliminate Islam.
The differences in perceptions of Moin and Minister of Religious Affairs
surfaced. The latter denied the reports about his resignation, but accepted that
his role in present government was limited. He had backed suicide attacks by
Palestinians, which were considered as the worst form of terrorism by America.
His days as minister were numbered.

CONCLUSION
India took advantage of Pakistans preoccupation in tackling its internal
problems. These problems are likely to persist and so shall the arrogance of
Indian leaders. India declared that peaceful Kashmir polls were crucial for
talks. If turnout or results of elections fell short of its expectations, Pakistan
will be blamed for cross-border subversion.
India will use elections to usurp the right of self-determination of
Kashmiris. After elections Pakistan will be accused of interfering in internal
affairs of India. This has been tried unsuccessfully in the past, but this time
India hopes to bulldoze its way with the support of Crusaders.
America supported India for holding elections. Pakistan and Kashmiris
will obviously not accept elections as substitute of Plebiscite, but the Crusaders
will tend to agree with Indian contention, because America has to
accommodate Indian nonsense to implement its agenda.
Actions against sources of terror funding have resulted in increase in
remittances. The Crusaders will soon take care of this boom. They will adopt
suitable measures to convert this boom into boomerang. The dependence of
countries like Pakistan on developed world will be ensured at all costs.

30th July 2002

CORRECTION OF CONSTTUTION
Constitution is a defined approach to achieve political stability and good
governance. It is reflection of peoples desire for the manner in which they
would like their country to be governed. This desire however erroneously leads
to an expectation that the constitution will automatically ensure political
stability and good governance.
When stability and good governance remain elusive, the people try to
modify their approach. Modification requires amendment of the document,
which spells out the approach. In doing so, they tend to ignore other factors,
which influence political stability and quality of governance.
For the last fifty years, people of Pakistan have been deprived of good
governance. The game of hide and seek played by the politicians and generals
has left the country in shambles. The present regime, since take over of power,
has been trying to clear the mess so created.
Bulldozing is the method known well to soldiers for clearance of debris,
but in the absence of well thought-out dumping plan it adds to the untidiness.
The start of reconstruction work without clearing the site can add to the
problems. The reconstruction squad thought that bulldozing can put everything
right.

CONSIGNMENT OF CORRECTIONS
The exercise of referendum was carried out to have public mandate for
military rulers authority to amend the Constitution. After referendum
Musharraf declared that people had voted for reforms, or in other words for
amendment of the Constitution. He took it as the prior approval of the people
and the government released first package of proposed constitutional
amendments for public debate.

The aim of amendments remained the same as explained earlier. It was to

achieve political stability and provide good governance by refining political
institutions and political culture. At the same time ensure inter-province
harmony by granting maximum autonomy to federating units.
The authors of proposed-amendments preferred to present these in
packages. Considering the number of amendments, it would have been better to
call these as consignments of corrections. The main contents of the first
package were:

President to have sacking powers. Presidents term will remain five

years.

Prime Minister, cabinet, Senate and National Assembly tenures to be

reduced to four years. All of them will be subject to dismissal.

Dismissals will be recommended by National Security Council. Leader of

Opposition will be member of NSC.

Issue of time-frame for fresh polls, at the time of dissolution of National

Assembly, will not be mandatory. Ninety days restriction to be removed.

Senate to have equal role in legislation.

On 14th July second package of constitutional amendments was released.

Important contents of this package were:

Cover to be provided to local governments. New chapter to be added for

local government system.

Floor crossing and defection to be checked with penalty of

disqualification.

Financial autonomy of Provinces to be enhanced and Concurrent List to

be divided into two parts to give more powers to provinces.

Council of Common Interests functions and powers to be enhanced.

Chief Election Commissioners tenure to be enhanced from three to five

years.

President to appoint services chiefs, chairman JCSC and vice chiefs of

staffs.

President will appoint Chairman NAB for four years in consultation with
Prime Minister. NAB will be accountable to Chairman National Security
Council.

President to appoint Chairman Federal Public Service Commission in

consultation with Prime Minister.

Federal Government to appoint Governor State Bank and members of

Central Board of Revenue in consultation with President.

In future any amendment to the Constitution to be subjected to public

debate.

In addition to the above, following constitutional changes had been

proposed already:

Increase in number of seats of National and Provincial Assemblies and

Senate.

Increase in seats reserved for women and reservation of seats for

technocrats in both the houses.

Age limit of voters was reduced to 18 years and graduation was made
mandatory for eligibility of the candidates of assemblies.

Senators to be elected under proportional representation system.

On 1st August the President amended Conduct of General Elections

Order-2002. The amendment implied that:

Senate will not be subjected to dissolution. Senators term re-fixed at six

years.

Seats of technocrats in National and Provincial Assemblies to be

abolished.

Non-Muslims seats in parliament to be restored.

National Assembly to have 332 seats.

The government claimed that proposed amendments aimed at bringing

minimum changes in the Constitution. Some of the changes would merely
formalize the covert moves applied by the politicians in the past. These
changes were necessary to undo past crises and to fortify institutions.
Commander of the reconstruction squad claimed that constitutional
package would block military takeover. Ranjha supported his viewpoint, saying
that amendments were aimed at stopping Armys intervention and sustaining
democracy.
For these reasons the government felt that amendments fell within
parameters laid down by Supreme Court and it was fully justified in amending
the Constitution, yet it did not want to proceed unilaterally. Musharraf ruled
out changes in Parties Act without the consent of political parties.
People from all walks of life participated in debate generated through
print media. PTV organized lively discussions on the proposed amendments.
Ministers took part in various debates and discussions. The President met

delegations of political parties and lawyers to personally listen to their

viewpoint. He assured that amendments would bring durable democracy.
The government assured that it would welcome positive suggestions.
Ranjha said, changes in amendments package were possible. Final decision
on amendments would be taken after talks and decision would be in line with
public opinion promised Nisar.
Musharraf and his cabinet were optimistic about approval of the
package right from the outset. President pledged to preserve the basic
character of the Constitution. He declared that secularism had no place in
Pakistan.
After meeting with different delegations, he felt that there was consensus
on most of amendments and these would be finalized shortly. He was
however apprehensive about the ultimate fate of these amendments. He
considered it a serious matter if the future parliament rejected these changes.

THE CRITICISM
The proposed amendments were widely criticized. The criticism can be
broadly divided into three categories on the bases of motives of the critics and
the rationale brought forth by them. The first category comprised of those who
rejected all the amendments. They were the people who either believed that
present regime was not competent to amend the Constitution or they were
staunchly against the government for extra constitutional reasons.
Qazi challenged the competence of Musharraf. He said, Musharraf cant
amend the Constitution. Professor Ibrahim supported his argument and said that
president had no authority to do it. Qazi dubbed the constitutional package
anti-federation and rejected it.
MMA thought that Musharraf had no right to amend the Constitution.
Any change in the Constitution would be illegal. MMA leaders rejected the
package and pledged to launch campaign against amendments.
PML-N spurned the package and alleged that amendments were Nawaz
and Benazir specific. The party believed that amendments would de-shape the
Constitution and demanded its restoration.
PPP leaders criticized proposed amendments on different counts.
Amendments would create constitutional crisis apprehended one of its leaders.
Another feared that these were aimed at imposing presidential system. Benazir
thought that amendments were threat to democracy and these would increase
ethnicity.

ANP was of the view that amendment in constitution was prerogative of

the parliament. Nasim vowed not to allow an individual to temper with
Constitution as this would deepen political crisis by imposing dictatorship.
The party resolved to resist dictatorship and challenge constitutional package,
because the amendments were anti-Pakistan and damaging.
ARD feared that amendments might prove fatal to country. The package
was nothing but a plan to prolong military rule. Armys role in government
was not acceptable to Nasrullah and ARD vowed to carry on struggle, hold
rallies and resist amendments in streets.
Most of the remaining political parties generally rejected constitutional
package:

JUI alleged that the aim of package was to concentrate all powers in one
hand. The party demanded restoration of the Constitution.

PTI chief rejected constitutional reforms, because these constituted a

conspiracy.

Moosvi was of the view that present regime could not amend the
Constitution. It is job of the Parliament.

Leaders of BNM, JWP, NAPP, PAT, PHCBA, BHCBA, PkMAP and

many other parties rejected constitutional amendments.

Other than the politicians, lawyers were quite vocal in criticizing the
proposed amendments. They challenged Musharrafs authority to amend the
Constitution and feared constitutional crisis and political instability. The
package was meant to gratify Musharraf. They held countrywide protests to
save the Constitution.
The second category of critics approved some amendments and rejected
others. These people considered merits and demerits of each proposed
amendment and based their opinion on reason. They conceded that the regime
could amend the Constitution, but to a limited extent.
They approved amendments in principle, but emphasized on national
consensus. They advised that clauses pertaining to important institutions should
not be tempered carelessly and Parliament and Cabinet should not become
irrelevant. Some of them cautioned the reconstruction squad that amendments
were beyond the mandate.
The last category was of those who seldom disagree with the rulers. In the
context of proposed amendments, they had complete understanding with the
government. Most of them felt elated to be on Kings side remaining oblivious
to implications of the amendments.

The proposed amendments raised many issues, out of which three stood
out conspicuously. The most debated issue was related to striking balance in
powers of President and Prime Minister. The most devastating in terms of its
effects was introduction of graduation clause. The least discussed was the most
important issue of provincial autonomy.
The sharing of power between President and Prime Minister has been a
major problem in the past. It arose immediately after adoption of the
Constitution in 1973, when Bhutto became the all-powerful Prime Minister. The
President was reduced to a dwarf not big enough even to serve the purpose of
protocol.
When Zia took the charge he tried to do the same to Prime Minister by
amending the Constitution. He could apply the presidential powers only once.
His successors however relished these powers and used them quite frequently.
Then came Nawaz with heavy mandate and tilted the balance completely in
favour of Prime Minister by amending the Constitution in quick time.
The lesson learnt was to strike balance of power at the top.
Reconstruction squad thought that it could only be struck by introducing a third
party at the top. That third party was proposed in the form of National Security
Council. Will it work? One can only hope with apprehensions.
Academically, the problem lied in text of the Constitution and subsequent
amendments. Factually it rested with persons, who held the two top slots. They
not only had the urge to have the cake, but also had the appetite to eat it. They
seemed to be in hurry to take the extreme step. On each occasion they forgot
that some powers serve the intended purpose better without being actually
exercised.
Not once the power exercised served any national interest despite
users claim that by taking a step, which he did not want to take, he saved the
country from a major catastrophe. Subsequent events proved that the countrys
cause would have been served better had the constitutionally stronger party not
kicked the weaker incumbent out.
The present regime strongly feels the need to have check on Prime
Minister. Musharraf has repeatedly defended the Presidents power to sack the
government. This argument can be understood better by bearing in mind the
events of Nawazs second tenure. Like a wild bull he flung three matadors out
of the arena in quick succession.
Politicians feared that amendments would establish one-man rule. They
were generally averse to presidential form of government. Some analysts
apprehended that the proposed changes would make the President a power

wielder beyond challenge and the idea of nominating a non-elected person as

Prime Minister strengthened such apprehensions.
The government tried to counter criticism on this count. Ranjha assured
that the President was not power hungry. A few days later Musharraf
personally confirmed it and promised, Prime Minister would have most of his
powers and he would have executive authority to run the government.
The President, however, insisted on need for having watchdog
institution of National Security Council. It could keep constant watch and yet
wont be blamed for victimizing when it came to the removal of the
government. The exact role of National Security Council will be clear once the
package is finalized.
The politicians reacted against graduation condition as rats of a barn
would have reacted against entry of cat in their abode. They feared unfortunate
and sudden demise of their political career. Almost all the veteran politicians
protested and demanded withdrawal of the rat eater.
Five-member Supreme Court Bench heard the plea on BA condition.
Petitioners argued that under this strict condition even Quaid-i-Azam could not
contest polls. In other words they feared that the new law would deprive the
nation of many living Quaids, at a critical juncture at which a Quaid was needed
the most. They also criticized the discriminatory nature of the law as women
would be largely affected if enforced.
During the proceedings Chief Justice remarked that withdrawal of
condition would protect privileged class. He hoped that graduation term would
end feudal hold. He however was quite considerate and desired that provision
of education facilities should precede imposition of any bar.
Supreme Court validated graduation condition and dismissed all petitions
in unanimous short order. Let the educated lot contest elections announced the
court. PPP was disappointed over the verdict and termed the condition a plot to
rig polls.
According to a report majority of people opposed this condition. The
majority in Pakistan, being illiterate, ought to oppose it. In fact under the pretext
of proportional representation they must demand that sixty-percent seats in all
assemblies should be reserved for illiterates.
The ruling caused hundreds of political casualties. Gohar Ayub was the
first to accept defeat and resigned. The condition will oust large number of
former Members of Parliaments from contesting October elections. Many saw
the brighter side and believed that the condition would empower enlightened
people.

Introduction of this condition has raised great expectations. Will it

achieve the intended aim of defeating hegemony of feudal lords over national
politics? Prospects are not bright. The feudal families have sufficient graduates
to field their teams under new laws to contest forthcoming elections. Hence
only the looks of assemblies are like to improve slightly, but the character will
remain unchanged.
The most sensitive, but the least deliberated or debated issue was the
provincial autonomy and inter-province harmony. In the absence of adequate
resources the provinces would always blame one another for grabbing,
misappropriating and usurping of their shares.
Blackmailing of the majority province will continue. Punjab has been
mercilessly exploited in the past and then blamed for usurping shares of
smaller provinces. The history tells that once the majority starts feeling that it is
being exploited by the minority, the consequences are invariably horrible.

THE FINISHED PRODUCT

Nusrat Javeed blamed Chairman NRB for elaborating a lot, but
concluding nothing. For a change he concluded the 15th Amendment quite
elaborately. The finished product was presented to the nation in a press
conference held on 21st August. In words of Musharraf, it was being done to
fortify democracy.
Before announcing the amendments, Musharraf said that this was a set of
amendments, and these were entrenched in the Constitution because of authority
and powers the Supreme Court had given to me, and there was no need to get it
validated or ratified from the Parliament. The package was given the title of
Legal Framework Order-2002.
Under the Legal Framework Order, all laws, actions, acts and ordinances
of the present government since October 12, 1999, were validated. The Order
brought following changes in the Constitution:

Article 58-2b was restored. Presidential powers of dissolving the National

Assembly were restored.

Article 152A was added to install National Security Council.

Article 243-3 was reconstructed. The presidential powers to appoint

Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and services chiefs in his
discretion were restored.

The strength of the National Assembly was increased from 217 to 342
including 60 seats reserved for women and 10 for non-Muslim Pakistanis.

The strength of the Senate was increased to 100 from 87 with

representation of women and technocrats.

The Senate was given more powers in several areas. It will now have
almost equal legislative powers to that of National Assembly. It will be
able to make recommendations even on the Money Bill.

Mediation Committee was introduced, which will resolve disputes

between the two houses on certain legislative matters.

Constitutional cover to the local government system was provided.

The voting age was reduced to 18 years.

Graduation condition would stay.

Article 63 was amended for cleansing the Parliament from corrupt,

criminal and absconders. Special mention of convicted persons, loan
defaulters or those got their loans written off and utility bills defaulters or
those declared absconders by the court was made.

The maximum of two terms for the Prime Minister and chief ministers
remained intact.

Exercise of Vote of Conscience was restricted. It cannot be used during

election of the Prime Minister or the chief ministers, during vote of
confidence or a vote of no confidence and in case of Money Bill.

The Election Commission can disqualify a sitting member but the

disqualified person can file an appeal with the Supreme Court.

A provision was introduced to have a caretaker government, both at

federal and provincial levels, on dissolution of an Assembly or when the
elections are called.

Installation of National Security Council was the most important change

brought by the Order. This institution is expected to perform the balancing act
between the President and the Prime Minister. The new Article, under heading
National Security Council read as under:

There shall be a National Security Council to serve as a forum for

consultation on strategic matters pertaining to the sovereignty, integrity
and security of the State, and the matters relating to democracy,
governance and inter-province harmony.

The President shall be the Chairman of the NSC and its other members
shall be the Prime Minister, the Chairman of the Senate, the Speaker of
the National Assembly, the Leader of the Opposition in the National
Assembly, the Chief Ministers for the Provinces, the Chairman Joint

Chiefs of Staff Committee, and the Chiefs of Staff of the Pakistan Army,
Pakistan Navy and Pakistan Air Force.

Meetings of the National Security Council may be convened by the

President either in his discretion, or on the advice of the Prime Minister,
or when requested by any other of its members, within the time frame
indicated by him.

About two-third of proposed amendments were dropped in view of the

public opinion and other reasons. Important ones were:

The power of the president/governor to appoint the prime minister/chief

minister and power of the president/governor to remove the cabinet and
prime minister/chief minister.

Power of the president/governor to disregard the advice of the prime

minister/chief minister to dissolve the national assembly/provincial
assembly.

Governors to be appointed by the president in his discretion. (Now Prime

Minister will be consulted)

Votes cast in the presidential election by the Senate to be multiplied by 2.

(Now one Senator will have one vote)

Reduction in the term of the National Assembly and provincial

assemblies from 5 to 4 years. (The tenures remain as hither-to-fore)

Reduction in the term of the Senate from 6 to 4 years. (Tenure remains

unchanged)

Reservation of seats for technocrats in the National Assembly/provincial

assemblies. (Only Senate will have technocrats)

Insertion of provisions in the Constitution relating to National

Accountability Bureau and the State Bank of Pakistan.

Changes in the composition and role of the Council of Common Interests,

the National Economic Council and the National Finance Commission.

Changes in the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council.

Changes in the method of appointment and enhancement of term of the

chief election commissioner, the auditor general of Pakistan and the
chairman of the federal public service commission.

Appointments of vice chiefs of the armed forces.

Changes in the emergency provisions.

Changes in the procedure for amending the Constitution.

Changes in the federal legislative and the concurrent legislative list.

Dropping of a large number of proposed amendments led to a very

pertinent question. What was the need to raise so many issues, if these were to
be dropped in bulk very soon? It could have been a planned move to get the
essentials through while diverting the attention towards non-essentials. The
dropped amendments were used as smoke screen to cover the forward
movement of essential elements.
The Legal Framework Order also catered for ensuring smooth
implementation of the changes. If there is any necessity for any further
amendment of the Constitution or any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of
the provisions of this Order, the Chief Executive may make such provisions and
pass or promulgate such orders for amending the Constitution or for removing
any difficulty as he may deem fit.
Lawyers and political leaders had pledged to undo amendments well
before these were finalized. Major political parties again rejected the finalized
amendments, except PML-QA and National Alliance. Both of them hailed the
Legal Framework Order. Lawyers moved faster and challenged the amendments
in court.

CONCLUSION
The amendments might face stiff resistance in next Parliament, although
Musharraf felt that these wont be subjected to Parliaments OK. His argument
that amendments do not require ratification may not be accepted by the
Parliament.
Chief Justice of Pakistan has already disagreed with the contention of the
rulers; according to him the decisions under PCO are not binding on
Parliament. If this is true, then all the efforts of reconstruction squad are likely
to go waste.
The Parliament may not undo the changes without trying these for some
time. Will this trial ensure provision of good governance? Will it guarantee
political stability and real democracy? Mir Shakeel-ur-Rehman answered these
questions. The amendments sadly, far from ensuring stability in the future have
opened the door for more political instability and chaos in the country.
Most of the amendments proposed for provision of good governance have
been dropped after having been used as smoke screen. The success of
amendments related to political stability rests in maintaining balanced
relationship between President and Prime Minister. National Security Council

has been assigned this task. The prospects are not very bright as three
secretariats at the top may make matters worse.
Musharraf looked quite confident during the press conference. His body
language reflected that he has consolidated his position at the top. His
confidence might not last for long. Some analysts felt that he has gradually
closed all doors for safe exit from power. Qazi has already predicted that
amendments would create new confrontation.
The guardians of the democratic values did not appreciate the efforts of
National Reconstruction Bureau. Commonwealth Secretary General criticized
the amendments. The Crusaders, however, were not much concerned about the
proposed changes.
America issued provisional NOC for armys role in civilian set-up. US
concern over Musharrafs sweeping powers had no serious connotation.
Americans remained focused on war on terror and they kept their options
open. The results of October elections will help in determining the course to be
adopted in future.
If the new government decides to pursue Musharrafs policies, American
will continue exerting friendly pressure in connivance with India. In case it
dares disowning the biased war on terror then Pakistan will fall in the category
of rogue states.

26th August 2002

TOWARDS ELECTIONS

Delegation of power to the grass-root level through devolution and

implementation of plan to secure power for at least five more years through
referendum caused worries to politicians. They though that the regime might not
feel the need to have general elections. They feared that elections were unlikely
to be held in October.
There were others, who thought that in view of the geo-political
environments of the region in general and persistence of tension with India in
particular, holding of elections in October might be too early. They apprehended
postponement of elections.
They were assured that elections would be held on schedule and the
government was committed to holding polls in October. The government kept
telling the nation that it was determined to restore democracy by holding
general elections.
The terrorist incidents wont affect polls. Even Pak-India crisis wont
derail polls assured Musharraf. Finally the government announced that polls
for National and Provincial assemblies would be held on 10 th October and the
elections would be free and impartial.
The promise was too rosy to be believed. In short history of Pakistan
there has never been free and fair polls except in 1970. Unfortunately those
elections resulted in disintegration of the country. Since then the rulers avoided
holding free and fair elections. Therefore, people in general and politicians in
particular always expected some mischief before, during and after elections.
Referendum was the latest experience. It was rigged to the extent that the
issue dominated the proceedings of cabinet meeting on 15 th May.
Commonwealth blasted the referendum and gentlemen like Barrister Baachaa
asked President to disown rigged results. The advice of stepping backward
could not be accepted by the leader of an aspiring nation.

PRE-POLLS RIGGING
Politicians apprehended pre-polls rigging. What is pre-poll rigging? It is
an art of controlling or influencing election dynamics with a view to having the
desired results. The government agencies in Pakistan have mastered this art.
There are many ways to do it, but all of these can be categorized under
the headings of favouritism and victimization. In these elections government
agencies were accused of favouring Kings Party and Kings men and
victimizing opponents through disqualification and by framing suitable rules
for reserved seats.

Imposition of graduation condition inflicted maximum casualties. A large

number of politicians were disqualified for elections. This condition fell in the
category of WMD (weapon of mass disqualification), but nobody could blame
this killer clause for victimization or favouritism. It primarily aimed at
cleansing of the assemblies.
NAB had been doing the same through judicial channels and its
performance was commendable. Reportedly NAB was probing dirty accounts
of politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen. It has provided the list of
absconders to Election Commission.
Recently Benazir and seven others were declared POs in SGS case. She
was awarded three year RI in ARY case. Wattoo has been kept out of the
contest as Supreme Court rejected his petition. Disqualifications awarded as
legal punishment should not be taken as victimization, but some politicians
involved in corruption have their reservations.
Enlargement of the scope of Article 63 of the Constitution can trap more
convicts, absconders, defaulters and illegal beneficiaries. However, like
graduation clause this Article too cannot be blamed for victimization, because
all cases go through the judicial process.
Nets can catch smaller fish, but for big ones it is better to use harpoons.
The Executive Order disallowing third term has been devised for this purpose.
This Order has an element of victimization and can be termed as Nawaz and
Benazir specific. PML-N and PPP rejected it and both parties have decided to
challenge it in Apex Court. Ranjha denied the charge. The Order was not
person specific. It was to bring new faces.
The Bazurg Siasatdan (the senior most politician) demanded general
amnesty for politicians. ARD asked the government to withdraw cases against
Benazir and Nawaz. Many opponents however saw relief in their ouster.
Benazir and Sharifs went to the courts against electoral ban and exile.
The adoption of proportional representation on the basis of ratio of seats
smacked of yet another manipulation in an electoral contest where more than
one-fifth of the seats would be decided by this method. The method of
proportional representation should in principle be based on percentage of votes
cast in favour of a party rather than proportion of seats won.
Originally the basis of percentage of votes cast in favour of a party was
proposed, but dropped later on. Disqualification of members after elections
could multiply the negative effects when 70 National Assembly seats reserved
for women and the minorities would be determined. For these reasons the
objection to this rule was justified.

The plans to retain some members of the regime in future government

were also resented. It was reported in early May that Musharrafs men would
get slots in new set-up. Next month it was reported that two women, Maleeha
and Zubaida would contest polls.
Election Commission asked the ministers to quit before contesting
elections and threatened to reject papers of sitting ministers. The government
mocked disagreement with Election Commission by saying that the order was
not according to law. Three federal ministers have resigned so far and
reportedly more could go after Senate seats.
Nazims and Naib Nazims were the new members of Kings family. They
were also accused of rigging, particularly those participating in elections. Their
resignation from local government posts failed to end the criticism.
Almost all the political parties expressed their concerns about pre-polls
rigging. Out of these, Pakistan Peoples Party was quite vocal in mentioning its
apprehensions about every aspect of pre-polls activities. Benazir accused
Musharraf of restricting her party. Her party wrote to the UN that Benazir was
being prevented from contesting polls.
Benazir apprised Election Commission of breach of election laws. She
resented the government ignoring proposal of PPP for induction of interim
neutral government to ensure fair conduct of elections. She alleged that
Governor Houses were being used as election centres for the Kings Party and
were converted into hubs of rigging. Military, civil and police officials were
pressuring candidates to leave her party. She reiterated the need to remove
politically motivated officers and establishment of equitable interim
administration.
Government officials were accused of anti-Bhutto activities. PPP
formally brought this to the notice of CEC through a letter. Earlier Benazir had
forewarned about possibility of rigging via software. She predicted that these
acts of favouritism would go waste and government backed parties wont get
majority.
Jamaat-e-Islami and ARD issued warnings about rigging. Qazi, after
meeting Musharraf, appealed to masses not to accept Kings Party rule. ARD
objected to holding of elections on the same day and declared it
unconstitutional.
Imran was not far behind the veterans in blaming the government for
pre-polls rigging. He alleged that giving less time for electioneering was part
of the plan for pre-polls rigging. He accused the government of violating
election code. He advised the rulers not to create hurdles and warned that

manipulation of elections would be disastrous. He strived for level playing

field and perhaps for a supportive pitch for batsmen as well as bowlers.
ANP warned about crisis if fair elections were not held. MMA
demanded independent Election Commission for fair polls. Religious parties
contesting elections were already at the receiving end due to Musharrafs
declaration that extremists had no place in politics. He was against using
religion for political ends.
The government repeatedly denied all allegations of rigging, particularly
about its link with any alliance or favouring any party. Obviously the
government couldnt agree with mere apprehensions and fears of defeated
minds. Nisar rejected Kings Party theory. As regards ban on Benazir and
Nawaz, Musharraf claimed that the people of Pakistan had decided their
rejection.
Politicians did not believe governments assurances. They begged for
foreign help. PPP drew UN attention on Benazirs case and requested for help
to end victimization. She met US Congressmen. PPP warned EU mission
against pre-election rigging and in concert with PML-N, complained that
elections would be rigged. ARD also sought UN and Human Rights bodies
help for saving the democracy.
The government too accepted interference in internal affairs in its
keenness for getting no objection certificate. Chairman of Election
Commission briefed various teams of the civilized world about coming polls
and assured them free and fair elections.
Cushnahan met NRB chief and discussed polls whereas the General had
nothing to do with polls according to CEC. It would have been appropriate if he
had discussed constitutional amendments with him. His meeting with General
indicated that mandate of the observers was much wider than the polls.
The requests of politicians were heard sympathetically and the civilized
world was keen to help them. The observers rushed to witness electoral
process. The government denied existence of any foreign pressure on electoral
process.
McKinnon first questioned fairness of polls and then denied his
statement. The government could do no more than resenting his remarks.
Cushnahan too denied allegation of interference in Pakistani politics. The
accusation did not embarrass the EU team; instead it wanted proof of
politicking charge. The team did not falter in its resolve to assess polls.
The assessment continued along with serving of occasional threats. Rocca
reminded Musharraf about October obligation. The reminder was hailed by
Benazir. EU vowed not to hold back concerns about polls process. US bill

linked aid to holding of fair polls. Cushnahan said that it was too early to
speak on election laws. That was how the apprehensions of pre-polls rigging
invited pre-polls foreign interference.

PRE-ELECTION POLITIKING
Two political parties, which ruled the country by turns after Zia, faced
leadership problems. Leaders of both the parties were in exile. Party seniors
present in Pakistan couldnt do anything for their return. Despite bleak chances
of their comeback the rumours about their return were spread continuously, to
keep the interests of party workers alive and hoping that they would remain
stuck to respective parties.
PML-N announced that early return of Shahbaz or Kulsoom was likely.
It was reported on 3rd August that Shahbaz wanted to stage honourable
comeback and he was likely to return by end of the month. Towards the end it
was announced that another round of government-Shahbaz talks was likely.
Benazir did not leave the matter to party leaders. She herself orchestrated
the return of She. She boasted that her presence would give polls credibility.
Government cant stop me from contesting polls she challenged. Rauf Klasra
reported that she was around the corner and preparations were under way for
her return.
The government refuted all reports of their return. Musharraf ruled out
Sharifs comeback. There was no case against Shahbaz yet he wont be
allowed to return insisted the government. President elaborated that he was
included in the deal with Saudi Government. Saudi Envoy confirmed this and
assured government that Sharifs wont come back.
Musharraf vowed that Benazir would land in jail on return. Inspector
General Police showed his preparedness to implement these instructions.
Benazir and her party hoped of her return because she had not left the country
as a result of any deal. She had opted for self-exile. They ignored that courts had
convicted her in more than one case while she enjoyed the self-exile.
The rumours about return of her, him or them did not help in saving the
respective parties from disintegrating. PML faced numerous rifts from within.
The divergent efforts of Azhar, Shahbaz, Chattha, Ijaz and Pagaro could not
ensure reunification of the party.
Disintegration of political parties was not something new and so was
carving of alliances for elections. All the important religious parties gathered
under the banner of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal or MMA. The aggrieved parties
rallied around Nawabzada Nasrullah. This alliance bore the old label of ARD.

Main components were PML-N and PPP. The like-minded PML-QA and NA
carved Grand National Alliance or GNA. This was an IJI-like alliance and was
called as Kings Party by the opponents.
Political alliances are marriages of convenience, which never last for
long; therefore, some political parties preferred electoral adjustments to
formalized alliances. Agreements for seat adjustments were reached between
PML-QA and TI, PML-QA and NA, PPP and PML-N, ANP and PPP, and PMLN, MMA and PPP agreed on Lahore seats by evolving 5-3-5 adjustment
formula.
Alliances for the purpose of contesting elections and accords of electoral
adjustments are nothing more than the efforts to manipulate results of the
polls. Unfortunately this form of pre-polls rigging is legitimized under the
pretext of political manoeuvring.
This strategy is adopted by those who are not sure of performing well at
their own and yet strive for their presence in corridors of power. It is the
strategy for desperate situations. The situations in which Sharifs see salvation
in backing PPP and forces Benazir to plan a visit to Jeddah for meeting with
Nawaz.
Those who keep the principles above everything, rule out alliances of
any kind. For such parties the victory in elections is of secondary importance.
Those who compromise before polls for anticipated gains are likely to do the
same after elections.

PREPARATIONS FOR ELECTIONS

The Chairman NRB had announced in June that elections would be held
on party basis and parties were advised to hold party-elections to strengthen
democracy before 5th August and political parties complied with the
instructions for the convenience of their registration rather than upholding the
spirit of democracy.
Benazir returned unopposed as PPP chairperson. Nasrullah was elected
as PDP president. Shahbaz was elected as president and Nawaz as Quaid of
PML-N. Hashmi was to remain acting president till Shahbazs return.
The so-called Kings Party was the only one to experience democratic
embarrassment. Ijaz refused to withdraw papers against Azhar. After polls both
the leaders claimed sweeping of party elections, which were held separately.
Azhar was declared clear winner. Ijaz did not accept the defeat and launched a
new party.

Election Commission rejected papers of the new party. Ijaz challenged

the rejection in court. The court upheld his petition, PML-Z was registered and
party symbol was allotted. He managed leadership for himself in typical
Pakistani style.
PPP dramatized its registration. It formed a new entity to contest polls in
the name of PPP Parliamentarians. Makhdoom Amin Fahim was appointed as
head of this group. Benazir was to provide political guidance. The move was
aimed at dodging Election Commission by avoiding registration of PPP.
While doing this, she challenged PPO, accused hard-liners of conspiring
against liberal forces, urged people not to allow their mandate be hijacked and
hoped Shahbaz would stand against dictatorship. She vowed to come back and
contest for presidency. Some experts opined that in trying to be smart she put
herself out of electoral contest.
In all 129 political parties submitted documents for registration. Out of
these 71 parties were allowed to contest elections and allotted election symbols
on 13th August. A few days later PML-Z was also allowed on orders of the court.
Three alliances, ARD, NA and GDA, did not apply for allotment of symbols.
PPP led in chanting election slogans and rhetoric. It questioned increase
in POL prices. Benazir assured the peace-lovers that political change would
ease tension. She promised new era for Pakistanis, if voted to power. She tried
to attract western audience by revealing that democracy (in Pakistan) was key
to defusing nuclear crisis. She held the key to real stuff. Musharraf was simply
calling dictatorship a democracy. Despite her brilliant ideas she refused to
appear in CNNs Q&A.
Imran coaxed the masses to reject looters in coming-polls. He
challenged Leghari for TV debate and also challenged ex-Swat rulers
family. He vowed to expose Gujrat mafia. He generally showed too much of
aggressive spirit. Nusrat Javeed observed that Imran needed to know secrets of
power dynamics.
MMA took initiative in kicking off its campaign with a legacy of prepartition days which was used successfully by Bhutto. Mullas opted for trainmarch; not bothering about the restriction imposed on electioneering at railway
stations and other public places. The marchers got what they wanted; marching
order from railway stations. This provided an excuse to condemn restrictions
on electioneering.
PPP invited applications and approved candidates for October elections.
The list was prepared well in time, which facilitated filing of nomination papers
by all including the leader-in-exile. Benazir also filed papers for seats reserved

for women. All this went down the drain. The papers of a convict were
rejected.
Of late PPP started recruiting ex-servicemen. Reportedly AVM Yusufzai
was set to join and hoping to get a Senate ticket. Earlier General Zaidi had
joined the party. It appeared that PPP wanted to give itself martial touch. Senior
retired military officers could help in establishing contacts in armed forces.
PML-QA faced problems in finalizing the list of candidates. Till 27 th
August not a single PML-QA candidate was finalized. In case of NA- 99, two
PML-QA leaders filed their papers. Papers of party leader were accepted.
Distribution of tickets created some rift in PML-N. Papers of Nawaz, Shahbaz
and Kulsoom were filed in time.
The parties generally faced no problem in filing the papers. Election
Commission made it convenient for the candidates by extending last date for
filing of nomination papers. More than thirteen thousand Quaids filed their
papers, not to lead the nation, but to serve the nation.
Second phase of elections was completed on 26th August. Scrutiny of
nomination papers inflicted no major casualties except Benazir, Ghinwa and
Khurshid Shah. The formalities of appeals and withdrawal of papers will be
completed by 15th September.

PERFORMANCE OF EC
In addition to changes in the Constitution, Political Parties Ordinance
2002 was also promulgated. The aim of this Ordinance was to check political
parties from working against sovereignty and integrity of the state and instead
encourage them to inculcate democratic culture within respective parties.
Salient features of the Ordinance were:

No party to be allowed to form armed groups/wings.

No receipt of funds from abroad. Record of funds collected must be

maintained.

Parties must prepare their constitution explaining the purpose of party

coming into being, rules of membership and suspension and rules for
selecting candidates.

Government servants were prohibited from being member of any party.

Election Commission issued the Code of Conduct for October polls on

4 July. Use of loudspeakers, hoisting of party flags, holding of rallies on roads
and use of arms and crackers were banned. Expenditure for NA and PA
candidates was restricted to ten and six hundred thousand respectively. No one
th

could create hatred against a foreign country. Article 63 of the Constitution

should be adhered to strictly.
Chief Election Commissioner met political leaders to receive proposals
and suggestions to ensure free and fair polls. He then issued 22-point code of
conduct to ensure peace during polls. The Commission recommended
amendment in Representation of People Act 1976 and warned parties against
illegal funds. It also laid down rules of the game for the Government.
Official machinery will not be misused during elections. Authorities were
forbidden from influencing polls. Balanced TV and radio coverage for all
parties to be ensured for which code of conduct for electronic media was issued.
CEC banned transfers of government officials till October elections and decided
to hold polling in government buildings only.
Commission had finalized the list of constituencies by the end of June.
Final electoral rolls were displayed with effect from 4 th August. These tasks
were completed without any serious objections. Only Benazir termed relocation
of NA-207 as mischievous.
Rules for voting were clarified, particularly for non-Muslim voters. As 72
million voters were to use right of franchise, the Commission urged Nadra to
issue ID cards before 5th October and submit weekly progress reports.
Nomination forms were revised to have detailed information about the
candidates. Even the graduates faced difficulties in filling the forms. The
candidates were asked to submit NTN and party affiliation. They were
promised five years jail for presenting fake degrees and three years jail for
exceeding limit of election expenses.
The allotment of party symbols for election was completed amicably.
Nomination papers were filed peacefully. The Commission set up a Grievances
Cell to receive complaints and ensure timely redress. Two Returning Officers
were suspended in Balochistan for indulging in corrupt practices.

CONCLUSION
Political parties wisely avoided such actions, which could lead to polls
postponement. No party threatened to boycott elections, even after rejection of
papers of their leaders. Election Commission too has performed well so far.
The disqualified lot should continue fighting on legal front, but the
shocked and surprised ambitious persons could resort to other means. PPP has
already vowed to mobilize public against decision of rejection of Benazirs
papers.

Most political parties, particularly PPP, have prepared sufficient grounds

to reject results of October polls. The allegations of rigging are aimed at
dubbing the elections as unfair, rigged and farce. Rejection of results will be
very unfortunate. Some foreigners might create political chaos by exploiting
vested interests of unscrupulous politicians.
It is too early to predict party position in forthcoming elections. However
one thing is certain, that no party will win clear majority in any of the
assemblies. The hung parliaments will produce weak governments making
political stability elusive.
The President has promised to transfer power to elected leaders by
relinquishing the Chief Executive office only. This led ARD to fear that
Musharraf may not transfer power. TI has warned the government against
creating 1971-like situation.

31st August 2002

SCREAMS OF SACKM
The Crusades in Palestine, Afghanistan and Pakistan continued. Pakistan
strangulated Jehadi organizations and did everything possible to check crossborder terrorism perpetrated by the militants in the name of freedom struggle.
India helped the Crusaders in forcing Pakistan to do more and more.
Pakistan performed well in hunting al-Qaeda men. It captured more terrorists
than America could hunt in Afghanistan. Most of them were genuine terrorists;
not presumed on the basis of false reports of informers.
Israel did its best to crush defiant freedom fighters of Palestine. Many
other countries cooperated with America in fighting against terrorism. Egypt has
been dealing with Islamic extremists with iron hand since long. It punished
sixteen of them recently. Even Qaddafi was successfully persuaded by Britain to
provide help for war on terror. ASEAN and US signed an agreement
prohibiting provision of sanctuaries to terrorists. Cooperation with Philippines
has been going on so well that America felt no need to seek new bases in that
country.
US troops have been chipping away at al-Qaeda. Pentagon prepared
plans to send commandos to attack terrorist cells in foreign countries. America

has been probing 500 Muslim firms for funding terrorists. This could not be
done without cooperation of friendly countries.
Despite these achievements, America talked about expanding the war,
which astonished Dasgupta. He felt that this could happen only in America. A
public debate is currently ragging in Washington on whether and how to invade
Iraq in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein.
This was being debated without any legitimate pretext, which further
amazed him. Any other government openly debating an invasion in such
circumstances would draw upon itself the wrath of the international community.
Being the sole superpower, the US is an exception. Exceptions and selfacquired immunities have encouraged America to act unilaterally. It seemed
ready to expand the holy war to Iraq.

CHOOSING IRAQ
Why Iraq has been chosen as next target? The answer lies in history and
geographic importance of the region, yet it is not easy to find the right answer.
According to Anwar Ahmad, endless theses can be offered. He formulated a list
of possible answers.
Bush fixation with Iraq could be for finishing Papas job, avenging
Saddams insult in carving Papas visage in the entrance to Baghdad hotels,
sheer bias and bigotry, drawing domestic woes in patriotism, securing another
victory before Afghanistan comes unstuck, validating American militarism in
the absence of any comparable foe, creating chaos to focus world attention on as
Israel finishes the bludgeoning job in Palestine, controlling Iraqi oil (which is
10 percent of the reserves, second only to Saudi Arabia) or to psychologically
de-fang the Arabs-Muslims
Some of these theses can be discarded without much of deliberations.
Papa had not left anything pending. Whatever was left, including sparing of
Saddam, was done by design. Revenge is also not the reason. If it were, then it
had to be other way round. Extraction of fangs is not required. Arabs and
Muslims have neither fangs nor poison bags.
Rest of theses is worth consideration. It may be added that removal of
Saddam alone would be of no advantage or importance. Sacking of Saddam is
just a pretext. The aim is to consolidate other gains, which have been secured in
the region. Consolidation is essential for availing more opportunities presented
by the tragedy.
Elimination of all possible threats to Israel was the goal for which
America has been working for more than half a century. Resultantly Israeli

defence has been made impregnable. Today Israel faces no worthwhile threat.
The only reason could be that by attacking Iraq, America wants to help Israel in
waging proxy crusades against Palestinians.
Israel has to be provided complete freedom of action to perpetrate state
terrorism in exercising the right of self-defence. At the same time it must be
saved from criticism. This would allow Israel to continue proxy crusades
showing no signs of faltering. Israel obliged:

Israeli tanks stormed Gaza town on 26th July. Two days later Jewish
settlers shot dead a Palestinian girl in Hebron.

Fifty Palestinians were rounded up on 31st July and next day two
Palestinians died of injuries in Gaza. The same day military chief of
Hamas was charged in a Tel Aviv court.

Five Palestinians were killed as Israeli tanks stormed Nablus on 2 nd

August and on the following day Israel bulldozed ten houses and arrested
fifty persons.

On 4th August two Palestinians were killed and next day Israeli
helicopters attacked Gaza City. Palestinians were banned from driving in
five West Bank cities. Three persons were killed and Hamas chief in
Jenin was arrested.

On 7th August Israeli troops killed six Palestinians and next day Israel
invaded Gaza.

Israeli army fired five rockets on Lebanon on 9th August and one
Palestinian was killed by Israeli tank fire.

On 10th August three Palestinians were killed and Hamas activist was
killed next day. A Palestinian child was killed a week later.

Two Palestinians were killed on 20th August and on the following day
Israeli tanks stormed Gaza town and killed a civilian.

Two Palestinians were killed on 23rd August and Israel ruled out pullback
from Hebron.

On 26th August Israeli tanks and helicopters raided Jenin refugee camp.
Two Hamas leaders were held and home of a Palestinian activist was
destroyed.

Israeli forces searched for smuggled weapons off Gaza on 28th August
and two Palestinians were killed in violence. Six more were killed in
Gaza next day.

Five persons were killed on 31 st August as Israeli missile hit Tubas. Next
day four more were shot dead in West Bank.

Bush and Sharon wont have felt satisfied with these achievements,
because Israeli aggression despite its brutality failed to intimidate Palestinians.
They have refused to surrender to the will of Sharon as could be seen from their
defiance:

Four Jews were killed on 26th July in West Bank shooting and next day an
Israeli soldier was injured in Palestinian gunfire.

On 30th July seven persons were injured as suicide bomber struck in

Jerusalem. Two Jewish settlers were gunned down in West Bank.

Seven Israelis were killed the following day in university blast. Dead
included a US national. Hamas claimed responsibility.

On 1st August Hamas threatened to kill 100 Israelis for any new attack
and Palestinian Authority warned against new explosion of violence.

On 4th August ten Israelis were killed in a suicide attack. Hamas claimed
responsibility and PA blamed Sharon for explosion. Two Israelis were
killed in other incidents of violence.

Two Jews were killed on 5th August and Hamas rejected Israeli security
plan. Three Israelis were injured on 11th August and one was killed on 20th
August.

Palestinian resilience invited more trouble for them. America openly

supported state terrorism of Israel. Sacking of Arafat had already been
demanded. On 27th July it came out with details of a plan, which had been
prepared in consultation with Sharon. America set following conditions for
resolution of current fighting in which 1,467 Palestinians and 564 Israelis had
died by the end of July:

An explicit condemnation of terrorism by Palestinians. A condemnation

by name of the al-Aqsa Martyers Brigade, the Islamic Jihad and Hamas:
the groups that have claimed responsibility for suicide attacks in Israel.

An appeal to all parties for a political settlement of the crisis.

A demand for improvement of the security situation as a condition for any

call for withdrawal of Israeli armed forces to positions they held before
the September 2000. (It is similar to the one India lays down for resuming
talks with Pakistan.)

America claimed that al-Qaeda was reaching out to Hezbollah.

Rumsfeld accused Palestinian Authority of its involvement in terrorism. On
11th August CIA chief held talks with Palestinian minister to elaborate what
Rumsfeld had said.

Palestinians resisted the pressure. Palestinian team met Rice and ruled out
replacement of Arafat. Americans were not deterred and they talked about
expulsion of Arafat. Palestinians were outraged and they rejected US election
proposal.
Arab envoys approached Europeans on UN text for withdrawal of Israeli
troops. Hamas refused to reciprocate partial withdrawal of Israeli troops from
Gaza and Bethlehem. Israel termed Bethlehem pullout a test case. US praised
the accord. Hamas and Islamic Jihad rejected the deal.
The resistance by Arabs on diplomatic front and retaliation of Palestinians
compelled America for direct military involvement in the region. It could be
done by screaming, sack Saddam so that Sharon could perpetrate terrorism in
peace without any kind of retribution from any quarter.
The mention of yet another aim of attacking Iraq was deliberately kept at
low key. It related to tackling of fundamentalism in Iran. Iran was accused of
harbouring al-Qaeda members. Asefi denied sheltering al-Qaeda deputies and
claimed that Iran has arrested and deported 150 people with suspected links to
neighbouring Afghanistan.
Iran also denied that it was planning to get missiles from Iraq. Russia was
pressurized to backtrack on nuclear ties with Iran. These developments
compelled Iran to consider declaration of emergency. Iranian army was ordered
to take preparatory measures for possible US attack and draw up plans to repel
it. Khatami told US not to attack Iran and opposed US naval presence in the
Gulf. Iran surely apprehended that it would be lined up soon after Iraq.

MOVES AND COUNTER MOVES

The mere cries of sacking Arafat and Saddam screamed by Bush couldnt
legitimize attacking a sovereign state. America had to come out with a
convincing reason. To this end it initiated diplomatic moves to legitimize the
illegitimate designs. It accused Iraq on three counts, i.e. repression, links with
al-Qaeda and accumulation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Any ruler can be blamed for repression and in case of Iraq the allegation
was too old to be fitted in prevalent situation. US alleged existence of al-Qaeda
camps in northern Iraq, but it failed to find any proof linking Iraq to September
11 or al-Qaeda. It then accused Iraq of defiance of UN resolutions to
stockpiling of Weapons of Mass Destruction, which were threat to regional and
world security.
Cheney stressed upon this point and argued for attack. What we must not
do in the face of a mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or willful

blindness. We will not simply look away, hope for the best and leave the matter
for some future administration to resolve. Ignoring Saddam was not an option
Rice supported her superior.
Initiating anti-Saddam activities augmented diplomatic effort. It was
reported in July that exiled opposition leaders planned to form provisional
government. A month later Iraqi Embassy in Berlin was attacked by disgruntled
opponents of Saddam. Such attack anywhere and by anyone else would have
been termed as an act of terrorism.
America could not muster support because of its shifting stance on the
pretext of attack, but demonstrated its resolve to attack by bombing Iraq. On
25th August eight Iraqis were killed in air strikes carried out by British and US
jets. These innocent people were killed just to convey a message, which could
not be conveyed through diplomatic means.
Another failure was in the context of Saudi Arabia wherein America
resorted to diplomacy of coercion. It was concluded in a briefing arranged in
Pentagon that Saudi Arabia was US enemy. Rumsfeld said that briefing left
harmful misimpression. Saudi Arabia hit back at US over enemy allegations
and rejected the briefing by calling it as pure fiction. Powell talked to Saud to
save the situation.
Internally, the screaming of hawks failed to out-voice the doves. Bush
Administration failed to justify attack and the Republicans refused to give him
free rein on Iraq. The nervous doves apparently caused momentary hesitation
in daring hawks.
Despite failing on internal and external fronts Bush remained determined.
Bush-Blair consensus was reported. Bush said, he was in no hurry to attack.
There was no timetable for action against Iraq. On 21st August he summoned
advisers to discuss defence policy and Iraq.
His advisers supported the contention of the boss. One said, Bush was
ready to act alone. Another stated that there would be no sudden US military
build up in Gulf. Franks revealed that he was working on Iraq plans. From
across the Atlantic Straw stressed that military action was still an option.
So far America has avoided the adoption of Security Council channel for
legitimization of its war plans. It was quite astonishing, because the UNSC had
always provided the legal and moral cover whenever America needed.
Richard Holbrooke explained the reasons behind it. Washington
policymakers have three core concerns when they discuss the Security Council
route: first, that Iraq will agree to inspections and then cheat; second, that
Russia or France will water down any resolution to the point of
meaninglessness; third, that the resolution will not authorize regime change but

only some lesser goal such as the elimination of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
America did not want any restrictions.
Allegation of repression, of links with terrorists and WMDs could not
constitute an aim. These were mere pretexts. Samuel Milne was of the view that
overthrowing the Iraqi regime is sought not because of terrorism or Weapons of
Mass Destruction or brutal internal repression, but because it is an obstacle to
the imposition of a new pax Americana on the worlds main oil-producing
region.
Hans B Bremer said the same in question form. Is the US in its
determination to overthrow Saddam Hussein really concerned about terrorism
or Weapons of Mass Destruction, let alone brutal internal repression, or does it
simply see the current regime in Baghdad as an obstacle to controlling the
worlds main oil-producing region?
Hassan A Barari of Jordan Times thought agreed with hypothesis related
to Israel. The war would further deepen asymmetrical balance of power in
Israels favour. Israeli press and the government urged Bush Administration
not to back away from launching an all out war aimed at disposing Iraqi
President Saddam Husseins regime. Israel always advocated adoption of
preemption over containment.
Attack on Iraq will result in increased American military strength in the
region. It will facilitate future operations, particularly against Iran, the second
component of the Axis of Evil. Iran was cognizant of this possibility and asked
its armed forces to initiate preparatory actions.
David Clark summed up the Americans efforts to prove its case against
Iraq as under:

At no point have they come close to articulating either a convincing

rationale for invasion or a viable military strategy for achieving it.

Nor will it do to argue that Iraq should be invaded because it has a

nuclear weapons programme and stands in systematic violation of
international law not at a time when Israel, also guilty on both counts,
continues to enjoy American patronage.

Many of these voices seem to regard Saddam as a sort of Middle Eastern

version of Fidel Castro: an authoritarian, but essentially harmless figure,
to be admired in a sneaking sort of way, for his ability to tweak Uncle
Sams nose.

Europe is not in disagreement with US regarding attack on Iraq. Europe

only wants that Bush must not act unilaterally. He must complete the preattack formalities by going through UNSC.

He warned America of the consequences. He predicted that Saddam

wont make the mistake he made in 1991, and the Taliban made 10 years later,
of concentrating his troops on open ground, exposing them to the full force of
US air power.
Iraq made some moves to counter diplomatic offensive launched by
America. The major allegation against Iraq was related to inspectors. On 2 nd
August Iraq invited chief UN inspector to Baghdad. America rejected the offer
of weapon inspection. The rejection carried a message for the UN.
Iraqi invitation was not responded, but the move had the desired effect.
Iraq went on offensive and urged UN to stand up to US on inspections. On 11th
August Saddam repeated the offer again and promised to let in arms
inspectors.
America rejected these invitations alleging that Iraq was not sincere in its
offers. When US tried to spell out the inspection requirements, Saddam replied,
all commitments to UN have been fulfilled. Iraqi Vice President added that
UN disarmament chief Hans Blix was a spy without tact or manners. The
American doves cooed, we want the inspectors back in Iraq. Deputy Prime
Minister of Iraq agreed to consider inspectors return.
While countering the moves, Iraq also confronted America directly. It
denied having missiles or ties with al-Qaeda and warned neighbours against
US attack. It dared irritating Bush by claiming that he was stuck with no way
out.
Iraq tried to restore its ties with Arabs in general and with Saudi Arabia in
particular. It lobbied in Arab countries and urged them to take firm stance
against US. It also sought support of Muslims states. Iraqi Foreign Minister
visited China for the same purpose.
The most effective counter move was the economic deal with Russia. A
deal worth $ 40 billion was a serious setback to American efforts to pressurize
Saddam through sanctions. Russia defended the deal despite criticism.
Counter-moves were reinforced with overtures of accepting the
challenge. Iraq rejected all ultimatums, vowed to face attack and to counter US
military campaign. Attack on Iraq is doomed to failure, America will face
humiliation and Iraq will teach US a lesson.

WORLD DISAPPROVED
America failed in convincing the world about justification of attacking
Iraq. The world, particularly the Muslims, did not approve of the Yankees
yelling. From within the region, Saudi Arabia was quite vocal in opposing the

attack plan. Saudi Press accused that US was plotting to control the region and
warned of catastrophe over Iraq war. Saudis refused to allow US to attack
Iraq from its soil.
In consequence of the briefing arranged at Pentagon, US-Saudi relations
plunged from mutual trust to mutual suspicion. Riyadh started receiving
advises to revise ties with US. Saudis categorically opposed war and called it
unwise to focus on Saddams ouster.
So far Saudis have resisted the pressure from Washington to play a role
in any military action against Iraq to oust the regime of President Saddam
Hussein. They, despite the fear of losing their money, have advised America
that its plans to be the worlds number one by consolidating its firm grip on
sources of energy lacked wisdom and objectivity.
Arab League cautioned that attack would destabilize the region.
Mubarak apprehended that striking Iraq was something that could have
repercussions and post-strike developments. He feared chaos happening in the
region.
Jordan predicted that it would open up a Pandoras Box. Libya warned
that attack on Iraq would wreak havoc in the Gulf. US policy on Iraq was also
slammed by Egyptian and Syrian press. Qatari Foreign Minister declared that
we were of course against any military action.
Saddam tried to win support on moral and legal grounds. If there is a
genuine desire to find a solution, it has to be based on international legitimacy,
international law and the UN charter and has to include implementing
commitments by all parties.
Bush was not impressed. He kept yelling war cries, but for a change some
fellow Crusaders did not join him. Germans displayed the moral courage and
tried to tell Bush to keep quiet. Schroeder threatened to quit anti-terror
coalition because of US plan to attack Iraq. America was displeased over
Schroeders remarks.
Chirac too warned US over Iraq issue. France genuinely felt that it was
time for building a coalition for peace in the Middle East, not to build a
coalition for war in Iraq. Italy tied sending of troops to proof of Iraqi arms
programme. On the whole, EU stressed upon America to desist from acting
unilaterally. Even the British people warned US against attacking Iraq and
were hesitant to join.
Russia opposed any military solution and warned against unilateral
decision. China appreciated Iraqi offer regarding inspectors. China and Russia
urged UN to settle Iraq issue. Annan could do nothing more than saying that
attack on Iraq would be unwise.

Pakistan did not approve US plan. Musharraf declined to be involved in

attack. Japan urged for restraint and India decried the plan to strike.
Widespread criticism forced Senators to caution Bush against Iraq operation and
some at the top demanded panel hearing on Iraq.
The Arabs and Muslims unanimously opposed the attack, which was a
surprise for the Guardian. The Islamic Worlds near unanimity in warning
against such an attack is the more remarkable in that many of the loudest
opponents are major recipients of American aid or loans from the International
Monetary Fund. The Guardian also observed that Gerhard Schroeder was the
only European leader who has publicly denounced US plans for an attack on
Iraq. Others hide their doubts and speak opaquely.
The opposition of Muslims and Arabs is not likely to deter America from
attacking Iraq. In fact America hoped that the opposition may dissipate with the
passage of time. Dasgupta held the same views particularly for the Arab
countries. He wrote, in the final analysis, the Gulf States will probably
succumb to American pressure to join anti-Saddam coalition.
He continued, this will not be the case with the European allies. Deeply
concerned over the political fallout of a war against an Arab country and
resentful over the tendency of their senior American partner to take unilateral
decisions, these countries (with the previously noted exception of Britain) will
be wary of joining the US-led coalition.

CONCLUSION
America is determined to sack Saddam and Arafat. The plan could be
postponed, not for want of international support, but for lack of unanimity of
views within Bush Administration. The might has no reason to listen to the
advice of the weak and the wise.
The war of words for and against attack on Iraq will intensify. Iraq and
terrorism will remain on top of the Congress agenda. The moment hawks
managed to prevail; the attack would be launched. The leaders of Muslim World
should see the threats looming large due to American bias and bigotry.
While Iraq does not occupy even an inch of any of its neighbours
territory, Israel, in blatant defiance of International Law and UN resolutions,
continues to occupy vast areas of Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian land and
build settlements on them, and continues to violate every international rule and
commit every heinous atrocity. While Iraq is only accused of stockpiling
Weapons of Mass Destruction, Israel is known to possess a huge nuclear arsenal
and ominous leaks indicate that the Israelis would use it said Hans B Bremer.

Muslims have to think beyond Iraq as the Crusaders conquests wont end
at Baghdad. Iran is the most likely target after Iraq as it has been declared part
of the Axis of Evil. Syria could be another. The most deserving is Pakistan,
because it possesses nuclear arms with means of delivery and acts as breeding
ground for Islamic extremism. Saudi Arabia could be the most surprising
choice, as mere declaration of intent of hostilities would earn billions of dollars
through freezing.
The enactment of Iraqi episode in the drama of war on terror may be
delayed, but one thing has crystallized clearly, i.e. the enmity of the Brits
against followers of Islam. Blair has vowed to publish evidence against Iraq
before Bush could claim of having any evidence.

4th September 2002

RUNNING OUT OF REASON

Since December last accusations and allegations have been hurled on
Pakistan at rapid rate. The accusing parties were convinced that the blaming
Pakistan was helpful in heightening tension in the region. This served the
purpose of coercion.
Apparently the Crusaders and India have now run out of reasons to
threaten Pakistan. It is not so. Both of them seemed to be satisfied with results
of their joint venture. They needed respite; India for holding elections in
occupied Kashmir and America for devoting more time and effort to pursue
war on terror in Middle East.
The pressure on Pakistan, to do what it has been asked to do, remained in
place. The only relief was that no new demand was placed. Pakistan has not
been provided any relief in pressure for accomplishment of the tasks already
assigned.
Pakistan must exercise strict control on infiltration so that elections in
occupied Kashmir are held to meet requirements of the largest democracy in the
world. Hunting of fugitives of al-Qaeda must continue to the satisfaction of the
Crusaders. The crackdown on Islamic extremists must also continue till
Pakistani society is made tolerant.
There was no respite in real sense, but in the absence of fresh assignments
Pakistan found time to remember the concerns, which had been forgotten.
Pakistan no more urged for defusing of tension, de-escalation or withdrawal of
troops from borders. It once again started talking about Kashmir cause, flaying
Indian attitude towards Kashmiris and assuring them about its all-out support.

PLIGHT OF KASHMIR CAUSE

Musharraf observed that Kashmir issue was fully internationalized. He
was of the view that only talks could resolve this issue peacefully. Pakistan
remained open to dialogue, which certainly earned some international support.

Musharraf and Jiang jointly declared their interest in peace in the region.
China renewed support to settlement of Kashmir dispute. France urged India
and Pakistan to resume dialogue. Oman desired the same while lauding
Pakistans steps to defuse tension.
Most importantly Powell said that Pakistan and India were willing for
US role on Kashmir. Nancy too assured help for initiating Indo-Pak dialogue.
Armitage focused on Pak-India ties during his visit to the Subcontinent in third
week of August. India however remained adamant and the visitor was
constrained to admit that US couldnt impose Kashmir solution.
Armitage agreed with Musharraf in his assertion that Kashmir issue has
been internationalized. He acknowledged that Kashmir was on world agenda
and its resolution was of absolute need for easing Pak-India tension. He added
that Russia, UK, China, Germany and US wanted peaceful solution of the
dispute.
Musharraf planned to raise Kashmir issue during his visit to US. He
hoped that America would mediate or facilitate. Expectations were once again
raised without giving due consideration to pre-occupation of Bush with
Saddam.
Vajpayee rejected all proposals emphatically, talks only if atmosphere
becomes conducive. India ruled out even a brief chat during chance meeting.
No suggestions, no matter how logical and softly worded, were acceptable to
India. Statements of Pakistani leaders like no compromise on Kashmir;
sidelining of Kashmir issue not acceptable; demanding early resolution of
Kashmir dispute; and threatening to raise Kashmir issue at UN annoyed India.
If India has to talk, it would prefer to talk to Kashmiris, who threatened to
boycott elections. India constituted Kashmir Committee for this purpose and
Jethmalani was tasked to woo Kahmiri leaders. He held discussions with APHC
and both parties agreed to continue the dialogue.
After first round of his meetings with Kashmiri leaders Jethmalani called
for delaying polls. He was optimistic that Shabir Shah was conditionally ready
to contest elections. India ruled out postponement of polls. Jethmalani arranged
second round of talks.
Hurriat leaders agreed to meet Kashmir Committee in Delhi. On 6th
September APHC leaders were placed under house arrest, resultantly they
threatened to postpone trip to Delhi. Despite these incidents APHC-Indian
Government negotiations continued.
APHC was told that these were peace negotiations. India however had
the sole aim of ensuring participation of Kashmiris in forthcoming elections.
This couldnt be done without making some concessions. Advani refused any

favour to Kashmiris. He declined to meet Hurriat leaders. Jethmalani accused

Advani of derailing talks. A mocked Advani-Jethmalani rift created an
impression that India was making concessions.
On 8th September came the breakthrough. Hurriat leaders and Indian
Kashmir Committee held two-hour dialogue. They unanimously agreed that all
concerned parties must rise above their traditional positions, abandon extreme
stands and show the necessary flexibility and realism to reach an acceptable,
honourable and durable solution. Indian Kashmir Committee supported
Hurriats desire to pursue a dialogue for peace and a durable solution with
Kashmiri political elements in Pakistan and with the Government of Pakistan.
Reaching an understanding in a matter of two hours was a surprise. The
counter-part of Indian KC in Pakistan was taken aback. When asked about talks
with Indian KC, its Chairman stalled the question by borrowing words from
Indian leaders that the time was not conducive for a dialogue.
APHC leaders refused to meet any member of the Indian ruling party.
Vajpayee countered by announcing that he would talk to the elected
representatives and other organizations after the elections. The message was
clear. Kashmiri leaders in their present capacity were not worth the status of
having a meeting with Vajpayee or Advani. They must improve their standing
by participating in forthcoming elections and winning some seats.
India tried to woo Kashmiri leaders by painting rosy picture. It was
willing to give some sort of autonomy to Kashmir, but for that holding of
reasonably acceptable elections was essential. If APHC could be seduced to
participate then both the demands of freedom and plebiscite could be taken
care of. That was why the NC, which had always opposed talks with Pakistan,
vowed to work for Indo-Pak dialogue for Kashmir solution.
America helped India in holding elections in occupied Kashmir. Firstly it
tried to ensure peaceful conduct of polls. We are talking to our Pakistani
friends making sure that these elections are held free of violence said Armitage.
America did this in response to Indian warning about role of Pakistan in prepoll violence. It confirmed that India and US had agreed upon a possible
solution and both were working for it. Pakistan however did not have to
interfere in polls. It had already rejected the polls in accordance with the wishes
of Kashmiris.
Secondly, the Crusaders joined hands with India in coercing Kashmiris.
Envoys of European Union held discussions with APHC leaders. An American
official met APHC and JKLF leaders. No participation in polls Mirwaiz told
the lady. The efforts to intimidate Kashmiri leaders apparently failed.

APHC ruled out participation in elections and Jamiatul Mujahideen

vowed death to supporters of elections. The leaders of APHC launched antipolls campaign. Analysts opined that Kashmiris would stay away from farce
elections. They were determined to boycott polls. Even Kashmiri Hindus were
likely to boycott IHK assembly polls.
India committed many deplorable acts in the context of Kashmir, but its
refusal to allow any monitoring of the elections was an exception. This must be
commended without prejudices. America and European Union called for
monitors and India rejected.
Indian CEC expressed its viewpoint on monitoring of elections. The
days of Whiteman telling natives what to do and how, are long past. The
suggestion was rejected with full knowledge that the observers from the
civilized world would have surely approved the conduct and outcome of
elections.
Indian refusal was in complete contrast to that of Pakistan, which invited
observers to monitor general elections. Pakistan was keen to get a clean chit.
Despite no monitoring the results of elections in Kashmir are likely to be
accepted; whereas there will be a long list of observations on the conduct of
elections in Pakistan.
The incident reflected the difference in degree of freedom enjoyed by
both the nations. In other words it spoke of the difference in respect shown to
the sovereignty of either state. It was matter of shame for the government,
political leaders and CEC of Pakistan to invite the Whiteman to point out black
spots on their faces.
Pakistan, in accordance with its perception, assailed Delhis rejection of
monitoring of the Valley polls. In all fairness it should have been applauded.
India decided to set up media centres to cover the polls. Western countries
agreed and planned to send envoys to IHK to get briefing in detail about polls.
India refused dialogue on Kashmir because measures adopted by Pakistan
to check infiltration were not satisfactory. Advani observed that Pakistan was
still pursuing policy of terrorism. India felt that pressure on Pakistan was not
working.
Musharraf pleaded that complete stoppage of infiltration was not
possible. Advani was quick to comment that his statement confirmed
continuation of infiltration. A few days later he noticed that Valley attacks
were diminishing, yet India wanted more US pressure on Pakistan.
Pakistan spurned all allegations and deplored continuation of the blame
game. It refuted sponsoring of Line of Control violations and claimed that
freedom struggle in IHK was indigenous. If at all there was any infiltration, it

was due to incompetence of Indian army. Musharraf once again denied

involvement of ISI.
India had yet another diplomatic success in the context of cross-border
terrorism. ASEAN asked Pakistan to end terrorism; whereas Armitage had
observed that Pakistan was doing its best to stop infiltration. Pakistan rapped
ASEAN for ignoring Indian repression in occupied Kashmir.
The pause in brinkmanship did not dampen the belligerence of Bania.
Counter insurgency operations in Kashmir continued:

On 30th July nine persons were killed in the Valley. Next day Indian
shelling claimed four lives in Azad Kashmir.

Indian shelling killed two more in AJK on 1 st August. In IHK eleven

fighters were among thirteen shot dead.

Two persons were killed and seven cops were hurt in clashes on 2 nd
August and a BSF officer was among sixteen killed next day.

Nine were killed in Kashmir violence on 4 th August and eight more died
the day after. On 6th August unknown persons killed nine Hindus.

NC official was among ten shot dead on 7th August and next day four, of a
Hindu family, were among 21 killed in occupied Kashmir.

Thirteen people died in clashes on 11th August and one was killed due to
Indian shelling in AJK.

Five were shot dead in the Valley on 12 th August and next day six more
died in clashes and grenade attack.

In next two days one died in AJK and three Indian soldiers were killed in
IHK.

Five persons were shot dead on 17th August and fifteen more were killed
in the Valley next day. Fourteen freedom fighters were killed on 20 th
August.

Three soldiers were among nine killed on 22 nd August. On the following

day Indian forces set 130 houses on fire and a 7-year old boy died in
Indian shelling in AJK.

Ten Muslims were massacred on 24 th August and Indian shelling claimed

two more lives in AJK.

On 26th August seventeen persons were killed in shootouts and next day
NC activist and three cops were among seventeen killed in the Valley.

Sixteen people perished on 28th August in IHK and one was killed in AJK
due to Indian shelling. Next day twelve persons died in Kashmir clashes
and two NC activists were among eighteen killed a day later.

Another NC activist was among eleven killed on 31st August and three
shepherds were martyred in Udhampur District the same day.

Two children were among twelve killed on 1st September and next day
three NC members were killed and six civilians were wounded in AJK
due to shelling.

Seventeen persons were wounded in grenade-attack on 3 rd September and

a Congress activist was among seven shot dead next day.

On 5th September PDP and NC activists were among twelve killed in the
Valley. Next day a candidate was among eight killed.

Fifteen more were gunned down in violence on 7th September. Next day
two persons were killed as India and Pakistan traded fire.

The above makes a boring reading. For many a news item about killing of
flies, on orders of Municipal authorities in a remote town of China, would be
more interesting. This is precisely the purpose to enumerate these killings.
The killings of Kashmiris and Palestinians have become so boring a
routine that even a passing reference to these is not liked. The mention of these
raises no alarm and causes no concern. Only those events are matter of concern,
which cause harm to interests of the civilized people.
India also violated the Line of Control. On 2nd August it tried to set up a
post at Line of Control, which was foiled. Next day four Indian soldiers were
killed in exchange of firing. On 23rd August India attacked a post in Gultari
sector. As ground troops failed to make headway, Indian Air Force was called to
extricate the attackers. Pakistan termed the attack highly irresponsible and
escalatory act. India denied the reports of attack.
On 25th August Pakistan and India again traded heavy fire. The tension
heightened. Interestingly once again these escalatory incidents coincided with
the visit of an American dignitary to the region. The purpose of escalation needs
no elaboration.

CRUSADING AGAINST TERRORISM

Pakistans resolve to fight against terrorism was sustained by the pressure
exerted by the Crusaders. Even Chinese appreciated firm and clear post-Sept
11 policies of Islamabad. Pakistan hunted the fugitives of al-Qaeda incessantly:

Two Palestinians were arrested from Khyber Agency on 3 rd August. Next

day a Jirga handed over al-Qaeda collaborator to the government.

Operations were launched in tribal area to hunt al-Qaeda men and on 17 th

August heavy arms were recovered during search.

Five Somali al-Qaeda suspects were nabbed on 18 th August. A week later

an operation was launched against South Waziristan tribesmen. Twelve
al-Qaeda activists were arrested in Peshawar on 28th August.

On 2nd September troops surrounded a village to get six al-Qaeda men.

On 4th two persons were arrested and houses were blown up.

Tribesmen rejected US claim of protecting al-Qaeda. They protested

against search and demanded end of military operations. Pamphlets warning of
death to US agents were found in Wana. Three pro-US tribesmen were gunned
down. Fazl opposed Pakistans support to US. Moin denied foreign agencies
role in any operation.
Protests and threats did not deter US troops from crossing Pakistani
border. The intrusions were carried out on the basis of intelligence reports. On
18th August a US General said that there were more al-Qaeda men in Pakistan.
Moin denied the presence of al-Qaeda. Qureshi asked US to look closer in
Afghanistan. Foreign Office dubbed Generals claim as speculative. Musharraf
said that al-Qaeda was regrouping in Afghanistan thereby suggesting that US
troops need not enter Pakistan.
New York Times disregarded all the above statements. It reported that
Osama was alive and moving along Pak-Afghan border. Iran also emphasized
on more Pakistani steps to bar al-Qaeda. Resultantly Pakistan had to reaffirm
its commitment to war on terror and assure that it had no plan to push alQaeda men into Iran.
In addition to hunting al-Qaeda men, the crackdown against extremism
continued. Law enforcing agencies busted nine terrorist outfits in Sindh. A
suicide bomber network was broken and twelve persons were arrested. Two LJ
activists were held after shootout in Vehari on 23 rd August. Next day an
explosives expert was caught. Four terrorists were killed in encounter with
police on 8th September. Government also decided to close illegal weaponmarkets.
The crackdown did not stop the die-hard terrorists from retaliating. Three
major terrorist attacks were carried out on 5 th and 9th August. One of these was
on an Imambargah in Parachinar in which five persons were hurt. Other two
attacks were against Christians.
On 5th August terrorists attacked a Christian school near Murree and
killed six persons. A foreign woman was among four hurt in the attack. Next

day the attackers committed suicide, as they could not make their escape good.
One of the attackers was identified as an ex security employee of the school.
On 9th August four persons were killed in attack on a chapel in Taxila.
Three women and one terrorist were among the dead. The attackers belonged to
banned religious groups. On 12th August five terrorists were arrested in
connection with chapel attack.
America condemned attack on the church. Pope assailed attacks on
Christians. Qureshi blamed outside powers for church blast instead of talking
straight. The attacks were undoubtedly in retaliation to victimization of
Muslims all over the world.
Government officials, politicians and intellectuals condemned these
incidents. They blamed terrorists for undermining the interests of Pakistan.
None of them dared mentioning the reason of adopting such a course in which
terrorists were sure to pay the ultimate price: their own lives. Were they insane
or brain washed or else?
The condemnations were generally meant to show that they cared for
interests of the civilized world. They wanted acknowledgement of their
pragmatic thinking from civilized people, because that was more important than
the futile search for causes of terrorism.
This is the age of interests. One has to look after them. There is no need
to waste time and energy in arguing that terrorism is an action or a reaction.
Such a debate can lead to the causes of terrorism contrary to the likings of the
civilized people.
They are privileged to do anything. They can kill women and children.
They can destroy a house where sometime ago a suicide bomber used to live.
They can destroy mosques, because Taliban and Taliban-minded frequently visit
these places of worship.
The civilized critics seldom visit places of worship of centuries old
religion. Therefore, their destruction merits no cognizance. As regards killing of
children, there is no difference in death of a terrorist or a baby terrorist. The
same is true in case of a woman as she is capable of producing many terrorists.
But all the Muslims do not think as wisely and maturely as most of their
rulers, politicians and intellectuals are accustomed to. The irrational people
believe that clash of civilizations is on and in this clash, Islam and its
followers are receiving all the bashing and thrashing.
The Muslims are being massacred at will around the world. They are not
being slain in battlefields. A battlefield is not mandatory for killing of the evil.
It casts no aspersions on holy war if evil is slain while attending a wedding
party or a funeral procession or a prayer congregation.

The rulers of Muslim World generally agree with the civilized world.
The people disagree. They are convinced for sure that Muslims are being
targeted in the name of terrorism. They want to avenge, because they are not as
tolerant as their leaders are. They would like to reach out to their enemies and
fight on their soil as they did on 9/11, but they cant do it for want of resources.
Hence, they are constrained to do something in the near vicinity.
The critics forget that there have never been any attacks on minorities in
Pakistan, what to talk of attacking the places of worship. This phenomenon
started after Americas attack on Afghanistan in which the Crusaders resorted to
indiscriminate killings.
Musharraf and his government have performed well in war on terror,
despite great odds. Pakistan definitely deserved generous appreciation, but it
got very little and that too lacked warmth, whether it was senators tribute to
Maleeha or Bush applauding Musharraf.
America agreed to provide radars and helicopters to Pakistan for
surveillance of western border. These were given, not for Pakistans defence,
but for waging Americas war on terror, yet helicopters were found unreliable
and refurbished.
Defence of citadel of Islam ought not to be the concern of Crusaders.
America was not pushed for anything other than action against terrorists. The
government requested America for equipment to protect ANF against armed
attacks. America refused to give helicopters to ANF, despite retaining trust in
Musharraf.
Some peanuts were served to arouse Pakistans appetite. Joint Business
Council was established. USAID for education worth $ 100 million was
granted. Debt worth $ 3 billion was rescheduled and debt swaps were promised.
Pakistan and US agreed to focus on defence, debt and democracy. During his
visit to Washington Musharraf will request for rewards and America will stress
upon improving the performance.

CONCLUSION
The latest developments resulting from dialogue between Kashmir
Committee and APHC created an impression that clever Bania might outwit
Kashmiri leaders. It will be extremely unfortunate if they are fooled. Hopefully
they will remain steadfast on boycott of elections.
Irrespective of the extent of Kashmiris participation, India will try to
substitute elections for plebiscite. Pakistan will be blamed for low turnout and

any untoward incident. Vajpayee will visit America in this frame of mind.
Protests rallies of Kashmiris during his address to UN General Assembly will
make no material difference.
The Crusaders will stand firm with India. Their unfortunate military
cooperation will continue. British will supply military aircraft. Indian and
American soldiers will conduct joint exercise in Alaska. The aid to Pakistan will
be made conditional as India complained that previously provided aid was
partly spent on defence. India will obviously be tempted to play big brothers
role in South Asia.
On the other hand similar cooperation between China and Pakistan will
be criticized and opposed. China has been compelled to impose restrictions on
missile technology exports. It denied supplying of missile parts to Pakistan,
despite claiming that new rules were not Pakistan and Iran specific.
India will not refrain from blaming Pakistan for sponsoring terrorism.
The daughter of the east will facilitate Indian task. She, with her in-depth
knowledge of the subject, has already remarked that Muslim dictatorships fuel
militancy and present regime of Pakistan is having terror links.
Running out of reason will pose no problem for India. With so many
people at its service India will keep teasing Pakistan. Pakistani leaders will be
irritated easily. An Indian lady remarked that Musharraf was guilty of
terminological inexactitude. The lady had shown her sense of humour, but
Pakistan took it seriously. Ignoring her remarks would have been a better
option.

9th September 2002

A YEAR AFTER ATTACK

The nature of human relations is as intricate as human behaviour. The
relations between individuals flourish on rectitude of human nature. These are
generally sincere and free of pretence. Because, in most cases these are the
outcome of common parentage or affectionate brotherhood; of emotional
commonalties and coincidence, which develop into love and affection; and long

associations that grow into mutual respect and lasting attachments. All human
societies or segments thereof flourish on these kinds of relationship.
Reflections of most facets of human relations are pleasantly colourful.
Very rarely greed, jealousy and selfishness mar these. The goodness of human
nature is seldom overcome by the negative traits of human behaviour, because
laws, customs and traditions curb these.
Inter-state relations are established and sustained by human beings on
collective basis. Strangely, there is no similarity in personal relations and interstate relations. Sincerity and love, sacrifice and kindness, attachment and
devotion are the main strands of personal relations; whereas inter-state relations
are based on selfish motives bearing the garb of national interests. These
relations have to be sustained through diplomacy, hypocrisy and intrigue.
When interests of two nations are identical, their relations are termed
friendly. If interests are at variance, but the states manage to pursue these
through diplomacy, the relations still remain cordial. In case diplomacy fails, the
relations become strained. When states insist on pursuing conflicting interests,
the use of force becomes unavoidable and the two nations become hostile. This
is the crux of western political thought. It is a thought, which by separating
state from church has got rid of all moral obligations.
Irrespective of nature of relations, friendly or cordial, strained or hostile,
no nation gives up its interests willingly. Every nation strives for preserving and
safeguarding its interests quite selfishly. Generosity is an unknown commodity
in the domain of international relations.
The nations aspiring to defend and promote their interests must acquire
military strength, which should commensurate with its ambitions. Stronger the
nation, more jealously it would be able to defend its interests.
America has well-defined global interests and it has the military strength
to protect and promote these. America is, in fact, the lone superpower of the
world and its interests ought to be supreme. Interests of all other nations have
become subservient to supreme national interests of America.
The nations whose interests clash with those of America ought to avoid
confrontation for their own good. These nations cannot afford challenging
America unless they have the requisite military strength to defend themselves.
At this juncture interests of Islamic countries are in conflict with those of
America, but they utterly lack the military strength to protect their interests. All
that has happened since 11th September 2001 should be viewed in the light of
the above perspective.

MASQUERADING CRUSADERS
On 10th September 2001, after a days work, the Americans went to their
beds as free citizens of a super nation. As individuals their personal liberty
had not been encroached and there was no threat to their collective freedom.
Victory in Second World War had eliminated most of the enemies. The
Soviet Union was taken care of during Cold War and the presumed enemy as
per hypothesis of clash of civilizations was kept at bay by waging a
preemptive war in 1991. If an enemy still existed, the two great oceans provided
enough cushions on either side of America. They could afford to be complacent.
Next morning the symbols of their economic and military prowess were
attacked, killing more than three thousand people in collateral damage. The
complacent Americans were rudely shaken. The true extent of American shock
was best reflected in facial expression of their President when an official broke
the news to him.
Every American, including Bush, wanted to know about the attackers.
Their government, despite all the means of surveillance and intelligence at its
disposal, was unable to come up with a convincing answer. Nothing could be
worse than to be clueless about the enemy even after having been attacked by
him. This angered and embarrassed the shocked people and administration of
America.
The Jewish controlled electronic media took charge of the post-attack
events. As soon as it was established that the hijackers were all Muslims, the
media subjected Islam and its followers to a barrage of ridicule. Muslims
became the most cursed and hated people in America. Hence, the shock, anger
and hatred were to be the forces to determine American reaction.
In such situations, the man at the top has to have steel-nerves. No news
should have breaking effect on him. He has to be cool as cucumber, as they
say it. He cannot afford to be impulsive. Unfortunately Bush does not belong to
this category. He was over-awed by the events. The hawks swooped and
carried Bush to their world where he could not think of anything, but revenge.
Shock and anger influenced the decision-making
The media justified Americans hatred by telling that Muslims hate them
intensely. In words of Dr Manzur Ejaz, they found out that in the form of
Taliban, al-Qaeda and many other names, Muslims were waging Jihad from the
North to the South poles. Thus they were right in hating Muslims and waging
Crusades.
The Americans forgot that these Jehadis were marshaled by them to fight
against communism during Cold War. In the aftermath of 9/11, America decided
to eliminate these and their likes. Kill some of them even if they were not

involved demanded Eagleburger. We should invade their countries, kill their

leaders and convert them to Christianity recommended Coulter.
A distant brother of the Americans, the Prime Minister of Italy assured
them that West would continue to conquer peoples, like it conquered
communism even if that meant confronting another civilization, the Islamic
one.
The hawks decided to crush terrorism without wasting precious time in
addressing the causes. The reasons behind this unreasonable approach were
quite obvious. Firstly, America enjoyed overwhelming military ascendancy over
its opponents, which eliminated the possibility of worthwhile retaliation.
Secondly, the United Nations had completely submitted to the will of the
superpower.
The war with such a noble aim had to be named holy war or crusade
against evil of terror or simply a war on terror. America decided to topple
Taliban and hunt their guests. The decision was taken to launch Operation
Enduring Freedom in first phase of the war.
As the preparations for attacking Afghanistan continued, America
planned to avail the opportunity presented by the tragedy. It was time to
launch the Crusades against Muslim World. However, use of the name, the
Crusades, was deliberately avoided.
The Christian World, particularly the whites, approved the aims and
objectives of the Crusades, barring some minor disagreements about its conduct
and the priorities. They argued with each other only to induce complacence in
the intended targets and to sort out the finer details.
About targets Masooda Bano wrote, US has the list of countries which it
wants to target in the name of war against terrorism. Taliban were the first
victim, Palestinian and Kashmiri freedom struggles have been the second
targets, and now it is Iraqs turn. After Iraq it will be some other nation.
They Christian World rallied behind the leader of Crusades. The hawks
assured Bush that America was capable of imposing its will and America must
avail this opportunity. How? Bush rattled out the answer to this question as
tutored by the hawks:

In great tragedy, we have also seen great opportunity. We must have the
wisdom and courage to seize them.

We will use our position of unparalleled strength and influence to build

an atmosphere of international order and openness in which progress and
liberty can flourish in many nations.

A peaceful world of growing freedom serves American long-term

interests; reflects enduring American ideals and unites Americas allies.

America, along with our allies, is pursuing terrorist networks in every

part of the world to disrupt their planning, training and financing. With
our allies, we must also confront the growing threat of regimes that
support terror, seek chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and build
ballistic missiles.

At the same time, we have the best opportunity in generations to build a

world where great powers cooperate in peace instead of continually
prepare for war. The 20th Century was dominated by a series of
destructive national rivalries that left graveyards across earth.
Competition between great nations is inevitable, but armed conflict is not.
September 11 revealed more clearly than ever that the worlds great
powers stand on the same side of a divideunited by common dangers of
terrorism

Dr Hassan Ali Shahzeb summed it up in these words, Americans

consider Muslim countries as the biggest threat to their nation as well as to the
western civilization, not because of military threat but because of the rogue
elements armed with lethal weapons doing another September 11.
America and its collaborators have been perpetrating state terrorism for
about a year and in the process have toppled Taliban, shattered al-Qaeda and
delivered fatal blows on freedom movements of Kashmiris and Palestinians.
Despite these achievements America has not come closer to defeating terrorism.
The success evaded America, not because of lack of support for
Americas war on terror. The countries across the globe have been cooperating;
sometimes reluctant but often willing. In the fields of intelligence, a great deal
of assistance was offered and rendered in tracking down suspects and squeezing
their financial resources.
According to Hasan Abu Nimah of Jordan, it was due to the reason that
America messed up and wrongly entangled with unrelated issues. Americans
have plainly frustrated, if not betrayed, the trust of those who had hoped the
anti-terror war would be conducted on the firm basis of objectivity, a high
degree of responsibility and justice.
Apparently the conduct of war has been lacking in objectivity and justice.
Realistically speaking American intentions have not been deciphered correctly.
American perception of objectivity and justice is quite different from the one
referred to by Hasan.
America has taken September attacks as an opportunity rather than a
tragedy and reacted accordingly to impose hegemony and to settle old scores.

Consequently America is consolidating, rather than alleviating the bitterness

and vast fears which, many believed, produced the brutal September attacks.
As far as Bush Administration is concerned, it has little regard for
imposing the cherished values of the civilized world on primitive people of the
Islamic World. Defeating terrorism is not the aim of Americas war on terror. It
is just an excuse. There are other interests, much more important than
eliminating terrorism.
The Crusades started with the aim to get hold Osama and Mulla Omar,
dead or alive, but both of them have managed to slip away quietly leaving their
foot-wears behind. A year after Bush finds himself wearing Mullas Chappals
and Sharon wears Osamas shoes. In the context of the Subcontinent Vajpayee
plays the role of Sharon.
The way the pairs of Bush-Sharon and Bush-Vajpayee have perpetrated
terrorism in the name of war on terror, it would have put Osama and Mulla to
shame. This kind of conduct of holy war could be aimed at anything else, but
defeating terrorism.
Terrorism cannot be eliminated without eradicating the root causes. Bush
Administration paid no attention to this aspect. Americans took no interest in
pondering about as to why so many peoples in the world detest them. The
fundamental question relating to the factors, which push young, educated,
affluent and religious men to extreme desperation and insanity has not been
addressed.
Hans B Bremer described the American attitude towards causes in these
words. I do not remember anyone from the White House, the State Department
or the Pentagon wondering publicly about the root causes of terrorism. And I
doubt anyone in Washington listens when someone like President Musharraf
does draw attention to the issue.
A report compiled by high-level UN officials was released a day before
the anniversary of 9/11. They viewed terrorism as an assault on the principles
of law, order, human rights and peaceful resolution of disputes and stressed
upon denying resources and means of terror to would-be terrorists. The report
said nothing about causes of terrorism.
Are Bush and his hawks so nave that they dont understand the
importance of eradicating the root causes? No. They are shrewd enough to
comprehend the impact of such a strategy. They dont want to adopt this line of
action, because the causes mostly relate to America.
Dr Jillani enumerated these causes, which are extreme selfishness, greed
for economic gain, longing for domination, display of arrogance, unreliability in

friendship, use of cunning and hard-heartedness at crucial times. America

doesnt want to give up any of these.
Unjust support of America to Israel, India and others has been the main
cause of anger of the Muslim World. Since 9/11 America has further
strengthened its support to these countries. It has moved on to work on regime
change.
Ruthless conduct of the Crusades multiplied the causes. In that it has
preferred unilateralism over multilateralism, use of military force over
dialogue, short-term pragmatism over peace-pursuing principles, militaristic
security over holistic security and the quest of domination over mutual
accommodation.
Nasim Zahra expressed it in these words; indeed shocking tragedy of
9/11 removed all the legal and intellectual barriers to a US military operation
Bush is prepared to cross all limits to avail the opportunity presented by the
tragedy.
Because of its mala fide intentions America sought immunity for its
troops in the context of International Criminal Court. UK and Italy showed their
readiness to exempt US from ICC. What a high handedness? One Crusader
demanded a privilege and other two have granted it, utterly disregarding the
views of majority of the world community.
It is shame that the leader of the civilized world is reluctant to make his
soldiers accountable for their deeds. The terrorists, on the other hand, commit an
atrocious act and have the courage to own that. The brave soldiers of civilized
world commit equally heinous crimes, but lack the courage to own those. They
cowardly take refuge in flimsy excuse of immunity.
With this attitude the terrorism may be suppressed temporarily, but cannot
be defeated. A yearlong war has not made the world a safer place. Therefore, the
anniversary of 9/11 had to be organized under unprecedented security
precautions all over the world.
Coming back to American interest in defeating terrorism, it may be said
that America wants it to survive for a while. It would like to hear reports that alQaeda is, by all accounts fit and well and poised to strike again at its leisure.
Based on such reports, US intelligence agencies can project the presence of
terrorists anywhere in the world. Their existence provides US ample pretexts for
selection of next target.
Talking of a new enemy every now and then is because of Bushs farsighted vision of opportunity in tragedy. However, so far America has not
gained much in that context either. The only gain has been the freezing of about
$ 112 million of suspected al-Qaeda assets.

The main beneficiaries have been Israel and India. Sharon and Vajpayee
cleverly exploited Bushs urge for crushing the terrorism to promote their own
interests. America is happy that it has used two non-Christians to serve the
interests of the Crusaders.
Russia also benefited because of its quiet support to war on terror. The
Crusaders stopped saying anything about Chechnya. China too has no violent
disagreement, because of freezing of assets of Uighur Muslim Group, which is
fighting to create an independent state of East Turkestan.
The attack of 9/11 is attributable to the biased policies or in other words
to the double standards of America. The biased conduct of war and war related
policies have further nurtured anti-American feelings in the Muslim World.
Muslims hold America directly accountable for every atrocity that Israel
commits on daily basis. The same is true in the context of American support to
racist regime of Vajpayee.
America has branded the legitimate Palestinian and Kashmiri struggles as
terrorism. This policy fits well in scope of the Crusades, but it is not justifiable
in the name of war on terror. It ought to result in decrease of support to war
against terrorism.
As long as the war was claimed to be aiming at defeating the evil of
terrorism, most countries in the world, including Muslims supported it, but
when the Christian fundamentalists tried to wage it in the spirit of clash of
civilizations or the Crusades, America still retained the support of Christian
World and others who have enmity with Muslims. No sooner political and
economic interests were added to the aim of war, America lost the support of
even some of the Christian countries rallied under the flag of NATO.
In its endeavour to change the world for better, America has inadvertently
decided to change itself, to cope with the threat of terrorist attack. Terrorism has
not harmed the Americans as much as the measures to counter terrorism have.
Resultantly, the land where civil liberty was a religion began to have
departments such as homeland security observed Pratap Bhanu Mehta of the
Hindu. Erica Jong was justified in asking this pertinent question from his fellow
Americans. How can we wage war in the name of freedom when at home we
are so ready to dispense with it?
Americans have spread this contagious decease around the globe. The
war on terror had negative effects on human rights around the globe:

Western governments have acquired greater powers of arrest and

curtailed the legal rights of detainees.

It has triggered backlashes against immigration and non-citizens can be

expelled on ordinary pretexts.

It has encouraged some countries to suppress unwelcome political

opposition and it has provided the perfect cover for domestic
crackdowns.

Mary Robinson declined to continue as UN High Commissioner, because

America was annoyed at her criticism of Guantanamo Bay and her perceived
anti-Israel stance. This combined with anger in Moscow at her persistent
clamouring for an inquiry into abuses committed during the suppression of proindependence rebels in Chechnya had made the going difficult for her.
The theme of hatred has cast its negative effects. Common Americans
suffer from the feelings of fear and insecurity. In words of Art Buchwald, in the
past, I thought terrorists were people far away. After 9/11, I felt they were right
next door. The propaganda against presumed terrorists multiplied their fears.
Hate and anger influenced American decision-making. Prudence was the
first casualty of the anger. Most decisions had the touch of rashness. The state
power was used with brute intensity, making mockery of human rights and
justice.
The unjust conduct of war has started telling on the mental health of
American troops in less than a year. Reportedly wives of three soldiers who
had served in Afghanistan were killed this summer at the military base at Fort
Bragg, North Carolinaallegedly by their husbands, two of whom then
committed suicide.
The report said that in Afghanistan it was a stressful environment. It is
hot, dusty and difficult to live in. And everyday its kind of surprise for the
soldiers out there, that they can run into in terms of an ambush or a near
ambush.
The observation is also applicable to media-projected threat of terrorist
attack on American soil. The reports of likely terrorist attacks have similar
effects on entire American nation. They are living under perpetual threat of
insecurity, which was unknown to them till 9/11.
Coming back to the soldiers, the killings of human beings, even during
war, tax the mind and conscience of the killers. The effect is more pronounced,
when the soldiers are not convinced about the cause of war or in psychological
warfare terminology, when they are not adequately motivated.
These incidents though quite few in number remind the days of Vietnam
War. In case the war on terror lingers or the terrorists succeed in hitting back,
the mental sturdiness of Americans will be put to test both at home and abroad.
The war is far from over, but Bush has plenty of resources at his disposal
to carry on in his mad pursuit of opportunities. Hugo Young quoted Vermont
Governor in this context. This president has the capacity to harm America more

than any other individual. For the first time we have a man in the White House,
who can neither manage economic affairs prudently nor foreign affairs wisely.
The Governor said it about America, but in the capacity of president of
the only superpower, he can harm the entire world. His disregard to universally
accepted values and principles and his urge for using military means cannot
serve the cause of peace and justice.
Ariel Dorfman observed that Bush and his fellow countrymen are
suddenly living what almost everyone else on this planet has experienced at
some point yesterday or today: the precarious pit of everyday fear. He
continued that nothing could be more dangerous than a giant who is afraid.
Thus America is likely to indulge in rashness more frequently.
Fear restricts the choice of options. Out of defence, containment and
preemption, America will tend to opt for the last. Possession of unmatched
military strength will invariably make it tempting. Preemption will become
order of the day.
America will attack any country after accusing it of indulging in or
acquiring capability to indulge in terrorist activities. America has already
exempted itself from the obligation of provision of evidence for any allegation.
Hence a nightmare by Bush or his hawks could constitute a legitimate pretext
for destruction of a country.
The media, particularly the electronic visual media has emerged as very
strong element of power. The secret of its strength lies in the saying that
seeing is believing. The visual media has exploited this weakness of human
beings. Selective, censored and stage managed documentaries have helped in
misleading the viewers.
The media depicted the same people as extremists and terrorists, who
were recruited from all over the Muslim World to wage Jihad against infidel
Soviets in eighties. When they fought to serve American interests, they were
called valiant fighters. When they resented and retaliated against American
injustice, they became terrorists. As tools of America, they were good guys,
but when they challenged the wrong actions of the Yankees, they were labeled
as evil. This has been done through clever use of electronic media.
The label of evil was not restricted to a particular segment of Muslim
Ummah. The attackers of 9/11 belonged to two or three Arab countries, but the
media blamed the entire Ummah. Everybody knew that attacks were launched
in retaliation to American injustice and state terrorism perpetrated through a
rogue called Israel, but no finger was pointed towards Israel or America.
The media projected the civilized worlds love for democratic values out
of all proportions. It was done despite its flirting with host of dictators from

Indonesia to Chile. As these dictators posed no threat to American interests, so

they could be tolerated in true democratic spirit.
Media onslaught had another negative effect apart from fanning anger
and fear. In a television interview Mrs. Bush urged the electronic media not to
show horrible scenes of the tragedy because that is bound to affect the mind of
children. The tragedy has already affected the minds of grown-ups, particularly
those of American leaders.
The media blitz coaxed many Americans to know more about Islam. This
was an inadvertent, interesting and positive development. If these people read
some original books on Islam, instead of commentaries written by western
scholars, they are likely to find the truth.
It will dawn upon them that Islam is more tolerant than any other religion
of the world. They will find out that moderation is the governing principle of all
the teachings of Islam. They will come to know that there is no place for
extremism in Islam. They will find that there are no two ways about justice in
Islam. And they will find that in Islam everything is not fair, not even in war.
Infliction of collateral damage is a crime.
The most dangerous precedence set by America was the dispensation of
collective punishment. Israel and India blatantly followed this. For instance,
out of the 49 Palestinians killed by the Israeli army in August, 30 were
civilians, more than half of them children. India has done the same on
numerous occasions. They are likely to do it in future quite frequently.
Americas misinterpretation and misapplication of international law and
justice has set yet another wrong precedence of might is right. This will be a
major threat to peace in future. According to Tariq Aziz the real threat to world
peace lies in America not being in step with international law.
Suspicions about Muslim immigrants could also spoil the peace and
harmony of America. Discriminators like Commissioner Peter Kirsanow will air
their prejudices on slightest of excuse. There are many like him who think that
if theres another terrorist attack and if its from a certain ethnic community or
certain ethnicity that the terrorists are from, you can forget about civil rights in
this country.
America has the strength to do and get what it wants. It has understood
well the advantages of being strong. It has learnt that might is always right.
America should have also learnt some obvious lessons from 9/11 attack.
Unfortunately it missed the best opportunity presented by the tragedy; the
opportunity to change itself. Americans should have grown up to be wise and
matured nation.

The growth of a nation does not end with acquisition of the status of a
superpower. It has to grow beyond the primitive level of human learning, which
revolved around physical strength. It may be situated far away from the Old
World, yet it must learn the art of peaceful co-existence.
America has the right to practice its modern values, but it must
understand that other nations all over the world too have the right to practice
their values. Their values are time-tested and despite being centuries old, some
of them are far superior to modern values.
It has well defined national interests, but it must recognize that other
nations too have their interests and above all there are definite interests of the
humanity as a whole. It has learnt that might is right, but it should know that it
is true for the animal world only. In the realm of humanity the might ought not
to be right always. The strength grants immunity to America from any
reappraisal or retaliatory action, but it cannot escape the curse of the conscience,
as it happened in case of Vietnam War.
The strength can help in attaining the dominating position, which can be
confused with leadership, but a real leader requires much more than physical
strength. Rejection of this simple reality has marked the beginning of
degeneration of Americans. A Chinese academic, Wang Jisi, opined that in the
short-term, September 11 reinforced American hegemonism. Nationalism saw
resurgence internally; countrys cohesion was reinforced, as well as the
governments capacity to mobilize the nation and the society. But, he
concluded, I suspect America is on a downward pathThe force of the
American model is declining.
In other words the rogues of yesteryears have opted to remain as rogues
even after attaining the distinguished position of world leaders. But they should
know it better that if vagabonds of yesteryears can become leaders, then the
rogues of today can also attain strength to be at the top.

MISMERIZED MUSLIMS
The civilized world commemorated the Remembrance Day on 11th
September. NATO countries confessed that war against terror was yet to be
won. Bush vowed to continue fighting till terrorism was comprehensively
defeated or till the opportunity was fully availed.
Annan paid tributes to the victims of 9/11 attack. Countries across Asia
joined the civilized world in expressing similar feelings. The leaders of
Muslim World, including those which have been at the receiving end since that
fateful day, also showed solidarity with victims.

They were obliged to remember the victims of 9/11 and forget all those
who had been massacred in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Palestine. They
shamelessly ignored that their people were bearing the brunt of the Crusades of
21st Century.
Their cowardly behaviour was the natural outcome of the disparity in
military strength of America and the Muslim World. These leaders sincerely
wanted to save themselves and their people from wrath of the superpower.
The unprecedented disparity was explained by Dasgupta in the context of
anticipated attack on Iraq. The vast gap in military power between the US and
its potential targets virtually ensures that American casualties will be minimal.
As it did earlier in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan, the US would fight war against
Iraq with precision-guided weapons launched from great heights or distances,
well outside the range of Iraqi firepower.
He continued, present day American military operations bear a closer
resemblance to a Shikar than to traditional warfare. From aerial Machaans well
outside the enemys reach, American soldiers hunt down the enemy without
exposing themselves to serious risk.
He then concluded: Never before in history has there been greater
disparity between rival armies. Even in the colonial wars of 19 th Century Africa,
in which tribal warriors armed with spears or bows and arrows were pitted
against European armies equipped with modern firearms, there was always the
element of battle and combat in which a chance arrow or well-directed spear
could find a target in the stronger force.
The disparity is not in relation to America only. Muslims are too weak
even against the proxy crusaders like Israel and India. That was why the
legitimate freedom struggles of Muslims, which have been going on for more
than half a century, were equated with terrorism.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais observed that the September 11 tragedy has not only
pushed to the sidelines the cause of the Muslims fighting for their rights or
engaged in national liberation movements in Kashmir and Palestine, but has
given a splendid opportunity to their tormentors to brand them as terrorists.
The freedom movements are being crushed mercilessly in war against
terrorism. Gregory Clark of the Japan Times commented that for extermination
of communists there had to be at least some proof of leftwing leanings before
setting out to exterminate people. With terrorists, not even this restraint is
needed.
The people of Muslim World know that American reaction to September
11 has been irrational and biased. Khalil Shikaki summarized their feelings as
under:

The people of the ME can see that a culture of hate and prejudice is
being advocated According to mainstream fundamentalist America it
is Islam itself, that is evil; it is the culprit and the enemy.

The war against Afghanistan, the threat of war against Iraq, and the US
denial of any distinction between the terror of al-Qaeda and the violence
of the Palestinians and Kashmiris convinced people that the US is using
the war against terror as an instrument to fight Muslims and Islam.

The US has not shown willingness to admit any responsibility for

creating the conditions that generated hate and anger. The attack of 9/11
was the outcome of hate and anger.

The commemoration of first anniversary promised no relief for the

Muslim World. John Sitilides and Paul Glastris asked American leaders to
expand the scope of the Crusades. The United States and its NATO allies must
project power into the arc of crisis stretching from Egypt to the West Bank to
Baghdad to Afghanistan and beyondbut in ways that do not lead to clash of
civilizations with the Islamic World.
The use of word beyond is worth note. Pakistan has been included
without naming it. Similarly it has been stressed upon that the Crusades must be
extended to entire region without calling it as such. Use the spade, without
calling it a spade.
Hatred against Muslims has become an acceptable attitude in the
civilized world. It has given birth to new kind of crime, i.e. to kill someone
simply because of his religious beliefs. Many hate-related crimes were
committed. Six Pakistanis were killed in Macedonia, because they were
carrying verses of Quraan.
Musharraf is a staunch supporter of war on terror. He performed well
during the first year of the Crusades as was evident from frequent mention of
his name in dispatches to and from Washington. The Crusaders, impressed by
his performance, have quietly consented to extend his rule in Pakistan.
The biased conduct of the war was so glaring that even Musharraf
grumbled against it. He complained, at the moment, all the disputes, all
military actions, all the casualties and sufferings are (faced) by the Muslims
around the world, because all the political disputes involve Muslims,
unfortunately. Muslims happened to be at the receiving end everywhere he
concluded.
He also identified Indo-Israeli nexus, which is a threat to Muslim World.
He cautioned Syrian special envoy about this threat. While telling this he could
not mention the real force behind this nexus and the services rendered by
Pakistan to that force.

He had to omit the accomplishments of his government in the context of

ongoing Crusades. He could not tell with pride that many detainees in custody
of America, having no link with al-Qaeda, were captured and extradited by his
government. The curse of disparity had compelled him to act against his
conscience.
Pakistan or the Pakistanis gained little from the war, although Moin
claimed that September 11 ended isolation and brought Pakistan benefits. There
were some monetary gains in terms of debt rescheduling; payment of couple of
service bills; increase in remittances from expatriates; and above all allowing
Pakistan to declare already purchased dollars from open market.
All these were one-time benefits except remittances from abroad, which
wont last for long. Many Pakistanis have already been thrown out of America.
Some have been hauled up and were in the process of being thrown out. New
work-permits will be refused and those already issued will not be renewed on
flimsy grounds.
Pakistan had always avoided getting into tribal areas following footsteps
of the British. It was compelled to carry out military operations in these areas,
which might prove beneficial in the long run provided Pakistan made a
concerted effort to bring tribesmen into the mainstream.
Apart from these benefits Pakistanis were generally treated as terrorists.
No link of any Pakistani was established to September attack in any way, yet
many Pakistanis languished in US jails on unknown charges. Many were
subjected to torture at US naval base in Cuba. Others were deported in
embarrassing circumstances.
Whereas Musharraf was commended for his contribution towards war on
terror, not once the people of Pakistan were appreciated or thanked. Practically
they were treated as rogues and gentlemen like Kamal Matinuddin told them
to tolerate this bias.
Militancy is not the answer to unjust policies of a superpower. He
advised the militant groups that they wont be able to achieve any of the
intended aims by resorting to terrorism:

If the objectiveis to compel USA to change its perceived anti-Islamic

policies throughout the world, the killing of civilians, unconnected to the
decision-makers in Washington, is not going to make any headway.

It will be nave of the anti-American clerics to believe that by attacking

foreigners they would be able to force the Americans to abandon their
presence in Pakistan.

Neither would Americans withdraw from Afghanistan just because they

are being subjected to sporadic attacks in Kabul and elsewhere.

If the killings are meant to send a message to President Musharraf to

retrace his steps and not support the US-led war against the Taliban and
al-Qaeda members and refrain from taking action against religious
seminaries, it is not cutting much ice. (In fact Musharraf has gone too far
to retrace the steps.)

He concluded that all their actions have had no effects on America. They
could not prevent indiscriminate bombing in Afghanistan. Its tilt towards India
on the Kashmir issue has not been rectified. Bushs Middle East policy, which
blatantly favours Israel, remained unchanged. America vehemently desired to
attack Iraq. It was also thinking loudly to occupy Saudi Arabia.
The observations of General were absolutely correct, but then what
should they do who are at the receiving end? Should they follow their leaders
and keep their heads down and bottoms up to be smacked to the convenience of
the superpower and its watchdogs?
The people, who have been wronged, insulted, humiliated and persecuted
for generations, are forced to react in desperation. The desperate reactions do
not fall within the precincts of such logical, rational and prudent arguments as
presented by the learned General.
There can be no logical or prudent justification for suicide attacks. It is
an act committed in absolute desperation. It is not for redress of grievances. It is
not for prevention of cruelties. It is simply to hurt the aggressor so that he too
has the feel of it.
At worst they can be accused of madness, but then American leaders too
are suffering from the same madness. Both are driven by the urge of revenge.
The only difference is that motive of terrorist acts is limited to revenge only;
whereas Americans while taking revenge are also trying to avail opportunities
presented by the tragedy. Terrorists can be blamed for being mad, but not for
being mean.
Pakistan may be a partner, but it has no say in decision making. It is not
even supposed to know the decisions once taken. Pakistan is simply employed
on forced labour in war on terror. It has to do what it is told, but has no right to
know the rationale behind that.
Pakistan hoped that its eastern border would be kept free of tension.
Contrary to its expectations, the Crusaders asked India to exert unprecedented
pressure. India amassed troops along Pakistani border on an engineered
pretext and extracted maximum concessions from Pakistan.
The war on terror has dragged Pakistan to a situation where its
neighbours on either side blame it for providing sanctuaries to terrorists.

Musharraf and his men have been refuting the accusations, but every time they
were snubbed by men of Vajpayee and Karzai.
Pakistan was pressurized to correct its bearing and change direction many
times. Every time it had to take 180 degrees U-turn. The most important U-turn
was taken on night after 9/11 attacks. America dictated Pakistan to join the war
on terror and it did with the excuse of having no choice.
The next U-turn was obviously related to its foreign policy regarding
Taliban Regime. After toppling of Taliban, Pakistan was told to accept the
Interim Administration dominated by Northern Alliance, which had known
terrorists in its ranks.
Pakistan was then pressurized to crackdown on Jehadi organizations,
particularly against those, which were supporting freedom movement in
Kashmir. Pakistan took yet another U-turn, which was imbued with dangers of
retaliatory attacks inside Pakistan.
America gave no assurance in return regarding negotiated solution of
Kashmir dispute. Armitage unambiguously said, we can offer assistance, we
cannot impose a solution and should not impose a solution. Another US official
said the same thing in different words. We are in talks about talks, and there is
not much more that we can do than nudge them in the end it is up to them.
American appeals for allowing observers to watch elections in Kashmir,
release of Kashmiri political prisoners and reduction of tension were rejected
by India in manner and style of Israel. Americans digested the rejections of all
their proposals. Appeals and their rejections were two acts of the same drama.
America did not want any of its appeals to be responded. In fact, if any of
these issues were taken up by UNSC, America might have been pleased to veto
it, as it has been doing in case of Israel.
On the other hand Armitage came to the Subcontinent and asked Pakistan
to do more in catching Taliban and al-Qaeda men from tribal areas and check
infiltration across Line of Control. He could be justified in asking for more in
the context of first requirement, but not in case of the latter, yet America
continued asking Pakistan to do more.
Pakistan was forced to disown the concept of Jihad as understood by its
people since ages. The regime moved forward from Jihad to Jihad-e-Akbar,
because the old Jehadis were declared as extremists, militants and fanatics. New
breed of Jehadis were needed to make Pakistan a moderate Islamic State.
Most of the redundant variety of Jehadis was minced by the daisy-cutters.
The Crusaders and their supporters captured some of them. Those who were
released have been sent to jail by Pakistan for taking part in banned variety of
Jihad. It was a U-turn related to the teachings of Islam.

This U-turn led to the need of a new slogan. The slogan of Pakistan
comes first marked the beginning of ideological degeneration. Pakistan came
into being on the basis of Islamic concept of nationhood. This slogan was akin
to the western concept of nationhood. It could lead to coining of more slogans
like Sindh comes first or Musharraf comes first and thus shaking the very
foundation of its ideology.
Pakistan was applauded on negotiating each U-turn. Out of all these, the
crackdown on mulla, mosque and madrassa was applauded the most. This
antagonized the militants, who diverted their anger towards Christians. For the
first time in Pakistan, the Christians were targeted by the terrorists. It was a
dangerous turn as the Crusaders could use this as a pretext.
A U-turn taken earlier related to presence of foreign troops on Pakistani
soil. After the demise of CENTO and SEATO, Pakistan had decided not to
provide military bases to any country, but in war on terror it was forced to
reconsider its decision; whereas the learned people like Masud Akhtar Shaikh
continued pondering about possibility of America using the war on terrorism as
a pretext for placing its troops on Pakistani territory.
So many U-turns in quick succession create spinning effect. Pakistan will
certainly feel giddiness from continuous spinning. It will not be able to walk
straight for quite sometime even if it is told to stop spinning with immediate
effect.
The most damaging U-turn was related to nuclear deterrence. Pakistan,
repeatedly assured not to be the first to use nuclear weapons. The forced
discard of the first use amounted to compromising on its deterrence value.
America wants to move beyond the discard of first use. The Crusaders would
like to roll back Pakistans nuclear capability at all costs, even if it meant rolling
back of division of the Subcontinent.
These changes within less than a year meant that nothing was managed
correctly in Pakistan before 9/11. It was American threat, which put most things
right. If that is true, Pakistanis owe a lot to America in terms of gratitude.
Pakistan was asked to make frequent changes, but there was no change of
hearts in Washingtons pro-India policy. Dr Francis Frankel, Director of Center
for Advanced Study of India, Pennsylvania University opined that Pakistan
would hardly figure anywhere in the US ties and boldly conceded that the US
relationship with Pakistan had been based on opportunism in the past as well.
Pakistan remains a rogue state. For the time being the Crusaders have
asked Musharraf to deal with his rogue people. He has proved to be quite
useful, but it does not mean that he has become indispensable in scheme of the
Crusaders.

Indian lobby in Washington has been working for disposing off

Musharraf. The theory of regime change can be applied with or without
approval of the UN. Dr Manzur Ejaz from Washington wrote about Musharraf
that his unpopularity reminded one of the last days of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif
governments.
Dr Hassan Ali Shahzeb has summed it all beautifully. As President
Musharraf stands isolated domestically, he becomes more vulnerable to US
demands. They want Pakistan to allow American troops to engage in hot pursuit
of al-Qaeda inside Pakistan. They want Pakistan to abandon the Kashmir
movement for good and recognize the Line of Control as a permanent border.
They will urge Pakistan to let the electoral process in occupied Kashmir go as
planned and accept the results. They want Pakistans support in an impending
attack on Iraq. In this regard they consider General Musharrafs recent remarks
as a political necessity since India had taken a pro-Iraq position. In the final
analysis they would ask Pakistan to roll back its nuclear programme.
Pakistan hoped that war on terror in Afghanistan would bring positive
change. The dreams seldom come true. Nasim Zehra observed that in Pakistan,
enthusiasm of those who believed that US military strikes against the Taliban in
Afghanistan would help evolve a new, progressive and democratic
Afghanistan has turned into scepticism.
Nothing has changed dramatically. Not even the suffocating shuttle-cork
Burqa or the moving tent has gone anywhere. These moving tents still survive
all over Afghanistan, including Kabul. Neither Karzai nor his Godfather has
dared to pull these tents down.
A year back the pictures of Burqa-clad women were shown by the media
with sarcastic and derogatory remarks with the intent of ridiculing and insulting
Taliban and the religion they followed. Burqa was depicted as symbol of
Talibans gender discrimination.
If that view was true then all the Burqas in Afghanistan should have been
collected and heaped at central places of each town. US air force should have
been called to target those with incendiary bombs for much-needed practice.
The Afghan women should have been ordered to come out of their houses
with faces uncovered. Their beautiful moon-like faces would have helped in
spreading light of the values of the civilized world in all directions. Primitive
Afghans would have been enlightened.
It was not done. Why? Burqa, the one that exists now, is part of the
Afghan culture. The civilized people respect the culture of other people. But the
Burqa of Taliban era was not the part of Afghan culture. That was the outcome

of teachings of Islam. Anything that bears the label of Islam is evil and the
civilized world hates that.
However, the war on terror has brought some positive changes. AP has
recounted these. Today anyone else can see the changes a year has wrought on
Kabuls teeming streets: the Burqa veils lifted from many women, the pious
Muslim beards shorn off many men; the vast street bazaar of televisions and
other once-forbidden pleasures; the sexes studying together at the university; the
old king back in his palace; American flag waving once more over US Embassy
hidden behind a new steel-plate fence.
US Army food items are on sale, including pork. A military mess-hall
container labeled as holding 18 portions of ham and eggs. These items are
donated to people and subsequently sold in the market. The department of
Virtue and Vice has now better things to do. They have to check the influx of
Haram rather than checking men for the length of their beards and women for
cuts of their Burqas.
The cultural advancement or emancipation of the society proved too hot
to be handled. Kabul TV had to ban telecast of Indian films, which resulted in a
row between Ministers and State TV Chief.
While Afghans were absorbing the impact of modernization, Americans
remained busy in hunting. They have started shooting at wedding parties. After
killing dozens of innocent people, the hunters blame the beaters for the
catastrophe. The simpleton Americans were manipulated by local informants,
who have personal or tribal scores to settle. The circumstances continue making
the collateral damage unavoidable.
The reason behind easy exploitation of Americans was that they had no
clue about the enemy. They were also not pushed to have such information,
because they enjoy universal immunity to all kinds of crimes. All their heinous
acts have the blanket-cover of collateral damage.
Colonel King claimed that no one was detained unless he met specific
criteria set down by the US Department of Defence. But he refused to discuss
the criteria. He need not. The world should know by now that all those, towards
whom a finger of an American leader is pointed, are guilty for sure.
Death and destruction dispensed in Afghanistan was justified to liberate
Afghans. The evidence about their liberation was produced in abundance in the
form of pictures of women showing their smiling faces to the world, of men
shaving beards, of girls in schools, of boys playing soccer in shorts. All the
ravages of war merited condoning for these extraordinary cultural gains.
The real gain of the war, however, lied in the reconstruction of
Afghanistan, which was trumpeted a lot at the beginning. Afghans kept waiting

for the pledges of aid to materialize. The urgency shown before destruction of
Afghanistan dissipated rapidly when time of reconstruction came. Afghan rulers
have been left alone to run from pillar to post to meet the financial
requirements of the governance.
Reconstruction has been neglected. Even New York Times was
constrained to say that unless the promises of long-term reconstruction
assistance that followed last years military defeat of the Taliban were kept,
anarchy could return.
The return of anarchy has been quite ominous. Minister for tourism was
beaten to death in Kabul. Vice President Haji Qadir was murdered in July. A
bomb exploded in Kabul on the eve of 9/11 and the American puppet Karzai
escaped assassination attempt in Kandahar.
Attacks on American bases have become a daily routine. Bagram base
was attacked right at the time when ceremonies in connection with first
anniversary were in progress. The surge in violence was not a good omen for
Afghans as well as for the occupation forces.
Warlordism has returned, because jealousies of warlords have been
fanned by the unwanted favours showered on Northern Alliance and
victimization of others. Resultantly there has been no respite in fighting in
eastern provinces and around Mazar-e-Sharif.
Americans have become party to the fighting between warlords. They
have been operating in eastern parts of the country against rebel warlords. In the
north they have been helping the rulers by opening the case of Shebarghan
prison.
Dostum denied reports of deaths by suffocating in an unconvincing
manner. The operation of sending prisoners to Shebarghan prison continued for
four days. In no case were any prisoners killed. In no case was there any
intention that they should die in containers he claimed.
Why has this point been raised after lapse of one year? It was to
pressurize Dostum so that he acted according to the wishes of the Tajiks.
Revival of the issue had nothing to do with humanitarian considerations. It was
a case of exploiting a human tragedy for political ends, which was not at all a
new thing for the civilized world.
These incidents indicated the things to come. Yusufzai viewed the recent
happenings in Kabul and Kandahar and almost daily attacks on Western forces
in the Pushtoon-populated southern and eastern provinces as potent indications
that henceforth US wont have a smooth sailing in the treacherous killing fields
of Afghanistan.

Attacks on US bases so far have been the acts of individuals, whose

patience was overcome by their anger. The isolated acts of individual failed to
have the desired effects. Sooner or later these like-minded angry people would
organize themselves into small groups to be able to launch planned and
coordinated attacks and the success rate would improve.
The main cause of unrest was Pushtoons exclusion from power. They
have very little representation in so-called broad-based government in
Afghanistan. The Crusaders, upholding the spirit of democratic values, have
given power to minority ethnic groups to reward them for their contribution in
winning the holy war against Islamic extremists.
Most analysts held America and its collaborators responsible for miseries
of Pushtoons. Baachaa believed that all those who aided and abetted the
Americans in their crime against humanity and those who by remaining silent
spectators endorsed the atrocities could not escape the blame and their share of
responsibility for the killing and destruction of Pukhtoons in Afghanistan.
Pakistan has lions share of the blame.
All attackers were Arabs, yet the war on terror has apparently been
fought on non-Arab lands for the last one year. It was not so. The revengeful
Americans could never spare the Arabs. They had to pay the price of their
crime. The most lucrative opportunities provided by the tragedy also lied in
Arab World. Therefore, it had to get special attention. Two of these were most
important. The first related to the security of Israel and the second pertained to
the oil wealth.
When Afghanistan was attacked the proxy crusader, Sharon, was told to
avail the opportunity to crush Palestinian resistance by targeting Jehadi
organizations. Israel in exercising the right of self-defence perpetrated state
terrorism of the magnitude of which even Hitler would have been proud of.
America condoned all war crimes committed by its protg.
David Hirst put it across in these words: US just doesnt care to look for
root causes. It has adopted the Israeli definition of terror, and that shapes its
policies for the whole region. He continued, never, in Arab eyes, has the US
acted so blatantly, so subserviently, in favour of its Israeli protg and, for
domestic reasons, the triple alliance of Jewish lobby, neo-conservative
ideologues and the Christian fundamentalist right, which take little or no stock
of rights or wrongs on ground.
Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular have undoubtedly paid the
heaviest price for 9/11. Because, the US wanted any Palestinian or Arab action
resisting or opposing the continued Israeli occupation of Arab lands should be
put on the list of targets. Regarding Palestine Rumsfeld said, I suspect that

there will be, even in my life-time, some sort of a (Palestinian) entity that will
be established.
Wealth of Arabs is in the form of oil and hard cash. The cash is already in
control of the civilized world. Arabs were aware of the vulnerability of their
assets. They were advised to withdraw their assets. The suggestion however
came late, because relatives of 11th September victims have filed $ 1 trillion
lawsuit against the Saudi and Sudanese governments as well as Saudi royal
family, banks and charities. It contends that they financed the plot in which
some 3,000 people died.
Such lawsuits are not uncommon in America. This one also appeared to
be a non-governmental initiative. However the lawyer seemed to be having
complete knowledge of public and private assets of these countries deposited in
American banks. The case would take care of all those, in case Arabs wont
behave.
The other component of the wealth has yet to betaken care of. Soon after
the start of war on terror America ventured on mustering support for attack on
Iraq. America has been continuously giving frenzied calls for an attack on Iraq
with the declared intention of bringing down Iraqi President Saddam Hussains
regime.
Cheney spelled out the pretext of attack. The Iraqi president doesnt like
us, might, now or in the future, have links to anti-American terrorist
organizations and might someday have the weaponry to do us serious harm. He
argued that Saddam wanted to gain time, and more time to husband his
resources to invest in his ongoing chemical and biological weapons program,
and to gain possession of nuclear weapons.
He continued that armed with an arsenal of these weapons of terror and a
seat atop 10 percent of the worlds oil reserves, Saddam Hussein could then be
expected to seek domination of the entire Middle East, take control of a great
portion of the worlds energy supplies, directly threaten Americas friends
throughout the region, and subject the region, and subject the United States or
any other nation to nuclear blackmail.
All his arguments were based on assumptions rather than facts. The
imaginary threat could not be exaggerated more than what Cheney did.
Interestingly, for him oil of the region was not the interest of the Arabs, but of
America.
David Hirst disclosed the real aim of attack on Iraq. With the overthrow
of Hussein, the US hopes to make this richly endowed, pivotal country the
linchpin of a whole new pro-American geopolitical order. That means Iraq
marks the start point of achieving hegemony in Middle East.

Arabs were aware of American designs. They unanimously opposed

attack on Iraq. It was not because of their love for Saddam. They thought that
the attack would be against entire Arab World. Arabs hated America since long
for its biased policy on Middle East and today they hate more than ever, and
more now from an Arab than an Islamic standpoint according to David Hirst.
Will Arabs join hands to protect their long-term interests? Masud Akhtar
Sheikh felt that going by the wording of the joint statement issued by the Arab
foreign ministers recent conference, one couldnt arrive at an optimistic
conclusion in this regard. Their warning to the United States (against attack on
Iraq) was not worth the paper it was written on. Will the Organization of
Islamic Conference come to the aid of Iraq or Iran? He was not optimistic about
that as well.
Their indecision and inaction was the outcome of their weakness.
Internally, they are dismally ill-equipped to meet the external challenge, racked
as they are by all manner of social, economic, cultural and institutional
sicknesses observed David Hirst. His remarks held good for entire Muslim
Ummah.
There was talk of using oil as weapon. This could result in freezing of
Arab assets, which are deposited in banks of the civilized world. Any attempt
of this nature could be taken by America as pretext to attack oil-rich states.
Thus, according to an Egyptian journalist Arabs today risk being subjected to
direct or indirect colonialism and backwardness of the Arab order makes the
pursuit of such imperial designs possible.

CONCLUSION
Bush declared 9/11 as Patriot Day. He said that the people killed on that
day would forever hold a cherished place in our hearts and in the history of our
nation as we mark the first anniversary of that tragic day, we remember their
sacrifice and we commit ourselves to honouring their memory by pursuing
peace and justice in the world and security at home. While paying the tributes,
he did not realize that the same was true for the attackers. They had precisely
the same feelings for their respective people who had been the victims of state
terrorism perpetrated on behest of America.
America, despite September attacks, remains one of the least threatened
countries in the world, yet it maintains the most potent military strength in the
world and spends the most on defence. This has to have some justifications?
Protection of supreme national interests around the globe is a fine idea,
but what are the threats posed to these interests? For this purpose American

leaders have to use their imagination and innovative ingenuity to invent

enemies.
Despite innovations they will run short of enemy worth posing a potent
threat. For that reason whatever enemy is found, its capabilities have to be
blown out of proportion as Cheney did in case of Iraq. Implications of this
tendency will be compounded by America assuming the role of Divine
Authority, i.e. the authority to differentiate right from wrong and good from
evil.
The interests of oil and Israel render the entire Arab World vulnerable to
American threat, including the so-called friends. At any moment America can
blame Wahhabi Sheikhs of Saudi Arabia for betrayal. There will be no problem
in fabricating sufficient legal authority for use of force.
American hegemonic designs stretch beyond Arab World. After Iraq, it
could be Iran or another Islamic State. Weapons of Mass Destruction provide
the ready-made pretext. Moreover, America considers that democratization of
Islamic countries is the only way to get rid of the terrorism malaise according
to Dr Manzur Ejaz,
The Muslim World has been totally mesmerized by the military strength
of America. Muslim rulers are completely helpless against onslaught of the
Crusaders. Individually they are too weak to put up any resistance collectively
they are in disarray.
OIC is incapable of protecting any interest of Ummah. Masud Akhtar felt
that this organization is quite dispensable due to its record. That being the case,
wont it be advisable for all the Muslim countries to quietly go under the yoke
of American hegemony he suggested cynically. He continued that nations that
cannot see beyond their own nose deserve nothing better than that.
The inability of Muslim rulers does not mean that there will be no fight
back against the Crusades. The followers of Islam will resist in small groups or
individually with whatever resources they can muster. Those who are prepared
to use themselves, as bombs cannot be stopped from fighting back the
aggressors.
As long as there is injustice there will be protests against it. Peace and
injustice cannot coexist. Unfortunately Muslims lack the strength to defeat the
injustice dispensed by the civilized world and the peace sought by the enemies
of Muslims is nothing but a ploy. It remains a ploy even when Arundhatti Roy
preaches it.
Western Media has been seeking peace and fanning hatred against Islam
and its followers in the same breath. The hatred, like all evils, spreads faster

than love. The humanity under the shadow of this evil cannot hope to coexist
peacefully.
No people or no nation can guarantee peace for others. A nation can
secure peace only by itself. The way to secure peace is to prepare for war and be
ready to pay the price of peace. Those who want peace without shedding or
willing to shed their blood have been the real culprits of destroying it
throughout the history of mankind. They have been the cause of aggression in
most cases.

16th September 2002

ALMOST ABANDONED

On the eve of taking charge of Transitional Government, Brahimi

reminded Karzai that security remained the foremost challenge. The United
Nations urged the new government to build secure country. Karzai vowed to
unite nation divided by war and ethnic anger. This couldnt be achieved
without taming warlords. He has to deal with them firmly and with urgency.
He has to accomplish the tasks of drafting constitution and choosing
parliament for Afghanistan. No doubt a lot will be done by UN and US in
choosing and drafting, but he as President of Afghanistan has to play his role
in the best interest of his people.
Much has to be done for return of refugees and rehabilitation of internally
displaced people. Their return and rehabilitation has to be so planned and
carried out that it must prove permanent. This cannot be ensured without
concerted efforts of UN organizations and financial support of the world
community.
The UN organizations dealing with the problem have shown no urgency.
These organizations could afford to be complacent, but Karzai cannot ignore
this essential task. Unless repatriation and rehabilitation of millions of Afghans
is not completed, the reconstruction of Afghanistan cannot take off.
Afghanistan also needs materialization of promises of aid made by the
donors for reconstruction and revival of economy. So far the promises have
been fulfilled with great care. Karzai has been appealing for provision of funds
without much success. He has yet to learn skillful use of begging bowl.

RESTORATION OF PEACE
ISAF was responsible for restoring peace and security in Kabul and rest
of the country was left at the mercy of warlords. In Kabul too the security was
breached frequently. In consequence of the incidents of bomb-blasts and
assassination of Qadeer, ISAF took measures to tighten security and train
Afghan bodyguards to protect officials.
The improvement of security in Kabul was important for the protection of
puppet regime, but people of Afghanistan wanted peace in country-side. There
was definite requirement of expanding ISAF as was envisaged in Bonn
Agreement. Dostum, Ismael, Karzai and his ministers repeatedly appealed for
the expansion. Annan demanded the same. The expansion was essential for
disarming local militias, which were source of most of the trouble.
America did not agree to the expansion and European Union considered
the expansion as virtually impossible. The best alternative to International
Force lied in raising of Afghan army and police. America saw multi-ethnic army

as key to stability. UN set a target of 60,000-strong army, but only 600 were
under training at present. The first battalion of new Afghan army graduated in
July. Karzai delivered a sermon of unity to the cadets, who vowed to serve their
country and not the warlords. The government pinned hopes on national army.
The army on which some hopes could be pinned would require
considerable time and effort to come up. America will never equip it to the
extent, which could make it a potent force. Donations of arms and equipment
from countries like Russia and Bulgaria will not make it stronger than a weak
militia.
Afghan Government, which was unable to pay the soldiers adequately,
could not equip it suitably. Lowly paid troops with lack of experience will not
be able to perform well. Ethnic loyalties will also hamper its cohesiveness.
The Germans assisted in renovating the Police Academy. It was claimed
that national police force was in the making, but its case was no different from
the army. Karzai had no trust in Afghan bodyguards. He called for their better
training, although his mistrust extended much beyond the scope of training.
The army and police, trained and equipped as such, will not be able to
meet the challenges posed by the warlords, who will protect their respective
domains jealously. And as long as the warlords retain the capability to run their
enclaves like private mini-states, they will maintain (private) armies to collect
taxes and ignore central authority.
Fahim alone has 500 APCs and 300 tanks provided by Russia. He will not
hand over his arms and military equipment, which he so dearly preserved even
during fighting against Taliban. If he doesnt do it, others wont. Having means
to fight, they will keep challenging the central authority and destroying peace of
Afghanistan:

Hundreds of Afghans became homeless when Dostum and Atta clashed

during last week of June. Six persons were killed as supporters of Zadran
and Mualim clashed during third week of July.

Fighting between Tajiks and Pushtoons in Shindand left twelve persons

dead on 23rd July. On 1st August fifty persons were killed in fighting in
Ghoryan district of Herat.

Eight Afghans were killed in tribal feud on 19th August. Next day five
supporters of Zadran were killed in Paktia. Ousted Zadran counter
attacked leaving sixteen Afghans dead as residential areas were pounded
with rockets and missiles.

On 7th September rival Afghan tribes clashed in Khost. Next day fifteen
people were killed in an offensive launched against Bacha Khan.

On 16th September eight persons were killed in factional fighting and five
Afghans perished in a clash near Khost on 19th September.

Karzai faced a gigantic task of establishing the writ of his government.

He vowed to eradicate warlordism by frequently appealing for peace, sending
teams for mediation and ordering them to respect central government.
The major challenge came from Pushtoon nationalists, who agree with
him only to disagree. He served warning to Padshah Khan and urged him to
halt protests. In the absence of any positive response he initiated action against
him. Padshah Khan refused to accept his authority. Tore Khan of Kunar
continued luring government soldiers on pretext of better wages. Differences
between Karzai and Ismail Khan were also on the rise.
In fact the warlords were trying to settle old scores and thereby
destabilized respective provinces. They have not been tamed even by bribes
offered by UK and US for seeking their support for Karzai. Only Hazaras
realized that revenge was not going to help. They felt the need of disarmament, negotiated cease-fire, observed truce after bitter clashes, but
removed the Tigga once again.
In addition to the warlords, the aggrieved Pushtoons have resorted to
subversive activities, which appeared to be gaining momentum. In Kabul a
bomb exploded outside building of a ministry on 16 th August and next day there
were two more blasts. A girl lost her hand due to bomb blast on 27 th August. On
5th September thirty persons were killed and fifty hurt in Kabul as result of car
bomb.
An Afghan official was shot dead in Paktia on 6th July. On 21st July a
female doctor was killed near Spin Boldak. One person was killed and two
injured in an ambush on 14th August. On 20th August a bomb killed one person
in Kandahar. Several people were injured in a blast in Khost cinema on 8 th
September. Hundreds of suspects were held after attack on Helmand chief.
There were two serious accidental blasts in Spin Boldak and Jalalabad in
which possibilities of subversion could not be ruled out. In first accident more
than thirty people died in an arms depot and in the second forty persons were
killed.
On 6th July Afghan Vice President Haji Qadeer was gunned down. The
killers escaped before the guards could react. The failure to react led Security
chief to suspect involvement of guards in assassination. Weeping Karzai
vowed to nab the killers. He sought help in murder probe, but there was scant
progress. Nangarhar reverberated with calls for arrest of Qadeers assassins.
There was no lead to the motive of murder, which resulted in
formulation of many hypotheses. Some said that warlords Hazrat Ali and Zaman

might be behind his murder. Others suspected NA, but Mujaddadi ruled it out.
India tried to implicate Pakistan. A few opined that it could be a drug-related
murder. The fact remained that factional rivalries were taking their toll.
Killing of one minister wont undermine Karzai government.
Nevertheless Qadeer was important for bridge-building for government access
to Pushtoons and in that context his murder would be great setback to Karzai
according to Yusufzai. It was definitely a blow to Karzais strategic policies.
There were threats to Karzais own life. US troops protected him against
these threats. A plot to kill Karzai was foiled on 30 th July after a tip-off. On 5th
September Karzai survived an assassination attempt in Kandahar where he had
gone to attend wedding of his younger brother.
His visit was being projected to show his popularity. Media claimed that
loud applause broke out as the presidential motorcade drove by. An on-looker
was reported saying that in the six years that Mulla Omar was here, I never saw
him even once. I have seen Karzai three times now.
The attack failed, but it negated claims about his popularity. The attack
was regretted, not by Pushtoons, but by the outsiders. Bush and Annan
condemned it. Washington reaffirmed support for Afghan leader. World leaders,
including those of Pakistan and Iran, were outraged at assassination attempt.
Sherzai blamed terrorists for shooting at Karzais car. Many fingers were
pointed towards remnants of Taliban and al-Qaeda, but nobody bothered to
mention the causes of this attempt. The precedence of not to bother about
causes was followed.
Abuses of Pushtoons were unacceptable to UN, but these continued
unchecked. They were targeted by Tajiks and others and humiliated in streets
of Kabul on behest of the Crusaders. Nobody cared about Pushtoons losing
faith in Karzai and US.
Human Rights situation remained unsatisfactory. Prisoners were
subjected to sex abuse and extreme torture. In these conditions Karzai found
time to visit US to attend September 11 anniversary and Tajiks paid tribute to
Masud to project him as national leader.

REHABLITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Repatriation of refugees did not receive due attention of those responsible
for accomplishing this important task. All of them had excuses for their failings.
Reportedly about one million Afghans had returned home from Pakistan by first
week of July, but thousands of them were stranded on border. This figure cannot
be taken as correct because Afghans go through repatriation process to pocket

few bucks given by UNHCR and then return, at times bribing border guards to
re-enter Pakistan illegally.
Iran handled refugee problem firmly. After giving a deadline it started
expelling them despite concerns shown by UNHCR. Pressure was mounted on
Afghan refugees to quit Iran. During first week of September Iranian police
arrested more than two hundred refugees.
The civilized world took stern action against Afghan refugees. They
were dubbed as asylum seekers. In July Britain decided to send home failed
Afghan asylum seekers and in consultation with France planned to close
Sangatte camp. It was reported that UK was offering 2,500 Pounds to each
Afghan for going back.
Australia handled asylum seekers like criminals. To start with it
cancelled their valid visas. Many of them were hauled up and put behind bars.
In August Australia decided to deport hundreds of Afghan refugees to Pakistan
as they had landed in prohibited land via that route.
In September EU took a collective decision to send them home. The
civilized world hunted the refugees in their countries, dubbed them as asylum
seekers, put them behind bars and deported them; whereas a rogue state
sheltered them for more than two decades. According to the civilized world
repatriation from Pakistan was hampered due to some humane constraints.
Refugees were scared to return due to prevalent violence in Afghanistan.
Optimist refugees faced daunting challenge as they found their homes ruined.
Organizations responsible for their rehabilitation were unable to provide them
shelter.
Bureaucratic approach of UNHCR and unwarranted interference by
custodians of Human Rights complicated repatriation procedures. UNHCR also
battled against fake refugees. Above all the civilized world was of the view
that return of refugees would place severe strain on Kabul government.
Humanitarian work carried out by UN agencies fell well short of the
requirement. Rehabilitation of refugees and internally displaced Afghans
suffered for want of funds. Even for sustaining the existing effort UN needed $
398 million, which were yet to be arranged. The agencies warned that
humanitarian crisis hovered over Afghanistan.
Rehabilitation work includes provision of food, transport, shelter and
medical. WFP, instead of asking the Crusaders, urged Gulf and Asian states to
provide aid. America pressed EU for food aid. When donors failed to provide
promised aid, UN was forced to cut rations. Pakistan however promised to send
50,000 metric tons wheat out of which 900 metric tons were dispatched in
August.

Movement of refugees could be carried out in hired transport, but for that
UN needed funds. Indus Motor Company of Pakistan donated 23 vehicles for
this purpose. Provision of shelter was restricted to provision of limited quantity
of tents and blankets. Saudi Arabia delivered medical aid worth $ 1 million. US
troops set up field hospital and Sweden sent 66 metric tons of medicines. WHO
claimed that Afghanistan would be polio free before Pakistan.
Estimates for reconstruction of Afghanistan were quite staggering. Only
for rebuilding of school system Afghanistan needed over $ 1 billion. It meant
that the pledged aid of $ 4.5 billion was not sufficient for reconstruction of a
ruined country.
European Union assured to fulfill aid promises. America reiterated its
commitment to get Afghans back on their feet. France renewed its support for
Afghan reconstruction. ADB promised to finance rebuilding of roads.
Businessmen and migrs were ready to invest if conditions were right.
Karzai pledged to create business-friendly climate. He and his ministers
repeatedly urged speedy delivery of pledged aid, but Afghanistan got small
fraction of promised aid. Canada announced $ 13.75 million for reconstruction.
Australia provided $ 1.3 million for demining. Japan, Saudi Arabia and US were
applauded for providing aid with a view to seeking more rather than
thanksgiving.
Till mid September the donors disbursed only half of $ 1.8 billion of
pledged aid. Western bureaucracy was blamed for blocking it. America had its
own views about slow progress. It blamed Iran for causing problems in Afghan
reconstruction.
The second impediment in reconstruction was the menace of mines.
Landmines were deadly threat to men, women and children. Everyday they
were killed or maimed due to landmine blasts. This menace should have been
tackled on priority.
Reconstruction needed sincere efforts. The failure can lead to chaos
and crisis according to UN. Frustration has been growing over delay in delivery
of aid. No landmark reconstruction scheme has yet started with the exception
of 120-kilometer highway from Herat to the Iranian border, which has been
entirely funded by Tehran. Only one contract of 5 million dollars to
rehabilitate the Salang tunnel was signed, but work on the project has not yet
started.
Neglect of rehabilitation and reconstruction has resulted in child labour.
More than 37 thousand children are working in Kabul alone. Women suffered
due to lack of facilities and suicide tendency among them was on the rise. The
situation is likely to aggravate if Iraq is attacked. Abdullah expressed concern

over diversion in US attention and Karzai asked the world not to abandon
Afghanistan.
Child labour and rise in suicide tendency did not perturb the civilized
world, but revival of poppy cultivation caused them worry. The government
admitted its failure in clearing poppy fields. Narcotics business thrived and
Afghanistan once again became top supplier of heroin. Karzai suggested that
reconstruction and drug fight could work together.
Some countries provided aid in kind. French soldiers started building a
school for children. Polish NGO planned to rebuild arts school in Kabul.
America awarded scholarships to six girls and launched first Internet caf. India
donated buses and three Airbuses. China gifted two lions for Kabul Zoo, which
perhaps meant much more than a good-will gesture.
The Transitional Government took preliminary steps to revive Afghan
economy. It decided to replace Afghani with new currency, to end speculative
dealings. The government pledged to make central bank fully independent.
The government faced problems in providing good governance due to
political infighting. Pushtoons resented their non-representation. Qanooni
accepted new assignment of education ministry with reluctance. He formed a
political party, probably to challenge Karzai in elections. Split between Karzai
and Fahim was reported. Northern Alliance pressurized its opponents,
particularly Dostum with a threat to investigate war crimes.
High-handedness of NA and discrimination of Pushtoons weakened
Karzais position. The problem was further aggravated by foreign interference.
He was incapable of telling EU and US to refrain from interfering in
formulation of cabinet and Loya Jirga.
Karzai did well in maintaining cordial relations with neighbouring
countries. He freed many Pakistanis, who were languishing in Afghan jails.
Pakistan reciprocated and Afghan prisoners were released. Pakistan desired to
reopen Herat and Mazar consulates. Its trade team visited Kabul and Pakistan
offered free trade to Afghanistan.
Both the countries acted promptly to address untoward incidents.
Torkham border was closed due to misunderstanding, but reopened the very
next day. Entry of Afghans in upper Dir was banned with mutual understanding.
Joint body was revived.
Khatami visited Kabul on 12th August. Karzai termed Afghan relations
with Iran as vital. Tanai hoped that Khatamis visit would open new era of
bilateral ties. Iran pledged to stay out of Afghan affairs and promised to arrest
al-Qaeda activists. Iran assisted in training of Afghan doctors and farmers.
Karzai offered mediation between Iran and US and assured cooperation in

nabbing persons involved in killing of 8 Iranians when Mazar fell to Taliban in

1998.
Relations with India remained cordial. Afghans found it easier to get
generous assistance from otherwise miser Bania due to his enmity with
Pakistan. India assisted in training of Afghan diplomats and law enforcers.
Sinha held talks on peace and rebuilding during his visit to Kabul.
Relations with Russia and Central Asian states have been friendly despite
some unpleasant incidents. In June and July Russian guards killed Afghans
trying to cross border and in July armed Afghans kidnapped Tajik border guard.

MANHUNT
America claimed that al-Qaeda fighters couldnt get back to mountain
hideouts. FBI felt that Osama was dead and US dismissed the claim that 98
percent of al-Qaeda leadership was alive and well. A General saw no possible
upsurge in al-Qaeda combat activity.
But Osama, Omar and their men kept haunting the Crusaders as reports
about their wellbeing poured in. Osama and Omar were alive said Afghan
Foreign Minister. Another minister stated that Omar was hiding in mountains
of central Afghanistan. Omar was alive and active revealed yet another
Afghan minister. A former minister predicted that Taliban might return. Osama
and Omar were in good health announced Abu Laith Allibi.
The Crusaders also indulged in similar speculations. Mulla Omar was
still hiding in Afghanistan said US official. Rumsfeld thought that al-Qadea
was getting fresh supplies. A spokesmans imagination went farther, he
visualized that al-Qaeda was planning new attacks against US. Brahimi
concluded that al-Qaeda and Taliban were still a threat.
The terrorists forced the Crusaders to stretch their imagination farther.
Al-Qaeda warned US against more attacks. A video showed Osama declaring
war against US. Internet displayed a letter in which Osama urged Afghans to
rise against US. Al-Jazeera aired al-Qaeda men interviews and a paper reported
that al-Qaeda sent many gold shipments to Sudan.
These reports were enough to fear fresh wave of Taliban and al-Qaeda
combat. What will be the nature of this combat? This could be assessed in the
light of more serious reports. Taliban were in search of buyers for smuggled
uranium. CNN showed al-Qaeda carrying out chemical tests. Al-Qaeda may
have or might get nuclear weapons concluded Pentagon.
Thus manhunt must continue. Coalition forces launched hunt for Mulla
Omar in June and British troops withdrew from Khost. In July US troops

searched Khost for weapons and in August fresh operations were launched in
Paktia. These operations were not successful, because al-Qaeda had received
prior warning. America complained about limitations in battling against alQaeda, yet achieved the following:

US forces arrested eight suspected Taliban on 22nd June and on 16th July
Americans detained four Afghans in Hesarak.

Two Afghans were killed and one Arab arrested in Nangarhar on 19th July.
Next day US troops captured a former Afghan commander.

Two Afghans died in an ambush in Khost on 27th July and on 6th August
US forces killed two Afghans in firefight.

US detained twelve Afghans on 12th August for suspected al-Qaeda links.

Ten Afghans were held during Operation Sweep.

On 29th August ninety-five al-Qaeda operatives were held and two days
later police official was held for his links to al-Qaeda.

Coalition troops recovered arms and ammunition during operations. In

last week of June two large cache of mortars and other weapons were seized.
Seven caches of weapons were seized in July, which included anti-aircraft
missiles and documents. In August US soldiers found weapons being smuggled
through Mazar. During first three weeks of September three more recoveries of
weapons and explosives were made.
America kept up to its tradition of inflicting collateral damage. Civilians
were killed and wounded in US bombing in Jalalabad and Paktia. The most
gruesome incident of collateral damage occurred on 1st July when American
warplanes bombed wedding party of niece of Taliban military chief for southern
provinces, Mulla Biradar.
Forty guests were killed in Derawoot, located in outskirts of Tarin Kot the
capital of Uruzgan. The area was bombed from 11 p.m. to 4 a.m. US troops
detained several suspects after the raid. The villagers alleged that the attackers
let bombing victims die. Nobody was allowed to help the injured. The soldiers
filmed naked women, as Afghan would call a woman naked if she was without
Chaddar or Burqa.
Reportedly Mulla Omar used to live in this area in the past. Some reports
said that the village was former home of Omar. It could be possible that US
suspected Mullas participation in the wedding party and tried to kill him.
Kabul slammed US over wedding party bombing. Abdullah termed it as
unjustifiable. Hizbut Tahrir alleged that Uruzgan massacre was intentional.
Afghans were furious over bombing and questioned US role after deadly air

strike. Protest rally was held in Kabul. Uruzgan governor asked US to hand over
Afghan informers.
People of Pakistan assailed the bombing. Peshawar Bar Association and
PTI flayed the attack. New Zealand condemned the incident. UN demanded that
US must shield civilians in its war on terror. China however voiced cautious
criticism of US air raid.
America tried to cover up the war crime. Major Gary Tallman of US
investigators team came out with these findings:

This area had been under reconnaissance since October and every time
aircraft flew over they were shot at.

Aircraft flew over area for two days. Each time they were fired upon from
walled compound of Abdul Malik. US special soldiers slipped into area to
confirm location of guns. For 48 hours our guys were watching them
fire.

The raid was part of a coordinated strike against four ant-aircraft guns, a
mortar position and a cave complex belonging to Taliban or al-Qaeda
forces in the region. (After air attack when US troops went into area they
found nothing.)

US decided to send another team to probe bombing, but called off its visit
to affected villages. It claimed that video of attack showed firing from villages.
Official spokesman at Kandahar blamed the attack on false intelligence and
confusion. Independent reports alleged that US troops removed evidence to
cover up. US and Karzai denied reports of cover-up.
Afghans demanded UN probe into Uruzgan tragedy. Pakistans religious
leaders termed the bombing as brutal act and urged UN to take notice of killing
of innocent people. UN held an inquiry and handed over the findings to
Afghanistan and US. The Crusaders did not accept the report, because UN
team was not qualified to make claims over US raid.
The incident was a heinous war crime, but the world ignored it, because
soldiers of the civilized world were involved. The incident will have no
serious repercussions as well, except that Karzai could earn more anger of
Pushtoons. The bombing blunder wont affect the ongoing US operations,
despite Gul Aghas plans to rein in US and Afghan Defence Ministrys request
to US to seek permission before striking al-Qaeda units.
America admitted civilian casualties in bombing. Bush phoned Karzai to
condole deaths. US commander pledged help to victims and reportedly America
planned to provide compensation to families of the victims, but on second
thought abandoned the idea as it could lead to an unending exercise of
compensation.

The incident caused no burden on American conscience. Its arrogance

remained unscratched. A Senator asserted that US troops presence was must for
security. Wolfowitz regretted civilian casualties, but backed air raid and said
that US campaign would last for years. Rumsfeld and Tommy agreed with
him. Powell announced that US troops would stay in Asia and a General
wanted to expand war on terror. Fahim was pleased to back US troops stay
and Abdullah affirmed continuation of campaign against al-Qaeda.
Bombing of wedding party coincided with an incident in Pakistan. A
young girl was ordered to be gang-raped as punishment of an offence
committed by her brother, who was seen flirting with a girl of superior caste.
The killing in a Killi of Uruzgan has some similarities with gang rape in village
Jatoi of Pakistan. In case of incident in Pakistan the honour of a superior caste
was encroached upon. In case of Afghanistan the pride of a super power was
dented.
In Pakistan elders of the village awarded and administered punishment to
the sister of the culprit. They considered that gang rape of sister of the culprit
was an appropriate punishment to avenge the honour of a superior caste. In
America the elders decided to punish hosts of the suspected offenders and in
doing so even wedding parties could be bombed on slightest of suspicion.
Only the people, who consider themselves superiors, come forth with
such logic and commit atrocious acts. The vanity of ostentatious people is hurt
quite easily. In awarding the punishments they dont go by the norms of justice.
The aim of making the culprit to pay the price as deemed fit by the superior,
cannot be achieved through administration of justice.
In Jatoi the culprits were apprehended, as there were authorities superior
to them, who could take cognizance of the crime committed in the name of
justice. In case of Uruzgan the superiors remained at large and will remain so as
there is no one superior to them. They are above law.
The decision of Punchait of Village Jatoi and the UN Resolution
approving attack on Afghanistan were outcome of the same rationale. Both had
to act to the wishes of the Village Headman. The Punchait moved to avenge
suspected molestation of honour of the superior caste setting aside the consent
of the girl. The UN resolved to avenge the destruction of twin towers without
apportioning any blame on America.
Hunt for al-Qaeda and Taliban has alienated ethnic Pushtoons. They have
started retaliating to atrocities committed by US troops:

On 24th June a rocket was fired near US Special Forces and next day US
troops came under rocket fire in Khost.

On 2nd July a US soldier was hurt in attack near Kandahar and four
rockets hit Jalalabad airport.

US soldier was injured in sniper attack on 11th July and grenades were
fired at US air base. Next day another US base was attacked near
wedding party site.

On 14th July four soldiers were killed in rocket-attack in southern

Afghanistan. Three days later four US soldiers were injured near
Asadabad.

On 21st July rockets were fired at US forces. Two days later four US
troops were reported dead in Gardez attack.

Reportedly seven US soldiers were killed on 26 th July, but Washington

denied. Next day four US troops were hurt in Khost and on 28 th July three
allied soldiers were injured in an ambush in Paktika.

On 1st August an Afghan suicide bomber killed three US soldiers. Next

day in another suicide attack one cop was killed and four injured in
Paktia.

Grenades were hurled on FAO building in Kandahar on 3 rd August. Three

days later two New Zealand soldiers were injured in accident.

On 7th August fifteen were killed in Kabul in a mysterious clash. Afghan

base commander claimed attackers were Pakistanis and Arabs.

Eight Afghan troops died in Khost firing and blast on 11th August. Next
day two persons were wounded as bomb exploded in a video shop in
Khost and a US soldier died of wounds suffered in ambush.

Rockets were fired at US base in Khost and five persons died in grenade
attack in Jalalabad on 13th August. Three days later US safe house was
targeted with rockets in central Afghanistan.

On 18th August two UK troops died of gunshot injuries. Next day two US
soldiers were shot dead in area north of Kabul.

A rocket landed near US troops base in Paktia on 20 th August and a bomb

was found in Kabul bazaar near US Embassy.

On 23rd August sixteen US troops were killed in Khost and Gardez and
one person was killed and five kids wounded in Spin Boldak blast.

On 25th August a blast took place in front of UN guesthouse in Kabul.

Two days later an American soldier was injured in mine blast.

Rockets were fired at Jalalabad airport on 28th August. Five Afghans

perished in Kabul and Bagram blasts on 1st September and next day five
more were injured in rocket attack near Khost.

Four rockets landed near Bagram base on 4 th September and three rockets
were fired at US base in Afghanistan on 12th.

On 16th September ten rockets were fired at US bases and two US soldiers
were injured in Khost blast. Next day an Afghan guard was injured in a
rocket attack on UN office and two rockets hit its office in Jalalabad.

On 20th September US forces were attacked near Bagram, an Afghan

woman killed two US Marines and gunmen in Burqas fired shots at
Afghan soldiers.

Coalition Forces expected cooperation from Afghan Government in the

manhunt. Karzai however opined that al-Qaeda was no longer a major threat
and Governor of Nangarhar agreed with him. He saw no threat from al-Qaeda
and Taliban. Only Tajiks tightened border security to check al-Qaeda men
entry. Norway demanded greater Afghans role in army operations.
Afghan leaders remained preoccupied in reporting whereabouts of Osama
and Omar rather than indulging in manhunt. Abdullah kept pointing towards
Pakistan by issuing ambiguous statements like Osama and Omar were hiding in
the region and Osama was outside Afghanistan.
Musharraf believed that Osama and Omar could be dead. Afghanistan
and US rejected Musharrafs claim to press him for doing more in tribal areas.
In turn he asked for sustained military operations in Afghanistan and wanted
US to stay in Afghanistan till achievement of stability. Disagreement on
whereabouts of al-Qaeda men was quite pronounced.

CONCLUSION
At the time of attacking Afghanistan it was argued that toppling of
Taliban would bring peace and prosperity for the people of war-torn country.
Taliban and their guests have vanquished and Karzai has openly admitted that
threat of al-Qaeda and Taliban no more existed. The peace however couldnt
make a comeback, because puppet regime failed in establishing its writ in
Afghanistan.
Warlords have torn apart the unity of Afghanistan. Gul Agha in Kandahar,
Ismail in Herat, Dostum in Mazar, Tajiks in Kabul and Panjsher, and others in
eastern provinces enjoyed more authority in their respective domains than
Karzai had in Kabul. He had no means to impose the authority bestowed upon
him through Bonn Accord.

Hekmatyar rightly alleged that President Bushs special envoy to

Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, was the real ruler of Afghanistan. As for
Afghan interim President, he needed American commandos for his own
protection. How can we expect his regime to restore peace and offer security to
the people?
Northern Alliance being partner of the Crusaders enjoyed privileged
position. Karzai understood well that Tajiks could threaten stability of his
government anytime. He had to be tactful and accommodating to prevent
toppling of his regime from within.
Alienation of Pushtoons will go against unity and peace of Afghanistan.
Majority cannot be suppressed forever. Karzai hails from the south and
understands the nature of their grievances. However America does not care for
concerns of Pushtoons and Karzai. Bush and his executioners consider all
Pushtoons as Taliban.
Rehabilitation of refugees and internally displaced people suffered from
complacence. The civilized world was interested only in pushing few thousand
Afghans out of Europe and Australia. There was no urgency about repatriation
of millions of refugees in Pakistan.
Reconstruction remained a dream with no signs of its realization. The
Crusaders took no interest and left it for Karzai. They expected him to hold a
begging bowl and test the generosity of his Muslim brethren. They had come to
Afghanistan with the sole aim of destroying evil forces assembled there with
the intention of waging Jihad. They have achieved most of it and concentrated
on completing the remainder. Unity, peace, rehabilitation and reconstruction of
Afghanistan were none of their concerns.
They were however interested in emancipation of women for moderating
the Afghan culture. But Rabbani warned against foreign cultures and Supreme
Court backed TV and radio restrictions on broadcast of Indian films and women
singing. They were dismayed over violence and repression against Afghan
women.
Karzai must remember that toppling of Taliban was not his achievement,
nor is he wearing the royal gown through his own efforts. These
accomplishments belong to the Coalition. He should also know better than
anybody else, that an Afghan in tattered attire is as proud as a gown-wearing
Karzai. He must preserve the pride of Afghans.

26th September 2002

DICTATOR DELVERS DEMOCRACY

Apprehensions have been belied. Musharraf may not be trustworthy for
Vajpayee, but he kept his promises with people of Pakistan. He held elections
on schedule, though many had doubted his intentions about restoration of
democracy.
The political stalwarts of Pakistan, who criticized his plans to restore
controlled democracy must appreciate that he risked confronting them
squarely. They can blame him for weakening the major political parties, but he
should be credited for tying Nawaz and Benazir into brother-sister relationship.
The sister thanked her brother for quitting the race in protest against her ouster.
This may mark the beginning of end to negative politics in Pakistan.
Musharraf addressed the nation on the eve of general elections and asked
the people to feel free to elect honest and dedicated candidates. His team
members put in their best for conduct of polling. The government instructed all
institutions to assist EC. Police was asked to remain neutral during elections.
Nadra set up centres for timely completion of issue of NIC.
Election Commission scrutinized the papers in accordance with rules laid
down by the government, without being deterred by demonstrations, protests
and hunger strikes. Election tribunals disposed the appeals in time. In all 3546
papers for NA and 7649 for PAs were accepted. Finally 12,308 were in the run
for 1070 NA and PA seats.
Election staff was instructed to perform their duty honestly.
Comprehensive security plan for October 10 was formulated. A large number of
polling stations were declared sensitive. Limited numbers of troops were

deployed and army officials were given judicial powers to deal with untoward
incidents effectively to ward against disruption of polls.
The Commission with the assistance of other government agencies made
elaborate arrangements for six weeks of peaceful electioneering; conduct of
unobstructed polling of all the assemblies on the same day; prompt compilation
of results; and facilitating foreign observers to closely monitor the whole
process.
The security plan worked well. RAW agents were arrested in Lahore,
Karachi and Peshawar, who confessed their plans to disrupt elections. Despite
strict security arrangements isolated incidents of violence were reported in
which seven persons were killed. It was no surprise that in almost all the
incidents JEYALAS of PPP were involved.

ELECTIONEERING
Ban on political activities was lifted on 31 st August. Electioneering started
at low key and lacked the usual luster throughout. Only MMA tried to add spice
by organizing a train march, but it was stopped as this was not the authorized
ingredient of the recipe.
The electioneering ended peacefully on 8th October, barring a clash
between workers of MMA and MQM in Karachi and killing of a pilot while
dropping pamphlets near Peshawar. The tribal elders upheld their traditions
and warned women not to vote on October 10.
Pathan of Charsadda availed the opportunity and indulged in betting on
favourite candidates. Nobody advised the tribal elders to send a few roosters to
check this deviation from the age-old tradition. Perhaps the elders found nothing
wrong in equating roosters with candidates.
The activities of electioneering include; issue of fascinating manifestos,
framing of attractive but deceptive slogans, rhetoric boasting and pulling legs of
the opponents in indecent manner. Unfortunately the politicians laid special
emphasis on the last activity. It served no useful purpose and instead stripped
off each other to present ugly sites.
Manifestos contain the outline policy of the respective parties on major
issues. Slogans and rhetoric boasting are the desires expressed in catchwords to
attract the voters. The real intentions however remain secret. Leaving aside
manifestos and secret intentions one can see a lot in slogans. These can be
divided into two categories, the claims and the blames.
PML-QA was dubbed as Kings party. It was generally in agreement with
policies of Musharraf, except minor reservations on amendments. It vowed to

work for economic stability to solve masses problems by providing jobs. It

promised to eliminate corruption and make Pakistan a welfare state.
Peoples Party participated in elections after adding one more P to its
name as if three Ps were not enough. It focused on mustering support of the
civilized world rather than the support of Pakistanis. Hence it talked about
issues of interest to the Crusaders.
Benazir claimed that political government can tackle extremism better.
Democracy in Islamic World would stem terrorism. She boasted about keeping
Taliban away from power. Despite her claim about Taliban, her faithful
husband thought that Benazir could unite Ummah and according to Adeel she
fought hard for democracy.
While launching the party manifesto Fahim and Rabbani pledged to
undo amends if voted to power. Benazir supported the supremacy of
parliament. The party promised to resolve grievances of smaller provinces. Its
candidates flayed the increase in oil prices, vowed to serve people, promised to
seek release of jailed Pakistanis and pledged not to take oath until BB returned.
MMA, a political union of the religious parties, thrived on slogans of
Islamization and anti-American rhetoric. Religious parties vowed to launch
crackdown on vulgarity and obscenity in the society, if elected. They pledged to
introduce Islamic system to bring revolution through Islamization of economy
and turn the country into a fortress of Islam.
Fazl expressed MMAs commitment to protect countrys Islamic identity.
Those talking of introducing secularism in the country are doing it to please
their masters to the detriment of the country he said. Qazi urged Muslims unity
to thwart designs of imperialists.
Jamaat warned that US was out to harm Pakistan and Qazi vowed to
foil US designs. He alleged that America was killing Muslims in the name of
terrorism whereas America itself was the biggest terrorist state. Noorani
boasted that US was afraid of religious forces and Fazl accused the West of
blocking Islamic movements. Sami asked the educated people to join fight
against US plots. MMA opposed US presence in Afghanistan, lashed foreign
policy and resolved to oust western agents.
MMA certainly laid emphasis on Islam and the Crusades, but it did not
ignore the aspects of good governance. It vowed to eliminate feudalism and
ensure establishment of egalitarian society. It pledged to purge corruption from
society and asked people to defeat looters and selfish politicians.
Qazi claimed that MMA platform was free of communalism and
Ibrahim assured to seek rights for Frontier Province. Noorani gave top priority

to supremacy of law and the party reiterated to launch movement against

amendments and the President.
PML-N adopted anti-establishment and anti-Generals stance in retaliation
to the treatment meted out to it since October 1999. Its election campaign
lacked enthusiasm, which reflected low morale of the leaders. However, it
asserted that Pakistan was not the property of Generals and talked about
strengthening democratic institutions to end future army takeover. It demanded
accountability of army Generals.
Moderate but politically weak parties formed national Alliance. Leghari
supported continuation of policies of present regime and deplored Benazir and
Nawaz. His party stressed upon provision of good governance and urged
political forces to help create national harmony.
On economic issues he ventured to be realistic and said that Pakistan
couldnt be run without loans. We will take soft loans to run the country. His
party promised to eliminate poverty, hunger and diseases and take drastic steps
to reform education system. It cautioned people against corrupt politicians.
ANP has been a staunch nationalist party by tradition. Asfandyar vowed
to follow footprints of his grand Pa. Nasim claimed that ANP was fighting war
of Pushtoons and the party vowed to secure and protect their rights. Her son
believed in strong federation and for that provincial autonomy was must. ANP
wanted stronger and stable Pakistan, but demanded cut in size of army. He
asserted that amendments were the sole domain of parliament.
Prime Minister from NWFP was demanded to pull the country out of
crisis. It appealed to the people for reposing trust in ANP. On the last day of
electioneering its leaders faltered by stating that ANP was not power-hungry.
The hospitable Pathans believed their words and served them no feast.
PTI was a newborn in politics of Pakistan. It had no achievements to
boast about and no mistakes to regret, but had lot of criticism for blunders
committed by the rulers of the past. It took rebellious anti-corruption and antiCrusades stance.
PTI pledged to work for economic uplift and for that Imran considered
the change in country was inevitable. He urged people to vote for change in
political system. His party member, Dr Afzal, intended to establish a society
free of exploitation and injustice, like the one established by Taliban in
Afghanistan. Imran expressed his desire to raise nations self-esteem and
support Kashmiris. No one can stop Kashmiris from crossing Line of Control.
Sherpao led a splinter group of PPP, which was restricted to NWFP. He
pledged to serve the masses. His party stressed upon provincial autonomy to
end woes of provinces. He pledged to secure rights of Pushtoons to tell the

voters that ANP was not the only party, which cared for their rights He shrewdly
remained conscious of importance of press-coverage and asked government to
remove grievances of journalists.
Qadri formed PAT to fight for the cause of poor and fulfill all genuine
demands of poor countrymen. He promised an end to the unfair distribution of
wealth, to purge society of inhuman customs and fight against obsolete and
cruel system. To this end he asked for election of honest people.
Achakzai is a staunch Pushtoon nationalist wandering in Balochistan in
quest of foot-steps of Bacha Khan. He asked democrats to block the path of
government-baked people and demanded greater Pushtoon province. MQM
also joined the band of nationalists and demanded complete provincial
autonomy. Abbas Sarfraz after quitting federal ministers office vowed to make
country welfare state. Sheikh Rashid announced that amendments needed
validation by parliament.
By and large election campaign was devoid of catchy slogans.
Politicians made plain promises, perhaps too plain to be believed and
implemented. They surely lacked the skill of framing attractive slogans, but not
in hurling accusations at each other.
The leaders of PML-QA excelled in accusing the opponents on different
counts. Azhar blamed Benazir and Nawaz for looting the country. Shujaat
called for foiling looters conspiracies. Pervez labeled Nawaz and Benazir as
turncoats and said that convicts couldnt serve the country. Salim asked
masses to reject hypocrites. The party appealed to the people to reject tax
evaders.
Some leaders specifically named the opponents. Nisar accused ANP of
doing nothing for Pushtoons. Saifullah flayed MMA and PML-N. All parties
generally blamed army for derailing democracy. The Kings party blamed
bureaucracy instead of army to remain on the right side of Generals. Towards
the end of electioneering, PML-QA wanted sanity in politics.
PPPP vowed to continue its struggle against forces of oppression.
Benazir urged people to foil plots of junta while addressing a rally via satellite.
Babar accused Qazi of misusing funds. MMA was quite vocal in accusing army
of destabilizing democracy. It blamed US agents for their designs to destroy
Pakistan. Qazi and Fazl urged people to reject US supporters.
ANP alleged that MMA was deceiving the nation by wooing voters in
the name of Islam. Nasim criticized MMA for misusing book symbol. An ANP
leader termed Qazi as American agent. Nasim called Qazi and Babar the
killers of Pushtoons. She also lashed out at Sherpao for following footprints of
his forefathers in showing loyalty to the rulers.

Imran dubbed Chaudhris as Gujrat Mafia and vowed to take them to

court over loan issue. He saw no room for looters in elections and urged voters
to reject plunderers. He challenged the forces of oppression. Sherpao asked
people to reject opportunists and tax evaders. PAT also vowed to fight against
looters.
The worst incident took place between Imran and Choudhris. He called
Choudhris of Gujrat a Mafia. The reaction was quite violent. They accused
Imran of getting Jewish money for his elections, an obvious reference to his
wife.
There is no harm in scrutiny of candidates personal conduct, but it is
absolutely unfair to involve family members of the candidate, use indecent
language and label unfounded allegations. Interior Minister had to advise the
political parties to formulate a code of ethics for electioneering.
The negative electioneering has only one positive aspect. It adds to the
knowledge of common man. If the people start believing what they hear during
election campaign then almost all politicians would fall in categories of
plunderers or looters, conspirators or turncoats, convicts or tax evaders,
opportunists or hypocrites, frauds or cheats, junta of plotters or Mafia and forces
of oppression or agents of US. Politicians of Pakistan are lucky, because the
people do not believe them.
While indulging in mud slinging politicians found time for reconciliation
and cooperation. Nawaz and Benazir buried the hatchet. Their parties were
urged to field joint candidates. PPPP offered coalition to PML-N after elections.
ANP and PPPP arrived at consensus on all issues in NWFP. Adeel termed
ANP-PPPP alliance natural. Bashir claimed that ANP-PPPP alliance would
prove milestone for province of NWFP. PML-QA, PPP-S and PQP also entered
into election alliance.
Experience of the past failures led to birth to MMA. Noorani claimed that
alliance of religious parties was not temporary, though their odd alliances
confused the party workers. Only Imran rejected cooperation with big parties
and Sheikh Rashid had his own style of cooperation. He vowed to gift seats to
PML-N after win. Seat adjustment was one of the methods to cooperate, but the
motive behind all adjustments remained selfish rendering the word
cooperation meaningless.
The contesting parties also prepared grounds for rejecting unwanted
results, because most of them apprehended that government agencies would
support the Kings party. PPPP spearheaded the assault on this avenue of the
election campaign.

Benazir apprised Commonwealth of rejection of her papers. She accused

the government of hijacking the whole electoral process and making a mockery
of the revival of democracy. She dubbed elections as mere selection exercise.
The party conveyed its concerns about polls to EU team in writing. It
apprised Election Commission about the government interference in polls and
urged it to pre-empt rigging. Despite fears of massive rigging it boasted to
emerge victorious as its workers were prepared to check pre-polls rigging.
A day before the polls it accused the government of initiating another
round of rigging. On 10th October it alleged foul play and next day threatened
to move court against delay in result. A day later she called for fresh elections.
Imran was runners-up in leveling allegations of rigging. Well before the
polls he cautioned that rigging would ruin Army image and vowed not to allow
the government to rig polls. As the time passed he felt that elections were a rerun of the referendum.
PTI protested against Maqbools alleged interference in elections. It
condemned the government for hoodwinking masses. Imran asked politicians to
unite and contacted Nasrullah over pre-poll rigging. A week before elections
he strongly criticized the government for bias.
Following the precedence set by PPPP, PML-N also complained to EU
mission. On 12th September it alleged that grand rigging was being planned.
Qamar Abbas apprehended that polls would not be free and blamed the
government for weakening major parties. On 10th October it joined PPPP in
alleging foul play. Nawaz rejected election results and his party announced
protest against rigging.
MMA too warned the government against becoming party to elections.
Ghafoor alleged that government broke all records of pre-polls rigging. The
party however did not comment on this aspect after the elections as it got more
than it had expected.
The regional parties did not lack behind in accusing the government.
Achakzai urged EC to take notice of pre-poll rigging. Bugti termed October 10
a day of selection. Government officials were accused of running Zubaidas
campaign. ANP alleged rigging in postal ballots. MQM alleged foul play and
rejected election results. Adeel held Establishment responsible for nationalists
defeat.
There were two parties which desisted from apprehending any foul play,
i.e. PML-QA and NA. PML-QA was satisfied with EC role in election process.
Leghari supported the measures taken for fair polls. Individually Fazl denied
raising issue of pre-polls rigging and his party expressed satisfaction over
election process and Sheikh Rashid decried rigging charges.

The government kept rejecting the charges of bias, foul play and rigging.
Musharraf assured that October elections would be transparent and reiterated
repeatedly that he was committed to holding fair elections. His ministers termed
all pre-poll rigging charges as baseless.
Election Commission resolved to hold transparent polls. It took notice of
reported biased PTV coverage. Action was taken against official preparing fake
ID cards. It remained firm on NIC condition. CEC vowed objectivity and
impartiality during polls.
After elections Nisar asked politicians to stop making charges. Moin
rejected Benazirs demand of re-election. However, keeping the conduct of
referendum in view, the possibilities of selective rigging couldnt be ruled out.
The government had foreseen the implications of rigging charges and
took counter-measures. It invited observers from the civilized world with the
hope that they would approve the fair and free conduct of elections. Hundreds
of observers flocked to Pakistan. EU observers chief arrived on 29 th September.
None of them shied away from coming to Pakistan, a high-risk country where a
team of cricket players had refused to play for security reasons.
The observers had a mission to accomplish, which was much more
important than playing cricket. They did not risk their lives to see restoration of
democracy through a fair and free process. They came to closely watch the
emerging leadership. Their reports would help determining future strategy to
deal with Pakistan.
The West kept urging Musharraf for restoration of democracy. On 7 th
September Rice told him that US expected free elections. VOA reported that the
government was backing PML-QA. Commonwealth considered taking up
rigging issue with the government and warned that Pakistans return to
Commonwealth hinged on polls.
Musharraf assured that polls would be held on time. He told the observers
that polls would be free and fair and genuine democracy would prevail
thereafter. On 6th October he personally briefed the observers. CEC assured EU
chief observer of fair and free polls. Observers were provided full access to
observe election process including vote count. Moin assured them maximum
security and asked Provinces to facilitate observers. EU observers met general
public and reviewed arrangements on 10th October.
The first observation came from Delhi. Sinha termed it sham elections.
He perhaps provided the guideline to Cushnahan, who questioned impartiality
of the government and EC. EU remarked that electoral process had flaws. It had
to be flawed in the wake of Mullas making inroads to the corridors of power.

They would have approved the electoral process if it had ensured the success of
parties of their liking.
The government was late in realizing that decision to invite observers
could back-fire. On 29th September Nisar asked observers not to become party.
Next day Musharraf reminded them of their role and his Foreign Minister asked
world not to prejudge polls process. The inevitable happened and the
government was constrained to take note of EU missions remarks. Moin
rejected EU observers charge and Musharraf flayed it.
The government looked for consolations. Russian Ambassador hailed
election arrangements. Commonwealth team showed its satisfaction with polls
arrangements. America announced that an important milestone was achieved
and declared elections as free and orderly, but decided to keep Pakistan on its
toes by saying that US would now watch transfer of power.

ELECTION RESULTS
At the end of election campaign some parties hesitantly claimed
sweeping of elections, but none was confident of winning thumping majority.
Political pundits had predicted split mandate well before 10th October. The
results announced till 14th October proved them right. Even a simple majority
eluded all the parties in Centre as well as in four provinces.
Three parties had close contest for National Assembly. PML-QA, PPPP
and MMA won bulk of the seats securing positions in the same order. PML-N
and MQM performed well below the expectations and ANP was completely
routed as it failed to win a single seat.
In Punjab PML-QA won 127 out of announced result of 287 seats. PPPP
could manage less than half of the seats secured by the Kings party and PML-N
got 37 only. Despite failing to win simple majority, PML-QA was in position to
form the government.
In Sindh results of 123 seats out of 130 were announced. PPPP led by
winning 50 seats and MQM secured 31 to be at second position. PML-QA,
MMA and NA qualified for bronze medal winning ten seats each.
In NWFP the results of 97 seats out of 99 were announced. MMA outscored all the parties and won 46 seats. Independents were runners-up with 13
seats followed by PPP-S with nine. Results of 48 seats out of 51 were declared
in Balochistan. MMA won 14 and was closely followed by PML-QA with 10
and independent candidates secured six seats.
MMA gave an excellent performance, which was far beyond the
estimates of experts. The alliance of religious parties stunned the game-

watchers around the globe. It surely deserved man of the match award. More
will be said about it later.
The nationalist parties suffered humiliating defeat. Mullas were solely
responsible for ousting them. The causes of their comprehensive defeat and the
course of action likely to be adopted by them in future will also be dilated later.
The government wanted to knockout Nawaz and Benazir. This was
arranged through constitutional amendments instead of defeating them through
political process. Due to the split of PML, Nawaz has been kept out for the time
being. Benazir on the other hand seemed to have escaped the defeat. PPP
retained its unity to some extent and she still exercises control over the party. In
her case the establishment has not succeeded fully.
The masses rejected soldiers-turned-politicians. No senior retired officer
of armed forces was voted to any of the assemblies. It meant that the masses no
more welcomed soldiers in political arena. Having seen their performance over
a prolonged period, the people no more like the army to poke its nose in
politics. The change should be good for the army, as it would help in keeping
the nose clean.
Almost all the party bosses lost their representation in assemblies due to
constitutional amendments or for not seeking the election or because of defeat
in polls. Benazir of PPP, Nawaz of PML-N, Azhar of PML-QA, Nasrullah of
PDP and ARD, Nasim and Asfandyar of ANP, Altaf of MQM and Noorani of
MMA are all non-elected bosses of their parties.
Everyone expected split mandate, but not so much in favour of religious
parties. The unexpected results were attributable to following factors:

Imposition of graduation clause and ban on third term for PM and CMs
knocked out some veterans and so-called popular leaders.

Establishment worked for split mandate, but failed in controlling the

extent of the tilt in favour of MMA. Perhaps, it banked on the past
experience and took it for granted that people wont vote for Mullas. The
government misread the popular sentiment.

Nationalist parties ignored the prevalent geo-political realities and

remained stuck to regional issues; whereas the Crusades had compelled
most Pakistanis to think about national and pan-Islamic concerns. The
nationalists too misread the mind of common man.

Religious leaders read the situation correctly and cashed in on anti-US

sentiments. The credit of MMAs success goes to the Crusades led by the
Richard the Lion of 21st Century.

Mullas were under pressure to perform, because their opponents,

including Musharraf, alleged that religious parties had no political
standing except nuisance value. The people of Pakistan had never voted
for them.

Mullas curbed their habit of fighting with each other. Their parties united
and formed an alliance to emerge as strong political force. Their unity
proved to be their strength.

Lastly, the two major parties had disappointed the people, who decided to
look towards religious leaders to deliver the goods.

MMA victory has sent tremors to India and US commented an analyst.

Benazir blamed the government for creating MMA genie to scare US. She
lacked the courage to blame Mr. Bush as the real culprit. Nusrat Javeed rightly
said, sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. His comments hold good for antiIslam forces in and outside Pakistan.
What could be the effects of the split mandate and MMAs victory? At
this moment only the following can be mentioned:

Gandhis of NWFP, Mizos of Balochistan and Baal Thakure of Karachi

have been routed primarily by MMA. Their defeat can strengthen the
federation.

The unity of religious parties can help in defusing of sectarian extremism.

Power brokers of Pakistan will not be able to ignore views of religious

leaders. They have to be heard and accommodated. This could facilitate
the process of Islamization.

Most of the party leaders will be sitting out of assemblies holding reins of
the elected members. They will be forced to act according to the
guidance provided from outside. Decision-making will not be done in
assemblies. Those who have been talking about supremacy of Parliament
would find it extremely difficult to ensure that.

India will again start crying about cross-border terrorism. Her endeavour
to isolate Pakistan will be reinvigorated.

Afghan Government will not like the re-emergence of Taliban in

Pakistan and that too in adjoining provinces. Northern Alliance is guilty
of committing war crimes against Taliban and their Pakistani supporters;
therefore it will now start looking for counter allegations. Thus PakAfghan relations could face problems.

Opposition to the Crusades will grow. America will be asked to wind up

its bases in Pakistan and operations in tribal areas. The Centre will find it
difficult to ignore the viewpoint of the provincial governments.

In the preceding articles it was hoped that the Crusades might unite the
Ummah. It has not happened so far. May be the Islamic World learns a
lesson from MMAs success.

FUTURE PROSPECTS
Political manoeuvring for forming governments started immediately after
completion of polls. PML-QA having won maximum seats moved fast to muster
the required support to form government at the Centre. Shujaat held meetings
with Leghari, Fazl and Noorani. PML-QA announced that MMA was our
natural ally and also spread the rumour that PPPP was offered premiership with
condition to have alliance with PML-QA.
Fahim rushed to UK to take orders from Benazir. On return he opened
doors to all for talks. Babar had already declared that PPPP would keep all
options open. Benazir tried to pressurize PML-QA to secure maximum benefits
by saying that working with army dictators would be a tedious job. The party
was reportedly divided over deal for government at the Centre and Fahim was
unable to take decisions independently. Benazir convened party meeting in
Dubai.
MMA having third largest mandate was not in position to form
government at the Centre, but others could not ignore it. Every party wanted
MMA on its side. Nawaz assured full support to Qazi and Zafar held talks with
him. Benazir was reported considering deal with MMA. Qazi seduced all of
them by stating that MMA would not make Taliban style government.
The split mandate always complicates formation of government. Some
pessimists suggested forming of national government. The positive side of split
mandate was that it offered wide range of options:

Option One: PML-QA, NA, Independents and others. It will ensure

continuation of domestic and foreign policies, but will be difficult to
achieve for want of required numbers. Even if it succeeds, the opposition
will be very strong.

Option Two: PPPP, MMA, PML-N and others. It will be anti-Musharraf

and could bring major changes in existing policies. The power sharing
formula will be difficult to be worked out as PPPP will not be satisfied
with anything less than a lions share. Establishment may also work
against this possibility. This too will have fairly strong opposition.

Option Three: PPPP, PML-QA and others. It will keep the Mullas out. An
acceptable power sharing formula will be difficult to be worked out.

PPPP will bargain for the return of She. The Crusaders may approve this
combination.

Option Four: PML-QA, MMA, NA, Independents and others.

Continuation of policies will be somewhat ensured. PPPP will be out of
power and will create lot of commotion. Will be easy to keep MMA under
control, but the Crusaders may not like this combination.

Option Five: National government. It will amount to negating the very

purpose of going through the electoral process.

Nusrat Javeed wrote that MMAs right to govern must not be denied.
This holds good for every one. The elected leaders should be allowed to work
out a solution of their own. Nobody has any right to undermine the process.
Even Bazurg politician should desist from ruling out ARD support to PMLQA.
The people elsewhere in the world go to the polls with the hopes of
change for better, but the people of Pakistan have been doing it as a ritual. They
have always been disappointed. The prospects are not very bright this time as
well, because:

PML-QA is likely to continue policies of Musharraf, domestic as well as

foreign, except in case of some constitutional amendments. It is a status
quo party.

PPPP is a party tested twice. It has nothing new to offer. In case of

foreign policy it will keep American interests dearer than national
interests. The party leader believes that American support is necessary to
come and stay in power. In this regard it will be prepared to do more than
what Musharraf has done for the war on terror.

MMA has appeared at National level for the first time. It is difficult to
guess about its performance. The victory has given boost to the
exuberance of its leaders, but exuberance is no substitute for experience.
It may be carried away by its success, dragging itself and the people of
Pakistan into trouble.

The present regime worked overtime to bring change through

disqualifications, ban, and introduction of graduation clause and more. It
managed to bring some new faces, but most of them belong to families of
professional politicians. This will not make any material difference in nature
and character of political outlook, because:

The split mandate will result in formation of coalition government, which

will remain preoccupied with preservation of its majority. Such
governments seldom succeed in providing good governance.

The new government will start working according to the laws

promulgated under Provisional Constitutional Order. Though Supreme
Court has observed that these laws have no legal status, yet the
Parliament will find it difficult to review the status of LFO.

Musharraf assured that Prime Minister and Parliament will enjoy all
powers, but he also said categorically that politicians wont be allowed
to misgovern.

Sami vowed that foreign influence would be eliminated. It will not be so

easy. Qazi has already told the West not to be afraid of MMA. Inam
rightly saw no change in foreign policy after polls.

The long list of apprehensions should not discourage the people of

Pakistan. May be this time the democracy works for the good of every one.
Optimism will do no harm. The reasons to be optimistic are:

Musharraf foresaw very healthy government and he has promised

smooth transfer of power.

Sami has assured that country was not heading towards Mullaism and
world should not to be scared of its victory.

Pragmatic sides of religious parties are already being projected. Qazi

Latif vowed that MMA will not disappoint masses.

PPP-S has predicted that politics will take turn for better.

CONCLUSION
Manifestos and slogans have no relevance to the intentions of politicians
of Pakistan. All parties vow to do wonders for betterment of the people, pledge
to keep the national interests at the foremost and resolve to fight for the
Kashmir cause. All these overtures are forgotten once the undeclared and
unannounced intentions come into play. This should end.
Numerous problems are awaiting the new rulers. They cannot afford to
bog down in constitutional amendments and changes introduced in last three
years. They must ensure political stability, provide good governance, revive
economic activities, salvage Kashmir cause from the damage caused by the
Crusades and withstand the pressure on roll back of nuclear capability, which
is likely to increase in future.

Nationalists will blame others for engineering their defeat, instead of

searching their own souls. They will not accept that their narrow-minded
political approach, dictated by vested interests and nourished by prejudices has
been rejected by the people, who care for Pakistan more than interests of some
individuals and groups.
Probably they are not likely to mend their ways after one defeat. With the
hope of doing well next time, they will try to regroup and present a united front.
Walis and Ajmals have already joined heads to bury the past and start afresh to
fight for Pushtoons.
The onus of defeating them for good lies on MMA and to this end it
should endeavour to provide good governance, wherever it gets the chance to
form a government. It should concentrate on two provinces and defer its
ambition to share power at the Centre. There is no doubt that working in
provinces becomes difficult when someone else is at the helm of affairs in
Islamabad, yet for the long-term gains it must prefer opposition benches.
Much will depend upon on the prudence of Mullas for safeguarding
national interests. They have to exercise extreme restraint to avoid confrontation
with anyone. They must remain mindful of the limitations of Pakistan and the
Ummah.
The unity of Mullas has borne the fruit. It is time for harvesting with care.
The internal and external enemies are harbouring jealousies and they will
reunite to harm them. The unity of Mullas will be subverted by sowing the seeds
of discontent and mistrust. It is time to hold the rope tightly.
They should also not forget that people have turned towards them with
hopes and expectations. They must not disappoint them. If they fail, they will
not only harm themselves but also the nation or perhaps the entire Ummah.
With restoration of democracy in Pakistan, America should start
preferring diplomacy over dictation, but because of its blurred perception it may
ignore the prudence yet again. Its attitude may change for worse due to reemergence of Taliban. It may abandon the strategy of threats and coercion and
resort to open hostility. The revival of religious extremism and insecurity of
Pakistans nuclear assets will be used as pretexts.
The Crusaders should understand that perpetration of state terrorism has
done no damage to the spirit of Jihad. The people of Pakistan, by voting in
favour of religious parties, have indirectly conveyed that Qataal-fi-Sabeelillah is
need of the hour, because the Crusaders consider it obligatory to crucify
thousands of Muslims in the name of war on terror

16th October 2002

OIL, ISRAEL OR ELSE

American war on terror has been going on for more than a year.
Hundreds of terrorists have been killed and captured. Thousands of them have

been beaten out of their main sanctuary. The sources financing them have been
choked. But the Crusaders could not claim that they have defeated terrorism.
Contrarily the terrorism has been on the rise. Hundreds of lives were lost
in many parts of the world. Suicide attacks in Israel, blast in Bali, ramming of a
boat filled with explosives into a super tanker and carnage in a theatre in
Moscow were a few to be quoted out of numerous acts of terror.
These were in addition to the acts of terrorism perpetrated by state
agencies in the name of war on terror. Killing of Kashmiris by Indians, of
Chechens by Russia, massacres of Palestinians by Israel and bombing of
wedding party by Americans were nothing but acts of terrorism. The state
terrorism too has gained momentum since October 2001.
Despite their visible but shameful victories, leader of the Crusaders
wanted to expand the holy war. Why is he bent upon creating more chaos
instead of clearing the mess he has already created? What are his intended
goals?
These could be anything other than defeating terrorism. Some say his aim
is to eliminate threats to Israel. Some opine that he wants to reach the riches of
oil. There are others, who think that he intends strengthening US troops already
present in the region. Few still believe in his sincerity about defeating the evil
of terror.

PUSHING FOR WAR

Bush has been longing for aggression against Iraq. The most propagated
reason for attack was Iraqs suspected capability of Mass Destruction Weapons.
Bush and his buddy boy Blair claimed to have evidence in this regard, but both
of them could not produce the proof.
America also saw link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, but rest of the world
was unable to see that. Bush insisted that Iraq and al-Qaeda posed equal threats.
Blair considered Saddam an outlaw and he was keen to help the Sheriff in
getting hold of the culprit. Chirac, a fellow Crusader, however rejected their
contention.
On the basis of these untenable arguments UK and US lobbied for
support of other countries. They sought broadest international support to
disarm Iraq. America failed to convince other nations and then turned towards
own people. It got vote of approval from Congress and then pushed the UN to
certify the legitimacy of intended attack. Announcing that America reserved the
right to act at its own increased the pressure.

In early September Powell started hectic lobbying with world leaders

against Iraq. On 14th September Bush personally sought world support and then
stepped up anti-Iraq campaign and pressed for the war option against Iraq.
America accorded special importance to Russian support. Bolton arrived
in Moscow and met Russian officials to discuss Iraq. About a month later US
envoy again talked with Russians. Italian Prime Minister visited Moscow to
augment American efforts. Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, also rushed to
Moscow to put across his views.
US military commanders visited Turkey to remove its apprehensions.
Bush asked China to back US on Iraq. Burns went to Oman for the same
purpose. Restive Blair had already talked with Putin and sent his envoy to China
and his Foreign Minister to Iran to muster their support. Diplomatic effort was
augmented with threatening gestures:

Dick Cheney was moved to a secret location on 10th September and next
day US vowed to take out Iraqi threat and declared its intention to
move military command to Qatar. Europeans showed solidarity with
America.

On 12th September US considered deadline for Baghdad for return of

weapons inspectors. Next day it was announced that Bush wanted Iraq
action in days.

On 14th September America announced that US command was likely to

move to Persian Gulf. Next day Powell warned that Baghdad wont be
given much time.

On 16th September Bush aide said that Iraq war would cost $ 200 billion,
thereby telling that everything had been worked out. Next day Bush
declared that time to deal with Saddam has arrived and a week later he
wanted 7-day deadline for Saddam.

On 5th October he declared that war with Iraq may be unavoidable and
three days later he asked Saddam to disarm or face war.

On 28th October Pentagon announced its plan to mobilize reservists if

Iraq attacked.

Finally US readied war crimes charges against Saddam on 30th October.

To provide meanings to the threats America and Britain conducted air

raids on Iraq:

On 6th September 100 aircraft attacked Iraq. Allied air strike hit military
facilities on 25th September, but Iraq claimed that civilian airport was
targeted.

On 27th September US jets hit Iraqi missile sites. Two days later US
bombers destroyed radar system at Basra.

Five persons were killed as US and British jets raided Iraq on 3 rd October
and on 11th coalition jets attacked Iraqi missile site.

US warplanes again bombed air defence sites on 22nd October.

Diplomacy, threats and actual attacks failed to convince the world. Bush
made moves on home front to seek legitimacy for his sinister designs. He
discussed Iraq with top lawmakers, asked Congress to approve Iraq attack and
pushed it to act now. US House Committee Okayed Iraq Resolution and
Congress allowed Bush to wage war against Iraq.
Seeking legitimacy through UN was the real aim of America. Bush kept
pressing for a tough UN action against Iraq. He urged UN to confront Saddam,
rejected compromises on Iraq and told UN to delay new inspections till Security
Council passed a resolution to his liking.
Blair repeated his masters desire. Baghdad must be forced to disclose
military potential. Having acquired vote from Congress, Britain and US leaned
on UN over Iraq. Bush unveiled a tough Resolution arrogantly demanding the
following:

Iraq has to accept the Resolution within 7 days of adoption.

Iraq must within 30 days declare all Weapons of Mass Destruction

programs and related materials, including items that also could be used
for civilian purposes.

Inspectors should resume their work no later than 45 days after the
adoption of the Resolution.

Inspectors are to update the Security Council 60 days after that but they
can report any non-compliance by Iraq at any time.

Inspectors are to get immediate, unimpeded, unconditional and

unrestricted access to any place they wish to inspect.

Inspectors have the authority to invite Iraqi scientists and others and their
families out of the country for interviews.

Inspectors can establish no fly and no drive zones around suspected

weapons sites. These zones can be enforced by troops but this proposal is
marked in square brackets, indicating that the United States consider it
provisional.

UN security guards can guard main offices for the inspectors, such as
Baghdad, Basra and Mosul.

Iraq is still and has been in material breach of its obligations under UN
Resolutions.

False statements and omissions in declarations submitted by Iraq

coupled with failure by Iraq to cooperate fully in the implementation of
the Resolution would constitute a further material breach of Iraqs
obligation. The Resolution recalls that the Security Council has
repeatedly warned Iraq it would face serious consequences as result of
continued violations of its obligations.

The inspectors are to report immediately to the Security Council any

interference by Iraq with inspection activities as well as any failure by
Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations. The council then meets
immediately to consider the situation and the need for full compliance
with all relevant Resolutions.

The Resolution was nothing but a concealed unilateral declaration of war

on Iraq. It was opposed by three out of five permanent members of the Security
Council. America disregarded their opposition and reserved the right to act
unilaterally.

WORLDWIDE REJECTION
The world refused to accept the envisaged attack on Iraq as part of the
war on terror. Thus the plans of expanding holy war, as conceived by
America, received criticism from within the ranks of the Crusaders. The war, a
devastating reality, should not be initiated on the basis of drama enacted by
Bush and Blair.
German Chancellor Schroeder opposed US plan of attack. In the heat of
election campaign he equated Bush with Hitler. Powell was outraged over BushHitler comments by German Foreign Office, but Schroeder reaffirmed his
stance on Iraq. After elections Germany however hoped that row with US would
be resolved soon. German Foreign Minister planned to visit US to repair the
damaged ties.
France apprehended that war could spark terror attacks. Frenchophone
nations wanted only essential UN role on Iraq. France opposed draft
resolution, because it lacked convincing argument in favour of war. Therefore,
France stiffened resistance against Resolution on Iraq. Resultantly Blair
exchanged vigorous words with Chirac at summit.
European Union opposed attack in the absence of UN backing. The
organization discussed war against terrorism and Iraq with Asian leaders. The

leaders of both the continents arrived at the consensus that inspectors should
return to Iraq at the earliest.
On home front Clinton urged Bush to get Osama before Saddam.
Albright said the same thing in her own words. US should finish with al-Qaeda
before Iraq. Carter opposed attack on Iraq. Protesters decried US stand on Iraq.
On 6th October Bush was greeted by an anti-war protest in New Hampshire.
Hollywood stars came out to battle Bush over Iraq. Next day thousands of
Americans protested against Bush policy. A banner read, Axis of Evil, CheneyBush-Ashcroft.
Robert Fisk commented that US case for war was built on blindness,
hypocrisy and lies. Blair faced threat of Labour revolt and embarrassment of
rallies in London. Canada warned US against attack. Anti-war demonstration
flared into clash in Australia. Amnesty International flayed White House for
using their reports for political ends.
Though opposition of Arabs carried no weight in comparison to American
will, yet they vehemently opposed attack on Iraq. Syria blasted US and hailed
Iraqi decision on inspectors. Riyadh repeated the accusation of double
standards practiced by US. Jordan and Saudi Arabia refused to become launch
pad for attack.
Arabs made some counter moves at diplomatic level. Arab League chief
took the drive against Iraq war to Europe and US and hoped for early Iraq and
UN talks on arms. Arabs stressed upon UN role in resolving the crisis. Saudi
leaders discussed Iraq and US warning with Iran. Riyadh asked US to have
world backing on attack. Saudi businessmen visited Iraq after twelve years.
Bahrain proposed sending Arab team to Iraq with a view to pre-empting US
attack. Moroccan king discussed Iraq crisis with Putin.
Arabs realized that attack on Iraq will open gates of hell and none of
them will remain unscathed. They were deeply worried after US Congress
green light on Iraq. But Arabs found themselves helpless against the Crusaders.
Sanity prohibited challenging the super power. One had to be drunk to ram into
US consulate gate to show ones anger. Kuwait rightly tested sirens in readiness
for war.
Saudi Arabia could only spell out condition for supporting toppling of
Saddam, i.e. removal of US troops from its soil, but ultimately it might allow
US strike from its soil. Straw was confident that Egypt, Kuwait, Iran and
Jordan would accept a justified war.
Bush rhetoric sparked alarm in Muslim countries. Turkey warned that
strike against Iraq could bring chaos. Turkish Prime Minister desired that

Saddams sincerity should be tested. Iran accused US of leading Middle East

towards blood and chaos.
Malaysia blamed US of anti-Muslim hysteria and asked for urgent OIC
meeting on Iraq. Mahathir warned that attack wont be productive; instead it
could lead to Muslim backlash and dangers of nuke terrorism. He urged
Muslims to use oil as weapon. A Muslim leader of Indonesia expressed similar
views.
Musharraf warned that attack could ignite extremism and pose dangers
for South Asia. Pakistan hailed Iraqi offer regarding return of inspectors and
supported UN efforts on Iraq. The reaction of Muslim leaders however was not
enough to force America to give up its designs.
Putin opposed use of force to topple Saddam and refused to accept
evidence that Iraq was developing arms of mass destruction. Russia said that
new UN Resolution on Iraq was not needed and refused to support draft
resolution. It rejected US proposals and asked for political solution.
Jiang urged Bush to respect Iraqs sovereignty. China declined to support
draft resolution and demanded consensus. Bush-Koizumi meeting focused on
Iraq and North Korea, but Japan called for weapon inspectors before US attack
on Iraq.
Annan warned against unilateral strike and challenged Bush policies. UN
officials saw progress in talks and hoped that inspections could begin in two
weeks. America prevailed upon UN to delay sending of inspectors. Mandela
observed that white supremacy makes countries ignore UN.
Irrational diplomacy of America met its fate. The threats in the form of
Bush ultimatums failed to sway Iraq and it vowed to repel any attack with
knives and stones. The gravity of situation did not affect Iraqi sense of humour
and Bush was challenged to have a duel with Saddam. On diplomatic front
Iraq made moves to rally support. It observed that Bush was losing diplomatic
and political ground and urged Arabs to confront US. It specially concentrated
on events taking place at UN forum.
Iraq showed its willingness for return of arms inspectors. America saw
this move as an attempt to avert war, but it did cause split in UNSC. It assured
UN of its full cooperation, asked UN not to bow to blackmail and urged world
organization to spurn US attempts.
Baghdad declared that new Resolution would be futile and threatened to
defy it. US draft was slammed as humiliation for UN and proposed inspection
plan was dubbed as an attempt to spying. Meanwhile Baghdad invited US to
inspect two suspected sites referred to in so-called evidence. Saddam also
acquired fresh mandate.

NOT A WAR ON TERROR

The opposition to attack on Iraq did not mean that the world was not
supporting the war on terror. There was no dearth of cooperation for war
against terror. America admitted that China was cooperating in fight against
terrorism and so was Russia. Others dare not refusing cooperation.
ASEAN and European Union leaders worked out a joint anti-terror
declaration. Malaysia pledged to deport US terror suspect, Ahmed Ibrahim
Bilal. Singapore vowed that Southeast Asia would win terrorism war. APEC
reached landmark anti-terror agreement.
Saudi Arabia assured cooperation and asked Muslims to shun militancy.
Yemen arrested many al-Qaeda suspects. Kuwait launched crackdown on alQaeda. Jordan hunted killers of US diplomat. Iran arrested and deported
hundreds of al-Qaeda men fleeing from Afghanistan. Danish police arrested top
Chechen envoy accused of involvement in Moscow hostage drama though it
declined to extradite him. Australian agents raided Muslims homes in search of
culprits of Bali incident.
Despite the worldwide cooperation, America threatened everyone who
was not liked by Bush. Iran feared becoming a US target as Rice asked Iranian
leaders to act in peoples interest. Iranian Foreign Minister alleged that America
was using Afghanistan as anti-Iran launch pad. We have information that the
Americans, in collaboration with bandits and terrorist groups, are organizing
actions contrary to the interests of Iran on our eastern borders.
US slapped curbs on three Russian firms. Indonesian and Malaysia were
linked with terrorism. Mahathir felt that US visa ban was a price to pay for
being Islamic. Yemen was accused of not accepting foreign help in tracking alQaeda. US sought freezing of accounts of Saudis. Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia
were assailed on religious freedom. Russia too was criticized for its operations
in Georgia. Powell called for human rights respect in African countries
indirectly warning Mugabe, who had been demanding return of Blacks land
from the Whites.
American threats did not produce the desired effects. The world criticized
the conduct of war and in that it refused to accept that attack on Iraq fell within
the scope of war on terror. The biased conduct of holy war had failed in
defeating terrorism.
America admitted that al-Qaeda network was disrupted in Asia but not
defeated yet. A bomb blast was carried out near US embassy in Jakarta. US
Marine and two attackers were killed in an ambush in Kuwait. French super
tanker was blown up off Yemen when an explosive-laden boat rammed into it.

Nine persons were killed as Chechens shot down a Russian helicopter. The
worst occurred on 23rd September when Chechens struck in Moscow.
Chechen gunmen held 700 hostages in a theatre and threatened to blow
up the building if security forces tried to storm. Putin ordered rescue operation
and Russian forces stormed the theatre which resulted in killing of more than
one hundred hostages and forty terrorists primarily due to use of nerve gas by
Russians.
Putin vowed to fight terrorism, but soon after that thirty persons were
killed in attack in Grozny. Maskhadov resolved to liberate Chechnya and his
men downed another Russian helicopter. It was feared that Chechens could
strike a nuclear plant next.
Maoists were on the rampage in Nepal. School fires and bombs rattled
southern Thailand. Sinhalese and Muslims clashed in Sri Lanka. The incidents
of state terrorism perpetrated by Israel and India are not mentioned as these
represent the holier side of the war. The same holds good for Muslims of
Buffalo, who feared backlash and throwing of anti Muslim material into a
mosque in Hawaii.
Why has a yearlong war failed in suppressing terrorism? The terrorists
instead of hesitating in carrying out individual suicide bombing have resorted to
carrying out collective suicide missions. Mahathir argued that US policy on
terrorism was irrational. Yazdi specified the irrationality. US want to break
and weaken rule of Islam. Thus US policy has strengthened Osama said
Khatami.
CIA concluded in a report that continuation of terrorism was because of
US failure to find out root causes of terror. It reported that:

Continued instability in Afghanistan, challenges facing Saudi rulers and

the festering Israeli-Palestinian conflict were likely to fuel radicalism in
the Muslim World.

Tenet caused a stir by predicting that, if cornered, Iraqi President

Saddam Hussein was more likely to resort to weapons of destruction - the
very outcome a proposed US invasion of Iraq is meant to ward off.

While we are striking major blows against al-Qaeda - the preeminent

global terrorist threat, the underlying causes that drive terrorists will
persist.

More than 1,300 Islamic radicals suspected of association with al-Qaeda

have been arrested in over seventy countries since the beginning of war
on terror. These successes notwithstanding, the CIA expressed doubt
about the US ability to stabilize Afghanistan and choke off terrorist
finances any time soon.

Remnants of Taliban and al-Qaeda were well placed to co-opt local or

tribal leaders and use them to re-establish a base from which to challenge
the central Afghan government.

With violence raging in ME, Bush is also pushing for leadership change
in the Palestinian Authority, accusing its leader, Yasser Arafat, of failing
the peaceful aspirations of his own people. But according to the CIA,
Arafats departure will have quite the opposite effect. His successor will
have neither the power base nor the leadership qualities necessary to
wield full authority.

These realities compelled the world, at least on diplomatic forums, to

oppose American unilateralism in pursuing its war against terrorism. Most
world leaders were convinced that attack on Iraq would spread terrorism rather
than eradicating it.

ISRAELI CAUSE SERVED

Attack on Iraq may or may not materialize, but the mere threat has
allowed Israel to achieve the goals of Crusades in the context of Palestine. Israel
perpetrated state terrorism unhindered and escaped the criticism as well.
America advised Israel not to show any kind of response to attack on Iraq, but
concentrate on the task in hand. Sharon accomplished it commendably as could
be seen from the following:

Two Palestinians were expelled from West Bank on 4th September and
two more were killed two days later.

On 7th September Israeli tanks raided Gaza Strip and four Palestinians
were killed in blast and firing. Next day Israeli army swept Yatta town
and arrested fifteen Palestinians.

On 17th September a bomb exploded in Palestinian school and on the

following day two Palestinians were shot dead in West Bank.

Israeli tanks shelled Arafats headquarters on 19th September and a boy

was killed. Next day headquarters building was blown off and four more
Palestinians were killed.

On 22nd September four Palestinians were killed when West Bank and
Gaza Strip erupted in protest. Nine were killed in raid two days later.

Israeli army demolished four houses on 25 th September and eight

Palestinians were killed next day including an activist of Hamas.

Two Palestinian boys were shot dead in Nablus on 30 th September and

one person was killed in Jenin next day.

On 4th October Israeli police charged al-Aqsa mosque and troops killed a
teenager and injured another.

A Palestinian was killed in West Bank on 5th October and three more were
shot dead in Jenin and Nablus next day.

On 7th October fourteen were killed as Israelis stormed Gaza. Two

Palestinians were shot dead in Gaza Strip on 10th October and two more
were killed in Gaza and West Bank two days later.

Five Palestinians were killed as Israel mulled Hebron pullback on 13 th

October and two more were killed in West Bank a day later.

On 16th October one was killed in Tulkarem and sixteen were hurt in
Gaza. Eight Palestinians including two children were killed next day.

Nine were held in West Bank and Gaza on 19th October and five days
later Israel nabbed a top Hamas militant and shot dead a child.

Israeli army stormed Jenin on 25th October injuring five Palestinians and
next day arrested eleven of them.

Hamas activist was killed in West Bank on 29 th October and three more
were killed in Gaza Strip two days later.

Sharon raided Palestinian towns at will and withdrew only to attack

again. His soldiers demolished homes of suicide bombers to punish their dearones. He turned down all appeals for cease-fire. Arafat was besieged and Israeli
military practiced his ouster.
Israel was accused of using depleted uranium shells. Israeli rights, who
slammed killing of Palestinian kids during curfew, condemned brutalities of
Israeli army. British envoy observed that Palestinian territories were largest jail
in world. He must have rejoiced on this observation. When the Defence
Minister resigned due to differences, Sharon appointed an ex-army chief in his
place, expecting him to do the job better.
Palestinians defied curfew, clashed with Israeli troops, and pledged to
continue struggle against Israel. Occasional suicide attacks were carried out
despite appeals of PA to militants to stop attacks. The intensity of Palestinians
retaliatory actions however kept decreasing as could be seen from the
following:

Two Israeli soldiers were killed in clashes on 6th September and on 18th
September three Israelis were killed in suicide attack and firing.

Suicide bomber killed an Israeli woman on 10th October and five days
later five Israelis were injured as gunman attacked a bus in Israel.

Fourteen Israelis were killed in suicide attack in a bus on 21 st October.

Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Six days later a suicide bomber blew up three Israeli soldiers. On 30 th

October three Israeli settlers were shot dead in West Bank.

Arafat rejected Israeli terms and refused to be capitulated under siege.

PLO declined to exile wanted Palestinians and they preferred death to surrender.
Meanwhile his cabinet resigned for holding fresh parliamentary polls and the
new cabinet won vote of trust.
Arabs urged UN to rein in Israel and blasted Bush for signing law
regarding recognition of Jerusalem as Israeli capital. Eighteen Arab states
contemplated reactivation of Israel boycott. Muslims slated Israeli attack on
Arafat Headquarters, slammed Arafat siege and called for Islamic moot against
US law.
Russia asked Israel to lift blockade, criticized Israel for deadly attack on
Gaza town and condemned use of force. China flayed renewed violence in
Middle East. UN demanded lifting of Arafat siege and hoped for withdrawal of
Israeli troops. European Union urged restraint and withdrawal of Israeli troops.
Solana visited Middle East and worked for Arab-Israeli talks. France called for
ending Arafat siege and Blair suggested new Middle East conference.
America tried to calm rage and sought end to violence, which always
meant the suicide attacks. It affectionately told Israel that siege was not
helpful and violent Israeli attacks complicated effort to end two years of
violence. Killings of Palestinians were generally accepted as justified.
Bush decided to compensate both parties and asked for new aid for Israel
and Palestinians, but he rewarded Israel promptly by recognizing Jerusalem as
Israels capital despite opposition of Arabs. With that Saudi peace plan
demanding withdrawal of Israel from Jerusalem, was dumped in the bed of
Dead Sea.
Arabs must regret their mistake committed in 1991, when America
exaggerated Saddams threat to their oil wealth. They did not contemplate for a
while that Saddam did not have to advance towards riches of Damam after
having captured Kuwaiti oilfields.
To protect their wealth from a threat that never existed, they invited
Americans to Middle East and thus created a real threat. Today Americans are
eager to come to their lands in a big way to make the wealth they saved eleven
years ago even safer. Arabs can do nothing against this real threat.

CONCLUSION

America wanted to overthrow, but not to kill Saddam. Saddams foreign

exile could help avoid war said Rumsfeld. His statement neither had an element
of mercy nor did it mean that war would be averted for sure. A Kurd leader was
not misled by his statement, he believed with certainty the possibility of US
attack after Ramazan.
Similarly Bushs doubts about credibility of allies and opposition from
France wont deter him from attacking Iraq. Bush understood that Chirac had no
concern about Iraq. He was only trying to be farsighted in defending global
order.
Apprehensions of a fellow Crusader can be taken care of later. At this
moment America must press for return of inspectors with a mandate to find a
pretext for attacking Iraq. To this end America was prepared for UN debate and
consider compromises.
Attack on Iraq wont be for serving the interests of Israel alone. Israeli
interests were amply served even without war. America has been attracted by oil
more than Israeli interests. Attack will aim at securing the oil wealth and in the
process overthrow Saddam and reshape the map of Middle East, if so required.
This time oil will be secured, not for primitive Arabs, but for the civilized
people of the West.
David Hirst expressed his reservations on this by quoting Lebanese
commentator Saad Mehio. The US may be preparing a big surprise for the
region, but the Middle East may be preparing an equally big one for the
Americans. At any rate, no one should forget that it has been the most renowned
source of surprises through the ages.
Sons of those who were renowned for giving surprises have belied the
history during second half of the last century. Arab World is totally unprepared
to face the threat hovering over it. The Sheikhs will feel satisfied in saving some
percentage in the form of royalties once they see losing the whole.
It is not the end but beginning of the catastrophe awaiting Muslims in
general and Arabs in particular. Muslims have been completely befooled by the
rhetoric of terrorism; whereas the Crusaders are determined to avail every
opportunity presented by the tragedy.

3rd November 2002

BREAK IN BRINKMANSHIP
Most of the intended aims of brinkmanship were achieved within first
half of the year 2002, except elections in IHK. For that India decided to
maintain pressure by extending the standoff. No sooner the elections were
over; it announced withdrawal of troops. It was time for pause in the game of
brinkmanship.
The Crusaders were satisfied with the outcome of pressure exerted by
them in collaboration with India. They succeeded in extracting maximum from
Pakistan and could not expect more. They too felt the need of having a break
in coercive strategy.
India acted unilaterally in pulling back its forces. Withdrawal of troops
in eyeball to eyeball contact with enemy is a complicated task. It normally

requires careful coordination between opposing forces to forestall untoward

incidents. India however felt no need of such coordination.
Even in withdrawal India was conspicuously arrogant, because it was
sure that Pakistan wont dare indulging in anything silly. Indians were right in
their assessment. Pakistan had a sigh of relief. It could not afford doing
anything, which would jeopardize eagerly awaited pullback. It even
downplayed the fist-fight that took place on Wagah border.
The October elections promised formation of democratic government in
Pakistan. India and America will observe the attitude of new rulers and refine
and redefine their strategy accordingly. The pause has nothing to do with goals
of the Crusaders and proxy crusaders as these remain unchanged.
Restoration of democracy in Pakistan was stressed upon with a definite
purpose, but unexpectedly it resulted in re-emergence of Taliban of Pakistani
brand. The Mullas have to be kept away from Islamabad, failing which Pakistan
has to be dealt with differently. Brinkmanship alone might not be sufficient in
future.

INDIAN ARROGANCE PERSISTED

India had mobilized its forces to consolidate its hold on occupied
Kashmir. Once Pakistan succumbed to pressure and curtailed activities of Jehadi
groups, the next obvious step was to hold elections in IHK with a view to
denying the right of self-determination. Kashmiri leaders understood Indian
game of installing another puppet regime and APHC decided to boycott
elections and AJK assembly backed this decision.
Hizb threatened to show no mercy for participants of polls. The
candidates expressed fear ahead of polls after Lones murder. More than half a
dozen candidates escaped murder attempts. Congress and PDP threaten to pull
out of Kashmir polls. Despite the widespread feelings of insecurity, Indian
Election Commission held elections as if with the sole aim of proving that
conditions in Kashmir were more conducive than Gujarat, where it had sought
federal rule over holding of elections.
First Phase was marred by strike, violence and low turnout as expected.
APHC alleged that troops forced people to vote. British press observed that
Kashmiris were dragged out to cast votes. Anti-polls strike was observed on
both sides of Line of Control and a rally in Srinagar turned violent. JKLF
announced that sham polls exposed Indias failure. APHC asked envoys not to
be misled by fake polls.

Musharraf estimated that turnout in Kashmir polls was only 2 to 10

percent. Pakistan rejected Kashmir polls. Vajpayee was happy; may be the
turnout was more than his expectations. Advani claimed that election in
Kashmir was a victory over Pakistan.
Flopping of Phase-I did not discourage the determined India and it went
ahead with Phase-II. Complete strike was again observed in occupied Kashmir
and very low turnout was reported. Protest rallies were again held in AJK. Third
phase of polls was held amid high tension. India claimed heavy turnout, but
Kashmiri leaders rejected this claim.
Elections were generally termed as Indian army operation. IHK army
chief denied coercion in Kashmir polls. Musharraf called elections as farcical.
Srinagar Imam accused India of holding polls to appease world. Bhat declared
that Indian bid of cosmetic change would not alter the situation. US opined
that Kashmir polls couldnt address the problem.
The Kashmiris had some consolation even in farcical elections. Omar
Abdullah suffered humiliating defeat and many rejoiced ouster of National
Conference. The contestant parties claimed that elections were free and fair
and looked forward to form representative government.
India imposed federal rule in Kashmir ahead of formation of new
government. Advani was blamed for creating hurdles in formation of
government. IHK governor invited the coalition and Mufti was sworn in as
Chief Minister on 2nd November.
The coalition promised to probe into custodial killings. Mufti vowed to
disband Special Operations Group and asked Vajpayee to resume talks to settle
issues. He showed his intent to give IHK a healing touch and pledged to fulfill
the promises. Hurriat Conference hailed the peace plan, but at the same time
vowed to expose claims of new puppet regime.
BJP denounced Muftis reformist agenda. It appeared to be part of new
Indian strategy in which India seemed to be making lot of concessions to
Kashmiris against the wishes of hard-liners. In general there was no respite in
state terrorism:

Five members of a family were among twelve killed on 9th September and
next day sixteen more were gunned down.

On 11th September eighteen including a State Minister were slain by

unknown attackers and nine were killed in violence.

Two civilians were killed on 13th September and five more were shot dead
next day.

On 15th September twelve were killed in violence and on the following

day nineteen more were killed in clashes.

Five were killed on 17th September and two NC activists were gunned
down on 18th. A boy and a teacher were among eleven killed next day.

Twenty were killed on 22nd September and APHC activists were arrested
amid strike call. Eleven died on the eve of controversial Kashmir vote
and twenty more perished on 24th September.

On 25th September nineteen including five soldiers were gunned down

and four were killed next day. On 27th September four more were killed
and twenty-three injured in violence.

Three soldiers were among twenty-one killed on 28th September and

twenty more were killed in next two days.

Seventeen were killed in violence on 1st October and twenty-two more

died on 2nd October. Thirteen were shot dead on 3rd October and thirteen
more died a day after.

Six were killed on 6th October and ten more died on the following day. On
8th October three were shot dead marking the end of voting.

Top freedom fighter was among nine killed on 11 th October and six more
were killed next day.

On 15th October nine were shot dead and fourteen more were gunned
down next day.

Fifteen died in violence and Hizb commander was killed in an encounter

on 18th October.

Ten persons died in shootouts and explosion on 19th October and two
Indian troops were among nine killed next day.

Five Indian troops were among ten killed on 21 st October and six more
were killed three days later.

On 26th October a politicians wife was among ten killed and next day
twenty militants were among 23 killed in the Valley.

Seventeen were killed on 28th October and six more were killed three
days later.

On 1st November three girls were among six killed and next day twentysix more were gunned down. Ten more were shot dead on 4th November.

Indian brutalities followed the pattern set by Israel and America. All of
them believed that state terrorism unleashed with full ferocity was the best way

to defeat freedom movements. In addition to the killings India kept arresting

Kashmiri leaders with or without any reason.
Furious demonstrations were held against state terrorism. Mirwaiz asked
India to announce cease-fire. India showed no mercy. The existence of any
freedom movement was denied and Pakistan was blamed for indulging in crossborder terrorism. India vowed to end it by resorting to cross-border terrorism of
its own kind:

Indian shelling claimed three lives in Azad Kahmir on 30th September. A

woman was killed in Chakothi on 2nd October and UN observers too had a
taste of Indian aggression when they escaped heavy Indian shelling the
same day.

On 3rd October Indian shelling killed a teenager. Two persons were killed
in AJK a week later. Three persons were killed and seventeen were hurt
next day.

On 18th October Indian shelling killed one person in Neelum Valley.

Indian shells claimed two lives a week later.

Musharraf and Anwar refuted Indian charge of infiltration. Pakistani and

Kashmiri leaders reiterated their commitment to Kashmir cause:

On 11th September Musharraf emphasized that cease-fire along Line of

Control and end to state terrorism in held Kashmir were must for peace.
He refused to recognize Line of Control as border. Qayyum rejected IHK
polls, as these couldnt be substitute to plebiscite.

On 13th September Musharraf said, only a fool can accept Line of

Control as international border. No U-turn on Kashmir said Nisar on
16th September. Plebiscite is the only way to resolve Kashmir dispute he
repeated next day.

No peace in South Asia without resolution of Kashmir dispute said

Memon. Inam discussed Kashmir with Annan on 25th September. Later he
declared that political support to Kashmiris would continue.

Qayyum saw no change in Pakistan policy and vowed to continue

struggle for Kashmir. On 5th November Pakistan again expressed
solidarity with Kashmiris.

Azad and Held Kashmir leaders met in New York. Umar Farooq renewed
demand for tripartite talks. Shabir asked India to allow Pakistan KC to
visit India. Victory is inevitable for Kashmir predicted Afrasiab.

Kashmir related Indian plans could not be implemented without

maintaining tension along international border. Therefore, India tried its best to
maintain tensions:

On 13th September Vajpayee once again alleged Pakistan for harbouring

extremists. He also accused Pakistan of nuclear blackmail. Pakistan
denied the charge.

On 24th September thirty persons were killed in attack on an Indian

temple. Advani linked it to polls. Vajpayee said that Gujarat incident was
part of well-designed plot. Delhi claimed attackers were Pakistanis
linked to Laskar-e-Taiba. Pakistan condemned attack and rejected the
allegation.

On 29th September five militants were gunned down in Banglore, who

were suspected of planning to kill Advani. Vajpayee again blamed
Pakistan for backing terrorism.

India blamed Pakistan for repeatedly delaying meetings of SAARC.

Pakistan termed these remarks unwarranted.

On 25th October Vajpayee alleged that Pakistan was turning into terrorist
nation and vowed to finish off terrorism.

Pakistan failed in countering Indian propaganda effectively despite

having abundance of evidence about Indian involvement in many terrorist
attacks. Even in the recent past grenades were found in Capital bearing Indian
markings and RAW agents with plans to disrupt polls in Pakistan were arrested.
On the hand India accused Pakistan without having any evidence. It was
done so well that Pakistan had to acknowledge its excellence. Musharraf
accepted that India and Pakistan ties were at the lowest ebb. His accusation
that New Delhi was holding peace a hostage was a tribute to Indian
brinkmanship.
The same was true for Pakistans repeated reiteration to peace
commitment. Musharraf said that Islamabad wont initiate war with New Delhi
or a war over Kashmir. He negated the effectiveness of Indian pressure tactics
saying that Indian threats were useless and there was no danger of war.
Soon after Kashmir polls Advani announced that decision on troops
withdrawal would be taken next week. On 16 th October Fernandes declared that
India would withdraw troops from borders, but Indian forces would remain in
IHK. While announcing the withdrawal India demanded that Pakistan must do
more. Vajpayee asked Southeast Asia to fight terrorism.
Pakistan decided to reciprocate and called for complete de-escalation.
Musharraf claimed that Pakistans position had been vindicated and Indias
policy of coercion had failed. APHC hailed troops withdrawal from border.
Qureshi, the spokesman of Pakistani armed forces, reminded world that
it's India that aggravated the situation each time. Till 27th October Pakistan saw

no evidence of Indian pullback. At last on 1 st November Indian troops were

seen heading home from Pakistani border.
Musharraf claimed that coercion was not the solution to issues. Nisar
urged India to open talks. Foreign Office said that talks were only way to
reduce tension. Musharraf however was skeptical about usefulness of bilateral
talks. He sought facilitation from America and also suggested SAARC-based
solutions.
India had standard replies to all the suggestions for dialogue. Vajpayee
saw little chance of Pak-India talks. Sibal said that India was in no rush for
talks with Pakistan as Pakistan had to end terrorism first. Vajpayee repeated the
same, talks if Pakistan ends terrorism. Trust is vital to resume talks.
On 17th October India announced that Vajpayee would visit Islamabad
for SAARC Summit. Pakistan welcomed Indian decision. Fernandes ruled out
negotiations on Kashmir. Vajpayee will attend summit if Kashmir is not on
agenda. It meant that he was only interested in getting a general salute from
the contingents of Pakistans armed forces for his victory without war.

CRUSADES IN PAKISTAN
Pressure on Pakistan was maintained to ensure that multi-pronged thrust
against militancy and terrorism continued. Pakistan was asked for operations in
tribal areas. America was eager to monitor all Pakistani entry and exit points.
FBI was allowed to install 3,216 cameras at Karachi hotspots and carry on with
arrests and interrogation of suspected people. Through auspices of UN a team
visited to discuss al-Qaeda and Taliban.
The pressure was so exhaustive that Pakistani counter-parts of FBI were
asked to explain the uses of Lotas stacked near the site of Riawind
Congregation. Pakistanis must have found it quite difficult to satisfy American
inquisitiveness about innocuous gadgets. Pakistan, the key partner continued
performing well under duress:

Karachi police intensified search for al-Qaeda men and prime suspect in
9/11 was held. Bin al-Shaida funneled money to September 11 hijackers.
Bush hailed his arrest. On 16th September al-Shaida was handed over to
US and five more were to be extradited soon. Bush thanked Pakistan.

On 17th Musharraf vowed to meet extremists with full force and

announced that extradition of foreign terrorists would continue. By 22nd
September Pakistan had handed over 420 suspects to US.

Two al-Qaeda suspects were held in Peshawar on 23rd September. Another

suspect was arrested in tribal area on 18th October.

A noted doctor was picked up for al-Qaeda link on 21st October. His arrest
was condemned countrywide, but the government did not care.

Two al-Qaeda suspects were held in Peshawar on 23 rd October. On 29th

October FBI nabbed Hekmatyars son-in-law in Islamabad.

Pakistans support to the Crusades was resented by many. Grenades were

fired at Janikhel army post and missiles were fired at Miranshah base. Qazi
accused US of punishing tribesmen in the name of al-Qaeda. Dr Amirs arrest
heightened anti-US sentiments.
The Crusaders also concentrated on religious extremism and Jehadi
organizations accused of perpetrating cross-border terrorism. US body
expressed its concerns over religious freedom. International Crisis Group
opined that Pakistan had become more unstable than before.
The assessment of unstable Pakistan fitted well in the scheme for
Pakistans nuclear capability. Its nuclear assets were suspected to be vulnerable
to falling in hands of religious extremists. ICG report coincided with that of
NYT, which blamed Pakistan for transferring N-technology to North Korea.
Musharraf rejected charge of N-ties. US refused to comment on the report, but
Benazir expressed her concerns over Pak-Korea N-ties.
Pakistanis continued to be treated as terrorists all over the world. Italy
arrested illegal immigrants and declared them as Pakistanis without ascertaining
their nationality and charged them for terror. Pakistani Tablighis found in the
vicinity of bomb blast in Bali were suspected of involvement.
Pakistan was not absolved of Indian charge of cross-border terrorism. US
warned Pakistan on Kashmir elections. American ambassador in New Delhi
accused that infiltration across Line of Control had increased during August and
September.
Pakistan was accused of aiding terrorism despite its displayed resolve to
fight against terror. The government took steps to eradicate Afghan legacy of
extremism, drugs and guns. Nisar declared that war against sectarian terrorism
would continue. Pakistan renewed its resolve by holding joint war games.
Musharraf pledged to rid country of terrorists even at the peril of his life. Plot
after a plot to kill him was discovered. Pakistans contribution to war on terror
has not been mean:

Dozens of suspects were held on the eve of first anniversary of 9/11. On

11th September a plot to attack McDonalds and KFC was foiled and two
suspects were killed and five held in Karachi encounter.

A big cache of arms was recovered on 18 th September and prime suspect

of Sheraton Hotel and US Consulate bombing incidents was arrested.

Five suspects were arrested in Karachi on 19th September and three

militants were held next day. On 21 st September three US Consulate
bombing suspects were arrested.

Two Harkat al-Alami activists were arrested on 22 nd September. Next day

Police launched hunt for al-Alamis financier. On 24th September two LJ
men were held in Taxila church attack case.

On 25th September Pakistan submitted progress report informing US that

33 deadly terrorists were still at large.

Two LJ terrorists committed suicide during clash on 29 th September.

Arms were seized and terrorists arrested in Rawalpindi on 4 th October.
Six suspected terrorists were arrested in Multan on 1st November.

The impact of these achievements was marred by retaliatory attacks by

terrorists, though these were far less than expected:

On 25th September seven Christians were gunned down in Karachi. A

bomb went off outside Sibi church on 29th September.

On 30th September a Shia teacher was killed in Charsadda and a Hindu

temple was ransacked near Quetta.

Girls Madrassa and a Christian hospital were attacked in Lahore on 4 th

October. Nine persons were hurt in three incidents of parcel bombs in
Karachi on 16th October.

On 28th October a religious leader was shot dead in Karachi. DSP and a
guard were hurt in parcel blast in Karachi on 5th November.

Pakistan government made passionate appeals for recognition of its

services. It hoped that recognition would bear rewards, specially defusing of
tension along its eastern border. Pakistan pleaded for resolution of standoff and
resumption of dialogue on Kashmir, knowing full well that all was happening
with connivance of the Crusaders.
Bush obliged and promised to continue playing role in reduction of
tension. He asked both Pakistan and India to address root cause and stressed
upon need of fair IHK polls. Rocca visited the Subcontinent and backed
resumption of Pak-India talks.
European Union urged India and Pakistan to defuse tensions. UK
expressed the same thing in specific terms. Its deputy PM asked for reduction
of tension over Kashmir and when India decided to withdraw troops from
border, US welcomed Indian move, which did not come a day earlier than what
India and the Crusaders had planned.

Musharraf also begged for aid by arguing that only vibrant Pakistan
could fight terrorism effectively. He urged for military level exchanges and
assured that Pakistans nuclear policy was restraint oriented. Kissinger
supported him by asking US to cooperate with Pakistan.
Pakistan was praised, but received scant recognition in real terms. It got $
300 million for logistics services. Musharraf received US nod on LFO. Apart
from these there have been lot of promises i.e. visas to Pakistani students,
restoration of military aid, UKs desire to strengthen ties, EU Parliaments
assurance to continue backing Kashmiris and Larsons assurance for long-term
partnership with Pakistan.
Part of the recognition went wrong way. Salman Farooqi was granted
political asylum in US. Discrimination and resultant mistreatment of Pakistanis
continued and Commonwealth maintained suspension to utter dismay of
Pakistan.
On the other hand the services of India were recognized and rewarded
expeditiously. It had to be so, because India provided the glove to the punching
hand of the Crusaders. Terrorism and bilateral ties were accorded top priority
during Vajpayees visit to New York. He told US that existing pressure was not
enough and urged for more pressure on Islamabad. Bush assured him as much
as he could. America also endorsed the Valley polls as successful.
India and US held largest naval exercises, which were followed by joint
air exercise. Japan also sent its vessels to India for drills. Indian military team
visited Israel to get AWACS and already procured Israeli radars were deployed.
The bias was too obvious to be ignored, particularly by Kashmiris. Anwar
regretted US and UN double standards on Kashmir. He showed his concern over
US tilt towards India. AJK Council urged UNSC to take note of the Indian
sponsored state terrorism. The optimists like Mirwaiz however, still believed
that US policy makers understood APHC viewpoint.

CONCLUSION
The principle of might is right was followed religiously in initiation and
conduct of war on terror. India experienced its usefulness during the game of
brinkmanship. Mere possession of military might can help winning a victory.
Therefore, India decided to further strengthen its military prowess.
India relentlessly pursued its plans to increase offensive capability of its
armed forces through acquisition and indigenous production of military
hardware. During last eight weeks it inducted new SU-30 fighter jets and
Pirthivi missile into IAF and also test-fired Trishul missile. Musharraf accepted

that India was increasing arms stockpile. In fact the piles have become surplus
to requirements. India has set ambitious military exports target including export
of cruise missiles by 2004.
Pakistan promised to be a good guy by announcing not to engage in arms
race. However, it will not be able to ignore the requirement of maintaining
balance by pursuing arms for peace policy. In October Pakistan was forced to
carry out tit-for-tat missile tests, which were brushed aside by India after
dubbing those as election gimmick.
Pakistan will find it extremely difficult to keep pace with India through
indigenous production. The external sources have already been choked by the
Crusaders, though Musharraf tried to convince America by arguing that PakIndia conventional arms balance defuses danger of nuclear-war.
The argument was valid, but the Crusaders are not likely to accept it.
They are allergic to logic which favours any Muslim State. They are not
interested at all in balance being sought by Pakistan. If stacks of Lotas detected
by satellites could send alarm bells ringing in Washington, then how could one
expect resumption of sale of military hardware to Pakistan?
Thus the so-called balance will keep tilting in favour of India. This will
make the BANIA more adamant. His arrogance will add to the miseries of
Indian Muslims whether they are in Kashmir or in Gujarat or elsewhere.
Genocide of Muslims will continue recurring at regular intervals. Deploring of
genocide, appeals for accountability and demands for world probe will earn
no response, because the civilized world does not consider Muslims as human
beings.
Pakistan will also continue suffering from the repercussions of war on
terror. The terrorists, who write Allah-o-Akbar with their blood before dying,
are not likely to give up their struggle. They will retaliate for sure and Pakistan
presents plenty of soft targets.
Musharraf prophesized, Allah will not forgive killers of Christians. The
terrorists know for sure that killers of Kashmiris, Palestinians and Afghans
will not be blessed by Allah. They only believed Musharraf when he meekly
said, Muslims are passing through difficult times. They will never forgive
killers of innocent Muslim women and children.

6th November 2002

DEMOCRACY RESTORED
Jamali was sworn in as elected Prime Minister of Pakistan on 23 rd
November. It made the military ruler proud of fulfilling yet another promise.
The Supreme Court could feel satisfied over implementation of its decision in
letter and spirit. The politicians could boast that they compelled the dictator to
succumb to their demand. They now had the opportunity to make up for the
time lost since October 1999.
The return of democracy will bring some cosmetic changes, as army has
yet to pullback from borders as well as from political arena. Bureaucracy wont
experience much difference, except bidding farewell to military writing and
replacing office seals and nameplates.
The People of Pakistan wont be surprised if the quality of governance
remained as hither-to-fore. Based on the experience spread over half a century,
the people have almost abandoned their hopes of a change for better. They
understand that democracy has been restored for fulfillment of ambitions of the
politicians, not theirs.
The civilized world led by America could draw some satisfaction in
return of democracy in Pakistan. It enlarged the scope of options available
against Pakistan. Having successfully achieved many goals of the war on
terror through cooperation of a dictator, the Crusaders could now achieve the
remaining goals with cooperation of the elected representatives. They welcomed
restoration of democracy for this reason, although the results of October polls
were not to their liking.

POST-POLLS POLITICKING

The split mandate led to intense struggle for winning the required support
needed for forming the government at the Centre. The party, which won the
maximum seats, obviously spearheaded this phase of the politicking. Within a
week after the elections PML-QA decided about its candidate for Leader of the
House. Reportedly the party was to nominate Jamali for PM on 19 th October, but
it was not formally announced to avoid any adverse effects on its negotiations
with others. Instead Shujaat was empowered to name the candidate at
appropriate time.
Zubaida was the first to disclose that PML-QA wanted PM from a smaller
province. Shujaat confirmed it two days later, but he said that there was no
hurry to name PM candidate and announcement would be made as soon as NA
was convened.
As chances of PML-QA to form the government became brighter, the
splinter groups and independents rushed to join the Kings party. Zubaida and
some independent MNAs-elect were the first to join and on 25 th October Sheikh
Rashid, who had pledged to gift his seat to PML-N, joined PML-QA. Jamali
and Shujaat also succeeded in winning over Ijaz and Sherpao respectively.
The new entrants added to the confidence of Shujaat. He claimed that
PML-QA alone could form the government at the Centre. Shujaat and Jamali
met President on 1st November and sought his invitation for forming the
government. He assured them that the parliament would be convened shortly.
PML-QA however knew it well that even with support of all the splinter
groups it could not secure simple majority. It had to have some agreement with
PPPP or MMA. The negotiations with PPPP failed to make headway primarily
due to inability of Fahim to take decisions at his own. Self-exiled party leader,
whose demands were not compatible with ground realities, controlled his reins.
Thus talks with PPPP were bound to fail.
The party earnestly focused on reaching a workable agreement with
MMA. On 16th October Qazi and Shujaat exchanged views on future political
scenario. Four days later PML-QA showed its willingness to consider all
demands of MMA.
PML-QA announced its support to MMA in NWFP hoping that Alliance
would reciprocate at the Centre. Sheikh Rashid claimed that PML-QA and
MMA were natural allies. Shujaat was prepared to share power with MMA and
reportedly both parties even discussed turn by turn rule.
The meeting of Jamali and Fazl failed. Jamali rejected pre-conditions.
Thereafter, Leghari was requested to break the iceberg of Mullas. On 8 th
November MMA and GNA agreed to evolve consensus stand on LFO. Legal

experts were tasked to discuss the details. The hopes of reaching an accord were
raised as PML-QA seemed to be inching close to MMA.
On 10th November Shujaat held talks with Fazl. MMA and GNA agreed
to continue talks and legal experts identified areas of agreement and differences
on LFO. Both the parties moved closer to agreement. Shujaat announced that
consensus was evolved on 21 out of 29 provisions and hoped that an accord
with MMA would be reached by Friday.
MMA and GNA agreed to scrap NSC, Article 58-2b could stay and
President should give time frame for resigning as army chief. Shujaat was asked
to get approval of the government on agreement. On 15 th November the talks
were stalled and Simin Mahmud declared that PML-QA wont let MMA to
push country into medieval society. On 18th November the negotiations ended
in failure.
The government rejected the demands of MMA and helped Kings party
in securing requisite support from other quarters. The support of MQM was
bargained in exchange of allowing it access to no go areas. The contingency
plan of creating a forward bloc in PPPP was also implemented.
PPPP members-elect frequently looked towards exiled Benazir and
jailed Zardari for guidance. They had to run from post of the jail to pillar at
Dubai to seek advice of the half and the better half. The events moved faster
than they could run from pillar to post, hence they failed to coup with the
situation.
The hawks opposed coalition at the Centre. Many preferred opposition
role. Aitzaz favoured broad-based national government. Fahim failed to woo
Nasrullah on this issue and PPP rejected national government under Leghari.
The party recommended Fahim for PMs slot, but Benazir held back the
decision.
PPPP vowed to hold talks on government formation with all parties.
Fahim met Shujaat, Noorani and Imran on 16th October and a week later decided
to set up committee for talks. It backed Fazl for PM slot and Fahim discussed
future strategy with him. Benazir wanted a written agreement with MMA,
which spoke of nothing but mistrust. Similarly MQM was claimed as natural
ally in the context of Sindh, but Benazir rejected MQM demand for apology and
directed party men to prepare for opposition role.
The disjointed approach was bound to damage its cause, if there was any.
In addition the chance meeting of Musharraf and Fahim at Pir Sohawa did the
damage to its understanding with MMA and ARD. Fahim denied any deal with
the government. The denial was soon followed by reports that he was likely to
head government of national unity.

PPPP assured ARD that there was no deal with government. The
government also denied the possibility of deal, but Zardari reiterated that
government-PPP talks were in process. Reportedly the talks failed, following
which Benazir called for national transitional government.
The consequences were obvious. Instead of mustering support of any
party or individual, the party, which was known for loyalty of its Jiyalas, lost
ten of its elected members through defection in the form of a forward block. The
conspiracy was detected well in time, but Benazir adamantly denied. Faisal too
denied emergence of forward block and at the same time stressed upon the
need for national government.
At last somebody took the decision. Ten-member forward block was
created. The leaders of forward block claimed that the decision was taken in the
best interest of the country. PPPP denounced governments bid to break major
parties. PML-N and Nasrullah also condemned creation of forward block.
Benazir alleged that MNAs-elect were being forced to change loyalties.
She ordered expulsion of three dissident leaders. Faisal asserted that no one
could expel him and warned PPP to stop making threats. While the party served
notices on three dissidents, Benazir feared more desertions.
Before 10th October Mullas were a condemned lot. After elections the
government or the government-to-be longed for their sweet company. The
people of Pakistan had undoubtedly salvaged the pride of Mullas. MMA was the
only party, which did not have to look for decisions from outside. It solely
depended upon indigenous decisions; hence it was the first to announce
candidates for PM and the Speaker. Qazi confidently pledged that MMA would
play vital role in assembly.
MMA had won more seats in two provinces and it wanted to be in the
government at the Centre, for smooth running of provincial governments. Fazl
urged that religious forces should be given chance to govern. He vowed that
government minus MMA wont last long. MMA called for early convening of
NA session and claimed having support of 175 MNAs.
MMA actively engaged in negotiations, unlike PML-QA which focused
more on bargaining than negotiating. Fazl discussed post-election situation with
Nasrullah and exchanged views with Sherpao. Hafiz Hussain Ahmed contacted
Nasrullah and MMA urged APC to end deadlock.
After inconclusive talks with PML-QA, MMA called for major
parliamentary parties moot. MMA-hosted moot agreed on 6-point course of
action to avoid deadlock and asked the government to convene assemblies, as it
suspected bad intentions in delay.

The negotiations with PML-QA failed, because MMA refused to bargain

on its mandate. Qazi was prepared to accept Musharraf only if he relinquished
the charge of army chief. Fazl refused to accept LFO as part of the Constitution.
MMA vowed to uphold supremacy of 1973 Constitution and the Parliament. On
16th November Qazi said:

None of the changes in the Constitution made in the last three years have
any legal or constitutional status unless validated by the Parliament with
the two-third majority.

MMA would not accept NSC as a part of the Constitution as the

Parliament is the supreme institution than any other body.

MMA has reservations on discretionary powers of the President to make

appointment on key posts like services chiefs and governors.

As regards 58-2b, President should enjoy powers to dismiss only the

government and not the whole assembly.

In the wake of Crusades, Mullas were accused of religious extremism and

militancy. Thus clergys political credentials were put to test. As a precaution
JUI barred MPs-elect from making statements. The Alliance had to counter
criticism by showing moderation and tolerance.
MMA declared that it would not treat women Taliban-style. There will
be no job restriction on women and honour killing was un-Islamic, but insisted
on abolishing co-education. It vowed to respect difference of opinion and
softened its stance on US bases in Pakistan.
On 17th October Qazi briefed US and British diplomats on MMA policies
and met foreign envoys six days later. Fazl asked the world to respect peoples
mandate and not to be afraid of them. He denied existence of any grudge with
NGOs. Both of them told foreign diplomats that Pakistan was not to emerge as
Pariah State. The critics blamed MMA for accepting American slavery. In
fact there was nothing wrong in trying to rectify incorrect perceptions of the
West about Mullas.
The smaller parties and independents make hey in the shiny days of splitmandate. Independents and MNAs-elect from tribal areas are known for their
acumen in this art. They always keep their options open till highest bids are
received. The only restriction on independents to join parties by given date,
did not make any material difference.
According to Amir Mateen this time the horse-trading was at its best.
FATA members alone had a 50 million-dollar game. MQM preferred bartertrade. Its leaders were allowed to enter no go areas and their rivals faced the
threat of deportation, but they kept the options open by not joining the
government to draw maximum gains.

The real profit making was done by the wise defectors of PPPP. They
picked the fruits of democracy with both hands. The profit-making spree
produced more dissidents and in Punjab they added another P to PPPP. Their
motive could be explained better in Punjabi; HOR PEE.
There were some exceptions, which either declined to indulge in trading
or were not in position to do so. Imran and Qadri remained prisoners of
conscience although the later had excelled in spending on election campaign.
Nationalists suffered due to imposition of ISO-9001 by MMA. They failed to
produce goods worth marketing. PML-N was constrained not to indulge in
power politics.

INFUENCES FROM OUTSIDE

It was alleged that the government wanted a split-mandate, as it would
allow Musharraf to emerge even stronger. He got what he wanted. The
strength had now to be harnessed. The way had to be cleared for pro-Musharraf
government. Although he refuted the allegation of dictating, yet he conveyed his
desire by stressing upon the need for good governance, socio-economic
development and continuity of reforms.
The spade-work had commenced well before the polls. The establishment
was accused of rigging the polls. The strikes and shutter-down protests in
Balochistan indicated that there were reasons to show such a strong resentment.
The rigging issue echoed even in the Cabinet.
After elections the government was blamed for indulging in horsetrading. Reportedly it encouraged MNAs-elect to join any other party.
Musharraf pleaded for showing accommodation and hinted at doing
everything for the sake of democracy. Floor-crossing was not banned knowing
that it would open doors of corruption as pointed out by Fazl and Qazi. It
ultimately facilitated creation of a forward block in PPPP.
Nisar claimed that government was not involved in horse-trading and
next day Musharraf told Corps Commanders that government backed no one.
Both of them should have at least confessed partially and said, HUM NEY
TOE BUS MANDI LAGAI HAI.
The MANDI so organized was not a JUMMA or ITWAR BAZAR.
Horse-trading required time for bargaining, unlike making purchases of
perishable vegetables and fruits. The transfer of power may be delayed it was
reported as early as 17th October. Four days later Ranjha confirmed that no
decision was yet taken on power transfer schedule.
Next day he stated that session of NA would be convened after
completion of women and minorities seats. On 25th October transfer of power
plan was finalized. PM was to be elected on November 7 and election of

Speaker and Deputy Speaker was to be held on 5 th. CEC was asked to chair NA
on 4th and administer oath to members-elect. Assembly members were to take
oath under 1973 Constitution.
The plan did not materialize and President summoned NA session on 8 th
November. Leader of House was to be elected after Speaker and Deputy
Speakers election. Meanwhile CEC regretted to chair NA session. The session
was again postponed as politicians wanted more time for government formation,
but some politicians alleged that postponement had GHQ connection. Joint
NSC-Cabinet meeting discussed deadlock and it was speculated that Musharraf
might help break the deadlock. At last National Assembly session was
convened on 16th November. Soomro agreed to chair the session.
The regime also took other measures to facilitate transfer of power and
consolidate position of the President. Two-time CM was cleared to be PM. The
government refused to scrap or alter LFO. It was also announced that
Musharraf did not need NA validation. He took fresh oath as President on 16 th
November and Constitution was restored partially. Musharraf was to remain
chief executive till PMs election. He addressed joint NSC-Cabinet meeting and
felt proud in recounting his achievements of last three years.
Concurrently he ensured continuity of reforms. To this end some
ministers were encouraged to contest general elections. Others were to make it
through the Senate. Shoukat, Javed Ashraf, Naqvi, Atta and Moin were the main
aspirants. Out of them Ashrafs way to Senate was blocked by abduction and
torture of Siddiqul Farooq. Rest of them had to wait till elections for the
Senate.
A force, other than the regime, which influenced the outcome of postelection politicking, was constituted by non-elected and non-representative
political leaders. Benazir of PPP, Nawaz of PML-N, Altaf of MQM, Azhar of
PML-QA, Noorani of MMA and Nasrullah of ARD captivated the elected
members for different reasons and through different means. They hampered the
decision-making abilities of elected members of respective parties.
Out of these Nasrullah under the auspices of ARD posed a potent
challenge to the aspirations of the king and his party. He refused to
compromise with PML-QA and insisted that there would be no coalition with
pro-government parties. ARD stuck to its stand on the Constitution and
sustainable democratic values.
ARD cleared Fazl as candidate for Prime Ministers post and vowed to
adopt joint strategy of ARD and MMA. ARD approved Fazl as PM and Aitzaz
as Speaker, though other issues remained to be sorted out. Liaquat and
Nasrullah discussed the fate of LFO. Nasrullah flayed delay in NA session and
threatened to protest if NA was not convened.

He opposed PPP-PML-QA alliance. Fahim assured him that his party was
committed to cause of democracy and there would be no compromise on
principles of ARD. But hilltop meeting sowed the seeds of mistrust. Finally
PPPP, on instructions of Benazir, did not support Fazl and nominated its own
candidate frustrating plans of Nasrullah.
The judiciary was also kept involved in political events primarily by
lawyers community, who filed petition after a petition on various counts. LHC
stayed polls on women seats and the same day another petition was filed in SC
on reserved seats. On 25th October LHC vacated stay, but SHC stayed election
on reserved seats. Subsequently SHC directed EC to hold elections.
A writ filed in Supreme Court asked Musharraf to quit. The Court was
also moved on referendum and general elections voting patterns. SC decreed
that October elections were not held under LFO and LHC dismissed a petition
filed on similar plea.
The ban on contesting Senate polls by candidates defeated in general
elections was challenged in SC by PML-QA. Its counsel submitted that
government had no powers to amend constitution. The argument belied the
stand of his client, who had accepted all amendments enforced through LFO.
These were the influences from within Pakistan, but like the past the
West, champion of democratic values, could not stay away from indulging in
internal affairs of a sovereign state. The so-called civilized world led by
America kept dictating does and donts.
Noorani urged Western media to shun bias. Visit of US officials evoked
speculations. Hafiz Hussain blamed US envoy for working against MMA rule.
The ambassador had been stressing the PPPP and PML-QA leadership to block
the MMAs chances to rule the country. She had been meeting the politicians for
this purpose at a private house in Chack Shahzad. He demanded of the Foreign
Office to take serious note of this.
European Union doubted the process of revival of democracy in
Pakistan in a resolution. It endorsed the report of Cushnhan on polls in
Pakistan, which according to him were seriously flawed. The cordially invited
observers came out with not so cordial observation.
America however supported democratic process and immediately threw
baits to new government. Larson announced that one billion dollar debt writeoff was on track. EU welcomed the return of civilian PM and his pledge against
terrorism. Commonwealths final report had already termed polls a welcome
step and IMF showed flexibility on political policy adjustments.

EFFECTS AND PROSPECTS

On 16th November 324 MNAs took oath under 1973 Constitution. Did it
mean rejection of LFO right from the outset? It shall be seen little later. Sher
Afghan chanted slogans against LFO while entering NA Hall and lawyers
staged protest in front of Parliament.
The press noticed some interesting changes in the Assembly of graduates.
Leghari had come down from president to pedestrian. The simply attired men
with beards and women with proper Hijab and headscarf were too conspicuous
and too many. Even Attiya was seen with carefully wrapped Dupatta.
Next day it was reported that Fahim might withdraw from race for PM
slot. His party rejected Musharraf as president. PML-QA asked Zardari to
immediately apologize for his remarks about its leaders. Otherwise, the PMLQA would be compelled to make public all the misdeeds of Benazir and
Zardari. The statement alleged as if Zardari had violated the secret pact
between politicians to hide each others misdeeds.
Qazi and Fahim held unsuccessful discussions on 18 th November to
decide on joint candidates. Thus Amir, Baloch and Aitzaz were to vie for
Speakers post, which ensured smooth going for the former. On 19 th Amir was
elected as Speaker and Sardar Yaqoob as his Deputy. Amir got 167 votes,
Baloch 81 and Aitzaz 71. MMA, PPPP and PML-N alleged rigging and staged
first walkout as four blank papers came out of the ballot box.
The controversy of oath surfaced when Amir said that it was administered
under LFO. Soomro reiterated that MNAs took oath under 73 Constitution.
Military government came under fire from PPPP and MMA leaders. Qazi
announced that MMA would sit on opposition benches and Sheikh Rashid said
that MMA lost golden opportunity to join government.
On 20th November Musharraf addressed the nation. He claimed that
promises have been fulfilled and sacred trust was being handed over to electedParliament. He boasted of three-year achievements and wanted continuation of
reforms. PML-N termed Presidents address as disappointing and PPPP rejected
his claims.
PPPP nominated Qureshi as its candidate at the last moment on
instructions of Benazir. A young and assertive orator was preferred over aging
and mild-mannered Fahim. Fazl asked PPPP to withdraw its candidate, but it
remained determined to show its strength in the House.
Jamali secured 172 votes and was elected as leader of the House. It was
thinnest of majority in a House of 342 members. Fazl managed 86 and Qureshi
70 with combined strength of the opposition standing at 156. The support of
forward bloc of PPPP proved decisive.

The newly elected Prime Minister vowed to take along all members. Fazl
congratulated Jamali, but feared repeat of 71 catastrophe if sovereignty of the
Constitution and the Parliament was not upheld. Qureshi also congratulated him
and sought return of Benazir and Nawaz. Musharraf greeted Jamali.
During the proceedings Opposition questioned Speakers impartiality. His
comments about LFO created uproar in the House. Aitzaz announced that LFO
would be taken to court. The same day the Chief Justice declared that decision
on LFO would be announced after transfer of power.
PPPP decided not to attend oath-taking ceremony, but MMA opted for a
saner course of attending it. Contest for Leader of Opposition was still on.
Nasrullah tried hard to unite opposition parties, but Benazir convened PPP
meeting in Dubai, which could undermine his plans.
Jamali and a team of 21 ministers were sworn in on 23 rd November. Six
out of ten PPPP dissidents joined cabinet in different capacities. Sikandar,
Faisal, Rashid and Kasuri got defence, interior, information and foreign affairs
respectively.
PM promised peoples welfare. Musharraf rejoiced over transfer of
power; only that power which can commit mistakes, not that which can do no
wrong. Shujaat lauded Musharraf for smooth transfer of power. Qazi vowed to
pursue objectives of MMA. Nasrullah stressed upon need for retention of ARD.
Musharraf could have the feeling of security, as the worst did not
materialize. PPPP, MMA and PML-N supported by some others had the strength
of more than 160 seats. Had they convinced some independents and PPPP could
forestall creation of forward bloc, the situation would have been quite different.
But threats to his security still existed. PML-N leaders made unpleasant
prediction that Musharrafs days were numbered. PPPP termed him as illegal
President. JI called Musharrafs fresh oath a farce and vowed to work for
restoration of 73 Constitution.
He must be fully conscious of strength of the Opposition. To ensure
safety of the office of President and his agenda of reforms, he and his party
have to work for more defections from the ranks of their opponents. In
terminology of the game of cricket, the batsmen on either end must continue
taking singles and twos and scoring fours and sixes on loose deliveries.
PML-QA has come into power by mustering support from every possible
quarter. This could not be achieved without giving attractive incentives to all
of them. Out of these incentives accommodation in the Cabinet proved to be the
most attractive.
Azhar assured that allied parties would have share in government. The
first batch of the Cabinet has proved that the promise has been kept, but these

lateral entries could cause resentment in the ranks of PML-QA, as many of its
members-elect had aspired for different slots.
PML-QA is no different from other political parties in terms of loyalties.
Infighting could lead to defections and creation of forward bloc. A division in
the party over award of Senate tickets has already been reported and because of
that the party found it difficult to oblige all ministers of Musharraf. Some
members have even talked about engineered polls though Shujaat denied
existence of such differences.
The party has to struggle continuously to preserve simple majority in the
Lower House. In view of this arduous task, Ijaz apprehended that government of
PML-QA would not survive beyond six months. The government can be overrun by a single member by taking few steps across the floor.
It has another limitation. It cannot afford to ignore the dictates of its
mentor. PML-QA has to dance according to the tunes heard from the backyard
of the Presidents House. Failing which the sword of 58-2b could fall without
warning. Azhar decried Presidents power to dissolve NA, but he forgot that his
party by indulging in horse-trading has already provided a justification for
dissolution of the assembly of corrupt politicians.
In short the new political setup will provide a weak government. Despite
the fact that Jamali is the product of tribal and feudal background and holds
ZAB and Bughti as his ideals. He certainly lacks the iron-will of his ideals. He
will not be an assertive PM according to Umrani. Fazl thought that his
government would remain hostage to General Musharraf.
Political credentials of Mullas have also been put to test. Even after
losing golden opportunity to join government, they still have to prove their
worth as Opposition at the Centre and as ruling party in NWFP. If they come up
to the task they should emerge stronger in the next outing.
MMA is not a party but an alliance. It will not be prone to defections but
remain vulnerable to disintegration. It has to watchfully guard against disunity.
Differences have to be resolved before these are hatched into resentments,
protests, disputes and walkouts.
MMA will face difficulties in running affairs of NWFP with PML-QA at
the helm of affairs in Islamabad. The resistance will also come from nationalists
as MMA has encroached upon their domain. ANP asked MMA to enforce
Islamic Sharia well before the new Assembly took oath. The demand of
enforcement of Sharia was not the outcome of its love for Islam, but of its
eagerness to prove incompetence of Mullas in running affairs of the
government.

Nationalists have been left without representation. NAPP urged

unification of nationalist forces. They are preparing to give new dimension to
their politics. That new dimension was amply reflected from the conduct of
Achakzai, who stirred Lower House by not casting his vote and not bothering
to shake hand with Speaker after signing the oath book. Obstinate defiance will
be the hallmark of their future approach.
PPPP will continue suffering from being run through remote control.
Benazir could blame others, but she was solely responsible for split in her party.
She will not allow the alternative party-leadership to flourish. Seeing the riches
that lie in defection, more Jiyalas could follow the footsteps Rao and Faisal.
It is evident from the foregoing that Pakistan will have weak and unstable
government. Such government usually proves to be self-serving. It will not be
able to do any service to the nation. Therefore, people of Pakistan have to let
their hope of change for better rest in peace. The government has already
opted for status quo in running the internal affairs and there will be no change
in foreign policy, including Kashmir and Afghanistan as announced by the new
rulers.

CONCLUSION
In a letter to the Editor published in the News on 21 st November Kainat
Kayani wrote about restoration of democracy. Allegedly, the Constitution is
subverted, the Referendum is rigged, the Presidents appointment is illegal, the
General Election is manipulated, the Oath of Parliamentarians is disputed, and
the election to the office of Speaker National Assembly is marred by casting of
blank papers. With all this, an era of genuine democracy, tailored in the
supreme national interest, sets in. Now this country need not fear Indian
designs to destabilize it. Hurrah.
No doubt the change has come in a manner that would not make many
Pakistanis proud. The leaders, military as well as civilians, have once again
disappointed the people by their conduct unbecoming. The masses have been
forced to wait and see.
While waiting they must ponder as to why do the meet the same fate
every time. Serious pondering will result in realization that they do not need
horses. They are not prosperous enough to have animals meant for joy riding or
betting. They do not need horses which can be traded and moved from one
stable to another. They require stubborn and sure-footed mules to relieve them
from burden under which their backs have been hunched.
Jamali and his men must read the mind of their people from the manner in
which they received the dead body of Kasi and cast their votes under the

influence of anti-American feelings. Pakistanis may be a poor nation, but they

do care for their self-respect and honour. The new rulers must desist from
hurting their pride, directly or indirectly.

26th November 2002

TERRORISTS TERRORIZED

The war on terror has been escalating. In fact it is being spread by

design, not to eradicate terrorism, but to terrorize the people struggling for
their legitimate rights. The Crusaders believe that this is the only way to achieve
comprehensive visible successes encompassing political, economic and
military objectives.
Immediate aims are to extinguish the spirit of Jihad and denude Muslim
countries of any worthwhile military prowess. Jihad has been dubbed as
terrorism and most of the world, including many Muslim leaders, has bought the
idea. Destruction of military strength will begin in Iraq under the cover of
destroying Weapons of Mass Destruction. Thereafter, the war could be carried
to other fronts.
At present the global environments are conducive for the achievement of
above objectives. Once these are achieved the subjugation of Islamic World
would be complete, thereby securing political and economic interests of the
civilized world.
The holy war has to be waged in the name of terrorism. The reports
that monsters of terrorism are still active in most parts of the world should cause
no worry to the Crusaders. In fact the recurrence of terrorist attacks legitimizes
the escalation of holy war and use of brute force against entire Islamic World.
Presently Middle East is bearing the brunt, but skirmishes on other fronts
are also going on. These fronts situated in South, Southeast and Central Asia,
provide wide choice to the Crusaders to perform acts of gallantry.

IN MIDDLE EAST
The Middle East is an active theatre of the war. Sharon is the theatrecommander, who has launched major thrust against Palestinians. Since 1 st
November he has achieved following:

On 1st November Israeli troops arrested seven Palestinians in raid on a

village and eight Palestinians were killed in attacks on 4th November.

Israeli tanks killed two Palestinians in Rafah on 5 th November and one

more was killed next day in Gaza.

On 7th November two Palestinians, including a suicide bomber, were

killed and two more were killed in West Bank next day. Two Palestinians
were killed in West Bank on 10th November.

On 12th and 13th November Israeli army raided Tulkarem camp and
Nablus respectively. On 14th November a Palestinian youth was killed in
Nablus.

Israeli army reoccupied Hebron on 16th November and two Palestinians

were killed in Jenin and Nablus.

On 17th November an Islamic Jihad member was killed in West Bank and
next day Israeli troops raided Palestinian security base in Gaza.

On 20th November Israeli army killed six Palestinians in West Bank. Two
days later a UN official was killed in crossfire in Jenin.

On 24th November Israelis arrested 31 Palestinians in West Bank and its

tanks killed a Palestinian child next day. Four Palestinians were killed
three days later.

Between 29th November and 1st December four more, including a child,
were shot dead in Gaza.

In next three days eight Palestinians, including a woman, were killed in

West Bank, Gaza and Ramallah. On 6th December ten Palestinians were
killed in raids.

The resistance of Palestinians kept dissipating gradually, yet Palestinians

retaliated and inflicted casualties on Israelis:

On 4th November a suicide bomber blew up two Israelis. Two Jews were
killed in Gaza Strip on 6th November.

Five Israelis were killed in an attack on 11th November. On 15th

November eleven Israelis were shot dead in Hebron.

Suicide attack killed eleven more in Jerusalem on 21 st November. Two

days later two persons died in suicide attack on an Israeli navy boat. On
28th November six more were killed in attack on Likud office.

Palestinian Government remained under pressure for stopping attacks on

Israelis. Fatah and Hamas even discussed ending attacks and Arafats deputy
termed Intefada a failure. But Hamas vowed to continue Jihad and al-Aqsa
Martyrs Brigade claimed responsibility of attack launched on 28th November.
Arabs accused Israel of committing war crimes in Jenin and Nablus. Arab
League slammed Israel over destruction of a building in which WFP had stored
food for Palestinians. They could do no more than accusing and slamming
barbaric acts of Israelis.
America on the other hand warned US firms against joining Arabs
against Israel. US Senate body desired attacking Hezbollah and Hamas.

America opposed UNSC Resolution on Jerusalem. A US attorney called for

destruction of Palestinian homes.
Muslims wanted action against this attorney for violating professional
ethics. Strangely many of them continued believing that brutalities committed
by Israel do not have the approval of Bush and his Administration.
While Sharon was asked to concentrate on Palestine, Bush took the
responsibility of dealing with Iraq. The UN Resolution was redrafted to give
Iraq final opportunity. France agreed with US president on draft resolution.
UNSC adopted US-sponsored resolution unanimously and gave Saddam a week
to accept terms. America warned Iraq to disarm or face consequences. Salient
points of the Resolution were:

The Security Council found Iraq in material breach of its obligations and
gave Iraq one week to state whether it intends to comply with Resolution
1441.

Iraq must produce comprehensive declaration of its weapons programs.

Saddam Hussein must give the inspectors immediate, unimpeded,

unconditional and unrestricted access to uncover the Weapons of Mass
Destruction that he has had so many years to hide.

Iraq termed the Resolution as unfair, but could not withstand the
pressure. Saddam summoned the parliament to discuss, which allowed him to
make the final decision while rejecting the Resolution. Iraq finally accepted the
UN Resolution and in words of Robert Fisk Saddams merry dance couldnt
hide the sad inevitability of events.
Blix, the chief inspector, warned that a denial of access, or delayed
access, or an attempt to put something off-bounds, would be taken very
seriously. In short he was not prepared to accept any no from Iraq. Blix met
Iraqi Foreign Minister and finalized terms for the conduct of inspections, which
were quite humiliating.
UN experts began inspections on 27th November saying that burden of
proof lied on Iraq. The team searched the suspected places, including bedrooms
of Saddams palaces. The inspectors however kept quiet on the nature of
WMDs, which could be stored in bedrooms.
Iraq submitted the declaration a day before the deadline affirming no
WMDs, but listed 28 nuclear sites. It claimed that inspections proved Blairs
lies. Iraqi people expressed their anger over UN teams visits to palaces
branding inspectors as spies. To date the inspectors have found no proof.
Well before the passage of UN resolution Bush Okayed plans for attack
on Iraq in which about 250,000 troops could be deployed. Reportedly the plan

envisioned capturing of three zones in northern, western and southern Iraq after
an air campaign lasting for about a month.
US opposition backed Bushs war on Iraq. He also sought NATO support
and urged other countries to join war voluntarily. The allies were given choice,
except Turkey, which was pressurized to back attack on Iraq. Armitage visited
Asia to drum up support, particularly from Japan. India was also taken into
confidence.
The preparations for war continued. Swatches of Kuwait were sealed off
for US-led war games and new airports and bases were prepared by first week
of November. America offered to deploy new Patriot missiles in Israel as US
geared up for wartime production of more than hundred types of bombs. The
plans were fine-tuned in second week of December by holding computerized
war games.
The pilots practiced for war over Iraq. Since 1 st November following
practice runs were conducted:

On 6th November British and US jets bombed Iraqs no-fly zone as a

result of which four persons were wounded.

Seven Iraqis were killed in air raids on 16th November. During next two
days British and US jets again struck Iraqi air defences.

On 29th November leaflets were dropped warning Iraqis against

threatening US-British jets. Four persons were killed in air raids on 1 st
December.

On 4th December Coalition jets again bombed targets in Iraqi.

America continued looking for proof for its declared pretext to attack
Iraq. US Senate offered green cards to Iraqi scientists hoping that some of them
might come out with plausible evidence. America, against the decision of
UNSC, whisked Iraqs declaration to Washington to draw its own conclusions.
In a desperate attempt to win support of its estranged Arab brothers,
Saddam apologized to Kuwaitis for his attack on their country. Arab leaders
disappointed him by urging him to respect and comply with UN Resolution. The
Gulf media however backed Iraqi call for an end to sanctions.
Rest of the world merely watched the events. Russia asked US not to
attack Iraq on its own and warned over illegal strikes. It also expressed
differences over oil-for-food programme. China vowed to push for UN
consensus and showed its willingness to send experts to Iraq, but analysts
opined that China would go with the UN decision.
Iran is the second component of the Axis of Evil and one of the
candidates for regime change. Kharrazi warned US that its guess over change in

Iran government was wrong. Iran advised US over student protests to mind its
own business.
Rafsanjani urged Basij Militia to be on guard. Satan is using his cavalry
and infantry to exploit the current situation, because he thinks our people are
backing him, which is absolutely wrong. They thought in an Islamic country the
priest will do the priests job and Caesar will do Caesars job. But that will
never happen, and they have discovered that the winter (autumn) of Islam has
gone and we are witnessing the spring of Islam. His overtures however wont
deter the Crusaders if the Muslim World remained complacent as hither-to-fore.
Saudi Arabia is an emerging candidate for receiving special attention of
the Crusaders. A Saudi Princess was implicated in 9/11attacks. The lawyers for
families of 9/11 victims included three brothers of princess on list of
defendants in the case brought by a group called Families United to Bankrupt
Terrorism brought before the US District Court in Washington.
It was speculated that America might pressurize Saudis for action against
terror funding. It has already urged Saudi Arabia to do more in war on terror.
Reportedly Bush Administration also threatened to openly attack Saudi Arabia
knowing full well that such megaphone diplomacy was not the way to sort out
problems. Saudi Arabia realized the danger and pledged to hunt down
terrorists mercilessly.
Yemen has been suspected as sanctuary of terrorists since long. It was
subjected to legal missile strike in which six suspected al-Qaeda men were
killed. Time Magazine reported that Yemeni was real mastermind of Bali
bombing. This report indicated possibilities of more strikes.
King of Jordan was quick to impose curfew and launch crackdown
against extremists. Jordan army entered the stronghold of Islamists to avenge
the killing of man from the civilized world. He had to do it to save his
kingdom from the wrath of the Crusaders.
Turkey failed in earning the trust it deserved due its long association with
Christian World and services as member of NATO. As long as Turks keep
calling themselves as Muslims, winning of Miss World contest will be of no
great help in winning the membership of EU.
The victory of Islamists in general elections has further aggravated the
situation; despite Erdogans vow to maintain pro-west stance. He opposed
unilateral US strike against Iraq, but to avoid application of principle regime
change, he has to allow use of airspace/airbases against Iraq. So was the case of
Bahrain where Islamists won almost half of parliament seats.

ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD

In Middle East the war on terror was being fought in collaboration with
Israel. Elsewhere in the world there were three main collaborators. Russia
looked after Central Asia; India was responsible for South Asia and Australia for
Southeast Asia.
Russia was allowed free hand to deal with terrorism in the context of
Central Asia in general and in case of Chechnya in particular. The only
restriction imposed was that it had to keep anti-terrorist operations confined to
Muslim states. It must refrain from operating in neighbouring Christian states.
Since the suicide attack on a theatre in Moscow, Russia toughened its
stance. It urged Denmark to extradite Chechen Envoy. It planned fresh attack on
Chechnya; claimed the right to take action beyond borders and vowed to
eliminate Chechen leaders. Putin rejected talks with Maskhadov, but was
prepared to meet Chechen initiative group.
His stance was similar to the one taken by leader of the Crusaders. He too
demanded extradition, claimed the right to attack beyond borders, sought
elimination of terrorist leaders and at the same time refused to settle disputes
through dialogue.
The Chechen terrorists, fighting for liberation of their country, were not
disheartened. Six Russian soldiers were killed in Chechnya on 1 st November.
Nine were killed two days later when they downed a Russian helicopter. Four
persons were killed in suicide blast in Ingushetia on 15th November. Two days
later two pro-Russian cops were killed in Grozny.
Russia however restrained from actively participating in war on terror in
other parts of the world, except backing India. India has been waging the war
quite effectively in South Asia. Its main thrust was against Pakistan, details of
which are covered in other articles.
Of late it has concentrated on Bangladesh. Advani observed that al-Qaeda
was increasing presence in Bangladesh. India gave Bangladesh a list of
militant camps as part of aggressive policy, which had borne favourable results
against Pakistan. Its troops resorted to killing of Bangladeshi villagers.
Bangladesh, like Pakistan, lodged a protest.
When Bangladesh launched operation to curb crime the Europeans took
note of abuses of Human Rights. Europe exerted pressure on Khalida to the
liking of India by threatening and demanding:

A breach in respect for human rights and democratic principles could

lead to suspension of EU cooperation.

It called for immediate set up of an independent body to conduct a

prompt and fair investigation into killings and acts of torture and to make
the findings public.

Release members of parliament, stop arbitrary mass arrests, detentions

and killing in military custody.

The parliament expressed concern at the growing Islamic radicalization

in the country.

Islamic radicalism was the real concern of the Crusaders. Bangladeshi

Jamaat was accused of nursing ambition of Islamic State and Crusaders were
prepared to go to any extent to check this. Human rights violations, arrests,
detentions and killings in custody were just the excuses. India has been
committing all these crimes since decades and nobody from the civilized
world has ever made a mention of these.
Contrary to the allegation of sponsoring terrorism, Bangladesh has been
the unfortunate victim of this evil. On 8th December eighteen persons perished
as bombs went off in Mymensingh theatres. Police defused another bomb in
Dhaka. Next day four Indian spies were arrested.
Nepal is a non-Muslim country, but India tried to avail the opportunity
presented by the tragedy. Hundreds of Nepalese were killed in attacks launched
by rebels operating from bases located in adjoining territory of India. The
violence resulted in closing of 2,000 schools in Nepal, which amply reflected
the extent of disruption of normal life. India, being privileged partner of the
Crusaders, was not even asked about this naked cross-border terrorism.
Sri Lanka too has been victim of terrorism perpetrated by India since
years. The mediation of western countries has succeeded in controlling the
fighting to some extent, but situation has taken a new turn. A Muslim leader has
warned of threat to stability of Sri Lanka. The nature of future confrontation
was quite clear from his statement.
In Southeast Asia Philippines remained the focus of war on terror.
America wanted Moro Islamic Liberation Front to appear on terror list and help
Gloria in crushing Muslim rebels. It was willing to train Philippines soldiers
and Europe offered assistance in anti-terror operations. The Crusaders were
ready to do more if so desired by Arroyo.
The war in Southeast Asia had chances of escalation against wishes of
countries of the region. It can spread to Indonesia if Jemaah Islamiyah decides
to re-enact Bali attack. The legal action initiated by Indonesian authorities
against terror suspect wont help averting the inevitable. Bashirs desire to have
Taliban-style government in Indonesia will be a handy pretext for the
Crusaders.

Apart from Indonesia, the war can be extended to Malaysia. Mahathir can
be asked to pay the price of expressing honest views about the biased war and
showing disappointment on Americas disregard to Malaysias cooperation in
the anti-terror war. A Yemen-style military action can be carried out any time
without warning.
Mahathirs crackdown on Islamic hard-liners would earn no regard.
America will continue insisting that his country could fall victim to a Bali-style
terror attack. The campaign of say no to Coke launched by Malaysian
Muslims and slamming of US probe of a terror suspect could expedite the
arrival of the holy war. Mahathir cannot beat it back by denouncing US
warning as paranoid and baseless.
Australia has assumed command of this theatre of war in the wake of Bali
incident. It vowed not to be intimidated by Osamas threat and wanted broader
UN rules on pre-emptive strikes. Asian nations rapped arrogant Howard, but
Japan and US backed pre-emptive strike remarks. It also introduced a law to
punish overseas killings.
Australia dismissed Asian criticism and decided to deport suspected
terrorists. Howard sparked uproar with call to ban Islamic robes and Australian
cleric stepped up war against Islamic dress. Muslims in Australia have to pay
the price for ill intentions of Bashir, who vowed turning Australia in to an
Islamic State through preaching.

THE RESULTS
The evil of terrorism has persisted. Osama hailed Kuwait, Yemen and
Bali attacks. Germany announced that terrorist network was still intact and
Britons had reasons to feel more jittery. Another kind of terrorism termed as
anti-Muslim crime has also risen by 17-fold in US, but Bush, for want of
moral courage, could not hail it unlike his counter-part.
The terror spread to new territories. On 28th November fifteen persons
were killed in an Israeli hotel in Kenya in a terrorist attack. The same day two
missiles were fired at Israeli airliner. A group called Government of Universal
Palestine in Exile; the Army of Palestine, claimed the responsibility.
Kenyan and Israeli authorities, however, suspected that Osama bin
Ladens al-Qaeda was responsible. Six Pakistanis were among twelve held as
suspects. Pakistan condemned terrorist attack in Mambasa, but Kenya denied
access to detainees, who were subsequently identified as fishermen.
Quite navely the civilized world continued blaming al-Qaeda for every
retaliatory act of oppressed Muslims. The holy warriors wont listen to the

argument that terrorism perpetrated by rogue states like Israel and India could
give birth to more groups like al-Qaeda. This argument was shunned, because it
pointed towards root cause of the evil.
The incident also proved that as to how quickly the civilized world
jumps to conclusions about enemies of the holy warriors. Immediately after the
attack, Kenyan Muslims feared becoming scapegoats and so were Pakistanis
and Somalis, who were the first to be suspected and interrogated.
Attack revealed upon a US Senator that anti-aircraft missiles pose big
terror threat. As the war progresses the list of weapons posing big terror threat
will keep expanding. The incident of 9/11 has placed Boeing airliners at the top
of that list. As a patriot American, the Senator would tend to ignore the
motivating force that drove those men to fly and navigate the airliners to the
target.
The beauty contest, which was to be held in Nigeria, added new
dimension to the on going clash of civilizations. Hundreds of Nigerians were
killed in riots caused by Miss World contest. The Daily News wrote these lines
about the tragic incident:

The immediate spark to this eminently avoidable tragedy was provided

by a newspaper article which, while discussing the Miss World beauty
contest scheduled to be held in Abuja on December 7, insulted Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH). This provocation came amid mounting Muslim
resentment and rising tensions ever since the beauty contest was
announced. While such contests have many critics around the world,
Muslims in particular regard these as degrading for women and as the
means of promoting western stereotypes of beauty and social
acceptability.

There is, of course, also the powerful push of the multi-million dollars
cosmetics industry which promotes such contests to project a glamorous
image of womanhood to boost the sales of its products. The string of
Indian successes in such contests was, in part at least, attributed to this
hidden factor.

The blasphemous reporter, following the footsteps of Rushdi, fled Nigeria

immediately after issue of death Fatwa. The contestants were moved to London
after having highlighted the contrasting values of two civilizations. Nigerian
Christians decided to teach the lesson as they felt tired of turning the other
cheek to Muslim attacks.
Opposition to war has been growing, because it has been war of terror
rather than a war on terror. The Muslims felt that US was leading Crusades

against Islam. A doctors group feared that war in Iraq could kill over 50,000
people. Many speculated that war would create new recruits for terror.
In some cases the opposition to American unilateralism turned into
hatred. Kuwaiti, who shot US soldiers, admitted that he hated Americans. The
hatred spilled beyond territorial limits of Muslim World. Violent protests were
held against acquittal of US soldiers involved in hitting Korean girls and an
explosion took place near US base in Japan.
The leaders like Jiang called for the need to address root causes of
terrorism rather than escalating the use of military means. Munir urged the
world to end religious hatred. But after Republicans seized control of
Congress, Bush started talking of war more vehemently.
America urged international support for expansion of war, particularly
from the Christian World. Historic enlargement of NATO has been planned for
this purpose. Pentagon advised anti-terrorism preparedness and pressed Europe
to boost military muscle.
America asked Russia not to worry about these developments. NATO
summit specially focused on improving its relations with Russia. Russia fully
understood the purpose of expansion. Those who would be the targets of
combined military might of Europe and America remained complacent. Bush
gave them false sense of security by sending Ramazan and Eid greetings and
hosting Iftar-cum-dinner parties.
Today America is in position to start war anywhere in the world with or
without an acceptable pretext. Most analysts take it as failing of UN. Gary
Young of Guardian observed that UN was founded on humanitarian principles,
but now it was being driven by the interests of money and power:

The UN is anything but perfect. Its structures are outmoded, its methods
are undemocratic and its record of restoring, defending or establishing
democracy around the globe is weak.

The business community is fast becoming one of the UNs important

allies he quoted remarks of Kofi Annan. Two months after these remarks
the UNDP accepted $ 50,000 from 11 multinationals in return for
privileged access to their offices.

The UN operates by and large, according to the golden rule - that those
who have the gold make the rules.

He further elaborated the point relating to American unilateralism by

referring to directive of Gondaleeza Rice to senior staff at the National Security
Council. She had asked them to think seriously about how they planned to
capitalize on these opportunities in order to change US foreign policy. The

answer was a strategy that would formalize Americas role as the worlds most
powerful rogue state.
He went on to say that great play has been made of the fact that the
French insisted on the substitution of and for or in one part of the text, as
evidence of the detail with which the agreement has been hammered out. But all
of this amounts to little more than antics about semantics if the Americans are
going to bomb (Iraq) anyway.
He concluded, the biggest threat to the UNs credibility now is not
Saddam Hussein, but Bush. If Iraq is in material breach of UN resolutions, then
Israel is no less so. So long as the UN is prey to bribery and bullying, then the
resolutions that it passes will have no more moral authority than the cheques
that are drawn on their account.
America enjoys an enviable status. It can thrust war on others and achieve
the desired goals, but with its present approach it wont be able to defeat
terrorism, because it is based on prejudices, anger, fear, mistrust and arrogance:

They relish their freedom to the extent that for its protection they are
prepared to invade and subjugate sovereign states, but deny this right to
oppressed people and equate their armed struggles with terrorism.

Americans consider their security so important that for its sake they do
not hesitate in subverting the security of other peoples.

Americans consider their interests supreme and their values superior, but
they usurp interests and ridicule values of other nations.

They boast about their values of democracy, justice and human rights
etcetera, but practice double standards on all their values.

They believe that democracy is the only reliable system for providing
good governance, but they try to impose this system on others using
undemocratic means.

To administer justice is Divine, but its biased and selective dispensation is

not. They frequently and blatantly resort to its distorted administration.

They are keen to protect human rights, but in practice they do not treat all
human beings as equals, irrespective of colour, creed and faith.

They claim that choice of faith is basic right of everyone, yet the religious
freedom in some countries is a matter of concern for them.

They protect rights of women and for that they promote beauty contests
and cat walks even at the cost of losing hundreds of lives, but treat the
veiled women as terrorists denying them the right to wear the dress they
like.

They condemn child labour and impose sanctions against defaulters, but
smuggling of children from poor nations for making them priests causes
them no concern.

They pretend to be noble in providing humanitarian aid and economic

assistance to needy people, but attach strings to aid and also impose
sanctions to starve thousands of innocent people.

They want peace, but hurry to go to war without trying other means. They
tend to ignore that militancy cannot be suppressed with brute use of
military might.

Tolerance is basic essential of peaceful co-existence, but they exhibit

zero-tolerance by being extremely arrogant in pursuing the doctrine of
pre-emptive.

They claim war on terror as holy act and persuade others to cooperate,
but refuse to define terrorism. Thus, in performing the noble act they
promote bigger evil of state terrorism.

They are against Weapons of Mass Destruction, because these are threat
to peace, but pile up arsenals of these with inclination of using them in
hundreds to destroy the imaginary ones.

They talk of rebuilding and reconstruction, but only after first turning few
countries into heaps of rubbles. Once that is done their desire of
reconstruction diminishes fast.

Bush, the fire fighter, is pretending to beat the fire of terror, but due to his
ill intentions and faulty technique originating from the complex of selfrighteousness, he has been spreading the Bush-fire. Bush, the doctor, is
prescribing medication for suppressing the symptoms, deliberately ignoring the
causes of disease.

CONCLUSION
The world community must act before it is too late. It should make the
UN a potent organization so that intended aims of its inception could be
achieved rather than protecting supreme interests of one nation. Only the will
of world community, as expressed in UN Resolutions, is supreme and that
should be implemented without discrimination.
The civilized world has vital interest in free flow of oil, but it must not
deny the rights of its lawful owners. They may contemplate about paying
special attention to men like Mogabe, who demanded return of land to blacks,
but must remember the words of Bishop Toto.

When Whiteman came to Africa, he had Bible in his hands and we

possessed the land. He started the sermon and we closed our eyes and listened
to him. When he finished we opened the eyes and saw that Bible was in our
hands and he possessed all the land. The real owners will never forgive the
usurpers.
America is bent upon finding an excuse to win a visible victory in
Middle East. Paul Kennedy observed that it seemed hard to believe that the US
would not find a cause for the stiffer consequences implicit in the new Security
Council Resolution. So the prospect of American led military action is high
Mossad chief predicted that Arafat and Saddam would be sidelined
within a year. If Israel could try a similar feat in far-flung island of Fiji, it
should not be a problem for America to do it in middle of the world. Whether
the inspectors find any proof or not, America will surely insist upon existence of
one. Some inspectors, however, will be of great help to US in assessing military
capabilities of Iraq. The assessment so carried out will be useful during the
invasion. Iraq had reasons to term inspectors as spies.
Some opinion seekers have opined that US image around the globe was
eroding. Anti-US feelings were growing even in friendly countries. In the
wake of acquittal of two American soldiers, Kim called for revision of an
accord under which South Korea ceded its judicial jurisdiction in crimes
involving US troops. The pulse readers ignored the fact that rogues never
expect to be loved. They like to be hated and feared.
Terrorism remains undefeated. Reportedly al-Qaeda has threatened to
conduct more Mombasa-style attacks. The survival of the monster fits well in
the scheme of Crusades. It allows the state terrorism to flourish. It provides
America a pretext to tighten the noose around some more necks. Even some
friends are feeling the pressure on their Jugular veins. The Crusaders are
knocking on many doors simultaneously, yet some Muslim analysts consider it a
cold war between the West and Islam. One wonders as to what constitutes an
active or hot war according to their definition.
The leaders of Ummah, like rats of a barn, are running around in panic
seeing American tomcat. Every one of them is seeking own safety by hiding
under nearest shelter. The proverbial rats could at least think of bell, but panicstricken leaders are unable to come out even with such absurd ideas. They
have failed to understand that they dont have to bell the cat. They just have to
stand united.

12th December 2002

AFGHANISTAN A YEAR AFTER

A year has gone by, but there has been no improvement in security
environments of Afghanistan. Russia warned of worsening situation in
Afghanistan. Afghan Women Council expressed concern over security in
Kabul. Afghan NSC discussed ways to counter insecurity during first week of
December. A few days later Interior Minister ruled out declaration of martial
law.
The meeting of NSC and statement of the minister amply proved that
puppet regime has failed in restoring the peace. But on the eve of first
anniversary of Operation Enduring Freedom Karzai was expected to join the
select band of Nobel Peace Prize winners.
The prevalence of insecurity could not be stemmed by a regime which
has been stalled and protected by occupation forces. Karzai lacked the strength
to establish the writ of his government beyond Kabul. The weakness of his
government lied in dominance of Northern Alliance. Ironically Shoora-e-Nazar

accused Karzai of bringing back Zahirs supporters in Kabul government and

reportedly cautioned him not to tread a risky path.
Rehabilitation and reconstruction works have not progressed smoothly.
Karzai and his ministers went to the donors begging for aid without much
success. Afghans kept waiting for rebuilding of their ruined country as they
were left with too little, not enough to pay even electricity bill to Uzbekistan.
Drafting of constitution to make Afghanistan a nation state continued.
Afghan experts visited Bonn to discuss the constitution, but Afghans questioned
the nature of constitution and blamed America for influencing its drafting.
So far Americans have paid no heed to the needs of Afghanistan. They
have been too busy in search of monsters in justification of prolonging their
stay in Afghanistan. They wanted to stay on, not to solve the problems of
Afghans, but to deal with other evils of the region.

PEACE AND SECURITY

Factional fighting and non-existence of law enforcing agencies were the
main causes of Karzais failure in restoration of peace and improving security
environments. The fighting between rival warlords and against government
troops has been taking its toll:

One person was killed and five injured in tribal clashes in Khost on 24th
September. Five days later nine more were killed as pro-government
Afghan commanders clashed in Paktia and three were killed in factional
fighting in Samangan.

Several days fighting left six dead in Herat. Seventeen more were
reported killed on 8th October in factional infighting. Next day three
soldiers were killed in a clash in Kabul between regular troops and
personnel of intelligence service.

Two were killed and four injured on 24th October and two days later six
more were reported killed in factional fighting near Mazar.

Commander Faiz Muhammad was shot dead in Logar. Eight persons were
killed on 10th November as rivals clashed in Nangarhar.

On 19th November two were killed as Atta and Dostum forces clashed.
Three persons were killed on 2nd December over disarmament dispute in
Kandahar area.

Karzais warnings to unruly warlords were welcomed by Afghans, but

ignored by fighting warlords and similarly the appeals of former warlords and

Khatami to end ethnic and factional differences fell on deaf ears. UN and US
also failed as brokers of peace.
The warring warlords however worked out truce to suit their
convenience. Rival warlords signed peace accord in Samangan on 5 th October
and five days later another pair of warring factions reached a cease-fire
agreement. Ismail and Amanullah agreed on truce after two days fighting. Atta
and Dostum met in Mazar for defusing tension, but the former vowed to launch
crackdown on commanders involved in clashes only a day after the meeting.
Thus the tendency to use weapons for settlement of disputes prevailed. The rule
of gun continued
Disarmament was considered necessary to end fighting. Japan agreed to
help pay for disarmament. Some warlords expressed their willingness to boost
the efforts. UN hailed the measure, but the surrendered weapons, as shown on
TV, were generally of obsolete type. Afghans shrewdly earned few bucks by
getting rid of non-essentials.
Analysts viewed Karzais disarmament plan with scepticism, despite
threats of Afghan army to crackdown on warlords for the purpose of disarming.
It was apprehended that operations by government troops, even with the support
of US, were not likely to succeed.
Karzai claimed that Afghanistan was not divided along ethnic lines, yet in
post-Taliban era battle between conservatives and moderates has been going
on. Enmities of warlords and arsenals of weapons maintained by them added
fuel to the on-going war. The feared civil war was being fought at low pitch and
it has been the cause of most law and order problems.
Those who had differences with the regime were condemned and others
were considered as Afghan heroes. Common Afghans were caught between
these two kinds of warlords. The incident related to Kandahar police pointed
towards further spread of factional division.
Karzai barred political leaders from engaging in military pursuits. The
ban wont work, because in Afghanistan political following of a leader is
directly proportional to his fighting prowess. The plan to appoint warlords as
envoys too may not help.
Chief Justice of Afghanistan accused warlords of bad law and order
situation. His assessment was based on the unusual nature of the crimes
committed in the country:

Two blasts shook Kabul on 28th September. On 5th October thirty Afghans
were arrested for torching schools.

A convoy carrying a governor was attacked on 9th October. On 17th

October an explosion hit girls school in Kandahar. Two days later two
persons were killed in a grenade attack at wedding.

A bomb hidden in a toy was found outside UN building. A man died

while laying mine near Khost. On 15 th November rockets hit Jalalabad
airport and a school.

Two children died in bomb blast in Kabul on 20 th November. Next day

rockets hit residential area of Kabul and eleven persons were injured in
Kandahar blast.

Two foreign aid workers were assaulted near Kabul on 24th November.
Next day two blasts took place near ISAF base in Kabul.

On 28th November two explosions took place in Jalalabad. Two bombs

rocked Khost on 12th December injuring one person.

Armed men picked up a businessman on 14th December. On 17th three

persons were killed in grenade attack in Kabul and a man died as
explosive device went off.

UN vehicle was snatched near Kabul and a UN convoy was attacked near
Ghazni on 19th December. Next day two Afghans died of injuries from
grenade attack.

The nature of crimes clearly pointed towards the causes, yet Karzai felt
the need to appoint a commission to probe. The judiciary had correctly
evaluated the situation and recommended introduction of Islamic punishments.
After all a good thing should not be discarded merely because Taliban did the
same. In no way it could result in re-emergence of Taliban.
Students protest in Kabul University was the only incident common to
those which take place in civilized societies, but unfortunately it was handled in
uncivilized manner. The police, driven by ethnic prejudices, resorted to highhandedness. The civilized world would have taken a serious note of this
incident had it occurred during Taliban era, but in prevalent circumstances it
was overlooked.
When troops of Northern Alliance entered Kabul about a year ago, the
Coalition knew it well that replacing Taliban with Tajiks would bring no
positive change, therefore deployment of ISAF was included in Bonn Accord. A
limited multi-national force was inducted for the security of essentials in Kabul.
The force accomplished the difficult task well by patrolling and imposing
curfew at night. As the security in Kabul improved the curfew was lifted during
Ramazan. They however failed in checking bomb blasts in Kabul and al-Jazeera
accused ISAF of harassing its staff.

The government of Karzai appreciated the role of ISAF, but attacks on

peacekeepers indicated that their presence was not fully accepted, therefore,
expansion of ISAF to other parts of the country was resisted by the Coalition.
UN, however, extended its mandate for a year to the disappointment Afghan
foreign ministry, which had desired that peacekeepers should stay for another
two years.
Bulk of the trained police force remained deployed in and around Kabul.
It claimed foiling some plots of subversion. It took stern action in dealing with
students protest-march and killed two of them. Kabulis accused it of extorting
money. Karzai rebuked the policemen and advised them to show
professionalism; resultantly police exercised extra vigilance to ensure safety of
Americans.
Raising of Afghan national army remained key to peace. Karzai was
assured that he would have 70,000 Afghan troops under his control, but the
Coalition was at all keen to raise the army on priority. The decisions on basic
issues of its role, capability and composition have not been finalized as yet.
The effectiveness of units, which have been raised and trained so far, has
also been hampered for these reasons. New army struggled to stop soldiers from
dropping out due to meager pay. Such a force would surely require the support
of commanders and warlords to perform effectively.
Consequently entire country, except Kabul, remained at the mercy of
governors, warlords and the Coalition forces. The warlords with the help of
their private armies endeavoured to settle the old scores and man-hunters of
the Coalition kept searching the eluding prey.
In last three months they could only capture one man for rocket attack on
an airport, some armed attackers in Paktia and a few suspects of Hezb. US jets
bombed Paktia in hunt for Taliban and al-Qaeda. US troops recovered weapons
by digging holes and searching burqa-clad women. These achievements were
enough for Bush to boast: we are making progress against terrorism.
The pursuit of visible successes by US troops caused resentment in
Pushtoon areas. Americans, along with their collaborators, were accused of
torture, harassment and extra-judicial killings. This resulted in retaliatory
attacks with increased frequency:

A US soldier was shot at and hurt near Kabul on 28th September. Three
days later shots were fired at US base in Shkhin in southeastern
Afghanistan.

An American helicopter was fired at on 5th October injuring a crewman.

On 14th October US bases were attacked and UN diverted aid aircraft

from Kabul for security reasons. Two days later a rocket hit Bagram air
base.

On 22nd October a rocket was fired at US base in Khost and three days
later rockets were fired at US airfield in Kandahar.

A blast rocked US base in Kandahar on 27 th October and five days later

rockets landed near US bases in Gardez and Khost.

Four US bases came under fire on 4th November and on 8th November US
troops were fired at in Dehrawed.

Rockets were fired at allied forces on 11th November and four days later
US base was attacked in Gardez.

On 16th November rockets were fired at US camp in Paktia and five allied
troops were killed in a blast in Khost on the following day.

On 18th November US base came under rocket attack in Gardez. Rockets

were fired at ISAF base in Kabul on 26 th November and Danish forces
also came under attack the same day.

On 27th November rockets struck Lwara base, located close to Pakistan

border and next day a soldier of US Special Forces was wounded in
sniper firing.

A US soldier was injured in ambush on 29 th November and four days later

US forces came under attack in Jalalabad.

American base at Lwara came under rocket attack on 5th December and
on 14th Harrier jets were fired upon.

On 21st December a US soldier was killed in clash; whereas according to

a report at least five Americans were killed.

The above retaliatory attacks did not cause much damage in terms of men
and material, as compared to that resulting from collateral factors:

A US soldier was injured in mine blast near Orgun on 27 th September. On

21st October three US troops were injured in car accident near Herat.

Three New Zealand soldiers were injured in landmine blast on 23rd

October. US soldier was injured in road accident on 22nd November.

Six Germans died in helicopter crash near Kabul on 18th December.

The increasing number of retaliatory attacks led analysts to draw various

inferences:

America has lost the momentum as the bad guys were striking with
growing frequency, accuracy and brazenness. Attacks sent strong
message to US and allies wrote Yusufzai.

American troops face hit-and-run tactics, which marked the beginning of

unconventional war.

The friction between US troops and Afghans, caused by the cultural gap,
was identified as the reason of these attacks.

An Afghan Vice President observed that attacks on US troops were aimed

at destabilizing country.

Al-Qaeda has intensified attacks against US forces and according to US

intelligence al-Qaeda has adapted to life on run.

All these inferences had touch of vested interests and personal desires or
wishes. The frequency and intensity of retaliation was not at all a matter of
worry for America. US troops fully understood that these isolated attacks did
not constitute organized resistance. These acts of aggrieved individuals were
quite acceptable to America, as because of these the existence of monster was
proved.
The threats were exaggerated by design. America readily authenticated all
the reports about Osama with renewed commitment to capture him. When the
desired reports did not come forth, the men like Franks speculated that
extremists still pose a major threat. Britain announced that terrorist threat had
not yet receded. A few days later Blair said, serious threat of more al-Qaeda
attacks remains. Germany declared that Osama was alive and al-Qaeda active.
Its secret service anticipated terror attacks. European states expressed their fears
about al-Qaeda attacks.
Australia too feared presence of al-Qaeda agents on its soil. The
government upgraded travel warning to citizens visiting Tajikistan and
Kyrgyzstan, the two neighbouring states of Afghanistan. Canada suspected that
al-Qaeda was at work on its soil as well.
UN, the voice of Crusaders, claimed existence of al-Qaeda camps in
Asadabad, capital of Kunar, which is located close to border with Pakistan. If
not in Asadabad, these could be in the neighbourhood. The suspected assassins
of Fahim were linked with extremist groups in neighbouring country and
members of the Taliban. Fingers towards Pakistan were also pointed, because
Osama tape was delivered to al-Jazeera in Islamabad.
The reports about monsters lurking in border areas allowed the Coalition
to man Pak-Afghan border and build bunkers along it. They occasionally
shelled enemy positions near the border with Pakistan. Fahim confirmed that
Taliban and al-Qaeda would surely strike again. Northern Alliance wanted that
monsters should live long, as its political domination remained secure as long
as US troops stayed in Afghanistan.

Iran too fell in the same category of neighbours, but it apprehended alQaeda attack on its embassy in Kabul. Russia feared Taliban might strike
back. A Saudi weekly claimed, Bin Laden is alive. Another paper reported,
al-Qaeda men are regrouping. A report said, smugglers and politicians
provide money to al-Qaeda and Taliban fugitives.
The monster too kept popping up its head here and there. Osamas
number two appeared in new video. Osama kept issuing new threats to
Americans and Jews. An al-Qaeda document warned of more attacks. These
pieces of evidence provided America the pretexts not only to prolong its
military presence in Afghanistan, but also to further extend it to other parts of
the region.
America has many pretexts up its sleeves. Hekmatyar was added to the
list of wanted monsters. So far he has survived the attempts on his life by
Afghan and US forces. The grounds for another opium war also existed. This
could help in dealing with opponents of the puppet regime. The digging of
mass graves of Talibans victims and talk of war crimes (not collateral
damage) fall in the category of pretexts. These can be exaggerated to serve the
cause of the Crusaders, with or without the able assistance of Asma Jehangir.
There are other excuses, which could be considered too flimsy by
discerning minds. Nevertheless these are good enough to prolong the stay in
Afghanistan. Many Afghans still having sympathy for Taliban; craze for
Osamas Eid cards; distribution of leaflets threatening music and movie sellers;
and dismissal of woman judge who met Bush without headscarf, speak of
widespread and deep-rooted fundamentalism.
These could constitute sound reasons for Bush, not only for staying on,
but also to drop loads of cluster bombs on these primitive people. The people of
Kunar have the right to protest against high-handed attitude of US troops and
call for their withdrawal, but Americans enjoy the privilege to turn their face
other way round. Tommy insisted that Afghanistan needed US forces and
Abdullah wanted US troops to stay. Japan supported US-led allies military
operation in Afghanistan. China hoped that US forces would eliminate
terrorism.
Brothers of Karzai slated America for failing to restore peace, but they
had to remember that peace in Afghanistan was in no way a supreme interest of
America. There are many more important tasks to be performed in this region.

REHABLITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Rehabilitation has to begin with resettling of displaced people. During
last quarter repatriation of refugees from Pakistan has slowed down.

Traditionally the nomads enter Pakistan from Afghanistan with the setting in of
winter, but it was not the reason for refugees to head back to Pakistan.
UN acknowledged that violence in Afghanistan was the main hurdle in
repatriation of refugees. Returning refugees faced intimidation due to anarchy in
Afghanistan. They preferred to return to camps in Pakistan to brave myriad
diseases and cold. Some refugees, like those in Karachi, were not willing to go
home for reasons of their own.
UNHCR ploy of increasing cash aid to refugees willing to go back
worked only to the extent of making a trip to Afghanistan. Perforce UNHCR
resorted to use of Iris (coloured portion of eyes) recognition technology to
check refugees from returning after repatriation.
Ultimately Pakistan, Afghanistan and UN worked out an accord on
repatriation. UNHCR hailed tripartite agreement. It envisaged repatriation of 1.8
million Afghans in three years. The time schedule indicated that UNHCR was in
no hurry to end this human catastrophe.
The problem of refugees in Europe was tackled with urgency. EU planned
to repatriate 400,000 Afghans. Despite strong criticism of its repatriation
initiative, EU was determined to start sending thousands of Afghans back
home. Kabul, UK and UNHCR inked a separate pact in this context. Countries
like Denmark used money to induce voluntary repatriation.
Australia employed colonial methods to get rid of the menace of refugees.
Hundreds of asylum seekers were rounded up and dispatched to Kabul.
Returnees had harsh words for Australia for the treatment meted out to them.
They must thank their stars for being Afghans; had they been the aborigines,
they would have been exterminated.
Iran dealt with refugee problem firmly and effectively right from the start.
Refugees have been returning in great numbers and by mid December over
360,000 of them had come back to Afghanistan. Those who were unwilling
were treated as illegal and arrested by Iranian police. UN took cognizance and
accused Iran of deporting refugees illegally; whereas in case of Australia it
preferred to keep quite.
Basic requirements of rehabilitation are provision of shelter, food and
health care. The task of provision of shelter was so enormous that nobody even
ventured to assess the requirement of funds. According to UN estimates about
four million Afghans faced food and water shortage. Most of them were likely
to starve during winter. EU portrayed grim picture of Afghan health services.
A mystery disease killed more than sixty children in Darwaz District alone.
To meet the basic needs of refugees UNHCR distributed blankets; India
sent biscuits for children; immunization campaign against polio was launched;

US army air-lifted WHO team to epidemic site; and the Coalition troops
provided medical help to Afghans. These actions were too little to be termed as
rehabilitation.
The revival of institutions of public services was the next step towards
rehabilitation. The incident of Kabul University reflected the state of institutions
of education. Refugee students complained of unfair treatment. National
Geographic, however, planned to set up girls education centre; thirteen Afghan
teachers concluded training in US and Japan assured to train female teachers.
As regards justice, the central authority was still in search of legitimacy.
Committee on constitution found it difficult to respect Islamic law without
offending the West; whereas the people urged the Centre to restore Taliban
punishments.
For rehabilitation of judicial system Afghanistan-Pakistan Peoples
Friendship Association sought assistance; Rome moot discussed the legal
system and Amnesty International sought donors help to rebuild it. It wont be
wrong to say that nothing concrete was done in this regard.
Last, but not the least, was the revival of Afghan economy. The
identification of measures to rebuild economy has taken too long. UNSC has
lifted curbs on Afghanistan. America vowed to help improve Afghan border
trade. Australia offered agriculture aid. China pledged to write off all Afghan
debts. These gestures were not sufficient to start the revival of a ruined
economy.
Karzai Government launched new currency to attract foreign investment.
The effects of introduction of new currency were yet to be seen. It was however
to the credit of Karzai that despite all the constraints his government increased
benefits for disabled.
With appalling response of the world enumerated, it was not easy to urge
the refugees to return home. Karzai was justified in having concern over
welfare of returned refugees. Afghan Government could do nothing except
condemning UN agencies deplorable performance in this regard.
The UN had its own problems. It needed $ 64 million just to provide food
to two million Afghans. Overall urgent requirements of aid for Afghanistan
exceeded $ 800 million. Out of the entire world only Canada earmarked $
116.6 million and EC allocated another 10 million euros in relief aid. Iran,
Uzbekistan and UAE donated humanitarian aid in kind. Yet the UN claimed that
it was making efforts to rehabilitate refugees.
Reconstruction of Afghanistan did not take off. Kabul-Kandahar-Herat
road was the only project on which work started and earned appreciation from
Bush. The deal of trans-Afghan gas pipeline project, expected to bring

prosperity to region, has not been signed so far by Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Turkmenistan. Building of Silk Road to China through Badakhshan was also
talked about. International aid started trickling in for telecom and broadcasting.
AWCC planned to open Internet cafes across country.
Provision of funds for reconstruction has been very slow. ADP approved
$ 415 million for highways. Japan pledged to provide $ 136 million for
reconstruction. ADB announced $ 150 million loan to rebuild Afghanistan.
OIC launched a fund for reconstruction.
These funds have yet to enter the proverbial pipeline before start
flowing. American Senate passed and Bush signed $ 3.3 billion aid and
peacekeeping package, which will be released over four years. This package has
inherent drawbacks. Firstly, bulk of it is likely to go for peacekeeping and
secondly, American pipeline is prone to choking.
Lip service to reconstruction continued. World Bank hailed reconstruction plans. America renewed its support. UK reaffirmed commitment
to pledged aid. Polish President and Prime Minister of Norway pledged aid for
rebuilding. UNHCR asked donors to do more for rebuilding Afghanistan.
Turkey called for additional aid. Pakistan repeatedly urged global community
for speedy reconstruction of Afghanistan.
American forces expanded humanitarian and reconstruction aid.
Australian troops also showed interest in rebuilding. Some elements in US
Administration were apprehensive about reconstruction. The planned shift of
focus from security to rebuilding was denounced. US treasury chief felt the
need to probe reconstruction.
According to Boston Globe the Bush Administration still seemed bereft
of any strategic plan to help Afghans reconstruct their country. The sad reality
is that hardly any American and few other foreigners are assisting in the
desperately needed work of reconstructing Afghanistans infrastructure. In one
northeastern province a plea for aid to repair the electrical grid was answered by
France with an offer to do the work for a half-million dollars. Eventually
Beijing sent an electrical engineer to do the job free.
The slow inflow of aid forced Karzai and his ministers to make begging
trips. Karzai visited Saudi Arabia to seek urgent delivery of aid. He urged oilrich Gulf States to help his country; reminded international community about
their promises; requested world leaders not to abandon Afghanistan; and assured
them of introducing administrative, judicial and financial reforms. He went to
Oslo to pave way for increase in donations.
Abdullah repeated his concern over inadequate aid. He reminded world
that Afghanistan still needed huge aid and asked donors to double the aid. He

visited India and China for talks on assistance. An Afghan adviser asked
America to fulfill its commitments.
Bureaucratic procedures were blamed for creating hurdles in foreign aid
and investment. Donors did not listen to Powells advice to ease bottlenecks in
flow of aid. The work on Spin Boldak-Kandahar road stopped precisely for this
reason.
Security hazards hampered the start of reconstruction projects. Mines
made the movement in countryside quite risky. Incidents of mine blasts kept
occurring. In one case five of a family perished when their vehicle hit a mine
near Herat. The slow pace of de-mining remained a matter of concern. Sites of
cluster bombs also took the toll by killing Afghan civilians and aid workers.
Attacks on schools hampered the revival of education system. Grenades
were hurled on offices of aid organizations. Hence the UN felt that global drive
to rebuild Afghanistan was petering out due to unsafe security environments.
Corruption was another impediment. Karzai sacked a dozen of senior
government officials to control unruly and corrupt provincial leaders. His anticorruption purge did not bear the desired results, because the fired officials
defied Karzai and many of them refused to vacate posts. This did not discourage
Karzai. Reportedly he has planned to turn against Northern Alliance in few
days.
Donors had reservations on proper utilization of aid. Japan and Germany
wanted that the aid should not focus solely on Kabul. Germany decided to
review utilization of its aid. Similarly ADB planned to establish resident
mission to improve use of aid.
Due to lack of diversification of economic activities Afghan farmers
reverted back to poppy cultivation. Despite the ban, poppy was planted all over
Afghanistan, particularly in provinces of Farah and Helmand. A bumper crop of
opium was expected. According to Brahimi the opium production could exceed
2,500 tons this year. Afghan press declined to blame the farmers, as they had no
alternative.
With availability of raw material in abundance, Afghanistan once again
became the largest producer of opium according to estimates of UN. Illicit drug
production boomed and in most cases narcotics were produced under patronage
of warlords. The production shot back up to record level. Russia slammed
government for lack of efforts to stop heroin production.
An advisor to EU stressed upon legal reforms regarding drugs. Antinarcotics squad was launched with the help of Britain. Anti-narcotic force was
set up in Nangarhar and the government vowed to destroy opium crop. Gul
Agha gave two weeks deadline to poppy growers and destroyed a drug market

in Helmand. Drug smugglers were killed while crossing borders. Despite these
stringent measures most opiate drugs which reached Europe came from
Afghanistan.
The civilized world remained interested in cultural refinement of
Afghan society. Focus was on emancipation of women. The Crusaders claimed
that by toppling Taliban they had brought a sense of freedom in better half of
Afghan population. Bush, Rice and Powell made it convenient to meet visiting
Afghan ladies. EU urged Afghan Government to improve womens rights as
these were still being abused in Afghanistan.
A study revealed serious obstacles in protecting human rights. The
donors urged help to end abuses and the West stressed upon human rights.
Karzai responded and called for action against human right abuses.
The Crusaders boasted about bringing back normalcy by projecting
revival of cultural and recreational activities. Fighting of birds and dogs
returned to Afghanistan. Singers and drummers rediscovered their talents.
Musicians resurfaced in famous Kharabat Street. However, to the dismay of
civilized world musicians were beaten by the police for violating local ban. It
reflected badly on Germans who trained Afghan police.
Archeologists searched for third Buddha in Bamiyan. World community
prepared to restore Bamyian Buddhas, which were demolished by Taliban.
Cultural minister sought help to save archaeological artifacts, though theft of
archaeological treasures went on unabated.
In the context of foreign relations, Karzai invited neighbouring states for
friendship. The statements of MMA candidates, who vowed to reverse Afghan
policy and support Taliban, however caused worries to Afghan regime. The
victory of MMA sent tremors to Kabul.
Once the election rhetoric of MMA was understood in right perspective,
Afghanistan wanted cordial ties with new government in its eastern
neighbourhood. Pakistan showed willingness to lift ban on eight Afghan items.
Arsala visited Islamabad and both the countries resolved to boost relations. He
met Musharraf, Jamali, Kasuri, Humayun and Shaukat and wanted unfettered
transit facility.
Pakistan has always been ready to help re-build Afghanistan. Kasuri
assured Karzai of his countrys help for reconstruction. Pakistan reiterated the
pledge of all possible assistance.
Afghanistan released about two hundred Pakistani prisoners and HRCP
hailed Karzai on their release. But the return of prisoners failed in stirring any
goodwill for reasons that will be seen little later. Nevertheless Pakistan

reciprocated the gesture and released Afghan prisoners. Arsala assured release
of all Pakistani prisoners.
Iran and Afghanistan stressed upon expansion of relationship. Thirteen
Iranians were released from Herat prison and Iran agreed to free Afghan
prisoners. Iran reopened Milak border with a plan to market Iranian goods from
February. Iran asked Afghanistan not to block crucial water flow and Karzai
pledged to allow Hilmand water flow into Iran. Afghanistan, Iran and Tajikistan
signed MoU on transit roads.

REVIEW
Attack on Afghanistan was projected as first phase of the holy war which
was initiated after 9/1. Christoph R. Horstel, however, differed with this
viewpoint. In a one-on-one personal briefing, a ranking member of a European
intelligence service assured the author that he had ample proof that US war
preparations for Afghanistan started as early as April 2001. A Pakistani
intelligence source has proved this information right. In the beginning of May
2001, a member of US intelligence unit visited my source at his table to instruct
him on operations for the months ahead. When the Pakistani got angry about
being ordered around, the American simply and shortly pointed out that there
was enough space for Pakistan on the hit list.
A year after the war its noble objective was still not achieved. Horstel
opined that the Afghanistan experiment was doomed. His disappointment was
based on following reasons:

Afghans miss the security because the Taliban had disarmed thousands
of small groups of bandits. There was a lot less corruption than
nowadays. Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Mulla Zaeef turned down in
November 2001, just days before his arrest, the visa application of a
German journalist who was offering one million dollars worth of food
and medicine in turn.

And even in the West it is being remembered and highly appreciated that
poppy cultivation had virtually been stopped in the last years of Taliban
rule.

The war against terror is lost right now mainly for two reasons. Firstly,
the number of sympathizers is growing worldwide, mainly through the
policy of the protagonists of the anti-terror show. Secondly, the Islamist
movement of the country came out of their defeat reinforced and united in
their opposition against the US.

The cost of war until December 2001 has been $ 40 billion. The
casualties have been estimated 4,500 people dead, whereas I, carefully

considering the sources, would place the figure higher, at about six to ten
thousand.

The latest-third-US creation of a government in Afghanistan, under

Karzai, is a weak puppet, according to all observers. It does not even
claim anymore to come to grips with the countrys woes. Justify US
military presence in the region is all this government has to do. And for
that it needs enemies. Monster is the term applied to their regional
enemies by US politicians. With regard to Afghanistan US Foreign
Secretary Colin Powell quipped in July, I hope we dont run out of
monsters!

In the context of Afghan interior affairs we cannot but acknowledge that

the US is taking contradictory steps. Most shining example is the warlord
Hazrat Ali in Nangarhar province, who enjoys US support of cash,
weapons and ammunition as well as transport facilities, including airlifts.
European Union officials as well as the (Turkish) Kabul ISAF command
have repeatedly and unmistakably requested the US to immediately
refrain from this double policy.

These US shortcomings play directly into the hands of the radicals.

Especially the elite units of 82nd rangers have not lived up to the
expectations. But General Franks does not care. He refused even to talk
about the problem. There are observers, who consider this a method to
create the right amount of trouble, which in turn justifies further
prolongation of US military presence.

Besides military and strategic reasons, there are others, which may
disrupt the Afghanistan experiment. The unfair and insufficient
distribution of development aid, for example, to the disadvantage of the
partly unruly Pushtoon provinces.

Millions of dollars in aid funds disappear in a morass of corruption.

The present administration appears so weak and helpless that they feel
the good days might be over any time.

His fellow countrymen, therefore, scaled him (Karzai) down from Mayor
of Kabul to Owner of His Chair.

In his analysis he also dilated on false reporting about Muslims and

pointed towards biased conduct of the holy war:

Often reports on conflicts involving Muslims are initiated from studios

and offices located under the jurisdiction of the enemies of these
Muslims: on Palestine from Israel, on Chechnya from Moscow, on
Afghanistan, Pakistan and Kashmir from New Delhi.

Especially efficient in this regard are reports on Afghanistan from

Washington. In the USA, media support for Enduring Freedom was
secured by stacks of these infamous internal information releases, which
forced every editor and reporter to comply with the US propaganda needs
of the day. It was forbidden, according to one of these releases, to publish
pictures of civilian casualties of Afghanistan bombing raids as front-page
news.

In an open letter to members of US Congress Hekmatyar wrote that

America has failed in attaining objectives in the context of Afghanistan. He
analyzed the Afghan war drawing conclusions and framing suggestions:

America could neither apprehend al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders nor could
restore peace and stability.

All freedom loving Afghans opposed to NA are labeled as al-Qaeda and

Taliban. Less than 10 percent out of 600 detainees (in Cuba) are linked to
al-Qaeda and Taliban.

US imposed the pro-Russia NA on the Afghans to further divide the

Afghan society. Their efforts to impose controversial king were foiled by
Loya Jirga and the puppet regime has no support in Afghanistan.

He claimed US dropped 72,000 bombs and rockets and killed 25,000

Afghans at a cost of $ 17 billion during first six months of war.

Attitude of the US soldiers in Afghanistan is insulting and humiliating.

Savages of American troops are reminiscent of the barbaric acts of the
Russian troops. Bush is lying about casualties suffered by US soldiers and
that US troops were welcome in Afghanistan.

He claimed that Afghans have started armed resistance against US troops

not only to drive them out from Afghanistan but also avenge the loss of
civilians in bombing.

Growing number of attacks on US troops are launched by people who

suffered at the hands of occupation forces and not by al-Qaeda and
Taliban as claimed by US. As a result of that more than 40 Americans
lost their lives in eastern provinces in last three months.

He narrated the story of Afghan woman who killed two US soldiers and
F-16 and B-52 planes were called as reinforcement. Is it not shameful
that the Americans need F-16s and B-52s to fight against an Afghan
woman?

He concluded that jingoistic policies of Bush would have catastrophic

consequences for the world in general and America in particular and then
urged Afghans to stage a national uprising to evict the Americans.
In another outing he touched upon the nature of ongoing war:

What is happening in Palestine, Afghanistan, Sudan and the possible war

on Iraq are all links in the chain of Crusader wars declared by George
Bush.

The Americans can kill hundreds of figures like Osama bin Laden, but
they cannot extinguish the fire of resistance. We declare our support for
every movement that works for Islam, struggles for the restoration of
independence and helps the oppressed and persecuted in wars against the
occupiers.

He denied existence of any organizational relationship between his

group and the al-Qaeda. No talks have taken place on a high level
between the Taliban Movement and us. I am confident that all faithful
Mujahideen will unite in one rank to defend their religion, honour,
country and people.

The resistance (in Afghanistan) is just a reaction to the provocative,

wrong and hostile policies of the United States against Islam. The policies
have aroused the anger of the people. It is due to American presence in
Afghanistan. We must end this presence, and then its supporters will
collapse.

Mulla Omar in his dispatch to al-Jazeera was more precise in reviewing

the ongoing Crusades:

America practices and supports terrorism and it is using the fight against
terrorism as an excuse for war against Iraq.

America and its allies did not reap anything from the attack on
Afghanistan except destruction and ruin, and the enmity of weakened
countries.

Afghanistan today is more chaotic than before.

The manner in which the civilized world and its collaborators have
treated prisoners of war was quite indicative of the barbaric conduct of the
Crusades in Afghanistan. The Coalition forces first quenched their thirst for
blood by carrying out indiscriminate killings and then decided to take some as
prisoners.
When the number of prisoners overshot the requirement, the surplus was
disposed off through well-planned mishaps like that of Qila Jangi. Some of the

survivors were transported to Cuba as war trophies and the rest were left in
custody of commanders of Northern Alliance.
The war trophies were selected at random as most of them had no link
with al-Qaeda or Taliban. After intensive interrogation of these prisoners,
America has established innocence of some prisoners, but decided to release
only five.
A released Pakistani denied any link with Taliban or al-Qaeda. He and
other freed prisoners narrated the horror of deaths in containers. We were
eating and defecating at the same place. We were kept like animals. They
remembered Taliban as good people. It was evident from their statements that
a US court, which disallowed clergy to represent Cuba detainees, had sound
reasons for its bold decision.
Despite criticism America was in no hurry to finalize the disposal of
prisoners in Camp X-ray. Punishing some of them and pardoning others has
been delayed deliberately. According to Russian News Service, America was
trying to bargain the exchange of prisoners.
The prisoners left in custody of Northern Alliance commanders suffered
no less misery. The released prisoners narrated horrifying stories of torture and
humiliation. Behroz Khan son of Niamat Khan of Shamshi village narrated his
ordeal as under:

The Ulema were not aware of the ground realities, geography and air
power of the enemy. But it was binding upon us to adhere to the call for
Jihad given by religious scholars from the Arab and non-Arab Muslim
World.

We were taken (by Taliban) to Razia Sultana High School, (near Mazar)
which was attacked the very next morning. The NA was targeting the
building with rocket launchers and heavy machine guns. US planes
bombed the school and at least 25 to 30 Mujahideen were killed in the
bombing.

The night was approaching and the trapped Mujahideen had not eaten for
the last three days. The surviving Mujahideen, about 300 in number, were
arrested and herded to a container like animals where we had to stay for
the next two days.

We had surrendered our weapons to the NA commanders against

assurances that the Mujahideen would not be harmed. But the agreement
between us and the NA commanders was not respected by soldiers loyal
to Ustad Atta Muhammad and General Rashid Dostum. They started
shooting us despite taking oath on the holy Quraan to respect the
agreement. About 120 Mujahideen were killed.

Six of the arrested Mujahideen, including myself were separated from the
rest and taken away. Five of my colleagues from Malakand Division were
shot dead by the soldiers and by virtue of sheer luck I survived the
shooting.

We were shifted to Shiberghan jail and subjected to all kinds of inhuman

treatment. Soldiers would snatch whatever food or medicines were
dropped by ICRC. Several of our colleagues died of torture inside the jail.

I am not repenting what I have done for Islam. I am satisfied with that. I
will go back if the need be.

Masood Khan of Dir was also caught in similar circumstances. He

narrated his sufferings in these words:

We had no formal training and no weapons to challenge the might of

America. But it was an Islamic duty and we had to prepare for any
sacrifice.

Men and women alike pelted stones on us after our arrest and we were
mercilessly beaten up by the armed soldiers. Three of our colleagues died
of stoning and beating killed one.

Most of the surrendered Taliban died inside the containers while

transporting them to Mazar from Kunduz. Only seven Taliban survived
out of 350 prisoners, who were shifted to Mazar.

Seventy people were butchered inside a container in which one

Muhammad Nisar of Ziam Dara in Dir district miraculously survived.

I have no regrets and I will go again for Jihad. I believe that General
Musharraf should have sided with the Taliban rather than the US.

A batch of prisoners was released from Kabul jail. Most of them were not
arrested in combat. They were visiting Afghanistan with valid documents. These
prisoners narrated the following account:

We went to Kabul on March 30 and were arrested on March 31. We were

innocent and we clarified our position, yet we were brought in torture
cells.

They wanted and forced us to accuse ISI. On my refusal they hit me with
an iron rod.

We also apprised the officials of our conversations with the Kabul

Ambassador but they ignored and abused entire Pakistan and ISI.

We are happy over our release but we cannot forget our countrymen still
in jails, particularly those who are sick.

We request Pakistan Embassy to take up the matter of Pakistani prisoners

with Afghan Government as to why Pakistani citizens with valid
documents are being punished.

I had to pay Rs 5,000 to the Kabul authorities to get permission to see the
jailed brother, complained elder brother of a prisoner.

It seems as good pass-time for the Persian speaking Afghan security

guards and armed soldiers to manhandle and humiliate Pakistanis
brandishing them as ISI agents or members of al-Qaeda.

Most of the released prisoners have lost mental balance due to torture.
They cannot tell their sad stories, like those who died in jails. But more details
will be known if those who are still held by America and NA are freed alive.
ICRC confirmed torturing of prisoners, though with less emphasis and no
concern. Many of them are mentally affected. They do not really understand
anything:

We were treated like animals said Wali Muhammad.

We were abused and sometimes beaten by jail authorities told Noor

Alam.

We were tortured and not provided with enough food and water said
Sakhi Muhammad.

We believe there are many who did not take part in any war but were
arrested just because of their Pakistani citizenship.

Based on these pathetic stories Behroz Khan was justified in saying that
release of Pakistanis created no goodwill for Afghan Government. The ability of
Pakistani Embassy in Kabul to provide any help or taking up their case with
Afghan authorities was minimal due to unfriendly attitude of authorities in
Kabul.
He continued that their attitude towards Pakistani prisoners speaks of the
hatred and dislike for Pakistan harboured by the non-Pushtoon Afghans. The
obsession of NA to link every Pakistani with ISI and every Pushtoon with alQaeda and the Taliban and meting out inhuman treatment to these Pakistani
nationals, could result in unpleasant repercussions. Afghan Government should
have no right to complain if these feelings are reciprocated and Afghan
refugees, particularly the non-Pushtoons, land in serious trouble.
These atrocities were committed in holy war being fought under the
slogans of peace and justice. These brutalities caused no shame to the
Crusaders and their allies. The media of civilized world continued harping
about excesses committed by Taliban and boasted about phenomenal changes

brought by the war. The phenomenal changes revolved around beard, Burqa and
music.
America tried to project religious tolerance of the civilized people by
inviting Muhammad Ali to spend some time with Kabulis and by permitting
Afghan pilgrims to use Kandahar airport. The Yankee soldiers, however,
undermined these goodwill moves by frisking of Afghan girls.

CONCLUSION
The conditions in Afghanistan, a year after toppling of Taliban, can be
summarized as under:

Karzais achievement to control warlords, quell political rivalries and

eradicate militancy has been negligible.

Peace in Afghanistan was still fragile. Some segments of Afghan society,

however, have been liberated to enjoy music, TV and cinema without
beard and Burqa.

Only about one-third of refugees in Pakistan have gone back to

Afghanistan, who can exercise the right to come back any time.

Aid for much-trumpeted reconstruction of Afghanistan has not gone

beyond trickle.

Presence of foreign forces in Afghanistan remained controversial, but

would certainly continue.

Taliban were often accused of ruining Afghanistan. The occupation of

Afghanistan by American has further ruined this country. Khatami has bracketed
both of them in category of evil. Taliban and US are a dangerous pair of
scissors.
Taliban had at least restored peace in most parts of Afghanistan, which
came under their rule, but the Coalition troops and ISAF have not. They have
vowed to train Afghan army and police for the purpose of restoring and
maintaining peace, but not much has been done in this context.
The training of a limited number of recruits commenced under
supervision of foreign instructors and in a practice firing these recruits killed
two children. The incident indicated the interest of their instructors in taking
safety precautions. Perhaps they were being drilled for inflicting collateral
damage.
There were apprehensions that US might leave Afghans lurking and in
view of Americas track record it seemed quite possible. America has already
threatened to suspend aid to force warlords to end fighting. EU threatened to

stop aid if its demands were not met. In less than a year the aid has become a
tool for coercion. Like aid, the accusations of human rights abuses were being
used for pressurizing Afghan leaders, who differed with Karzai and NA.
Some foresaw yet another war due to persistent chaos in Afghanistan.
That seemed impossible in near future. However once the first elections are held
in 2004 in which Pushtoons might win maximum representation and NA could
resort to mischief to deny them the power. In that eventuality the possibilities of
confrontation would certainly increase.
The increase in incidents of firing on foreign troops has led some
observers to infer that armed resistance has started. This too is not correct.
These incidents do not constitute an armed resistance. These are acts of the
aggrieved individuals as Afghans know only one way to express their
resentment.

26th December 2002

VOLUNTEERED TO BE VULNERABLE
During fifteen months of war on terror Pakistan has been accepting all
demands of America, knowing full well that the war was targeting Muslims in
the name of terrorism. Pakistan actively participated in fighting against the evil
and rendered meritorious services. It arrested and handed over more than four
hundred terrorists to America.
In return it received radio and communication equipment worth $ 4.5
million. A million per 100 terrorists could be termed anything but reward. The
consignment too was provided for further improving the efficiency and impose
binding obligation on Pakistan to do more.
Pakistan showed no signs of faltering in its resolve to fight against
terrorism. It planned to raise new unit to combat money laundering to
prevent flow of money to terrorist groups. Newly elected Prime Minister, who
acquired the vote of confidence through courtesy of patriots, resolved to
continue Musharrafs policy with the same degree of commitment.
The commitment to Crusades has alienated the rulers from their own
people. The masses have become more vocal in expressing their anti-American
feelings. It has also antagonized the extremists, who have started targeting
churches. This had never happened in Pakistan before year 2002.
Western Media exploited these incidents to fan anti-Pakistan feelings,
with complete disregard to the root causes. The rowdy Pakis ought to be an
ominous threat to peace, more so when they posses Weapons of Mass
Destruction. Sooner they are dispossessed, the better.
India made hey when sun shined. It pressurized Pakistan to stop crossborder terrorism and thus disown the Kashmir cause. Pakistan lost some ground
to its traditional adversary, which encouraged India to indulge in Advani-style
adventurism.
Based on these bitter realities, one can say that Pakistan has voluntarily
exposed its vulnerabilities despite rendering meritorious services to the
Crusades. Its sovereignty and security have become more fragile than ever
before.

SOVEREIGNTY USURPED

Pakistans judicial system in general and its laws in particular have

become redundant in the wake of war on terror. The government and people
have practically lost their freedom. They have become slaves of the whims of
US Administration. Will of the Crusaders has been ruling supreme as could be
seen from some incidents of last two months.
In first incident Dr Amir was arrested in Lahore. His mother moved the
court against his arrest. LHC asked government to explain Dr Amirs detention
and restrained it from extraditing him. Then court directed the government to
produce Dr Amir, but Interior Ministry kept making lame excuses. It lacked the
moral courage to admit that it was unable to comply with court order against the
wishes of those who had apprehended him. The court was equally incapable of
enforcing its orders. It could do nothing except chiding government.
His mother pleaded for his recovery. At last Dr Amir was freed as
mysteriously as he was arrested. He revealed that FBI and CIA had interrogated
him. He told that he was not physically tortured and deliberately avoided
mentioning other forms of torture.
The surgeon was suspected of having links with al-Qaeda, because he had
treated Osama in 1999, after he had hurt his back in fall from a horse. He had
again met his patient in November 2001 in Kabul.
On 7TH November US issued global alert ahead of execution of Kasi, as
it feared reprisals. This was done a week before the decision of superior court
on Kasis appeal, which meant that rejection of appeal was taken for granted.
Pakistans request for clemency was rejected so adamantly that nobody
from US Administration bothered to say a word in response. America took
necessary precautions by tightening security, advising its citizens to exercise
caution and closing its embassy and consulates in Pakistan on the day Kasi was
injected to death in prison.
Mariana Baabar described the events prior to Kasis execution as narrated
by his brothers:

While coming out of the death row and proceeding to the execution
chamber, Kasi paused and addressed his five-year jail warden: We really
spent a good time together. The embarrassed and choked warden looked
down, as he could not face a gallant Kasi.

Actually, Kasi told us that for five years this warden tortured and teased
him. He (the warden) would insult him at every given moment and make
a mockery of his being a Muslim and practicing Islam. At times he would
bring him food (mostly boiled vegetables and rice) and say it was porkmixed.

Then two guards came to hold him walk to the death chamber, but Kasi
calmly told them, I can walk on my own.

On 18th November LHC ordered release of Hafiz Saeed. With complete

disregard to judiciary, America objected to his release. Soon after his release
Hafiz Saeed vowed to continue Jihad. His overture earned criticism from
Indian Government.
In mid December LHC ordered release of Masood Azhar. His Jaish has
been supporting freedom struggle of Kashmiris. Proxy crusader slammed
Pakistan for freeing Jaish chief. Pakistan rejected Indian concern, saying
apologetically that he was not given any concession by government.
Dr Khawaja was arrested in a joint operation conducted by FBI and
police in Manawan near Lahore. Doctor along with eight others was held for alQaeda link, whereas the suspect claimed that his family only sheltered an
Arabs wife.
The arrests were made so indiscriminately that in less than forty-eight
hours four of them were released. The freed suspects disclosed that the
investigators threatened to send them to Guantanamo Bay during the so-called
quizzing.
ATC refused physical remand of Dr Khawaja. The government was asked
to produce three suspect doctors before LHC. In reply it was announced that the
main suspect was being probed for his link with al-Qaeda and his involvement
in anti-state acts.
The wife of the suspect challenged the government charges in LHC.
Khawajas were not freed even after grant of bail. Meeting with doctor was
denied to his relatives. LHC ordered the government to justify Khawajas arrest,
but his ordeal continued.
FBI issued a list of suspected terrorists, who could have entered America
clandestinely. One of the suspects was a jeweler of Lahore. Some time back he
had tried to go to England on forged documents, which made the President of
America to wonder as to why Pakistani jeweler needed fake passport. FBI
however decided to end hunt blaming its source for wrong information. The
incident proved that since 9/11 Americans panic on slightest of suspicion.
These were the incidents, which came to the limelight through media.
There were many others who were victims of terror perpetrated by FBI. It has
been active in picking up suspects from all over Pakistan. One was arrested in
Quetta in late November. Two Arabs were held in FBI-assisted raid in Karachi
on 9th January. One of them was al-Qaeda suspect, Abu Omar, who could be
handed over to US.

The worst happened in late December, when US troops clashed with FC

troops and a plane dropped two bombs in tribal area flouting sovereignty of
friendly Pakistan. As usual the government preferred to be secretive. Qureshi
claimed that Pakistani territory was not bombed.
The aggression was too naked to be covered up; therefore Qureshi had to
accept that US bomb fell on Pakistani soil. Foreign Office took its time in
investigating the incident. Three days later Pakistani and US forces again
exchanged heavy fire.
American troops in Afghanistan insisted that incident took place inside
Afghanistan. When the evidence proved them wrong they adamantly warned
of hot pursuit into Pakistan. Powell talked to Musharraf to clear the
misunderstanding and assured that there would be no cross-border pursuit
into Pakistan. The commanders of forces on either side met and US forces
agreed not to cross border. But the democratic Americans did not forfeit the
right to disagree. They started war games near Pakistan border.
The government displayed extraordinary wisdom in digesting all the
disgrace showered upon Pakistan by the Crusaders, directly or indirectly. For
Kasi the legislators could only offer Fateha. About Dr Amir the government
provided all the assistance for his quizzing and yet boasted about refusing his
extradition.
It could not tell the man hunters that Dr Amir would have visited even
Bush or Sharon or Vajpayee had one of them hurt his tailbone by falling from a
horse in a ranch or from a tank chasing stone-pelting teenagers or due to
prolonged sitting on floor during party meetings. A doctor could not be termed
as evil for meeting or treating an accused person. Doctors treat hundreds of
accused persons daily all over the world. Should they be dubbed as criminals?
Prime Minister denied involvement of FBI in raid on Dr Khawajas
house, but his minister Humayun felt that FBI raids worry entire nation and
Interior Ministry showed concern over FBI operations. The cabinet members
perhaps did not believe their boss.
The cases of Saeed and Masood were slightly different from those of
doctors. They were guilty of supporting a cause for which Pakistan has fought
three wars with India. Issuing of clarifications at the time of their release was
not required at all. The government should have resisted the demand for their
illegal arrests right at the outset.
MMA opposed operations in Pakistan, but Durrani, the only MMA leader
in power, consented that his government will not hamper search for al-Qaeda.
He too denied presence of FBI in NWFP.

Qureshi denied presence of remnants of al-Qaeda and Taliban in

Pakistan, Kasuri asserted that only Pak forces could conduct operation within
country. Faisal and Rao made similar assertions. If there were no remnants,
then against whom these operations would be conducted? It proved that these
statements were issued for public consumption. The government tried to prove
its metal.
Subsequently Pakistan announced that it was trying to identify al-Qaeda
suspects. It did not take time in realizing that in war on terror American
soldiers did not require visas to cross Pakistan border. They have no respect for
international borders. They can cross any border, particularly of Muslim
countries, with or without permission.
In fact the government asked America not to involve its troops in
unfriendly environments. Let Pakistani troops serve you better. They were
there to raid any Madrassa pointed out by the Yankeest. Even an FC soldier
involved in the firing incident could be arrested, if so desired.
The people of Pakistan however lacked the similar kind of wisdom.
Students and lawyers protested against scheduled execution of Kasi. Protest
rallies were held in Multan and Quetta. People expressed their sympathies with
Kasi and criticized rulers and religious leaders. On 15 th November black day
was observed in Quetta.
The dead body of Kasi, who recited there is no god but Allah before his
death, received heros welcome in Quetta. Hundreds of strangers thronged his
residence to condole his death. The mourners vowed to avenge martyrs
death. Black flags and banners fluttered throughout the city. Bar held reference
in Peshawar in his honour.
Kasi was convicted in a criminal case in accordance with American law,
but people of Pakistan elevated him to the status of a martyr. His family
narrated, when we opened his casket, we thought we would be in shock as it
had been five days since he was executed. But surprisingly he looked so fresh
with a glowing face.
Only doctors could tell the reasons as to why his dead body had not
started decomposing, but people in this part of the world believe that bodies of
martyrs remain fresh even after their passing away. They believed that Kasi was
martyred and vowed his revenge.
The people also protested against arrests of Dr Amir and Dr Khawaja.
The conflicting statements about Dr Khawajas arrest resulted in public wrath.
Religious leaders demanded his release. Lawyers protested against FBI
operations and held anti-US demonstration.

These arrests amounted to surrendering sovereignty to FBI in words of

Imtiaz Gul. MMA and Shabab-e-Milli staged anti-US rally in Peshawar. Sami
urged people to take to streets against American high-handedness in conducting
operations in Pakistan. Anti-US rallies were held in Multan and Lahore.
Lawyers demanded closure of US bases. Rockets were fired on a building
in Miran Shah. Fazl wanted US forces out of Pakistan. MMA vowed to block
US hunt in tribal areas and warned government against supporting US.
The incident of hot pursuit was assailed by NWFP Assembly and slated
by Jamaat-e-Islami. America was condemned for violating sovereignty of
Pakistan. Qazi and Fazl addressed anti-US rally. Qazi demanded redefining of
countrys foreign policy. Sami declared that MMA would intensify anti-US
campaign.
After operation of 9th January the protesters slammed FBI raids. JI
women threatened to organize countrywide protests and demanded immediate
halt to FBI raids on innocent citizens. IJT staged anti-US rally in Peshawar.
With complete disregard to public sentiments, the newly elected
government vowed to continue Musharrafs policies in letter and spirit. In the
context of foreign policy it meant continuation of eating onions. It assured
America to end terrorist financing.
With a view to taking stringent action against terrorists the government
promulgated Anti-terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance 2002. The new law was
widely criticized, but it certainly reflected dedicated or dictated commitment
to war on terror.
Pakistan Government, like Americans, seemed to have forgotten the need
to address the causes of terrorism. Resultantly terrorists attacks inside Pakistan
continued:

On 15th November two persons perished in Hyderabad due to bomb blast

in a bus. Two days later two persons were killed and five injured in
grenade attack on house of an Afghan refugee near Peshawar.

On 12th December a blast took place in a church at Kohlu. Three days

later a plot to kill US diplomats was foiled.

On 21st December two persons were killed in Hyderabad due to blast in a

bus and four terrorists planning suicide attacks were arrested in Karachi.

Nine persons were injured in a blast in Rawalpindi on 24th December.

Two days later three girls were killed in an attack on church in Daska.

The Crusaders rewarded Pakistan for its commitment to war, although

Pakistan had no greed for such rewards. Denmark wrote off $ 18.4 million

loan, Belgium rescheduled $ 27.89 million debt and reportedly US paid Rs 20

billion for using aviation and logistic facilities.
The most conspicuous gain of war was increase in remittances from
abroad and resultant rise in Forex reserves. The Crusaders were quite aware of
this indirect benefit to Pakistan. They initiated appropriate actions and
promulgated laws to keep it within acceptable limits:

Three Pakistanis having links with al-Qaeda were held in America on 6 th

November.

On 19th November US deported another batch of 130 Pakistanis. Ninety

deported Pakistanis reached home next day.

On 21st November a batch of 75 exiled Pakistanis arrived from Spain. A

week later another batch of 50 Pakistani deportees arrived.

British police raided London office of Pakistani channel on 29 th

November.

Fifteen Pakistanis were arrested in Brooklyn on 27th December.

America assured Pakistan to improve visa policy for its citizens and
about a month later issued INS watch list. Pakistan was included in the list,
which meant that its citizens would be subjected to tight security control. So
tough procedure awaited Pakistanis in US.
Pakistan protested against its inclusion in this new watch-list and
conveyed its concern. Its inclusion in national Security Entry-Exit Registration
System was termed excessive and unnecessary. Washington was asked to take
Pakistan off the hook.
Pakistani-Americans denounced INS registration requirement. Qazi urged
government to protect Pakistanis in US. HRCP grilled government for poor
stance on INS issue. NWFP PA condemned Pakistans inclusion in the list.
Kasuri termed it as unfair and Shujaat sought relief for Pakistanis.
America listened to all these appeals of relaxation and quite
considerately agreed to make registration convenient. Pakistani leaders could
do nothing to alter fortunes of their people. Perhaps the leaders of entire
Muslim World were helpless in this regard.
All countries put on list were Muslim except North Korea. The intentions
behind this law were quite clear. Mir Jamilur Rahman wrote about these: In the
USA anybody born in Pakistan or holding a Pakistani passport is being rounded
up. Every one of them, together with Arabs and Iranians, is being considered
potential security risk to the USA.

SUBJECTED TO ADVANISM
While Pakistani leaders were rejoiced rescheduling or writing off of
petty loans, the Indian leaders talked of wiping out Pakistan. To this end
Advani invited Pakistan to fourth war. Of course Pakistan regretted the
invitation due to prior commitments and asked India to desist from war
mongering.
Pakistans timid retreat since 9/11 has encouraged even ordinary Indians.
They have picked up the courage to carry out suicide attacks against Pakistan.
Indian Government however advised the suicide squad chief to give up his plans
as in the presence of Advani and RAW, services of such squads were not
needed.
India had announced pullback of troops from borders by end of the year.
Some troops were withdrawn from certain areas, but on 12 th December India
decided that it would take no more de-escalatory steps till cross-border
terrorism ends.
Ten days later India confirmed that relocation of troops has been
completed, but some troops will remain on border as mine-lifting will take six
months. India created ambiguities about de-escalation by design due to which
Rao termed Indian troops pullback claim absurd. America however observed
that Pak-India tensions were no more alarming.
Qureshi was quick in estimating losses of India. According to him India
suffered huge losses for amassing troops along common borders. His boss was
more meticulous in calculating the exact figure. India wasted Rs 80 billion
during crisis he said. Both of them avoided the mention of Pakistans losses as
these were beyond calculations in monetary terms.
Musharraf went on to claim that his warning to Vajpayee deterred India
from attacking. I conveyed to him that the moment Indian forces cross the Line
of Control and the international border, they should not expect a conventional
war. We have defeated our enemy without going to war.
There was no harm in claiming a victory without war months after
Vajpayee had claimed the same. The year was closing and it was appropriate
that balance sheets should tally. The only difference was that Vajpayee claimed
it publicly and Musharraf did it in an exclusive gathering.
There was another anomaly in his claim. The mention of nuclear threat
backfired. Qureshi had to clarify that President was wrongly quoted on nuclear
war. Fernandes violently reacted to Musharrafs war comment by threatening to
wipe out Pakistan in case of nuclear war. Pakistan spurned his threat, but must
have realized the futility of initiating a debate with irresponsible comments.

India carried out partial de-escalation in military terms, but on diplomatic

front there were no signs of change of heart. It kept accusing Pakistan of
sponsoring terrorism for which it fabricated evidence by carrying out fake gunbattle in a super-market and then told Pakistan to collect dead bodies of its
terrorists.
Pakistan and Bangladesh were bracketed as partners in perpetrating
terrorism in India. Dhaka has become nerve centre for anti-India activities by
Islamabads spy agencies accused India. It also claimed having proof of alQaeda men in Bangladesh.
Terrorism is halting development said Vajpayee. His deputy accused
Pakistan of being hub of terrorism. On this pretext Indian Government
launched hunt for 11,000 illegal Pakistanis. Advani wanted to throw out all
them.
India kept raising hoax of terrorism with the sole aim of diverting world
attention from Kashmir dispute. There was no end to sufferings of Kashmiris. In
year 2002 more than four thousand Kashmiris were martyred. In the month of
Ramazan alone 284 Kashmiris were killed by Indian troops. The casualties
reported during last two months were as under:

On 6th November eight civilians were killed and thirteen injured in the
Valley and next day nine more were shot dead as Indian troops continued
repressive operations.

Six persons were killed on 8th November. Two persons were gunned down
on 12th November and next day nine more were shot dead.

On 15th November two persons were killed and sixteen more were shot
dead on the following day.

Eight were killed in gun-battles on 17th November and two more were
shot dead next day.

On 19th November Indian army killed sixteen Kashmiris. Next day one
Namazi was martyred as Traveeh congregation was attacked by troops.

Eleven persons were shot dead on 21 st November and two days later
twenty-two more were killed in landmine blast and clashes.

On 24th November twenty-three persons were killed in different clashes.

Two days later three children died in a blast.

Fifteen persons were shot dead in shootouts on 30 th November. One

Namazi was also martyred and a wedding party was raided.

Nine persons were killed in clashes on 2nd December and ten more were
gunned down in violence next day.

On 4th December two civilians were killed. Sixteen persons were killed in
violence on 8th December and six more were shot dead in fighting next
day.

On 11th December six were killed and thirty injured and on the following
day seven more perished in blasts and shoot-outs.

Eight persons were gunned down on 14th December and the same
numbers of Kashmiris were killed on 16th and 17th December.

Three Kashmiris were awarded death sentence on 18 th December over

attack on Indian Parliament. Two days later five civilians including three
women died in violence.

Four of a family were among fourteen killed on 21 st December. Next day

three children were among eight killed in the Valley.

On 23rd December three persons were shot dead and on the following day
four more were killed.

Nine persons were shot dead on 26th December and two more were
gunned down in clashes next day.

Four civilians were killed on 28th December and on the following day two
fighters were killed in Jammu and five villagers disappeared in armys
custody.

Nine persons perished in clashes on 30th December and thirteen more

were killed next day.

Eight were killed on first day of the New Year and three more were killed
on 2nd January.

Seven fighters were killed in encounters on 4th January. Three days later
three dead bodies were recovered.

Six persons were gunned down on 10 th January. Mother and her son were
among eleven killed on the following day.

Indian occupation forces and their sympathizers also suffered at the hands
of freedom fighters. But attrition of Indian forces decreased considerably as the
freedom fighters lost material support from across the Line of Control:

Two soldiers were killed on 8th November and three days later thirteen
Indian policemen died in mine blast.

An army officer was killed on 19 th November. Next day MLAs brother

and a police officer were killed.

Six Indian soldiers were killed on 22nd November in raid on an army

camp. Two days later ten Hindus were killed as militants stormed temples
in Jammu.

An Indian soldier was gunned down on 13 th December and four days later
four more soldiers were killed.

Ruling partys MP was shot dead on 20th December and four days later
nine soldiers were killed.

Three policemen were killed on 28 th December and a week later one

policeman was gunned down.

India also indulged in cross-border terrorism and inflicted civilian

casualties by firing and shelling:

Indian shelling claimed a girls life in AJK on 12 th November and one

civilian was killed ten days later and yet another on 28th November.

On 13th December a civilian was killed. Next day Indian firing claimed
three lives in AJK and Baltistan.

On 17th December shelling claimed four lives and two villagers were
injured on 23rd December. Next day one more civilian was killed.

One civilian was killed and two wounded in shelling on 8 th January and
next day an aid worker was killed in firing.

Indian firing killed two women in Northern Areas on 10th January. Next
day Indian shelling hit a Madrassa injuring three students.

India completed the election process in IHK, not for peace or betterment
of Kashmiris, but to sideline the issue of plebiscite. Bhat saw no sign of peace
after polls. Newly elected Chief Minister planned to release all political
detainees as a step towards restoration of peace. Yasin was the first prominent
leader to be released.
BJP criticized his plan and ruled that IHK government had no
jurisdiction to review POTA. Vajpayee was annoyed with Mufti over release of
prisoners and so was his deputy. Abdullah also opposed the release. Mehbooba
grilled Advani on the issue of prisoners, but PDP which looked determined to
start with, soon started talking about forming of panel. A joint committee was
to be formed to decide release of prisoners.
After deciding to go slow on this issue, Mufti started placing Kashmiri
leaders under house arrest. Delhi helped him by imposing travel ban on
Mirwaiz. In the context of pledges made during elections Mufti government
proved to be no different from Farooq regime. APHC slated his government for
not fulfilling the promise.

Mufti had also pledged to provide relief to martyrs families, offered

incentives to Hindus to return to IHK and promised empowering of Panchayats.
These measures to provide relief and restore normalcy were adopted halfheartedly. Troops continued harassing widows. Mehbooba accused agencies of
derailing peace process, which had never got going. She also blamed Pakistan
and India for interfering in state affairs.
Mufti asked Mujahideen to surrender weapons. Kashmiri leaders accused
Mufti of planning rift among Jehadi groups and thus implementing New
Delhis agenda. Hizb rejected his plea to lay down arms.
He tried to play the old game in new style. He tried to win over Kashmiris
by fighting NOORA KUSHTI with Delhi. Kashmiri leaders took no time in
understanding the game. Vajpayee and Mufti always played to get support. He
failed in fooling Kashmiris.
Performance of his government was flayed. Kashmiri leaders and
freedom fighters conveyed to him that he wont succeed in curbing their
struggle. Bhat concluded that regime change couldnt solve Kashmir issue.
Mirwaiz slated India for insincere and stubborn attitude on Kashmir. Kashmiri
press termed Advani as warmonger.
Demonstrations against Indian armys excesses were held frequently.
Hurriat repeatedly condemned brutalities and barbarism and denounced state
terrorism perpetrated by Indian troops. Women protested against arrest of youth.
A rights activist set himself alight. Total strike was observed for two
consecutive days against award of death sentences to Kashmiris by an Indian
court.
Yasin Malik vowed to continue martyrs mission. Ansari and Mirwaiz
made similar pledges. Hizb urged renegades to rejoin freedom fighters and
JKDPM threatened to intensify liberation struggle. It asked world community to
help solve Kashmir issue. Fai stressed upon UN to implement its resolutions.
Kashmiri leaders always wanted resolution of dispute through peaceful
means. They urged talks as hither-to-fore. Hurriat agreed to show
accommodation and discuss all options for Kashmir solution. It was ready to
accept something less.
Mufti accepted that dialogue was must for restoring peace. He and
Shabir Shah held talks with Kashmir Committee. Mufti urged India to initiate
peace talks with Mujahideen. In the absence of any response he vowed to
initiate talks with Mujahideen at his own.
Advani opposed dialogue with Kashmiri freedom groups. He offered
unconditional talks to other groups. Mufti called for positive response to
Advanis offer, but it was not accepted. JKPM declared that tripartite talks

were the only solution to resolve Kashmir dispute. Javed Mir urged India to
resume talks with Pakistan.
Pakistan, under pressure of Crusaders, had stopped all kinds of material
support to Kasmiris. Indian army chief acknowledged decrease in incursions.
He said that flow of militants from Pakistan was now waning. In existence of
perpetual Indian hostility towards Pakistan he could not be expected to
complement his adversary in words better than these.
Pakistan however retained the right to indulge in verbal bouts on Kashmir
issue. President and Prime Minister renewed their support to Kashmiris.
Kashmir struggle is not terrorism said Rashid. Kasuri added that solution of
Kashmir dispute was vital to durable peace.
Pakistan did no give up its right to closely monitor the situation across
Line of Control. The revelations resulting from recent monitoring were not
pleasant. Mariana Baabar described these as under:

The west has the perception that elections in Occupied Kashmir were free
and fair with 40% participation.

Recently several emissaries of the US leadership met with Kashmiri

leaders on both sides of the border.

The BJP government, according to the Indian Media, said that Mrs.
Muftis interview to BBC was nothing short of sedition.

The first observation left no room for optimism. Elections in IHK earned
better grading than general elections held in Pakistan. The emissaries did not
meet Kashmiri leaders to sort out details of plebiscite. Pakistan was at liberty to
draw pleasing conclusions from the last revelation.
Standing with the Crusaders Pakistan sought Tehrans help in
normalizing ties with India. Musharraf and Jamali hoped that Iran could
facilitate Pak-India talks and solution of Kashmir dispute. Khatami obliged by
mentioning importance of dialogue, but Iranian Embassy in New Delhi
promptly clarified that there was no change in Irans policy on Kashmir.
Pakistan could find none to plead its case except Iran, with whom it has
differences on numerous issues relating to Middle East, Afghanistan and India.
Recently it tried to help India in isolating Pakistan in the region by increasing
Indo-Afghan cooperation through its territory. Iran reduced 90 percent taxes and
50 percent warehouse and portage fees to facilitate Indian trade.
Indian stand on Kashmir became increasingly uncompromising day by
day. Fernandes ruled out cease-fire in Kashmir. Indian army wanted operational
control of IHK to intensify state terrorism. India will never give up Kashmir
vowed Vajpayee.

It was the support of the Crusaders, which hardened Indian nut. Putin
added another layer by signing accord on strategic partnership. India and
Russia called for end to infiltration. They stressed upon importance of
Islamabad implementing in full its obligations and promises to prevent the
infiltration of terrorists across the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir and at
other points across the border.
They also asked Islamabad to eliminate terrorist infrastructure in
Pakistan and Pakistan-controlled territory as a pre-requisite for the renewal of
the peace dialogue. Both countries were determined to enhance collective and
bilateral efforts to prevent and suppress terrorism in Chechnya and Kashmir.
My opinion is that in this case it is not only important that Islamabad cut
the waves of infiltration of militants through the Line of Control, but also
increase its work to liquidate the whole terrorist infrastructure working in this
region said Putin.
Vajpayee continued slamming Pakistan on Kashmir. Advani blamed
Pakistan for attack on temple and his boss foresaw more attacks. Indian
occupation forces accused Pakistan for supplying missiles to militants and
blamed for air violations by flying UAVs over IHK. Pakistan remained busy in
denying and rejecting the charges.
Confidence started oozing out of Vajpayees overtures. He claimed that
message to Pakistan was working. The message was, and it continues to be,
clear and simple: that we are determined to end cross-border terrorism and to
protect the unity and integrity of India, whatever it takes. And I can tell you that
the message is working. We will make sure that it does.
In circumstances bearing favourable results India felt no need to consider
Abdullahs suggestion for attacking AJK. This option was deferred for the
same reasons for which planned major strikes in AJK were not executed in
January 2002.
Indian aggression against Muslims was not restricted to Kashmir. Hindu
dominated government continued perpetrating state terrorism in Gujarat:

On 11th November four persons were killed in renewed violence. Next

day the toll rose to six.

Two persons died on 16th December in post-election violence. Three days

later four persons were wounded in clashes.

One person was killed and three injured in riots on 30th December. Three
more were injured next day. On 1st January twelve persons were injured
in clashes.

BJP intensified anti-Muslim drive before Gujarat polls. The victory of

BJP was celebrated by Hindu mobs by attacking a mosque and Muslims feared
social boycott. Vajpayee urged new beginning, but VHP vowed to stick to
Hindutva ideology. Advani justified the stand of VHP. He claimed that
Hinduism is against extremism, yet he announced not to use Hindutva slogan
in next polls.
India resorted to subversive diplomacy in addition to its aggressive
stance. India continuously worked for undermining the usefulness of SAARC,
because of apprehensions that neighbours could use this forum to confront it
with its failings in the context of regional peace. The safety lied in avoiding the
attendance in meetings of this forum on lame excuses.
India demanded that it would attend SAARC summit only if no bilateral
issues were raised. Pakistan refused to accept Indian pre-conditions, but urged
Vajpayee to attend the summit. Vajpayee linked his visit to terrorism.
At last Pakistan was able to read Indian mind. On 9th December it
postponed 12th SAARC summit. Islamabad and Delhi traded charges of
sabotaging the summit. Pakistan accused New Delhi of not playing by the
rules. India must have been encouraged by this allegation, because with this
character trait its chances of attaining the status of a super power were
brightened.
Having aroused Indian adventurism to unprecedented level, Pakistan
blamed Indian rigidity for hampering regional growth. Jamali regretted Indian
stubbornness and urged democratic attitude. But Pakistans desire for dialogue
did not dissipate. Efforts for talks with India will continue said Kasuri.
Pakistan wants talks, but ready to counter attack elaborated his boss. Jamali
tried to impose dialogue on India by threatening that there was limit to
tolerance. India was not at all impressed by his rhetoric.

CONVERGING CRUSADERS
America made no concessions to its reliable ally in war on terror. Even
petty favours like release of textile consignments for adjustment in next years
quota were refused blankly. Instead America devoted its energies to exerting
pressure on the partner.
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are the main
instruments for exerting pressure on countries like Pakistan. IMF once again
asked Pakistan to cut defence spending. It also blamed Pakistan for corruption
and poor governance.
IMF has been pressing Pakistan since long to stop domestic borrowing
through saving schemes. The Government of Pakistan hesitated to do so for two
reasons. Firstly, closing of schemes could lead to public resentment and

secondly, it would increase dependence on foreign borrowing. Ultimately it

succumbed to pressure and decided to do away with saving schemes, by cutting
the interest rates drastically.
World Bank advised cut in defence spending, which along with high
debt was held responsible for neglect of social sector. The bank saw rise in
transient poverty in Pakistan due to regional tensions and adverse weather.
Based on these observations, some analysts speculated that government and
WB have locked their horns on poverty. They did not realize that Pakistan
Government has no such thing as horns.
WB renewed its concerns about Ghazi Brotha project on counts of
compensation and environmental agreements. It made no mention of land worth
Rs 10,000 per kanal that was acquired for Rs 69,000 per kanal in NWFP and Rs
17,800 per Kanal in Punjab. A bull fetched Rs 350,000 when compensation for
livestock was paid. IMF must have included these cases of generous
compensations in the list of corruption.
International Crisis Group advised Pakistan and India to lower tension,
with special emphasis on Pakistan to prevent incursions across Line of Control.
EU condemned attack on temple in Jammu and was disappointed with
postponement of SAARC summit without apportioning the blame.
Officials of UK and Pakistan discussed terrorism. The visitors from the
West had nothing else to discuss with Pakistan except terrorism. All talks started
with this subject and ended there for obvious reasons and motives. Even
Abdullah Abdullah had the cheeks to talk in language of his master and told
Pakistan to do more. Japan had already stopped Official Development
Assistance and Pakistan begged for its resumption.
India was not satisfied with pressure exerted by the Crusaders. As
regional commander of holy war, it called for exertion of more economic
pressure and also for pressuring Pakistan on Kashmir.
America focused on next important aim of its war on terror. New York
Times reported that Pakistan had helped North Korea in development of nuclear
weapons. US Administration promptly warned Pakistan over North Korean
link as if it knew nothing before publishing of that report.
An American lawmaker recommended action against Pakistans nukes
after Iraq. US congressman planned to move curbs bill against Pakistan to bring
it under pressure regarding Kashmir and its nuclear capability.
The bill may be used as stick against Pakistan with no carrots. It serves
the Indian purpose, helps Bush Administration and levels the ground for US to
deal with Pakistani nuclear program after the issue of Iraq is settled commented
an American journalist.

The report about Korean link was followed by more alarming

revelation. Qadeer allegedly offered Iraq nuclear help. This time the venue of
reporting shifted from New York to London. To add to authenticity of the report,
it was alleged that Pakistan had informed US about nuclear technology
transfer. This was followed by yet another sensational report. Osama had
sought nuclear help from Pakistani scientist.
Pakistan rejected arms deal report with North Korea; remarks of US
lawmaker about Pakistani nukes; and London Times report about alleged offer
to Iraq. The report about informing US was termed as rubbish. Dr Qadeer
rejected nuke export charges. Musharraf assured that Pakistan would honour
nuclear accords.
Rocca accepted Musharrafs clarification about nuclear-link with North
Korea. Nevertheless the reports did the damage. Japanese Foreign Minister
cancelled his visit to Pakistan. Pak-Korea nuclear-link worried Japan and it
announced that the link might hit ties.
The allegation of transfer of technology failed to ring the alarm bells at
desired intensity due to lack of evidence. If one fails in raising alarm by being
factual, one resorts to presumptions. Vajpayee and Putin did the same by
borrowing a propaganda theme, which was lobbied by Western Media some
time ago.
During his visit to New Delhi Putin said that it was necessary to
strengthen the international non-proliferation mechanism. We really think that
there is a problem. There was a danger of spreading proliferation of Weapons
of Mass Destruction. We should be introducing through international public
opinion the understanding of the presence of such a threat.
The guest and his host feared that nuclear weapons of Pakistan were
serious threat to peace as these could fall into hands of terrorists. Remarks of
Putin were spurned by Islamabad, reminding Moscow of 200 cases of
attempted smuggling of alleged nuclear material out of Russia.
Putin had expressed similar fears earlier during Bushs visit to Moscow.
When regional commanders of the Crusades, Putin for Central Asia and
Vajpayee for South Asia, met in Delhi they expressed the concerns which had
been deliberated in Moscow. Both spelled out desires of the supreme
commander in unambiguous terms. All weapons in every Muslim country have
to be treated as threat to peace.
Pakistan dubbed Delhi Declaration as unwarranted. Putin is totally
wrong said Khokhar. Kasuri downplayed the Declaration saying that IndoRussian ties were not worrisome. He and his boss assured the world that
nuclear material and assets were in safe hands.

These unwarranted statements clearly reflected the sinister designs the

Crusaders and proxy crusaders. Putin could be totally wrong, but he was totally
serious and in agreement with the Crusaders. Soon after the departure of his
guest Vajpayee reiterated his apprehensions:

If Pakistani nuclear bombs go into the hands of terrorists, it could pose a

disastrous threat to the entire world community.

Atomic bombs reaching the hands of extremists could prove highly

destructive to the entire world community and should be taken as a
challenge by all.

This matter raised by President Putin must be taken seriously by the

entire world.

Vajpayee was not suggesting something new for the entire world for
serious note. He knew that those who mattered in the entire world understood
his concerns. He also knew that this was already on agenda of the Crusaders. He
was only urging them to accord it priority.
Therefore, Sami was not correct in saying that Israel and India were
behind drive against Pakistani nukes. The real force behind this drive is the
Crusaders. Israel and India are indirect beneficiaries and interested as such.
Dr Mubashar warned of danger to nuclear assets of Pakistan as well as of
India. He too was wrong in equating India with Pakistan. Only the weapons
held by Muslim countries are threat to peace. As regards India, America has
been considering easing of restrictions on nuclear technology transfer and
space cooperation.
The Crusaders have been regularly providing military hardware to India
of the shelf. America cleared sale of dozens of P-3 Orion Planes. Purchase of
low-level transportable radars was finalized. India and US were studying
installation of sensors to curb incursions. America agreed on technology transfer
in more than one field. Israel and India planned to launch satellite jointly.
Strategic dialogue was going on with France. Last but not the least, multi-billion
arms deal with Russia was likely to be finalized soon.
These were the deals reported during last two months. None of them is
likely to melt into sordid soybean oil. In addition Indias capability of
indigenous production has been allowed to flourish without a speck of concern
or scrutiny.
India has refused to take part in missile-control pact. It has been working
on production of long range nuclear capable Agni missile. It has frequently
carried out test fires of missiles without fear of any repercussions. Its nuclear
capability has been developed so elaborately that it required appointment of
nuclear forces chief.

Pakistan resisted indulgence in tit for tat missile tests; not because it did
not want to match Indian capability, but for repercussions of such indulgence. It
just cant risk adopting tit for tat attitude. It cant think of acquiring more
when it has become difficult to retain that it has.
With so conspicuous a tilt in favour of India, the Crusaders have shrewdly
kept Pakistans interest alive in war on terror. Headly, Deputy National
Security Advisor appreciated Pakistans role in war against terrorism. Pak-US
ties are broad-based and multi-tier said Pakistani Envoy. America reiterated its
commitment to Pak-India dialogue noticing Pakistans eagerness about it.
Britain threw bait by reviewing defence relations with Pakistan.
Strategic symposium was resumed. US Secretary visited Pakistan to boost
economic relation. Powell and Kasuri pledged stable relationship on telephone.
Kasuri believed that Pakistan was important for US. Faisal declared that
cooperation with US would continue. All the wisdom of Pakistani leaders
flowed from the fear of the super power.
Even the oppressed Kashmiris had been less fearful than Pakistani
leaders. They were forthright in pointing out American bias. APHC accused US
of pursuing anti-Muslim policies and condemned US envoys refusal to meet
Mujahideen. Mirwaiz criticized America for toeing pro-India line, though the
criticism proved to be counter-productive. Blackwill declared that US wanted to
end terrorism in Kashmir and war would go on till terrorism in India ended.
Gandhis grand son too showed the moral courage by asking America to
play honest role in solving Kashmir dispute. The Government of Pakistan did
not find anything wrong with American bias, not even in Admiral Thomas
Fargos visit to Siachen and Kupwara. The visit meant that the Crusaders
considered these areas as integral parts of India; and not as disputed territories.
The Government however was very angry at Pakistani journalists anti-US
remarks.
The Government of Pakistan has been completely oblivious of the
consequences in obeying America. It must re-evaluate designs of the Crusaders
revealed by analysis of Global Trends 2015carried out by CIA. The candid
conclusions relevant to Pakistan are:

India will be the unrivalled regional power with a large military,

including naval and nuclear capabilities and a dynamic and growing
economy.

Pakistan in 2015 will not recover easily from decades of political and
economic mismanagement, divisive politics, lawlessness, corruption and
ethnic friction.

In a climate of continuing domestic turmoil, the central governments

control probably will be reduced to the Punjabi heartland and the
economic hub of Karachi.

Pakistan will be more fractious, isolated, and dependent on international

financial assistance.

Continued turmoil in Afghanistan and Pakistan will spill over to Kashmir

and other areas of the Subcontinent, prompting Indian leaders to take
more aggressive pre-emptive and retaliatory actions.

Further domestic decline in Pakistan would benefit Islamic political

activists, who may significantly increase their role in national politics and
alter the makeup and cohesion of the military.

The potential for conflict will arise from rivalries in Asia, ranging from
India-Pakistan to China-Taiwan, as well as among the antagonists in the
Middle East.

Indias conventional military advantage over Pakistan will widen as a

result of New Delhis superior economic position.

India will continue to build up its ocean-going navy to dominate the

Indian Ocean transit routes used for delivery of Persian Gulf oil.

The decisive shift in conventional military power in Indias favour over

the coming years potentially will make the region more volatile and
unstable.

Whatever Indias degree of power, her rising ambition will further strain
its relations with China, as well as complicate its ties with Russia, Japan,
and the West-and continue its nuclear standoff with Pakistan.

In South Asia, the risk of war will remain fairly high over the next 15
years. India and Pakistan are both prone to miscalculation. Both will
continue to build up their nuclear and missile forces.

Both India and Pakistan will see Weapons of Mass Destruction as a

strategic imperative and will continue to amass nuclear warheads and
build a variety of missile delivery systems.

In the event of war, urban fighting will be typical and consequently,

civilian casualties will be high, relative to those among combatants.

The size of Indias population-1.2 billion by 2015-and its technologically

driven economic growth virtually dictate that India will be a rising
regional power.

Instability in Russia and Central Asia and the nuclear standoff between
India and Pakistan will be peripheral but important in East Asia security

calculations. The Middle East will become increasingly important as a

primary source of energy.

The widening strategic and economic gaps between the two principal
powers, India and Pakistan-and the dynamic interplay between their
mutual hostility and the instability in Central Asia-will define the South
Asia region in 2015.

Wary of China, India will look increasingly to the West, but its need for
oil and desire to balance Arab ties to Pakistan will lead to strengthened
ties to Persian Gulf states as well.

Pakistans projected population growth 140 million to about 195 million

in 2015 will put a major strain on an economy already unable to meet the
basic needs of the current population.

The percentage of urban dwellers will climb steadily from the current 2530 percent of the population to between 40-50 percent, leading to further
deterioration in the overall quality of urban life.

Different population growth patterns in Pakistan will exacerbate

inequalities in wealth. Ties between provincial and central governments
throughout the region will be strained.

The threat of major conflict between India and Pakistan will overshadow
all other regional issues during the next 15 years.

The above conclusions have in-built guidelines for the Crusaders in

general and for India in particular. They will do everything possible to help
India in fulfilling its ambitions, but do nothing to alleviate problems of Pakistan.
By design the West will keep the disputes unresolved for fanning them on as
required basis.

CONCLUSION
Sovereignty of Pakistan has been usurped to great extent by unhindered
and high-handed American operations inside its territory. The Government of
Pakistan lacked the desire and the ability to save the leftover.
Only judiciary can salvage some pride. The courts have endeavoured to
do it by asking government to explain cases of rampant detention and blocking
extradition of suspects. One-way traffic of extradition has to be stopped. The
judiciary should press for implementation of LHC decision in which it directed
Foreign Ministry to contact US Embassy for revocation of visas issued to
Pakistanis fleeing courts.

International border with Afghanistan has again degenerated into Durand

Line. Pakistani leaders must take cognizance of the consequences. In case of
original Durand Line the then super power was on this side of the Line, but now
the super power is standing on the other side.
India in its present advantageous position will remain adamant. The
success of its coercive policy, supported by the Crusaders, has added to its
arrogance. It will care too little for peace through dialogue.
Pakistan should stop begging for talks. By begging for dialogue it can
neither prove its desire of peaceful coexistence nor will the talks from a
weaker position accrue any good results. It is nave to think that MFN status or
gas project can help in reducing tension.
The civilized world has accepted Occupied Kashmir as integral part of
India without making formal declarations. The visit of Admiral Fargo to
disputed territories carried a clear message for Pakistan to forego its right to
talk about Kashmir cause.
Pakistan has taken bitter pill of abandoning Kashmiris to rid the world
from terrorism. It must bear the bitter side-effects, rather than grumbling about
these. It should now concentrate on next pill meant for curing the ailment of
nuclear proliferation. Its deterrence has become an invitation for aggression.
America has been often accused of as unreliable friend. The experience
belies this allegation. Americans have always been predictable, because they
always act in their interests. Predictable people cannot be blamed for
unreliability.
The fault lies in them who wishfully expect America to serve their
interests. Pak-US friendship is a friendship between beauty and the beast. The
beauty can never charm the beast to the extent that it would give up its beastly
urges.
Pakistans envoy in Washington has called attackers on Christians as
enemies of Pakistan. He has shown this concern to please the Crusaders. No
American ambassador in any Muslim country has ever called the murderers of
Muslims as enemies of America, because Crusades become meaningless
without killing of Muslims.

14th January 2003

HOLY WAR TURNED UGLY

On 1st February Space Shuttle Columbia broke up killing seven astronauts
on board. NASA ruled out sabotage possibility in crash of Columbia. On 7 th
February security alert in America was ordered during Haj and Eid. On 17 th
February twenty-one persons were killed in stampede in Chicago nightclub due
to terror scare. Three days later a Saudi Arabian traveler sparked a scare at
Philadelphia International Airport when he innocently sprayed three guards with
cologne while trying to demonstrate that the liquid wasnt dangerous.
The possibility of sabotage in case of space shuttle was unimaginable, yet
some people talked about it. Ordering of alert during Haj period was aimed at
nothing, but conveying that Muslims are accustomed to celebrate their religious
occasions by perpetrating terrorism.
Two other incidents indicated that one does not need bombs to spread
terror-scare in greatest nation of the world. But all these incidents clearly
pointed out the mental state of American people and their government. They are
undoubtedly suffering from self-created fear.
The people who are scared to that extent and at the same time possess
unmatched military might are likely to do anything. America driven by its urge
to seek security for its people can threaten the security of others on slightest of
suspicion. In pursuit of peace it can ruin the peace of any nation any where in
the world at any time.

AMERICA KEPT CRYING WOLF

Since 9/11 America has kept crying wolf. It warned Iraq against use of
chemical and biological weapons against US forces, thereby trying to tell the
world that Saddam surely possessed these weapons. CIA confirmed that
Saddam planned to use bio-weapons during Gulf War. Washington Post went a
step farther by reporting that al-Qaeda got nerve gas from Iraq.
Despite crying hoarse, America failed to scare the world. It soon realized
that mustering of support for attack on Iraq was not as easy as was in case of
Afghanistan. A concerted diplomatic effort was required to muster the
requisite support.
Ever-trustworthy Blair was assigned the difficult task of lobbying. He
sent his envoy to discuss Iraq and Middle East with Mubarak. His representative
had tough talks with Assad. Britain worked on Turkey for use of bases. Straw
visited Southeast Asia with agenda of terror and Iraq. UK even invited Iran for
talks on Iraq. A top US envoy was sent to Russia.
Diplomatic effort was augmented with propaganda effort launched by
Pentagon. America also referred using coercive methods over convincing
argument. That enabled America to secure backing of Qatar, quiet agreement of
Malaysia, reluctant willingness of Turkey for use of its air space by spy planes.
Bolton, ambassador on arms control, claimed that America got the
support from Asia. Powell said, America was counting on support from at least
a dozen governments, but in real terms only leaders of Spain, UK and US spoke
with one voice. Historically all three of them have been the most active
Crusaders. Australia too decided to take part in the war.
The support of Afro-Asian countries had numerical significance only.
Meaningful support was to come from Europe, but it didnt. Bush lost patience
and said, diplomacy has only weeks, not months to produce results. He
indirectly told the fellow Crusaders to do what America wanted.
Two weeks later Rice threatened to abandon Iraq diplomacy. We are in
diplomatic window, but it cannot last very much longer. It will have to come to
an end pretty soon. We need to keep the pressure on Saddam. Continuing to talk
about more and more time is basically going to relieve pressure on the Iraqis to
do what they must do. The UNSC is unfortunately getting a history of being
unable to react. The Security Council needs to show resolve.
American threats to Europe were something new, but not so in case of
Iraq. America had been threatening Iraq long before Bushs remarks of Axis of
Evil. In mid December America set late January as turning point for Iraq. At

the advent of New Year Bush said, Saddams day of reckoning was looming
and America was ready to act if Iraq refused to disarm.
Bush told Saddam that his options were dwindling. Straw came out with
advice that Iraq should solve crisis through sensible decisions and few days
later he repeated the old allegation that al-Qaeda could be operating in Iraq.
Spain extended the date of reckoning and announced that Iraqs fate would be
known after 14th February.
With increase in activities of mobilization the threats became more
potent. On 28th December Rumsfeld signed final order for war buildup. Military
buildup continued to put in place the force for invasion of Iraq. On 29 th
January Bush asked troops to prepare for possible Iraq War.
Blair followed the leader of the Crusades and told troops to be ready for
Iraq action. Britain recalled reserve forces and denied urging delay in Iraq War
until autumn. On 11th January British carrier set sails for Gulf. On 21 st February
Rumsfeld announced that ample force was poised for war.
Efforts to intimidate Iraq were also made by mentioning the horrendous
effects of the war. A report published in Times cited worst kind of fighting in
Iraq and that the UN was making plans to cater huge number of war refugees.
It was reported that America has planned massive attack on Iraq in
which thirty thousand bombs will hit Iraq in 48 hours in an air attack to be
launched by six hundred warplanes. It will be followed by two-pronged ground
offensive. America also kept the nuclear option open.
At home front America tried to convey that war wont cost much. It
could cost less than Gulf War. If that were so then Iraq War should earn
handsome profits for America, as Gulf War had cost nothing. In 1991 the war
expenses were mostly borne by Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Germany.
It can be understood as to why UK army was planning occupation of
Iraq for three years and America for full control in a postwar Iraq. The
expenses incurred on destruction of Iraq would be recovered in that period with
appropriate mark-up.
Intimidation was not restricted to frowning and growling. The beasts
resorted to occasional biting as well. Air strikes on Iraqi air defence facilities
continued, killing three persons on 26th December and one on 1st January. US
planes also dropped anti-Saddam leaflets over Iraq.
Threatening moves and aggression in the form of air strikes were carried
out simultaneously with UN inspections aimed at peaceful disarmament of Iraq.
It was quite evident that America either doubted the competence of inspectors or

it was sure that they would find nothing drastically wrong with Iraq in the
context of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
America kept finding faults with inspections right from the outset. It
found Iraqi declaration full of holes and announced that Iraq has lost last
chance. Iraq was accused of failing in meeting UN conditions. Powell vowed
that Iraqi non-cooperation would be proven by months end, despite that
inspectors were not likely to find any material evidence by that time.
Working under constant pressure the inspectors did their best to come up
to the expectations of America. They probed all suspected sites including key
presidential palaces. Iraqi scientists were put under scrutiny and their private
interviews were conducted. Inspectors did the utmost to find the smoking
guns.
Ultimately they found a gun but it wasnt smoking. Inspectors found
eleven empty 122-mm chemical shells on 16th January and three days later Iraq
declared four more similar warheads. Iraq clarified that these were abandoned
ten years ago. Inspectors also discovered some hidden documents.
America was not surprised. Blix considered the situation as dangerous
but said that war was not inevitable. This evidence could not justify war. UN
laboratory did not find anything fishy in Iraqi samples collected by inspectors.
IAEA chief too had no surprise in his report.
However during the inspections Blix blamed Iraq for not meeting the
demands. He, on behalf of his employee, threatened Iraq that time was running
out and it was already five minutes to midnight. He sought for greater Iraqi
cooperation and more time from his boss for completing the assigned task.
Iraq tried to counter allegations. Saddam accused inspectors of spying
and Iraqis held protest rallies. Nevertheless Iraq promised help in hunt for
weapons. Iraq invited Blix and ElBaradei for talks. Blix held very substantial
talks with Iraqi officials and noticed change of heart on Iraqs part. Iraq also
allowed U-2 flights as demanded by America.
These developments exerted pressure on party seeking justification for
waging war against Iraq. Russia, China and some European countries supported
continuation of inspections forcing Bush and Blair to have mutual discussion.
As usual Blair did not agree to grant more time for inspectors. Inspectors
could not be relied upon any more. Something had to be produced off the cuff.
Powell was tasked to produce fresh evidence against Baghdad, who said,
Iraq, Iran and North Korea pose great danger and pledged compelling proof
in the shape of photos and Iraqi intercepts. On 5th February he presented tapes
and pictures as evidence against Iraq. Blix questioned US satellite photos and

reiterated that no Weapons of Mass Destruction have been recovered, although

many banned weapons remain unaccounted for.
America had anticipated this eventuality and for that reason it created
ambiguities about the timings of attack. Iraq War was not imminent declared
Britain. America denied that decision to attack Iraq has been taken. Straw
sought Saddams disarmament and not regime change. He could stay if he
destroyed WMDs. Washington hinted at immunity for Saddam and helping him
in finding place of exile. Blair promised to seek UN backing and America
termed new Resolution on Iraq desirable. Use of force against Iraq would be
the last resort.
Iraq resorted to tit-for-tat accusations. It said that US wanted nothing but
war and its forces were bent upon indefinite occupation of Gulf. Its media
slammed US democracy as colonial plot. Baghdad accused US of double
standards. Iraqi Foreign Minister criticized US for backing opposition.
Iraq vowed that Saddam would never leave and Iraqis were ready to die
for him. Saddam warned that US would commit suicide if it attacked. He vowed
to kill one million US soldiers (four times more than America planned to induct
in war). UK and US soldiers would go back home in body bags and the desert
would be turned into a cemetery. The only difference in threats of America and
Iraq was that the former had the strength to give meanings to its words, whereas
the latter lacked that.
Iraq accused Kuwait of meddling in its affairs, but agreed to resume talks
for tracing out missing-persons as result of Gulf War. Saddam, however, thought
that neighbours were capable of preventing attack. Iraq urged Arabs to take
inspiration from North Korea. He also asked UN to stop US-British air strikes,
which amounted to waging undeclared war.

OPPOSITION TO WAR
America has been bullying lesser nations since long. It was carried away
by the success of this policy and tried the same on partners in the Crusades. It
did not work. Some European countries opposed American unilateralism. Many
strategic considerations could be quoted as reasons of opposition, but American
attitude was its primary cause. For the first time since Second World War the
differences within the Crusaders surfaced.
Schroeder refused to join a war for geo-strategic and oil interests. War
will close the doors of dialogue with Muslims and thus increase chances of
spread of terrorism. He went on to say that war was not unavoidable and
inspectors must be given chance to do the job. Europe undoubtedly feared

backlash more than America, because of its geographic proximity to Muslim

World. From the forums of UN and EU America was urged to choose peace.
France and Germany were the first to oppose attack on Iraq openly.
French Foreign Minister went to New York to convey the viewpoint of his
government on anti-terror war and attack on Iraq. His German counter-part
held talks with neighbours of Iraq.
Both the countries rejected war for want of evidence and asked for
stepped-up inspections. They blocked NATO decision on Iraq. Belgium joined
them in turning down US request for support. France advised NATO not to join
US. This caused split in NATO and EU over Iraq.
The opponents of war vowed to foil attempts vitiating UN inspectors
report. They urged UN efforts to avoid war and sought solution via UN. French
Prime Minister also asked Iraq to cooperate with inspectors. EU sought Arabs
help for US-Iraq mediation.
Opposition spread to Britain and other countries. A minister asked Britain
to rein in US over Iraq. Some UK and US leaders cautioned Bush. The people
of the civilized world held protest rallies against war on 18th January. The
rallies in Britain and Spain were of greater significance as governments of these
countries were supporting Bush. Anti-war rallies flared in Europe and America.
French protesters compared Bush to Hitler. Some anti-war elements decided to
send human shields to Iraq.
Divided Europe struggled to find unity on Iraq. The leaders were urged
for sacrifice of principles for the sake of unity of Christian World. EU summit
was called to evolve common position on Iraq. Europe through NATO
succeeded in removing only one snag and approved urgent deployments in
Turkey as asked by America.
Arabs felt that evidence produced by Powell was not convincing. Fearful
Arabs called for peaceful way out. They were helpless against America and
resolved to defend Kuwait against Iraq attack. Arab Foreign Ministers
gathered in Cairo and agreed on not to help US war.
Saudis symbolized helplessness of Arabs. Prince Abdullah asked US to
handle Iraq declaration cautiously. Riyadh warned against war and called for
diplomacy. War can turn Iraq into another Afghanistan said Saud. Saudi prince
called for sending Arab troops to Iraq. (Alas! he came out with this idea only
twelve years late) Saudis felt no need for emergency Arab summit and kept
quiet on use of military facilities by US.
UAE became hub of activities to avert war without producing a
consensus. Syria criticized Wests stand on Middle East, but held talks with US
on Iraq crisis. Arafat warned Arabs that Iraq war would be new Nakba. It

would hurt the Arabs as much as the creation of Israel did in 1948. Qaddafi
offered his good offices for mediation in Iraq crisis.
The people of Arab World opposed war more vehemently as compared to
their leaders. Jordanians vowed to send human shields to Iraq. Women held
rare anti-war march in Oman. Syrian branded Bush as butcher during protest.
Even some Kurdish scholars called for holy war against US.
Arabs with strong feelings against war resorted to militancy. A follower
of the ideals of Osama killed an American and injured another in Kuwait. Shots
were fired near US army convoy in Kuwait. On 20 th February a British was shot
dead in Riyadh.
Like Arabs, leaders of Muslim World were also afraid of saying firm No
or Yes to attack on Iraq. Out of all the Muslim countries Turkey was most hard
pressed. America wanted to launch major offensive from the safe base of
Turkish soil to liberate Kurds inhabiting oil-rich areas of Iraq.
Turkey feared retaliatory missile strikes and economic fallout. It was
justified in demanding anti-missile defence like the one provided to Israel and
economic aid to compensate expected losses. Till the time these were assured,
Turkey denied use of airbases, giving cold shoulder to US, insisting on UN
approval for action and advising US to wait. No doubt Turkey would like to
avert war, but in the end it would agree to provide limited support.
Iranian stance on war has to be seen in the context of Axis of Evil. Iran,
as potential target of the Crusades, had to oppose unilateral US action against
Iraq. Khameni rejected attack on Iraq. Tehran will not join war said Kharazi.
Iran also advised Iraq to obey UN Resolutions.
As America had bracketed Iran with Iraq therefore, Khatami saw Israeli
nukes as threat to peace. But to his dismay the evil powers were dubbing Islam
as threat. An Iranian cleric opined that presence of US in the region was worse
threat to peace than Iraqi arms.
Pakistans position was similar to that of Iran despite the fact that it
considered itself as front-line state in war against terrorism. On 20 th January
Foreign Minister addressed UNSC meeting on counter terrorism. He shunned
worlds double standards and blamed India and Israel for misusing war on
terror to suppress peoples right of self-rule. He also recounted sacrifices of
Pakistan.
Jamali visited Gulf States to discuss Iraq. The aim was to know the mind
of Arab leaders before finalizing own stand on the issue. Before the start of his
visit he warned that world peace was at stake. He wanted that Iraqs integrity
should remain intact and hoped that Gulf leaders would heed to his point of
view.

During the visit he and his hosts showed concern over Iraq situation,
pledged to continue their efforts to avert war and urged Iraq to comply with UN
Resolutions. By the end of his visit Jamali found out that Gulf leaders wanted
UN nod for Iraq action.
Musharraf also exchanged views with rulers of Qatar. He discussed Iraq
situation with Chirac. Bush and Musharraf agreed on disarming Iraq, but he
advised Bush that war was not good option to do it. Finally Pakistan decided
to stay away from war. It was neither to act as Iraqs defence line nor would
support attack on Iraq. It desired that peace should be given a chance failing
which Iraqs integrity must be ensured.
The people in Pakistan were quite vocal in opposing the war, as was the
case elsewhere in Muslim World. Anti-war rallies and demonstrations were held
in major cities of Pakistan and Kashmir. Women also participated in rallies.
Religious parties were in the forefront. MMA rallies warned US against
attack on Iraq. It would be deemed attack on Muslim Ummah said Fazl. Sami
threatened that no American would be safe in Pakistan. Lahore rallies
threatened civil disobedience. Noorani advised US to accept Germanys
proposal on Iraq for intensifying weapons inspections.
Fazl asked Muslim rulers to adopt common strategy against aggression.
MMA planned to requisition NA for foreign policy debate and vowed to resist
any move against Iraq. Qazi warned government against backing US.
Political parties looked at Iraq War differently. APC declared the war
unjustified. Bilour said that US attack on Iraq would increase religious
extremism. Sabir Shah opined that US wanted to occupy resources of Muslim
World. Speakers at PML-N rally condemned US for anti-Muslim policies and
warned that Iran and Pakistan would be US targets after Iraq.
Masses unanimous opposed the war; if nine Turks out of ten opposed war
then in rest of the Muslim World opposition had to be more than that. It was for
this reason that Saudi Grand Mufti, in his Haj Khutba, categorically said that
enemies were targeting Ummahs economy and faith and Hujjaj held anti-US
protests and prayed for Iraq.
Russia considered the war against its interests and feared that attack on
Iraq could spread terror. Russian Speaker hit out at US position on Iraq and the
lawmakers voiced concern. Putin talked to several Security Council members to
avert war.
Russia rejected US call for extension of list of goods banned for Iraq. Iran
and Russia signed deal to boost nuclear cooperation. It denied reports that
Moscow was persuading Saddam to step down and sending warships and
forces to Gulf.

China insisted on peaceful solution and backed Saudi initiative to

dissuade US from attacking and supported the viewpoint of three European
nations. China and Russia also voiced concern over US missile plans. The
president of Chinese Peoples Institute of Foreign Affairs commented that US
wanted to dominate world.
Japanese government has been supporting the ongoing Crusades due its
economic compulsions. It welcomed presentation of more evidence by US,
which had failed to impress others. However, according to a poll two-third
Japanese opposed US attack on Iraq and thousands protested against it.
Howards government stood firm with Bush and Blair, but most
Australians opposed war. The people held protest rallies in January and
February and slammed troops deployment. Doctors warned Howard over
joining war and teachers told him to stay away.
India wont join war announced New Delhi. It followed the guideline
provided to Israel. The Jewish State was advised by the Crusaders to stay away.
Most Indians however opposed the war. Some Israelis also joined global antiwar protests.
Asian states urged US to be patient. Africa stressed upon peaceful
resolution. Mandela censured US for its policy on Iraq. Bishop Tutu asked
America to listen to call for peace. Non-aligned states sought public UNSC
session. Castro said US war on Iraq would be unjustified.
Annan claimed that Iraq could be disarmed without war. He warned
Bush that his act of war would be premature. It could derail world economy
and IMF agreed with him. UNHCR feared that the war would cause disaster.
HRW made plea to spare lives of Iraqi civilians.
Some Americans also opposed attack on Iraq. Celebrities asked Bush to
stop war rhetoric and forty Nobel prizewinners opposed the war. Bush was
accused of moving too quickly. Ramsay Clarke called for impeachment of
Bush. Seventy percent Americans are against war claimed a leading peace
activist. On 16th January two hundred thousand protesters gathered in
Washington. Democrats asked Bush to get more support.

THREAT OF SOLO WAR

The tone of critics became harsh when America accused European
countries of shying away from war. European leaders told America to mind its
own business. Jean David Levitte wrote in NYT, European government may be
divided over the use of force in Iraq, but public opinion is united. People oppose
it.

America once again showed the arrogance. Europe was told that US was
ready for solo war. We will not shrink from war said Powell. Bush threatened
to act if UN backed down. UK and US demanded 48-hour deadline for
Saddam. Britain warned Saddam that he had days to change behaviour.
Adamant Bush said that he wont be deterred by demonstrations.
America compared human shields to moths flying to flame. Bush ordered troops
to be ready for war. If force becomes necessary to disarm Iraq and enforce the
will of the United States, if force becomes necessary to secure our country and
to keep the peace, America will act deliberately, and America will act
victoriously with the worlds greatest military.
He declared that UN go-ahead for war was not necessary. He cautioned
Americans abroad to be prepared for evacuation. Public was told to be ready for
retaliatory attack by evil forces and stock up on water, duct tape and batteries
against chemical and biological attack.
Threat of solo action further deepened the crisis. Harold Pinter of the
Telegraph termed US Administration as bloodthirsty wild animal. Bush is a
threat to world peace wrote Guenter Grass.
Why was America so impatient to attack Iraq despite strong opposition?
Was it for defeating terrorism or promoting peace or protecting Israel or
securing sources of energy or something else? Attack on Iraq could not be
justified in the context of war on terror. France rejected the reports about alQaeda link. Jean David Levitte said, no link with al-Qaeda and Iraq has come
to the light though its bases in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Algeria and Bosnia are
confirmed. He warned that attack on Iraq would fuel extremism in Muslim
World and encourage al-Qaeda recruitment thereby promoting terrorism.
The pretext of promoting peace was also untenable. Weapons of Mass
Destruction held by Israel, India and Korea posed greater threat to peace.
America could refute existence of any threat to peace from Israel and India, but
not in case of North Korea. Despite that America was not very keen to promote
peace in that region.
Robert Fisk said that the men driving Bush to war were mostly former or
still active pro-Israeli lobbyists. For years they have advocated destroying the
most powerful Arab nation. Richard Pele, one of Bushs most influential
advisers, Douglas Fieth, Paul Wolfwitz, John Bolton and Donald Rumsfeld were
all campaigning for the overthrow of Iraq long before George W Bush was
elected - if he was elected - US President.
He continued that a 1996 report, A Clean Break: A New Strategy for
Securing the Realm, called for war on Iraq. It was written not for the US but for

the incoming Israeli Likud Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and produced
by a group headed by - yes, Richard Pele.
He concluded: Palestine has much to do with it. Brits have no love for
Arabs but they smell injustice fast enough and are outraged at the colonial war
being used to crush the Palestinians by a nation that is now in effect running US
policy in the Middle East. The writer was angered by the remarks of Bush
about Europe. Driven by his anger, he forgot that his own country was to be
blamed for the plight of Palestinians more than any other.
America, for Israeli or its own security, had not much to worry about
from Iraqi threat. It is true that Iraq has military strength more than most Arab
countries, but it does not pose any serious threat to Israel. It could not do so
when it had far more than what it has today. At that time too it was not Iraq, but
Israel, which launched a preemptive attack. Nevertheless America wont mind if
a presumed threat is eliminated in the process of achieving undeclared aims.
Oil wealth of the region was often quoted as economic reason of attack
on Iraq. Angry Fisk argued, Bushs odd remark to the UN General Assembly
last 12th September about the need to protect Iraqs Turkomans only becomes
clear when one realizes that Turkomans make up two thirds of the population of
Kirkuk, one of Iraqs largest oil fields.
He alleged, Israeli and US ambitions in the region are now entwined,
almost synonymous. This war is about oil and regional control. It is being cheer
led by a draft dodger who is treacherously telling us that this is part of an eternal
war against terror.
Certainly the oil is one of the motives of war, but it is not the sole aim. He
rightly observed that the conflict was driven by the self-interest of US. That
interest lies in imperialist ambitions, as identified by him. Rumsfeld and Bush
symbolize the old America that killed its native Indians and embarked on
imperial adventures. It is old America we are being asked to fight for - linked
to new form of colonialism - an America that first threatens the United Nations
with irrelevancy and does the same to NATO.
Once again in his anger he forgot that those who exterminated Red
Indians were not Americans. They were all Europeans. The colonialism of that
era was not restricted to the Continent of America. It was spread around the
globe from Africa to Asia and Australia, not by Americans but by Europeans.
Despite his anger he identified the motive accurately. I Hassan agreed
with him. This new US imperialism, the likes of which the world never saw at
the height of the British imperialism is really an unashamed display of
exhibitionist terrorism the object of which is the same as a brigand entering a

house with arms, brandishing and demanding all there is in house and taking it
away.
In the absence of any power that could challenge, America is in position
to decide attacking Iraq at its own. Nobody will be able to stop it. If it finds no
excuse it will blame others for not providing one. I Hassan said the same in
these words: US wants to attack Iraq not because it has found any Weapons of
Mass Destruction, but because it has found none. The people have to be
punished because how dare they not have any such weapons.
In the civilized world Solana pleaded for patience. I think everybody
has recognized that war is the last resort. I think everyone agrees war may be
necessary at a given moment but we have not at this point reached the time for
that.
Straw insisted that time was running out. He urged European countries
to take hard decisions. It is only by fighting tyranny that we are able to enjoy
the freedom that we have. Eventually Europe is expected to start listening to
men like Greek Prime Minister, We do not want dividing lines between the EU
countries.
Europe will ultimately succeed in narrowing rift over Iraq. The
comments of Fisk that it was the last chance for the UN, or for NATO will be
proved wrong. It may well be the last chance to take America seriously; after all
there is no disagreement on the very purpose of the Crusades.

CONCLUSION
As leader of the Crusades, America started bullying its comrades in
exuberance and accused them for dragging their feet. Europe, the home of
Crusaders, did not like it. The differences emerged at wrong time and from
unexpected quarter.
The disagreement will not last long. In the civilized world everyone has
the right to disagree as well as the ability to evolve consensus of opinion. They
will soon overcome the difficulties encountered in pursuit of noble goals of the
holy war.
In words of Powell, the Crusades will continue to change the map of the
Middle East. It is not likely to end there, as maps of many countries require
realignments. For this reason America has been pressing hard for action against
Iraq. In future it will serve as precedence to proceed against other culprits.
UN tried to avert war by asking Iraq to destroy missiles by March 1.
Iraq may comply with instructions, but the war will not be averted. The
compliance will also set a new precedence of getting the job done through a

memorandum instead of smart bombs. That is how the holy war is turning
ugly.
Robert Fisk while reporting about protest rallies wrote, a million march
in UK, but Arabs are like mice. He might have been somewhat sarcastic, but he
was very correct in his observation. One could disagree with him only on one
count; he should have used the word Muslims for Arabs.
Osama ventured to impart military training to Iraqis. Do not worry about
the American lies and their smart bombs and laser ones, they look for only the
clear obvious targets. The most effective means to devoid the aerial force of its
content is by digging large number of trenches and camouflaging them.
Pinching remarks of Fisk and motivation-cum-training talk of Osama will
fail in agitating the minds and hearts of Muslims or Arabs. Even if they are
agitated or motivated, they will only dig the holes deeper in search of safety.
Rats will remain rats.

22nd February 2003

FEARED AND THE FORGOTTEN

With the start of inspections under UN, America geared up the

deployment of troops. Israeli defence chief could see US siege on Iraqi cities.
Israel deployed nine anti-missile batteries to intercept Iraqi Scuds and US troops
fired patriots in a joint exercise.
The inspectors utterly disappointed by not producing the evidence wanted
by America. They could only point their finger towards al-Samoud-II missiles
with range prohibited in view of Israels security. UN instructed for destruction
of these missiles and Iraq complied hesitantly.
That left the Crusaders with no excuse, but Bush, the bully, asked for
setting a deadline for Iraq making it difficult for the world body to meet the
ever-increasing demands of America on the basis of flimsy excuses or no
excuses at all.
The world saw that story of lion and the lamb was being re-enacted. Most
people of the world read the mind of lion correctly. They opposed the
unjustified war being thrust on Iraq. Anti-war protests were held all over the
world. The shouting of millions of people did not deter the lion, not even its
cub. The cub took these protests different from those of sixties and ignored
them.
The frightening sight of lambs stalking by lion and the cub distracted the
worlds attention from the hunting spree of the rest of the pride. Iraq was yet to
become the casualty, but there were others, who were sought, stalked and
slaughtered by the Crusaders and proxy crusaders.

THE FEARED
For the last six months the world had feared the expansion of war. Arabs,
who would be directly affected, rejected Iraq war and change of government.
Some of them pledged that they would not support US-led war. Others wanted
that Saddam must quit ending the crisis. Generally the Arabs failed to show the
solidarity of the kind, which was essential to avert the war.
Reaction of Muslim World was not much different from the Arabs. OIC
called emergency summit, opposed unjustified war and rejected attack on Iraq.
Reportedly OIC nations considered using oil as weapon, but dropped the idea
due to fear of confiscation of this unconventional weapon.
Mahathir warned that terror war was for world domination and within
that the attack on Iraq was aimed at Muslims and Islam. Malaysia condemned
US on false nuclear weapons report on Iraq and urged NAM members to vote
against war. Iran warned against US aggression and proposed referendum in
Iraq to avoid war. Its chief of national security, Rowhani, warned that Iran was
next in US sights after Iraq. Khatami urged US to give up language of force.

Unexpectedly Turkish Parliament stunned Washington by voting against

deployment of US troops even at the risk of facing political crisis. The vote
forced US military into strategic rethink. Iraq urged Turks to stand by
decision. Turkey delayed reconsideration of decision until second Resolution.
Government of Pakistan surprised many by maintaining ambiguity about
casting its vote in UNSC. The opposition and people protested against Iraq War
by holding mammoth rallies in Karachi and Rawalpindi. Qazi warned against
backing US. MMA asked government to cast no vote in UNSC and threatened
to send youth to Iraq if US attacked.
Pakistan being non-permanent member of UNSC became the focus of
intense lobbying for and against the war. Rocca met Musharraf and asked for
support. Straw discussed crisis with Kasuri and Blairs envoy met the President.
Reportedly America followed cheque-book policy. Powell desired deepening of
Pak-US ties. After the announcement of one time waiver Nancy met Jamali
on 15th March.
Those who were against war also contacted the government. Saddams
envoy met Musharraf and Iraqi Envoy thanked Pakistani people. Bashar urged
Musharraf to block the war. French, Russian, Canadian and Saudi foreign
ministers discussed Iraq with Kasuri. Islamabad was urged to cast its vote at
UNSC against the Resolution.
Pakistan was in dilemma about UNSC vote. Unprecedented briefing of
envoys was held in Islamabad. Pakistan wanted peaceful end to Iraq crisis, but
the final decision of the government was never announced in unambiguous
terms.
On 10th March Prime Minister declared that Pakistan wont be part of
Iraq War. PML-Q clarified it further saying that Pakistan would abstain from
UN vote. This was how Pakistan decided to explicitly oppose the war guided
by its national interests. Pakistan also vowed to work for consensus in UNSC.
Abstention means indecision or avoiding taking side of any party. By
abstaining Pakistan will try to please both parties, but annoy both of them.
Praful Bidwal, while commenting on Pakistans decision to abstain, expressed
his views under the caption of Now is the time to say no.
A few days ago, there were signs that the big anti-war marches of
Karachi and Rawalpindi had some effect on the Pakistan Government, and that
it might move towards such position. But Islamabad has now chosen to take,
like New Delhi, a soft option. It says it will abstain from voting at the Security
Council. Such pusillanimity is at odds with the popular sentiment in our region.
This only underscores the importance of citizens peace movement, which can

mount moral pressure on our governments. The time to stand against war is
now.
It was matter of shame that an Indian suggested this course. The
Government of Pakistan has to bear in mind that it is matter of time when
similar Resolution will be moved by the Crusaders on Pakistan. At that juncture
Pakistan will have no face and no moral grounds to ask anybody to vote against
the Resolution. India by abstaining loses nothing, but Pakistan has a lot at stake.
Russia worked in agreement with France and Germany. It vowed to block
second Resolution and threatened to put off ratification of arms treaty if US
attacked. Moscow refused American request to expel Iraq diplomats.
China insisted on political solution and hailed Iraq for destruction of
missiles. Like Russia it vowed to block the Resolution, but kept quiet on use of
veto. Jiang told Bush that international community did have a consensus on the
issue. Great efforts should be made to maintain the unity and authority of
UNSC. He told the exuberant Blair that our world was facing many problems,
and the problems would not be solved by relying exclusively on armed force.
Japan was interested in pushing for UN Resolution, but it was worried
over expected use of veto by France. Castro felt that Bush was pushing world
into danger. Mugabe slammed Britain and America, the born-again
colonialists. NAM condemned Israeli aggression against Palestinians and
rejected war on Iraq without UN nod.
Vajpayee asked Indians to be ready for Iraq War and then called for
averting war. Sinha announced the formal stand; Indians to follow middle
path on Iraq. Some experts opined that India might offer refueling facilities to
US.
Chief inspector after failing in finding any evidence, accused Iraq of
having no credibility. Blix sought more time as he saw Iraqs disarmament very
limited. Annan warned US not to flout world law and urged Security Council
to work out compromise on Iraq.
Unexpectedly the real opposition came from within the ranks of
Crusaders. EU opposed regime change and insisted that disarmament was the
job of UN. European citizens saw US as danger to world peace, but Solana was
not optimistic on avoiding war.
France and Germany opposed the Bush-Blair method of tackling the
problem. Belgium and Russia joined them. Belgium rejected US request to
expel Iraqi official. France and Russia threaten to veto, if nine members
supported UN Resolution. France and Germany rejected British benchmark for
Saddam. Chirac proposed 30-day deadline. However, French army was ready
in case of war. This did not mean that France was coming on to the line, but it

definitely indicated that it was not prepared to go beyond certain limit in

confronting the superpower.
Blair faced difficulties in convincing the British public. Lawyers warned
him that attack would breach world law. Reportedly 150 Labour MPs
threatened to step down if Britain supported US war against Iraq.
Canada denounced US desire to overthrow Saddam. Australian PM was
greeted in New Zealand with tomatoes for his hard-line stance against Iraq. He
failed to get support of his own public. Differences existed in American
Administration as was indicated by resignation of diplomats Brady and Brown.
Bush and Blair pushed for war resolutely and Spain supported them.
America moved new Resolution; despite that Bush had seen no need of second
Resolution. March 17 was proposed as deadline for war. Blix told UNSC that
US claims were baseless and reported that Iraq had accelerated disarmament.
ElBaradei too had seen no prohibited nuclear activity.
When it became clear that America wont be able to get its Resolution
passed; Britain drew up a list of conditions for Saddam:

Saddam should renounce Weapons of Mass Destruction in a television

appearance.

Iraq should grant permission to 30 key weapons scientists to travel to

Cyprus to be interviewed by UN inspectors.

Iraq must destroy forthwith 10,000 liters of anthrax and other chemical
and biological weapons suspected to be in its possession.

Iraq should surrender and give explanation about biological weapons

production.

A commitment to destroy proscribed missiles.

An accounting for unmanned aerial vehicles.

America failed to win support of nine members of UNSC. In addition the

threat of veto remained at place. Therefore, Bush and Blair decided to act
bilaterally, as was indicated by the above list of conditions. Abandoning of
second Resolution became certain.
Apparently the disappointment faced at UNSC forced America to
abandon the course of dialogue. It was not so. For more than a year America has
been treading the path of military confrontation. The events of last three weeks
clearly indicated that America and Britain had moved very close to imposing
war on Iraq:

On 23rd February Americans in Asia were alerted for Iraq War backlash.

House of Commons backed Blair on Iraq on 26th February.

At the end of February sixth US carrier was moved to the Gulf.

During first week of March 60,000 more troops were sent to the Gulf.

On 6th March Rear Admiral Moffit warned Iraq that it would face most
powerful force ever.

America expelled Iraqi diplomats and asked others to do the same. Powell
said that America was ready to oust Saddam without UN.

Reportedly America was soliciting bids to rebuild postwar Iraq and tested
its heaviest bomb in Florida.

During second week of March Stealth bombers were deployed for strike
against Iraq and secret surrender efforts were under way as reported by
CNN.

Before the start of Bush, Blair and Anzer meeting US vowed to remove
Saddam.

On 16th March Bush announced the last day for Iraq diplomacy.
Tomorrow is the moment of truth for the world. Tomorrow is the day that we
will determine whether or not diplomacy can work. Powell asked journalists to
leave Baghdad. The feared war seemed imminent.

FORGOTTEN PALESTINE
The deafening sounds of war drums beaten by Bush and Blair distracted
the world attention from the ongoing Crusades. The feared world could not pay
due attention to the campaign of terrorizing the opponents, particularly in
Middle East. The crimes committed against Palestinians were so heinous that a
Belgian court ruled that Sharon could be prosecuted for his crimes against
humanity.
Sharon after withdrawing his ambassador from Belgium continued
committing atrocities, as the world was kept preoccupied by American threats to
attack Iraq. This allowed Israel complete freedom of action as could be seen
from the reports of last three months:

On 11th December Israeli troops killed a Palestinian militant. Next day six
more were shot dead in Gaza Strip.

One Palestinian each was killed in Gaza on 15th and 17th December and
on the following day a boy was killed.

On 19th December Israelis killed two Palestinians and one more was
killed the next day.

Israeli Special Forces killed two Palestinians on 23 rd December and one

more was killed on 24th in Bethlehem.

On 26th December seven Palestinians were killed as army recaptured

Bethlehem and a Palestinian girl was shot dead in Gaza Strip on the
following day.

Eleven-year-old Palestinian boy was killed in Israeli fire on 29 th

December and next day three Palestinians were killed.

Three persons were injured as Israeli tanks raided Gaza on 2 nd January

and a day later two more were injured in clash.

On 8th January Israeli troops killed two Palestinians and a day later a boy
was killed.

Israeli troops rolled into Jenin on 11th January and killed two Palestinians,
four civilians were killed next day.

On 13th January two armed Palestinians were killed and four days later
two Palestinians were killed in attack on Jewish settlement.

On 26th January thirteen Palestinians were killed during Israeli attack on

Gaza Strip.

Seven Palestinians were killed in shooting on 28 th January and two more

were killed in West Bank a day after.

On 3rd February two Palestinians were killed in Gaza and a youth was
sentenced for al-Qaeda link. Two days later an old woman was among
three killed and next day six more were killed.

On 9th February three Palestinians were killed in car blast, one was killed
on 10th and two more killed on Eid day.

Six Hamas activists were among nine killed on 16 th February and next
day a top Hamas operative was among three killed in Gaza. Another
Hamas militant was killed on 18th February.

Fourteen Palestinians were killed in Gaza and West Bank on 19th

February. Two Islamic Jihad men were killed two days later.

Two Palestinians were killed in West Bank on 22 nd February and ten

perished in violence next day. On 25th February Israeli tank fire killed a
teenager.

Two were killed as Israel stormed Gaza on 2 nd March. Next day nine
Palestinians were killed and founder of Hamas was arrested.

Israeli army killed 85-year old shepherd on 4 th March and eleven

Palestinians were killed in Gaza two days later.

On 7th March eight were killed in violence and next Israel killed a key
Hamas leader.

Sixteen were hurt in Gaza firing on 9 th March and six more were killed in
next three days.

On 13th March four Palestinians were shot dead in West Bank and six
more were killed two days later.

On 16th March Israeli bulldozer in southern Gaza killed a US peace

activist.

Death toll in Israeli attacks has been constantly rising. In addition to the
killing, Israel held 5,000 Palestinians in custody in January 2003. Israeli army
continued destroying Palestinians houses and shops. Three universities were
closed.
Israel banned Arab party, confined Palestinian ministers to respective
cities, and closed Palestinian liaison and police offices. Palestinian TV and radio
stations were closed and Arafat was not allowed to visit Bethlehem on
Christmas. The prevalent situation forced the Palestinian leadership to postpone
January polls.
The death and destruction were dispensed in exercise of right of selfdefence. The stringent defensive measures did not discourage the Palestinians.
Hamas vowed not to stop operations inside Israel. Its fighters targeted Israeli
tanks and used innovated donkey bombs.
Two-third Palestinians supported continuation of terrorism in the form
of suicide bombings. Despite Arafats rejection of al-Qaedas help and warning
to Osama to stop exploiting Palestinian, retaliation continued though with ever
decreasing intensity:

Two Israeli soldiers were killed in Palestinian firing on 12 th December

and on 20th a Jewish settler was killed in Gaza Strip.

On 27th December four Israelis were shot dead in West Bank and five
Israeli soldiers were injured in clash on 4 th January. Next day two suicide
bombers killed nineteen in Tel Aviv.

An Israeli was killed in attack on Jewish settlement on 17 th January and

four days later three more were killed in attack in Hebron.

On 15th February four Israeli soldiers were killed when a bomb destroyed
their tank and an Israeli was killed in violence a week later.

Fifteen were killed in Haifa as result of suicide blast in a bus. Three

Israelis were killed in violence two days later. One Israeli was killed on
12th March and two more were killed next day.

Powell asked Palestinians to clamp down on terrorism. Palestinians

blasted Americans for delaying peace roadmap and Arabs flayed use of veto on
Syrian Resolution. America responded by sending its soldiers to Israel to
participate in joint manoeuvres.

FORGOTTEN ASIA
Threats to Iraq not only overshadowed the state terrorism perpetrated
against Palestinians, but also the ravages of holy war elsewhere in Asia. This
war has been going on under supervision of Australia, India and Russia or under
direct control of America where required.
Australia looked after Far East with intimate support of America. Being
in the vicinity of two large Muslim nations, Australia considered itself
vulnerable to terrorist attacks in the wake of war on terror. In view of that it
supported the policy of preemptive. It boosted Special Forces to combat
terrorism and threatened to attack overseas targets.
Australia feared terrorism from migrants and refugees from Muslim
countries. They were dubbed as asylum seekers and concentrated into camps.
The security agencies were accused of torturing them, but the government
stood firm despite criticism.
The trouble in camps of migrants spread. Fifth asylum seekers centre
was torched on 1st January. Many of the detainees were charged of rioting.
Australian Prime Minister denied crisis. Neighbours resented Australian
highhandedness. Malaysian Islamic party demanded apology from Howard for
his threat to launch preemptive. Mahathir warned that aggressive foreign power
could expect bloody nose. He also slammed Britain on terror warnings.
Nevertheless the neighbours cooperated in war against terror. Megawati
pledged to root out terrorism. Indonesian police and FBI agents jointly probed
the killing of Americans. Mahathir acted against suspected organizations,
particularly against Jemaah Islamiyah, although Malaysias Islamic opposition
had denied link with al-Qaeda.
Muslims in Philippines have been struggling since long, but after 9/11,
their struggle has been dubbed as terrorism. Out of these Abu Sayyaf group is
known well by the outside world. These rebels and the government troops
frequently clashed with each other. The intensity of fighting can be judged from
the reports of last three months:
Mayor of a town was among thirteen killed in a bomb blast on 24th
December. Three days later twelve more died in a similar attack.

Ten persons were killed in an encounter between Muslim rebels and

government troops on 11th January. Next day Philippines claimed killing
twenty rebels in a clash.

Seven Filipino soldiers were killed in clash with rebels on 7 th February.

The troops killed eight men of Abu Sayyaf two days later.

On 14th February seventeen persons were killed in a clash between rebels

and army.

Seven Abu Sayyaf men and three soldiers were killed in a clash on 19 th
February. Next day fourteen more were killed in southern Philippines.

On 25th February thirteen persons were killed in fighting. Nineteen

persons died and 149 were injured in a blast on 4 th March. Next day
another bomb blast was carried out.

Four soldiers and two rebels were killed in fighting on 9 th March. Four
days later sixteen rebels were killed in air assault.

America offered help to Philippines to crush the Muslim rebels. US

troops had been sent to Philippines in the capacity of trainers and advisers, but
their direct involvement in operations was denied, as was done in case of
Pakistan.
There were reports about US charging six Abu Sayyaf men of clashing
with and killing Marines. Manila kept silent on involvement of US troops, but
in view of the threats to US troops further deployment was postponed till after
Iraq War. It implied that anti-terror drive in Philippines could gather momentum
after war.
Hong Kong launched drive against terrorism. Two Pakistanis and an
Indian-born US citizen faced judicial probe for their involvement in buying
Stinger missile for al-Qaeda network. Asia-Pacific nations resolved to curb
terror financing. Singapore joined the holy war by flaring the issue of wearing
Muslim scarf in schools.
The Subcontinent is the domain of India in the context of Crusades. The
details of proxy crusades launched against Pakistan and Kashmir are covered in
other articles. Herein the only point worth mention is that both India and US
have decided not to send their citizens to ICC, which speak of their noble
intentions.
India extended the holy war to Bangladesh. On 3rd January two
Bangladeshis were killed by Indian border troops and another Bengali was
killed on 23rd February. An army officer was hurt amid insurgency in
Chittagong. Insurgency in Chittagong hill tracks is part of cross border terrorism
perpetrated by India.

Following the footsteps of the civilized world India made more than
thirty attempts to deport Bengali-speaking persons, which resulted in
heightening of border tension. Ultimately India succeeded in deporting 213
Bangladeshis and Fernandes accused Bangladesh of sheltering al-Qaeda.
India also availed the opportunity presented by the tragedy by
supporting cross border terrorism in Nepal. Maoist rebels sheltering in Indian
Territory adjoining Nepal have played havoc with peace and tranquility of the
neighbouring country.
Russia was provided free hand to crush Muslims of Chechnya with
impunity. For Russia it was an opportunity to avenge casualties inflicted on its
troops. According to a Russian agency in 2002 alone, 4,739 Russian servicemen
were killed in the breakaway republic of Chechnya, 13,108 more wounded and
29 were missing.
Putin refused to hold talks with Chechens. America extended the helping
hand by blacklisting Chechen groups. Russia planned to hold referendum in
Chechnya by bargaining votes for bread. For Russian soldiers it was right time
to get drunk and open fire on Chechen bus. Yet Russia called the allegation of
committing war crimes as absurd.
The Chechens were not deterred. They continued fighting against
occupation forces. On 27th December 46 persons were killed in Grozny as result
of suicide attack and 70 were hurt as a truck was blown up near government
headquarters. Four Russian troops were killed in clashes with Chechens on 12 th
January and six more were killed on 3rd February. Seven soldiers were killed in
attacks and blasts on 7th February.
In all the above operations America had very little direct participation. As
leader of the Crusades it exercised general supervision around the globe;
prepared grounds and plans for future expansion of the holy war; and took
measures to improve security of the civilized people.
To improve the internal security of America even the relatives of
suspected al-Qaeda operative were arrested. As deadline for immigration
neared Muslims braced for new wave of arrests. Globally US tracked dozens
of ships linked to al-Qaeda. In mid December White House approved the list of
terrorist leaders and CIA was authorized to kill them.
EU, Canada and US agreed to take steps to prevent nukes falling into
terrorists hands. In mid January Bush released $ 450 million to destroy Russian
chemical weapons, which were prone to theft and falling into hands of
terrorists. On the other hand America worked on making small nuclear
weapons for future use.

The collaborators took actions at their ends. EU enforced new law for
asylum seekers and warnings of terrorist attacks were rung across the Continent.
Anti-Muslim feelings were aroused to the extent that Europe felt the need to
hold a conference on Islamophobia.
Germany lured in and held two Yemenis for al-Qaeda links. In Hamburg a
Moroccan got 15 years jail in September 11 attacks. Seven Muslims were held
in raid on London mosque. Cleric, Abu Hamza, faced expulsion. A Pakistani
was among 12 indicted in Italy for planning chemical attack on US Embassy.
UN stepped up monitoring of al-Qaeda sanctions. Kuwait launched
crackdown on al-Qaeda supporters. Yemen chased the killers of Americans.
Saudi Government planned to fingerprint Asians with effect from March.
The biased conduct of holy war enraged common Muslims and they too
started committing hate crimes. Three Americans, a doctor and two of his
colleagues, working in a mission hospital were shot dead in Yemen. America
experienced new Anthrax scare.
Analysts predicted that suicide terrorism would increase in 2003, as alQaeda still retained the ability to pose such threat. Al-Zawahiri urged Muslims
to kill Americans. Al-Qaeda has multi-faceted marine strategy told an arrested
man. According to CNN it has turned to assassinations. Terrorist missile attacks
posed threat to airlines. Russian Defence Minister reported that al-Qaeda
leaders were alive and plotting terror. UK police chief disclosed that al-Qaeda
network was at large in the country. Al-Qaeda was getting close again reported
a German official.
The conduct of war on terror kept receiving criticism. A Spanish antiterror judge blasted Bush for trampling rights in quest for security. Cuba
accused US of aiding terrorism. Even EU protested over FBI blunder of
arresting its citizen. HRW slammed US for turning blind eye to repression.
The reason of repression was quite obvious. America committed, coaxed
and condoned rights violations around the globe. About 600 persons have been
detained in Cuba without trial in pitiable conditions for more than a year.
Ironically the annual report of HRW did not list America in countries violating
human rights; whereas it has been responsible solely responsible for the rise in
violations during 2002 due to biased conduct of its war on terror.
America was not pushed about criticism. It prepared for action against
Iraq and planned to go beyond. CIA reported Iran, Libya, Syria and Sudan were
also seeking Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iran appeared to be the obvious
choice after Iraq.
America accused Iran of developing nuclear weapons and urged IAEA to
inspect N-sites. It asked Russia to stop nuclear help to Iran as Iran was moving

closer to make nukes. Iran rejected US claim saying that its nuclear
programme was already under IAEA supervision.
It invited IAEA to inspect two nuclear sites suspected by Washington.
ElBaradei inspected Iranian nuclear facility and Iran also showed nuclear plant
to media. Snap nuclear inspections were refused, however it was willing to
discuss nuclear plan in return for aid. Rejection of accusations neither saved
Iraq nor will it save Iran or any other country from American aggression.
Muslims can learn a lot from North Korea. DPRK kicked IAEA
inspectors out by setting a deadline and announced that reprocessing plant
would be reactivated soon. It first hinted at quitting and then actually pulled out
of NPT. Pyongyang warned that UN curbs would be taken as declaration of war
and demanded resumption of fuel shipments.
North Koreans backed governments decision on NPT. Pyongyang
rejected world criticism and resisted calls to return to NPT. While defending its
decision DPRK alleged that US policy was increasing N-war risks and
cautioned about nuclear disaster. It sought US trial for nuclear proliferation
and called Bush shameless charlatan. ElBaradei, however, accused North
Korea of adopting nuclear-blackmail policy.
North Korea tested anti-ship missile, slammed US plans to boost
firepower and threatened to restart missile tests. Pyongyang vowed to resist US
pressure and warned on clash in which US would confront sea of fire. It also
threatened to pull out of armistice truce that ended Korean War. Nevertheless
Pyongyang insisted on negotiations and formal pact with US, rejecting
multilateral negotiations. It assured South Korea that there would be no war and
desired national cooperation with Seoul.
Muslims can also take a lesson of unity from the neighbours of DPRK.
North Korea could not take such a tough stand without being sure that its
neighbours will never support war in their region. The estranged brothers of
North Koreans spearheaded the opposition to war.
South Korean activists scuffled with police while carrying out anti-US
rallies. Their government urged IAEA to postpone meeting. Its envoy went to
North and held discussions with top US officials to help defuse crisis. Seoul
opposed military option against North Korea. Roh warned of horrible results if
peace was shattered. Reconciliation with North must go on said Kim. Lately
South Korea urged US to show flexibility.
China asked US to be flexible with North Korea and showed willingness
to host US-North Korea talks. Top US official held talks in China on nuclear
crisis, but Powell had to leave China empty handed. Escalation of North Korea
crisis worried Japan. It regretted Korean decision on nuclear reactor, but played

down latest missile launch. Even Russia held talks with DPRK and termed those
as successful.
America felt the pressure and declared DPRK situation less pressing than
Iraq. It agreed to give North Korea another chance, which wont be the last.
America saw hope for diplomacy, agreed to negotiate and offered energy help.
Powell denied plans to strike North Korea, but refused bilateral talks with
Pyongyang.
America however kept blowing hot and blowing cold out of its habit. US
warned that there was no easy way out of Korean crisis. No concession to end
Korean standoff said US Envoy. Bold initiative on North Korea is possible
threatened Bush as US spy satellite detected suspicious activities relating to
movement of fuel rods around a nuclear plant.
Apart from the tough stance of DPRK and strong opposition to war by its
neighbours, the military strength of the adversary also forced Bush to blink.
North Korea has at least 1.1 million frontline troops in service backed up by
1.8 million reservists. Most are stationed along the border with South Korea. In
addition, more than 10,000 missiles and artillery pieces are in position along the
border.
Bush and Roh were constrained to agree on peaceful solution of North
Korea nuclear dispute. The bully tucked his tail and decided not to push the
regime change in DPRK although it saw North Korea moving towards making
nuclear warheads. It decided to go for softer opportunity offered by Iraq. This
is the art of keeping the options open.

CONCLUSION
The Crusades, from Palestine to Philippines, progressed well and that too
with minimum of direct involvement of America. Its armed forces made no
significant contribution towards holy war since fall of Kabul. Its colossal
military strength had not been fully employed to avail the opportunities
presented by the tragedy.
America had identified opportunities in Axis of Evil. Action against
DPRK was wrought with difficulties and it did not fall within the purview of
Crusades, therefore, this option was discarded. Iraq became the obvious choice
for which justifications had already been brought to the notice of the world
body.
America could wait no more for want of proof. The plans to avail the
opportunities could not be shelved simply because the world was not prepared
to accept the arguments of Bush and Blair. The expansion of holy war could
not be deferred for want of holy reasons.

The Government of Pakistan decided to remain non-committal on its vote

in UNSC. It would have certainly abstained if voting was held. Pakistani leaders
could dare not vote against war, despite knowing well that sooner or later
Pakistan could also be targeted.
Benazir showed her concern for Islam. She urged the West not to confuse
Islam with terrorism. The confusion is normally between similar things.
Terrorism and Islam, or for that matter any religion, have nothing in common.
Was she trying to suggest something already known to the Crusaders?
North Korea sought US trial for nuclear proliferation. It would have been
more appropriate if a trial was demanded for use of nuclear weapons. Such trial
can be of great help in curbing the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction in
future.
May be one day this cynical idea might come true, because a crime of
that magnitude cannot be time barred. On that day America will face a long list
of charges of crimes it has committed, continue committing and bent upon
committing in future.

17th March 2003

AILING AFGHANISTAN
More than a year ago Afghanistan suffered due to terrorism perpetrated
by Taliban in the name of Islam. Today Afghanistan is suffering due to
terrorism perpetrated by those who came to this country to fight a holy war
against terror. Two more evils, narcotics and warlords, have been added to it,
which had been controlled effectively by Taliban.
The intended attack on Iraq added to the worries of those who were
installed to rule the country on behalf of the Crusaders. The rulers in Kabul
feared that militancy in Afghanistan might increase in case of Iraq War. It could
spark attacks on foreigners and also destabilize Afghanistan. The Crusaders
assured Karzai that invasion of Iraq wont result in neglect of Afghanistan.
They could not neglect Afghans more than they have already done. In any
case Karzai could hardly do anything to stop the Crusaders from attacking Iraq
for the sake of his country. He has to learn to live with problems of his people.

Peace and security; repatriation and rehabilitation; and rebuilding and

reconstruction of Afghanistan are not the concerns of the Crusaders. They have
leveled Afghanistan during war for the convenience of Afghans to rebuild their
country afresh. It is up to them to do it or keep waiting.

PEACE AND SECURITY

Abdullah claimed that security in Afghanistan has improved, but
independent observers noticed that security in Afghanistan remained fragile
despite US help. Lawlessness reigned in Northern provinces and Karzais writ
was confined to Kabul. Even in the capital the rise in crime was reported.
Leadership failed to stabilize the country as it faced tough obstacles to
security establishment according to UN. The major obstacles were the warlords
and angry Pushtoons. The menace of narcotics added a new dimension to the
law and order problems. The civilized world emphasized more on this problem
than the other two.
The warlords kept settling old scores with use of gun. In the north
tensions mounted after Atta ordered arrest of a commander. Six persons were
reported killed in factional fighting in Faryab province. Two were killed in
Herat province on 6th March. One more was killed and ten injured in series of
ethnically motivated bomb attacks. Ethnic Hazaras accused Ismail of
monopoly in Herat. Clashes between supporters of Bacha Khan and his rivals
continued in Khost. The fighting posed risk of disaster according to Fahim as
UN was forced to stop aid work. The elders intervened and tried to end the
fighting between warlords unsuccessfully.
The rivals battled with each other for petty reasons as low as sheep and
scrap. Apart from fighting the scores were also settled through murder.
Haqqanis son was shot at in Peshawar. Suicide attack attempt against Dostum
was foiled and a plot to kidnap Karzai was detected. Top Afghan commanders
defied orders of Karzai regarding holding of military and administrative posts
concurrently. Bamiyan governor rejected appointment of security chief by
interior ministry accusing him as murderer.
Disarmament of warlords was the only way to control this menace.
Karzai repeatedly vowed to speed up disarmament. In January he formed four
commissions for this purpose. UN drive in Mazar resulted in recovery of only
39 light weapons during, but the government rejected the proposal of disarming
local commanders forcibly for obvious reasons. Karzai planned to purchase
weapons of warlords. He asked funds from Japan to get rid of private armies.
Japan donated $ 35 million and Britain provided 350,000 pounds. Karzai was
confident of getting more help.

Afghanistan joined International Criminal Court with a view to

threatening the defiant warlords. EU hailed the joining of ICC. Human Rights
groups placed warlords on notice and warned them of facing ICC prosecution.
Warlords shared bulk of the drug money. Drug and warlords were
considered as hurdle in prosperity. Opium cultivation became more profitable
in 2002 due to overall fall in economic activities. Opium output rose by 20-fold
and Afghanistan became the biggest producer in 2002 according to INCB.
The rise in production resulted in increase in smuggling of drugs.
Seizures on Tajik-Afghan border tripled during 2002 as record quantity of 4.9
tons of heroin was recovered. Russians helped Tajiks to check smuggling, but
illegal drugs continued flowing freely through Central Asia.
The government under pressure from the civilized world vowed to
control production of opium based drugs. Poppy fields were destroyed and large
quantity of heroin making acid was seized in Nangarhar, but governor of the
province warned that crackdown on poppy farmers could shatter peace. Firing
by tribesmen at anti-drug enforcers was reported. The government failed in
helping poppy farmers and curbing poppy cultivation.
The acts of terrorism continued. On 23rd December and 24th January
explosions rattled Kabul. In January bomb blast took place in a bus, two persons
were killed in Mazar and one died in Balkh as result of blasts. In February one
person was killed in Jalalabad and three were injured in bomb attack in
Kandahar. In March a bomb rattled eastern Jalalabad, three persons were killed
in Kandahar and bomb exploded at Nangarhars governor house.
In addition to bomb blasts a government official was killed in an incident
of robbery in Kabul. Security commander of Logar was kidnapped. Two
civilians were injured in rocket-attack near Kandahar. Karzai admitted that
sporadic violence was still possible.
The militants did not spare the aid agencies as well. In January office of
an Italian NGO was looted in Mazar and UNHCR halted its operation in
Nangarhar after attack. In February UN men were beaten, robbed and their
vehicle was stolen. UNICEF office in Kabul was looted. In March a tented
school was set on fire in Kandahar and gunmen robbed UN vehicle in Wardak.
Mines remained a security hazard. The clearance of mines was restricted
to areas of interest for the occupation forces. Rest of the country was still
littered with anti-personnel mines. Lately Afghan agencies provided $ 7.5
million to clear mines along vital highways and Japan promised to provide robot
mine-hunters.
There was no significant development regarding peacekeepers, except
change of command. The outgoing chief from Turkey desired that ISAF should

stay for two more years. During last three months a British bodyguard killed
two Afghans, a translator working with peacekeepers died in attack and another
was hurt in mine explosion.
Raising of national army remained a challenge for Karzai. On 7 th January
another battalion was added to it. Fahim visited America for talks with
Rumsfeld on national army and other security issues. On 15 th March Karzai
inaugurated first two brigades of national army. It was estimated that at present
speed the planned strength of 70,000 would take three to four decades to be
completed.
Formation of national police was also slow. The police personnel were
accused of high-handedness. Anti-police rally was held in Kabul. Amnesty
demanded police reforms and called for overhauling criminal justice system.
Overall security environments did not improve despite the pledge of new
interior minister in this regard. British Parliament warned that anarchy might hit
Afghanistan again. Poor security hampered delivery of humanitarian aid and the
agency asked the world to restore security.

REHAILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Return of refugees from Pakistan progressed well till December 2002, but
thereafter it slowed down. The decline in repatriation could be attributed to
various factors identified earlier. However, in this context a report on return of
refugees is worth mentioning.
This report warned that repatriation could destabilize country. It said
that certainly, mistakes were made by the international community and by the
government in Afghanistan in encouraging a wide range of refugees to return.
The saner argument against random repatriation could have been that it
did not solve the problem, unless adequate arrangements for rehabilitation were
made. But the mistakes referred to in the report related to wide range of
refugees. Pushtoons represent the wide range and the occupation forces do not
want the return of potential Taliban in great numbers.
Lubbers, head of UN refugee agency, before visiting Afghanistan and
Pakistan urged warlords to stop factional fighting. He advised them in view of
the safety of returning refugees. On 18th March Pakistan, Afghanistan and
UNHCR inked historic accord, which envisaged repatriation of six hundred
thousand refugees each year.
Iran handled the return of refugees efficiently. By the end of January
about half a million Afghans returned home from Iran. UAE repatriated illegal
Afghans under amnesty. Australia treated Afghan asylum seeker so harshly
that one of them committed suicide.

The democratization of Afghans made some progress. Election

Commission was formed and first draft of new constitution was ready and it
will be finalized by October. The traditional institution of Loya Jirga may be
incorporated in the constitution as Karzai termed it a form of democracy.
Some rules of Taliban era may also be inducted.
Karzai has not yet decided to contest in polls, but Rabbanis Jamiat and a
coalition of progressive parties have decided to contest. Communist parties will
not be barred. Canada has promised assistance in polls preparation. Census is
underway to clear uncertainty about population. The uncertainty could be
related to comparative position of Tajiks.
Karzai was helpless in checking warlords from custom dutys recovery.
Fake notes hit Afghanistan as the government grappled with introduction of new
currency. Afghanistan might have to spend extra $ 100 million to buy back
notes. American firms will help in upgrading the accounting system.
Not much was done for revival of economy. Military base at Bagram was
hailed for providing economic lifeline to many locals. May be the
establishment of more military bases in Afghanistan could ensure quick revival
of economy.
Rehabilitation of judicial system made no progress, despite the agreement
between UNDP and Kabul and Italys promise of aid to reform it. Hundreds of
detainees kept rotting in government and private jails of warlords. International
Crisis Group decried Afghan judicial system.
Health care solely depended on foreigners. Even for treatment of seasonal
diseases, like whooping cough, the government looked towards UN and NGOs.
UNICEF launched drive to immunize women against tetanus and America
planned to expand aid for maternal and child health.
State of education was no different from health care. US intended to
spend $ 60 million on 1,000 new schools. UNESCO launched literacy project
by providing aid for schools. Japan started training of twenty women teachers.
British troops unveiled a kindergarten.
There was one sector, which received special attention of the civilized
world, i.e. refinement of Afghan culture. The year 2002 witnessed return of
music. Life returned to Bamiyan after Taliban. Conference on preservation of
Buddhas heritage was held.
Thirty Afghan women will get driving licences. Literacy centres were
being established for Afghan women. Women bakers challenged barriers to
female working outside their homes. Government planned to recruit women into
police force. AWJA vowed to ensure female judges participation in judicial
system. Establishment of women radio station was another breakthrough.

Achievements in this sector were exaggeratedly projected. It was

however noted with regret that women were scared to abandon Burqa.
Women were still facing discrimination according to a UN report. Another
report said that fall of the Taliban in late 2001 lifted some onerous restrictions
on women but didnt shake the fundamental primacy of Islamic and tribal law.
Conservative Afghan society could not be changed in a decade or two.
There was bound to be resistance against change of centuries old traditions.
Governor of Herat imposed some restrictions on female education. Men were
prohibited from teaching girls. This was resented and concerned minister
promised to probe ban. UN vowed to lobby against the ban on male teachers for
girls and a UN team decided to study HR situation in Herat.
Chief Judge declared that cable TV and co-education were against
teachings of Islamic. He wanted implementation of Shariah. His edict on TV
was termed as symptom of power struggle. Ulema of Herat backed ban on cable
and satellite TV. Resultantly foreign videos were also banned in Herat and video
centres were closed in Kunduz. However, Karzais home province refused to
follow cable ban.
The ruling of Chief Judge on cable TV and coeducation was lauded by
Afghans, but International Watch Organization demanded his removal. Afghan
women called for greater freedom on International Women Day. UNICEF
urged more investments in females education to ensure their emancipation.
Rehabilitation of environments, which had been degraded over last two
decades, required concerted effort and abundant resources, but both lacked
badly. Only Mother Nature provided some relief by ending almost a decade old
drought in southwest and north Afghanistan.
World was repeatedly reminded about rehabilitation of Afghans. UN
warned that the country couldnt cope with catastrophe for a decade. Central
Asian leaders called for more aid. EU asked world not to forget Afghanistan, but
pledges made at Bonn Conference were not honoured.
Apart from humanitarian aid for refugees, grant for clearing international
debts, donations for women projects and arrival of 25 buses and biscuits from
India, nothing else was done during the period. Yet Karzai felt satisfied with UN
assistance; may be because of the admonishing he got in Washington for
relying heavily on Americans.
The dreams of reconstruction did not realized, but hopes were kept alive.
Afghanistan is investor friendly said Abdullah. Samar assured that
Afghanistan wont be forgotten due to Iraq crisis. Donors will not to forget
Afghanistan claimed Karzai.

UN lauded Pakistans support for Afghan reconstruction. Consultations

between two governments were held at highest levels. Construction of HeratDoughan road was almost completed with Iranian assistance. Iran pledged to
build five and reconstruct ten schools.
Swedish Committee built 1,180 and deepened 1,040 wells. Britain
promised to fulfill all rebuilding promises. Japan however provided more
assistance for reconstruction during 2002 than promised. ADB provided $ 200
million for reconstruction and WB gave a loan for 24 years. America desired
to speed up rebuilding efforts as part of its strategic moves. Karzai asked Bush
to do more for Afghans, but unfortunately he could dare not giving a deadline
as US did in case of destruction of Afghanistan.
He requested with all the politeness an Afghan could muster. Dont
forget us if Iraq happens. We are nearly at the end of forest, not out of it. Then
he shrewdly supported Bushs Iraq adventure. We know the Iraqi people very
well. They are Muslims; we are Muslims. We would wish for them what we
wish for ourselves: To be free, to be liberated, and to have access to a better
life.
Karzai was assured continued US support, which made him forget the
bitter realities as pointed out, by Michael McKinley of National University of
Canberra. They (the United States) just left Afghanistan to the wolves. The US
has no interest in Afghanistan apart from putting a pipeline through it. And the
price tag for putting Afghanistan back together pales beside the likely bill for
Iraq.

MANHUNT
The threat of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan almost diminished, but some
disgruntled Pushtoons occasionally fired at foreign troops and soldiers of Kabul
regime. However, occupation forces exaggerated the threat to justify their stay
in Afghanistan.
It was announced in December that al-Qaeda was still controlling major
part of Nurestan, which is adjacent to Chitral. In January rumours were spread
that Taliban had chemical arms and al-Qaeda and Taliban were regrouping.
Hekmatyar added to the evil forces operating in Afghanistan. He was declared
global terrorist.
Leaflets against Osama, Hekmatyar and Omar were distributed in
January. US forces searched mountains and carried out cave-clearance
operations. The planes bombed suspected areas in Kunar, Southern, Eastern and
Central Afghanistan, with special focus on Helmand and Khost provinces.

Norwegian warplanes had the opportunity to carry out first air-strikes since
1945.
Italian commandos joined the hunt for Osama, Omar and Hekmatyar. FBI
remained occupied in hot pursuit of Hekmatyar. At the start of Iraq War one
thousand US troops swept area near Kandahar and combed villages and caves in
search of Taliban.
The occupation forces had following visible successes during the
period:

An enemy fighter was killed in firefight on 22 nd December. On 2nd

January a former Afghan minister was arrested in Khost and an exTaliban commander was also detained.

On 7th January four persons linked to Taliban were arrested for stealing
vehicles. Two days later four Taliban fighters were killed southeast of
Kandahar.

US troops killed Afghan attacker at Deh Rawud in central Afghanistan

on 23rd January. Next day some Taliban suspects were arrested in
southern Afghanistan.

On 27th January three persons were arrested in Jalalabad for suspected

link with al-Qaeda. Three more were arrested on 30th January for
plotting terrorist activities.

On 4th February three Afghans were arrested in Nangarhar. Ten days later
seventeen were killed in US air raids.

B-52s were called against Taliban in central Afghanistan and an eight

years old boy was hurt on 15th February.

On 24th February two Afghans were killed as US forces battled with

attackers in Tari Kot in Uruzgan.

An Afghan commander was among thirteen suspects held by US on 3 rd

March in Operation Viper in Helmand. Five days later six more were
killed, including two Pakistanis.

On 11th March US troops destroyed positions of Bacha Khan Forces and

two al-Qaeda suspects were held at southern border. Two days later five
suspected extremists were killed as Coalition jets swooped on road
Khost-Gardez.

Five attackers were killed on 15 th March and ten Taliban were arrested
over attack plot. Two days later twelve more were arrested in raid on
Taliban base disguised as aid agency.

On 19th March Italians injured gunman after attack on US base in Khost.

Coalition and Afghan forces removed Khost commander.

In addition to body blows the Coalition forces also succeeded in

recovering weapons:

On 31st December a large cache of weapons was found in Kabul and three
days later another arms cache was seized near Orgun.

US troops unearthed arms dump in Khost on 12 th January and next day a

bomb-making cache was found in Jalalabad. Four days later a rocket
cache was found in Khost.

On 26th January rockets were recovered near peacekeepers base and a

month later mortars and missiles were found in Nangarhar region.

US forces seized weapons in Khost on 11th March and on 20th March

explosive experts destroyed weapons in Jalalabad.

Karzai government assisted in recovery of weapon caches and operations

against suspected Taliban. Pakistan kept rendering services in war on terror.
Kabul regime however urged Pakistan to do more. Pakistani envoy assured
that efforts were underway to arrest al-Qaeda activists, but Osama and
Hekmatyar were not in Pakistan.
`General Dan McNeill vowed that Ladens statement would not affect
Afghan war. We are going to win it and whatever he might want to utter on
tape causes me no great concern. The local commanders were also not
discouraged by frequent rocket attacks, because the only common denominator
with the rockets was that they never hit what theyre aimed at. There has been
not a single Coalition casualty caused by one of these rockets. Only 25
Coalition members were killed in combat and another 30 in non-hostile
situations since October 2001.
Nevertheless the terrorist threat kept haunting the Coalition Forces.
Smoke from mountain indicated that hostile forces were still hiding. The
fighters shot at them when they searched caves. The suspected Taliban, alQaeda and Hezb alliance could spell more trouble for them. A Governor alleged
that Taliban remnants were trying to incite revolt. Al-Qaeda was still a viable
threat confirmed FBI.
The man-hunt was resented by Afghans including some members of the
Karzai Government. Afghans protested against arrest of ex-minister and tribal
chief. It was feared that US bombing could lead to chaos. In raids conducted in
Helmand at least 17 civilians were killed which constrained Karzai to request
American commanders to spare civilians.

Afghans hearts are burning to take revenge of slain relatives said a

report. Haji Din Muhammad whose nephew was killed in American bombing in
a Mosque in December 2001, said, I am too old to feel revenge, but for our
youths, the revenge is like ember that burns in your heart. His other nephew
murdered an American CIA agent a month later in revenge. The worst enmity
in Afghanistan is not religious and not political, it is cultural said deputy
Governor of Khost.
The intensity of heat of burning ember can be measured from the courage
of a six-year-old Afghan boy, who attempted to stab a US soldier in Gardez with
a syringe containing an unidentified liquid. Pushtoons retaliation has taken the
following toll since December 21:

On 22nd December two Afghan soldiers were killed in grenade attack in

Kandahar. Two days later rockets were fired at Bagram base.

Rockets were again fired at Bagram base on 26 th December. Three days

later two Afghan soldiers were killed in blast near Chaman.

On 30th December a US soldier was wounded in firefight in Bagram and

next a US soldier was killed in attack on a camp in Paktika.

Two fuel trucks exploded near Kandahar on 8 th January and rocket was
fired at Bagram base next day.

On 13th January US troops engaged in aid activities came under fire and
next day rockets were fired at them.

Three US troops were hurt in two incidents in Jalalabad and Kandahar on

16th January. Next day a US soldier was injured in Shindand.

On 21st January US forces sustained twin attacks and next day rocket
landed near Bagram base. A vehicle was destroyed in rocket attack near
Chaman on 23rd January.

Two Afghans were killed as UN convoy was attacked on 26 th January.

Next day an Afghan post in Khost was attacked with missiles and two
Afghan troops were shot dead in Paktia.

US troops and Taliban fought pitched battle near Spin Boldak between
28th and 30th January. Taliban claimed killing seven Americans, fifteen
Afghan troops and shooting down a US helicopter.

On 1st February three rockets landed near ISAF base in Kabul and US
forces were shot at during search of caves.

On 7th February US troops were fired upon in Gardez and next day an
alleged Taliban killed five Afghan soldiers in southern Afghanistan.

Rockets were fired at US bases in eastern Afghanistan on 10 th February

and next day Khost airport was subjected to rocket attack.

On 14th February fighters fired rockets on Coalition troops in southern

Afghanistan. Three days later rockets landed near Bagram base.

US troops were ambushed in Asadabad on 18th February. Next day two

blasts took place outside US base in Kunduz.

On 25th February rockets were fired at Bagram air base and a bomb blast
hit house of an official in Kandahar.

A gunman opened fire on US force near Bagram base on 1 st March. Next

day three soldiers were wounded in southern Afghanistan due to mine
blast and a UN convoy was fired at in Paktia.

On 3rd March a US observation post came under fire in Khost. Next day
mortars were fired near US military base at Bagram. The dose was
repeated six days later.

Four US Marines died due to an explosion in Kunar on 13 th March. Two

days later a US convoy on road Khost-Gardez was ambushed
unsuccessfully.

One person was killed in blast near Bagram air base on 16 th March and
two days later rockets were fired near US position in Gardez.

US troops also suffered collateral damage through mishaps. On 30 th

January four US soldiers died in helicopter crash near Bagram. In February a
CIA officer died in grenade accident during live firing exercise. In March a US
soldier was injured in unspecified mishap at Bagram base and another was
injured in landmine blast.
Spiders and dogs of Afghanistan have been biting US troops. However,
insects and animals could not be blamed for indulgence in terrorism, because
their reaction was instinctive against unwanted intrusions of their domains by
the strangers.
Increase in anti-regime and anti-US activities has been reported.
Pamphlets were distributed against Coalition forces. Private radio station aired
anti-US message in Paktia. Fuel suppliers were warned against aiding US
forces.
Frequency of calls for Jihad has also increased. Hekmatyar kept renewing
the call. Unknown radio broadcast and pamphlets incited Afghans for Jihad.
Reportedly Taliban formally declared Jihad against US and its allies and Omar
urged Jihad against US and the puppet regime.

Reports of regrouping and reorganization poured in. Pamphlets claimed

raising of new anti-US secret army. Non-Pushtoon ethnic group emerged in
northern Afghan provinces to fight against US. Secret training camps were
producing new wave of fighters and volunteers were joining resistance. AntiUS backlash brewed in Kunar province. Brahimi warned that support for
Taliban may be growing. He felt the need to broaden the political base;
unfortunately he took more than a year to understand this basic requirement.
Despite continuous man-hunt, the security environments did not improve.
US nationals were warned not to travel to Afghanistan, not even to
peacekeepers strongpoint of Kabul. UN warned its staff of rising threat of
attacks and kidnapping by guerrillas. The soldiers too were so scared that they
got confused by the sight of duck hunters.
The reports of Osama setting up female suicide squads added to their
worries. These squads include Afghan, Arab, Chechen and women from other
countries. We are present in all the countries of the world. In Afghanistan,
female Mujahideen are fighting the infidel forces on ground. We will avenge
our brothers.

REALATIONS WITH NEIGHBOURS

Six neighbouring countries signed a declaration of non-interference and
pledged to respect each others sovereignty and territorial integrity. Washington
hailed Kabul declaration. Tripartite gas pipeline deal was signed in December.
On 22nd February Turkmenistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan signed protocol on
timeframe. India was asked to join the project.
Pak-Afghan ties showed increased trust. Pakistan desired peace and
stability in Afghanistan; wanted to help in reconstruction and planned to set up
trade zone to promote bilateral trade. It provided arms and ammunition for
newly raised army and police and offered help to restore archaeological sites
and exploration for oil. Afghanistan sought cooperation in media development.
Pakistan acceded to Karzais request for transit facility to Indian buses.
It opened new transit route from Khost to Bannu, which was hailed by the
Afghan Government. Brahimi met Musharraf and lauded Pakistans help for
reconstruction.
Confidence building measures particularly in the context of prisoners
were taken by both sides. In December Dostum freed seven sick Pakistani
prisoners. In January Afghanistan released four mentally sick prisoners.
Nineteen Pakistanis and 72 Taliban were freed as goodwill gesture before Eid.
Progress on this sensitive humanitarian issue had been slow. Action by
either side did not match the expressed desire. Therefore, the issue remained a

major irritant in their relations as hundreds of Pakistanis kept languishing in

Afghan jails. Jamali personally talked to Karzai on phone for release of
prisoners. In addition to the issue of prisoners, vested interests in Kabul blamed
Pakistan for ISI help to Taliban. Afghanistan claimed arresting a Pakistani spy
in Nangarhar. The matter of fake currency was also taken up with Pakistan.
Relations with Iran improved despite US pressure on Kabul over ties
with Iran. An Afghan minister denied the existence of American pressure. Iran
denied giving shelter to Osamas family and claimed that it had deported 500
al-Qaeda suspects to date.
Iran agreed to increase trade with Afghanistan. Iran-Afghan chamber of
commerce was set up. Afghanistan and Iran inked $ 6.5 million power contract.
Abdullah visited Tehran to discuss aid for reconstruction. Afghanistans Red
Crescent Society requested for Irans urgent relief aid. The only irritant was the
flow of water in River Helmand.
Afghanistan was invited to join CACO. Kazakh-Afghan cooperation was
discussed. During the period the relations with India developed much faster as
compared to relations with neighbours. New Delhi was linked with Kabul via
satellite. India reopened consulate in Kandahar and donated third plane to
Ariana airlines. Karzai visited New Delhi to get more aid for reconstruction and
hoped extension of gas pipeline to India. According to Karzai the trade ties
with India were symbolic. Both countries agreed to sign PTA pact.
India offered to build road at Afghan border with Iran. Afghanistan, India
and Iran agreed to have new trade route, to reduce dependence on natural route
through Pakistan. An Afghan minister hailed signing of MoUs with Iran and
trade with India. Iran played key role in facilitating Indian trade with
Afghanistan.
These developments indicated that battle for influence has resumed. In
last few months India has developed a huge economic presence in the country
and opened consulates in four cities outside Kabul. It promised to deliver
military equipment to Fahim. India was determined to outflank Pakistan by
wooing both Karzai and the warlords.
Russia and Iran have also been arming one warlord or another causing
concern to Americans. Quietly, American officials have issued several
demarches asking Moscow to stop the flow of arms. But Washington was
unwilling to push harder because it needed Moscows backing on Iraq.
Karzai blamed the neighbours for resumption of battle for influence.
Afghan officials said that the warlord Ismail was receiving cash and military
support from Iran. Similarly Pakistan was still sheltering Taliban to counter

influence of Tajiks. These reports were against the spirit of non-interference

agreement.

CONCLUSION
Overall conditions of security in Afghanistan showed no sign of recovery
from the ailments. Those who had promised to cure ailing Afghanistan have left
the patient in nursing care of Karzais regime. The doctors have gone to attend
cases in emergency ward of Middle East.
Iraq War can add to the problems of Karzai, but it will mostly depend on
the outcome of war. If Iraqis perform well, then attacks on occupation forces
might increase, particularly in southern Afghanistan. According to an estimate it
would take three to four decades to complete the planned strength of Afghan
army at double the present speed. Only after that it would be in position to
contribute positively towards improvement of security.
The progress regarding rehabilitation and reconstruction is no different
from that of the raising of army. During his visit to Washington Karzai
requested for more help for reconstruction. He was snubbed for relying heavily
on Americans. Bush, however, was kind enough to apologize to Karzai for
Senators harsh treatment. Karzai should be prepared for more snubs and
apologies rather than expecting aid and assistance.
Reconstruction, which has already been disowned by some Senators,
could be further neglected due to expenses to be incurred in invasion of Iraq.
Therefore, Afghanistan should take 30 to 40 years to start showing signs of
recovery. That was exactly the aim of toppling Taliban by the Crusaders.
Much of Afghanistan continued bleeding. Afghans have been torn by
ethnic and political strife, banditry is epidemic, calls for Jihad have become
frequent and Afghan soldiers are attacked daily. US soldiers make comparison
to Vietnam War, farmers by day and Taliban by night. These incidents provide
pretexts to occupation forces to perpetrate state terrorism. The hunters will keep
inflicting collateral damage and killing detainees by torture despite HRW
accusations of detaining prisoners illegally.
Pushtoons will remain the target of Crusaders, as has been indicated by
the recently conducted operations. Most of the recovered arms belonged to
Pushtoon. No such operations were carried out in northern Afghanistan or in
areas of Tajiks and Uzbeks. The aim of occupation forces remained the
disarmament of Pushtoons only.

23rd March 2003

MIGHT IS RIGHT
The war had always meant destruction and it is more so in modern days.
The benefits or gains of war, no matter how carefully these are calculated, are
out weighed by the incalculable human sufferings, particularly those related to
non-combatants.
Despite use of smart bombs and precision weapons the modern wars
cause colossal collateral damage, because the battles are no more fought in
open spaces away from civil population. These are now generally fought in and
around big cities or towns, the so-called hubs of communications. That has
made the war uglier than it was ever before.
Nevertheless the human beings will not shun war because of its ugliness.
It will be used as tool of protecting and promoting national interests, though as
last resort. But the stronger will invariably rush to the last resort under the
pretext of preemptive.
The option of war is, or should be, dictated by the factors of ability,
necessity and utility. The necessity and the utility of war on Iraq were
questioned by the vast majority the world community. The opponents thought
that the war was wrought with dangers. It would be far more harmful than being
beneficial for the region or for rest of the world.
Despite this sensible advice Bush and his warriors adopted the
horrendous option. This clearly indicated that America has acquired the habit of
waging war merely because it posses the unmatched ability. According to
American hawks it is the ability to wage war which matters. All the rest is
rubbish. This was the analogy on which America attacked Iraq.

FIRST WEEK OF WAR

On 17th March US and allies withdrew their Resolution from UNSC
blaming France. British Ambassador to UN, Jeremy Greenstock said that last

minute talks had shown that council consensus would not be possible. Powell
said that this was a test that the Security Council did not meet.
He remarked, he could think of nothing that Saddam Hussein could do
diplomatically. This marked the end of diplomacy and war became inevitable.
America decided to disarm Iraq without UN. Bush was to ask Saddam to leave
country. Baghdad waited for the fury of US-led war designed to redraw the
map of Middle East.
Next day Bush asked Iraqis not to fight invaders and told Saddam
Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will
result in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing. The tyrant will
soon be gone. Baghdad rejected the ultimatum.
Bush claimed, United States of America has the sovereign authority to
use force in assuring its own national security. The danger is clear. Using
chemical, biological or, one-day nuclear weapons obtained with the help of Iraq,
the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds
of thousands of innocent people in our country or any other.
The same day America announced, its troops would enter Baghdad even
if Saddam leaves. (The logic behind asking him to leave remained
unexplained.) Meanwhile US navy ships were deployed in Red Sea as result of
Turkeys refusal to allow the use of its air space. It meant that air space of
Arabs, mainly of Saudi Arabia, was available for use.
On 19th March US forces were ready to attack Iraq. Bush met war council
and a US Admiral saw war within two days. Two million leaflets were dropped
in Iraq as part of psychological warfare. Iraqi Parliament united behind Saddam
and Azizs defection was denied.
Bush was expected to ask Congress for 100 billion dollars to pay for the
invasion and House of Commons backed Blair on war with 412 votes in favour
and only 149 against. An important opportunity presented by the tragedy of 9/11
was about to be availed.
America attacked Iraq only a few hours after the expiry of deadline. Bush
spelled out the aim of the war. It was to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to
defend the world from grave danger. It was given the name of Operation Iraqi
Freedom.
He cautioned the people about the unexpected. War could be longer than
expected. He further warned that in this conflict, America faced an enemy who
has no regard for conventions of war or rules of morality. (Only man like Bush
could say this after flouting all international laws, conventions and norms of
morality.) He assured them, we would accept no outcome but victory.

Iraq is surrounded by Iran in the east; Turkey and Syria in the north;
Saudi Arabia and Jordan in the west and by Kuwait and sea in the south. Ground
attack against Iraq could not be initiated from Iran and Syria, as both countries
had opposed invasion of Iraq. Turkey did not allow the use of its territory. Saudi
Arabia declined to join the war. Kuwait was the only country, which could be
used as springboard for jumping into Iraqi pool of crude oil.
American invasion aimed at quick victory. The plan was based on various
factors related to enemy and own capabilities. America banked upon rebellion
of Shiite Muslims of the south and Kurds of north triggering of coups against
rulers. Own high-tech air power and fleet-footed ground forces were to be used
to cripple command, control and communications of the adversary.
In words of a US Admiral America planned to launch a blistering shock
and awe strike aimed at stunning Iraqs army into a quick and clean surrender.
Rumsfeld vowed that Iraq would face an attack of scope and scale never seen
before.
Strategic targets along Euphrates and Tigris Rivers and oil fields were to
be the initial objectives for ground forces. To this end three-pronged offensive
was launched from the secure base of Kuwait. On the right a combined force of
British and US troops were tasked to capture Umm Qasr and Basra. On the left
a column was to head for Karbala and Najaf. Main effort was tasked to capture
Nasiriyah and then join the other column near Najaf.
Iraqis planned their defence in the light of lessons learnt in 1991 War and
Afghan War. As they could not match the air power and mobility of ground
forces of their adversary, therefore they decided not fight in open areas on
extended frontage.
To this end they allowed the enemy to carry out deep penetrations, with a
view to drawing and compelling him to fight in and around built up areas. This
was the only way to fight on ground of own choosing and inflict some
casualties, if not the way to win the war.
Against air attacks they were quite helpless. The effectiveness of
innovation of passive measures like trenches dug around Baghdad, filled with
oil and set alight every day has yet to be established. This measure could be
effective against heat-seeking devices, but not against laser guided weapons.
The attack was launched on 20th March, only ninety minutes after the
deadline given to Saddam by Bush. It meant that everything was in place and
waiting for orders. America had reasons to be impatient.
Washington issued worldwide alert. The first volley of 40 Tomahawk
cruise missiles was fired from six naval ships. F-117 Stealth bombers also took
part. Iraqi leadership was the main target of first volley as disclosed by

Rumsfeld. Even at that hectic moment Bush found time to talk to Vajpayee to
discuss war.
Four persons were killed as allied troops entered southern Iraq. Baghdad
denied fall of Umm Qasr, claimed repulsing of attack and fired six missiles on
Kuwait. Saddam vowed that the devil would be defeated.
On Day-Two 320 missiles set Baghdad ablaze. Allied troops were
reported to be poised to take Basra. Six hundred Iraqis were made prisoners,
two US Marines were killed in fighting and twelve died in helicopter crash.
Several oil wells were ignited.
Rumsfeld claimed that Saddam was finished and then advised him to
give up before it was too late. Saddam is now history said a US official.
America asked governments to sever ties with Saddam. Blair predicted, not so
optimistically, that the war wont be won overnight. Iraqi minister vowed that
no force could conquer Iraq.
On Day-Three Baghdad was subjected to round the clock bombing.
Tommy said that his forces were using munitions on a scale never before seen.
This would be a campaign unlike any other in history. A campaign characterized
by shock, by surprise, by flexibilityand by the application of overwhelming
force. Bush however felt that war would be longer than planned.
In the city of Nasiriyah, US troops forging a path to Baghdad secured a
bridge over the Euphrates, dislodging Iraqi forces who had slowed down their
advance. After two days of skirmishes, Marines claimed winning control of
Umm Qasr, Iraqs only deep-water port, which lies close to Kuwaiti border.
Rumsfeld pledged to do what was necessary. So far they (Iraqis) have
made a bad judgement. He wanted to return Iraq to Iraqis free of fear and
torture and advised Iraqi people not to support a regime which would soon be
history. The British Defence Secretary opined that last night dramatic TV
coverage showed that tyranny was collapsing.
Four US Marines were killed in fighting and seven British soldiers died
as two UK helicopters collided. Pentagon abandoned Turkey option and ordered
shifting of troops to Gulf area. America apologized for errant missiles, which
had landed in Iran a day earlier.
Iraqis put up stiff resistance in Basra and Umm Qasr and claimed
shooting down 21 cruise missiles. A car bomb exploded close to the border with
Iran, killing an Australian journalist and one other person and three British
journalists were missing. Forty died in an attack on suspected al-Qaeda group.
Iraqi Defence Minister boasted that no force in the world could conquer
us. Information Minister said that the attacks were the work of an

international gang of criminal bastards, as more than 200 civilians were

wounded in Baghdad.
By Day-Four 70 tanks and 60 Bradley fighting vehicles of 3 rd Infantry
Division had covered roughly 370 kilometers to take positions near Najaf about
160 kilometers from Baghdad. A US soldier (a Muslim) attacked own base in
Kuwait killing one and wounding twelve. A Tornado aircraft was shot down by
friendly Patriot missile. Reportedly US-UK forces came under Iranian fire near
Basra.
America alleged that Russian technicians were helping Iraqi defence.
Personnel of a Russian firm were operating a sophisticated system that
interfered with the US global positioning technology. An official accused that
Moscow has been extremely unhelpful to complaints made earlier. The firm
denied the allegation.
British intelligence chiefs told Blair that Saddam was injured when his
bunker was hit in the first allied air strike and needed a blood transfusion. His
eldest son Uday was killed or badly injured. Myers declared that no Weapons
of Mass Destruction were found so far. Pentagon claimed that secret talks with
some Iraqi leaders were held. Bush boasted that Saddam Hussein was losing
control of his country.
Iraqis fought back fiercely in Umm Qasr, Basra and Najaf. Iraqi
Information Minister while referring to Umm Qasr said: We have drawn them
into a quagmire and they will never get out. An Iraqi commander near Basra
said his division, which Washington earlier claimed had surrendered, would
continue to resist US and British forces. In Basra 77 civilians were killed and
366 injured due to air strikes.
Baghdad claimed killing 25 enemy troops and capturing a few US
soldiers. America admitted that ten soldiers were missing in southern Iraq. Five
planes and two helicopters were shot down according to Iraqi sources. Iraqi
Vice President vowed, we will let them go for a walk in the desert, but all our
towns will resist. Iraq urged Arab Foreign Ministers to help end war.
On Day-Five a howling sandstorm slowed advance of the invaders. US
troops launched fresh assault on the town of Nasiriyah, a key crossing point
over Euphrates. Earlier US had claimed capture of this city. US admitted that
less than ten soldiers were killed in and around Nasiriyah, some were wounded
and a dozen were missing. A medical officer who did not wish to be named said
the toll was much higher.
Battles for Umm Qasr and Basra continued. Blair told House of
Commons that Basra airport was secured. In Baghdad five civilians, including a
woman, were killed and 28 injured. In northern Iraq US troops pummeled

targets around Kirkuk. Iraq reported that 24 civilians were killed and more than
400 were injured in the area. Mosul was hit by air raids everyday since the start
of war.
UK confirmed death of its soldier. Queen went on morale-boosting visits
to British bases. Bush vowed that anyone who did not treat POWs under the
Geneva conventions would be later treated with as war criminal.
Rumsfeld admitted, there have to be tough days ahead. There were still a
large number of difficulties and things that could go wrong. Those are still
ahead of us. Wars are unpredictable. Tommy however claimed rapid and in
some cases dramatic progress. About Turkey sending troops to northern Iraq,
Blair termed such incursion as entirely unacceptable.
Tareq Aziz rejected invaders claim of progress. Saddam spoke of quick
victory and asked people to cut enemys throats. Iraq claimed shooting downing
two Apache helicopters and capturing pilots and taking more US and British
soldiers as prisoners. Six members of Baath Party and a regional leader were
killed.
On Day-Six storm kept US advance checked. As fighting for Nasiriyah
raged, America claimed fall of Umm Qasr. Allies reported revolt in Basra. 3 rd
Infantry Division estimated that 500 Iraqis were killed in two days fighting near
Najaf and 20 US troops were killed and 14 were missing. A US F-16 fired on
Patriot battery deployed in Kuwait.
Iraqi state TV and another channel were knocked off. Six satellite
jamming devices, which Iraq was using to thwart American precision guided
weapons, were destroyed. Allies warned civilians to stay home.
Myers saw toughest fight ahead. Rumsfeld feared chemical arms attack
near Baghdad. Bush sought $ 75 billion for war while assuring that Operation
Iraqi Freedom was making good progress. We cannot know the duration of this
war, yet we know its outcome. We will prevail. The Iraqi regime will be
disarmed. The Iraqi regime will be ended. The Iraqi people will be free.
Iraq denied revolt in Basra and claimed shooting down three helicopters
and killing eight troops. Saddam asked tribesmen to inflict damage on enemy.
Basra was on the verge of humanitarian disaster as US planes dropped 1000pound bombs amidst fierce fighting. Sixteen civilians were killed and 95
wounded in Baghdad bombing. Taha Yasin asked Arabs to impose oil embargo
on US and Britain.
On Day-Seven US claimed killing 650 Iraqis outside Najaf. 3 rd Infantry
Division advanced to within 80 kilometers of Baghdad. 101st Airborne Division
was within striking distance. British forces remained locked in fighting around

Basra. Sandstorm resulted in cancellation of armed helicopter flights. Another

stray missile landed in Iran.
Bush said that war was far from over. We will stay on the path, mile by
mile, all the way to Baghdad and all the way to victory he asserted. Powell
announced that US would reject calls for cease-fire. We are interested in
concluding this as quickly as possible so that we get on with the rebuilding of
Iraq and putting in place a better system of governance. He accused al-Jazeera
of bias. Blair was for helping uprising.
Sahhaf disputed allies claim of full control of Umm Qasr. Iraqi
opposition denied revolt in Basra. Iraqis issued first report of battlefield action
by the Republican Guards. A Special Forces unit attacked Coalition troops in
south-central Iraq, destroying six armoured vehicles and inflicting unspecified
number of casualties. Allies observed a convoy of 1,000 vehicles of Republican
Guards heading south. On this day 14 civilians died as missiles hit residential
locality in Baghdad.
The end result of the war has been predicted by all and sundry with
conviction. When will the war end even the confident Americans are not sure of
it. Praful Bidwal predicted the events to come on the basis of war fought so far.
In almost every town declared taken last week, the Americans and the
British are still fighting for convincing control. This is true of Basra, Nasiriyah,
Najaf and Karbala. It may again apply to Umm Qasr. If this resistance is a
prelude to what is to come in Baghdad, then US and British forces could get
sucked into close-quarter combat and guerrilla warfare - in which they enjoy
little advantage over their adversary.
American strategy based on shock and surprise to be achieved with the
help of its high-tech military might has yet to succeed. The optimism of
victory-in-three-days and northern surprise evaporated as resistance shock
reminded them the Vietnam nightmare.
On fourth day of war the American tasted a bit of shock and awe
dispensed by the human will to withstanding high-tech military might of the
superpower. Shireen M Mazari observed, US military is probably not too wellversed in traditional military combat any more - given its heavy reliance on
aerial bombardment, missiles and high-tech long-distance warfare.
Some observers attributed the unexpected resistance put up by Iraqis to
tribes, women and sandstorm. It is true that these elements made positive
contribution, but credit must be given to Iraqi defence planners for taking some
useful lessons from history.
America trumpeted the possibility of use of chemical weapons by Iraq at
some critical stage of the war. Iraq was not likely to use these even if it had such

weapons, because in that case America would be proved right in accusing Iraq
for having WMDs.
America has been mentioning this threat time and again to legitimize the
destruction caused by its forces. The conduct of this war thus far and what has
been experienced in Afghanistan proved that America was interested only in
destruction, nothing else but destruction of Muslim countries. All the rest was
hoax.
Within a week the bitter realities of war started dawning upon people of
the civilized world although some of them still did not want to see those as
was indicated by al-Jazeeras ban from New York Stock Exchange. The war,
however, revealed upon Bush the usefulness of international law and
conventions.
As the war prolongs the opposition to it will also intensify. More mothers
like the one of a Marine killed in Iraq will speak against war. Each one of them
will say, I dont agree to war. There should be other ways to sort things out.
They will curse Bush and Blair like Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has. I am
burning with fury, because my country has been betrayed. If they elected a
monkey as President of the United States, Tony Blair would ingratiate himself
and do its bidding.
British public was less confident about war. An ex-UN weapons
inspector, Scott Ritter apprehended that US would lose war. War in Iraq is
doomed to fail opined Ivanov. These statements could be true in the context of
consequences of the war, but in military terms the victory for America was a
foregone conclusion.

AGGRESSION CONDEMNED
The Muslims all over the world were enraged by attack on Iraq as they
considered it part of the on going Crusades. They deplored the unjust war.
Astonishingly the reaction of the rulers of Arab World was quite mild. After
failing to prevent the war, Arab League called on UN to help end war, not
realizing that if the world body was capable of doing anything, the war would
not have started.
Saudi Arabia could only resist US pressure to join war and beef up
security at border with Iraq. On sixth day of war it came out with yet another
peace plan, but as usual the US was not impressed. Riyadh promptly cut its
peace proposal to general idea. Saudi press however blasted US and warned
of catastrophe.

Unlike Jordan, Lebanon refused to close Iraqi Embassy and freeze

countrys assets. Syria demanded end to barbaric aggression. Egypt and Yemen
remained busy in arresting the protesters and opposition politicians for their role
in protest.
The people of Arab World, unlike their leaders, resented the attack.
Islamists threatened US troops in Kuwait. Blasts took place outside US
headquarters in Qatar, US Navy base in Bahrain and British Council in Beirut.
One protester was killed in Sudan and twenty were injured in Lebanon.
Policemen and protesters were injured in Egypt when protesters burnt American
fast-food restaurant.
In Palestine the protesters chanted, Saddam, Saddam, hold fast, we are
with you. In Jordan they chanted similar slogans. We will not give you up;
expel the US Ambassador and close air space to the B-52s. Generally the
slogans were regularly mixed with criticism of Arab governments for their
collaboration with the US in face of public condemnation of the war on Iraq.
The Muslims of Far East condemned unjust war. Malaysian Prime
Minister vehemently criticized America. Indonesia declared that attack had no
legitimacy. An Indonesian group demanded ouster of US diplomats. In Jakarta
protesters of Islamic Defenders Front declared that killing of Bush was
permissible under Islamic law.
Two non-Arab neighbours of Iraq opposed the invasion. Iran being part of
the Axis of Evil had to do so. During war when an errant missile hit Iranian
building injuring two, Iran threatened to react against air violations.
Turkeys stand on war was bold and commendable. This should put many
Arab countries to shame. Turkish bases are off-limit to US planes said
Erdogan. Turkey also refused to provide transit rights for as many as 62,000
American troops into Iraq. In turn America withdrew 6-billion-dollar aid offer.
Pakistan followed the footsteps of Arab brothers. Once American
intentions became clear it asked Pakistani diplomats to leave Iraq immediately.
Foreign office pleaded that peace be given a chance. Kasuri said, stance on
Iraq reflected state interest.
Withdrawal of Resolution relieved Pakistan, but its sympathies remained
with Iraq. Jamali could claim no shift in Pak policy. He allowed a debate on
Iraq in National Assembly, which failed to adopt a Resolution. A wrong
message was given to the world by not adopting a Resolution in the House said
Javed Hashmi.
As soon as the war started Pakistan called for swift end to attack. Exactly
the same was desired in case of Afghan War. Pakistan proposed that:

Priority must be given to avert a humanitarian disaster for the Iraqi

people.

Civilian casualties, infrastructural damage, particularly to the civic

services and the holy places, must be strictly avoided.

Military action should not prolong.

The territorial integrity and sovereignty of Iraq must be preserved, as well

as its rights over natural resources.

The fundamental rights of the people of Iraq, including over their

governance, should be respected.

The UNSC must resume its primary responsibility under the UN Charter
for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Foreign Minister of Pakistan made these proposals after Bush had sent
three hundred thousand soldiers, armed to their teeth with lethal weapons, to
wage war against another Islamic State. Kasuri somehow thought that they were
sent to avert human disaster; protect civic services and human rights; and to
safeguard integrity and sovereignty of Iraq. Above all he hoped that the Yankee
friend would listen to his advice.
Pakistan was in touch with OIC said Jamali. Like his Foreign Minister
he too seemed confident about the ability of this organization to avert the
disaster. Kasuri urged UNSC to end Iraqi suffering, knowing well that the
superpower had already rendered it redundant.
The Government of Pakistan however took measures to protect the
Crusaders brothers-in-faith. The security around churches and embassies was
beefed up. Jamali cancelled US trip, Pakistan Day Parade and SAF games to
appease the fellow Pakistanis.
People of Pakistan widely condemned attack on Iraq. Religious parties,
political workers, traders, teachers and students organized protest rallies against
unjust war. Million March flayed rulers for supporting US in Lahore. Protesters
in Multan called Bush a Dracula.
The world condemned attack amid fears of huge casualties and backlash.
Worldwide anti-war protests continued through the first week of war. In Geneva
nine countries of the UNHRC asked the worlds top human rights forum to hold
a special session on war. Ambassadors of 19 NATO countries discussed the
fallout from Iraq War. Even India announced that it was not in favour of war or
its continuation.
Chirac declared that Iraq did not pose immediate threat, therefore an
immediate war was not justified. He vowed not to accept a Resolution that
would legitimize the military intervention and would give the belligerents the

powers to administer Iraq. France flayed US plan to depose Saddam and

rejected US and UK role in post-war Iraq. No country is worlds guardian.
Russia termed the war unjustified and opposed regime change. Moscow
believed that there was still time for diplomacy to head off a war. Russia
repeatedly asked America to end war and the UN to determine war status.
Ivanov cautioned US about post-war scenario. Without a doubt, there
will be attempts to find a way to confer legitimacy on military operations or
post-war reorganization in Iraq through the UNSC. We, of course, will not give
this military action legitimacy. Iraq does not need a democracy, which is carried
on the wings of a cruise missile. We are worried about the nature of the dialogue
between the US and the main countries in Europe.
German Chancellor, Schroeder said, Saddam did not pose enough of a
threat to justify war, which would result in the deaths of thousands of innocent
men, women and children. Germany warned about the risk of a humanitarian
disaster. After the start of war German press asserted that the apprehensions
have proved correct.
China was seriously concerned about worsening humanitarian
situation in Iraq and urged to stop the war. Once America decided to ignore the
world body, its boss made touching remarks. Whatever our differing views on
this complex issue may be, we must all feel that this is a sad day for the United
Nations and the entire international community. In the short term, the conflict
that is now clearly about to start can only make things worse, perhaps much
worse. Annan advised Iraq and US to respect humanitarian law and sought over
$ 2 billion in emergency aid for Iraq.
The attack on Iraq was also opposed from within the reduced ranks of the
Crusaders. Robin Cook along with two ministers resigned. Polly Toynbee wrote
in the Guardian that by backing Bush and blaming France, Tony Blair has
missed his and Britains European identity. Andrew Murray said, this is a day
of shame for Britain. British people called for country-wide walkout and wanted
Blair out of the government.
Australians, Spaniards, Greeks and Italians protested against war. The
Vatican condemned US attack and Pope prayed for Iraqis. Anti-war
demonstrations were held in America in which hundreds of protesters were
arrested.
The language in which the attack was condemned reflected the intensity
of resentment against American attitude towards rest of the world:

The United Daily News of Taiwan wrote, Bush has virtually become the
global dictator who belittles the whole world.

Hindustan Times noted that US wanted to reorder the world according to

its own likes and dislikes.

Ahmed Kedidi, a Tunisian historian and philosopher observed that

Americans were in the footsteps of Mongols.

New Hilterism has emerged said Khamenei. Calling US leaders a

stupid lot he blamed them for launching one of the dirtiest wars without
taking into account any humanitarian principles.

The Nation of Pakistan wrote, the worldwide opposition has failed to

dissuade the pig-headed Coalition of a pugnacious handful of nations
from inflicting a totally unjust war on Iraq.

Bush apparently thinks the world revolves around America, that if he

believes he is right, the whole world (must) simply nod in agreement
wrote Philippines Daily Inquirer.

Mark the day: March 20 2003. History will record it when bombs,
instead of international laws, started to count in regional or world
conflicts wrote China Daily.

Spanish daily ElMundo observed: We are not confronted with a just or

inevitable war, but with a unilateral, unjust, arbitrary and disproportionate
attack that is outside international law as the vast majority of countries
within the UNSC refused to support it.

Muslim Parliament of Great Britain declared that the war against Iraq
marked a new era of imperialism, aggression and violation of
international law.

Badawi, acting Prime Minister of Malaysia, declared that war was in

contravention of international law, upon which the security and stability
of the world is based.

German centre-left Suddeutsche Zeitung passed the verdict. The United

States has committed a capital crime in modern international law: an
attack against another state in violation of the UN Charter.

Austrian paper Die Presse observed that from the point of view of
international law drawn up over the last year, the behaviour of George W
Bush is closely approaching a war crime.

As US soldiers started leaving Turkey, a young Turk said, we do not

want to be accomplices in a crime.

Ismail Yusanto, spokesman for Hizbut Tahrir of Indonesia said that the
attack now clearly showed the world who the real terrorist was. We call

on the countries and their leaders to declare Bush as a terrorist and as a

war criminal.

The New Straits Times of Malaysia quoted acting Prime Minister: The
US should be isolated globally. Let that country live alone and die alone.

It is mind-boggling that we live in such an unjust world, which lets a

country, a president, decide on the life and death of other human beings
and countries wrote an Indonesian Paper.

Vietnams Nhan Dan opined that dominated and invaded by colonial and
imperialist forces for decades, the Vietnamese people understand the
suffering caused by an unjust war and sympathize with the suffering of
the Iraqi people.

Patrick Seale in Gulf News wrote, attack on Iraq is the climax of USIsraeli partnership.

US attack is cowardly and imperialist act said Mahathir. The

superpowers, including the US, Britain and Spain, have such low morals
to the extent they are supporting assassination as a weapon of national
policy he added.

Korea Herald of South Korea observed, war cannot be justified morally.

Thailands Thai Rath dubbed it as resort to stone-age measures to resolve

conflict.

Liberal Asahi Shimbun of Japan declared: We do not support this war at

all.

Ming Pao of Hong Kong feared that the war would stir up revenge, and
endless war. It would tie down the global economy.

Sega of Bulgaria wrote that war had become as banal as it was before the
modern era, when it was the normal state of the world, a source of
honour, of plunder, of political legitimacy or simply of adventure.

Kremlins official mouthpiece Rossiyskaya Gazeta

international law gave way to the right of might.

Hungarys Nepszabadsag felt that war marked the end for the political
institutions of the 20th Century.

French regional daily Presse Ocean worried about the unity of Crusaders.
The first victim of the war in Iraq is Europe, whose unity has been
shattered by the harshness of the clash between Jacques Chirac and
George Bush.

Saudi Media slammed handful of maniacs in US.

opined

that

In Johannesburg the protesters chanted the slogan: Down with US

greed.

Gorbachev termed the war a big mistake.

CONSEQUENCES
The duration and intensity of the war will greatly determine the nature
and extent of its consequences. The problems encountered by the invaders
during first week of fighting indicate that the war will last longer than
anticipated by the planners and the experts.
Some analysts argued that if Basra was captured then those at Baghdad
would think twice before resisting. There were others, who simply wished
quick end for humanitarian consideration, like Inayatullah; if nothing can be
done to stop the war, one hopes it will end soon that the people of Iraq suffer the
least possible damage.
Most people wanted the war to be short. That would mean a quick and
easy victory for the aggressors. Without being a cynic, one would like it to drag
for long enough to hurt the invaders as well. Only then America might hesitate
in availing more opportunities in future. No doubt Iraqis will suffer, but
someone has to suffer to save others from the harm.
Whether the war ends abruptly or lingers on is yet to be seen, but it has
already confirmed most of the conclusions drawn during last fifteen months.
The war on terror, waged to avail the opportunities presented by the tragedy, is
likely to prove more devastating than Second World War.
Second World War was blessing in disguise, because it weakened the
imperial powers and resultantly Muslims got the freedom. This war may end in
their subjugation, because:

America has preferred to degenerate to a bully rather than transforming

itself into a good leader.

In future the war will be sought more than the peace. Peace, however,
will be used as slogan for war.

America will look for pretexts, but it will not be held back for want of
justifications to attack suspected adversaries.

American unilateralism has undermined the validity and utility of the

international institutions and laws.

In pursuit of respective national interests the Muslim states have

neglected common interests. Resultantly, the Ummah as a whole is
drifting fast towards worst kind of subjugation.

Attack on Iraq has marked the beginning of redrawing the map of

Middle East, which means that the region will remain in turmoil for
considerable period.

With the opening of an active front in Iraq, the war has not moved away
from Pakistan. It has become more ominous, because the designs of
Crusaders have been revealed in unambiguous terms.

The points listed above need elaboration for better understanding of the
gravity of their effects. Americans have progressed and prospered tremendously
during the last century due to rapid breakthroughs in the field and technology,
but intellectually and morally they are like their forefathers. They still cherish
the principle of might is right.
With degeneration to a bully American prestige has diminished
according to Partap Bhanu Mehta. The fact remains that word prestige has
different meanings for a bully and a gentleman. This bully suffers from
incorrigible complex of self-righteousness.
The totalitarian rulers of the past in a way were lucky, because their
intellectual and moral honesty escaped the scrutiny. The kings issued the royal
decrees to wage war against other nations, but people could not judge the moral
justifications of bloodshed they sought, as texts of their decrees were not
accessible to common citizens.
The American rulers, like all others of modern times, are unlucky in this
regard. The advancements in electronic media have subjected them to the
scrutiny by common people around the globe. No matter how expertly they
manipulate the noble words for their sinister designs the people understand the
white lies issued from the White House.
Mongols also had justifications for ransacking the world from China to
Europe and Moscow to Middle East. Hitler too had pretexts to rage war in
Europe and Africa. But both Mongols and Huns did not conceal their desire of
imposing their will on other nations. They wanted to conquer them and had the
moral courage to own their action as such, unlike the hypocrite Yankees. Bush
and his band have the same motive behind liberating the oppressed people, but
they utterly lack the moral courage of Genghis Khan and Hitler.
Like all bullies America too will seek action (war) instead of inaction
(peace). Attack on Iraq is just the beginning of a season of conflicts that will
become a part of the international political landscape. The world will now have
to live with the reality that war and not peace is the desired norm opined the
editor of The News on 21st March.
The notice for war will invariably be short to forestall any possibility of
settlement through peaceful means. In case of Afghanistan the war started on

four weeks notice. This time the ultimatum was of 48 hours. Bush did not
reduce the deadline to be reasonable.
Next time the notice may be even shorter or no notice at all. The action
without notice will fit better in the strategy of shock and awe. Iraq War has
proved that even a short notice can cause problems in application of this
strategy.
The strategy of shock and awe is synonymous to terrorism. No other
words can explain the effects of terrorism better than these words chosen to
terrorize the Iraqis. Americans are bent upon using the methods of terrorists in
war which they insist calling the holy war.
Having degenerated to a bully, America is not bothered about the moral
grounds or so-called justifications for waging a war. All that it needs is the
company of some willing partners. It no more requires any friends, particularly
in treasure hunts. Only willing workhorses are needed and there is no dearth of
greedy-fools in this world.
In any case a bully never runs short of justifications, because of his
ability to fabricate these according the opportunities presented. Michael Moore
after receiving Oscar award for the best documentary at the 75 th Academy
Awards pointed this out. We live in fictitious times. We live in a time with
fictitious results that elect fictitious presidents. We live in a time when we have
a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons.
One of the fictitious justifications for war on terror is the theory of
preventive war in self-defence. For this theory the existence of material threat is
not necessary. The threat can be imagined like the Sikh who cultivated
sugarcane near some straw huts. After having sown the field he feared that
inhabitants of the huts would damage his crop by steeling.
He preferred action to inaction. At night he went to the huts and set those
on fire to punish them for the crime they would have committed. This anecdote
is quoted with apology to Sikhs, who are far more sensible people than the
Yankees.
The action can be taken to liberate oppressed people, not of Kashmir
or Palestine, but of those countries who disagree with the bully. In the context of
Iraq War Robert Fisk has put it across in these words: It looks as if the
Americans and British are bleeding to liberate a people who are not all that
keen to be liberated.
If nothing else the war can be waged for the noble cause of peace.
Americans have been and will continue making mischief as peacekeepers. It is
for them and their likes that Allah has said: And when it is said unto them:
Make not mischief in the earth, they say: We are peacemakers only. Are not they

indeed the mischief-makers? But they perceive not. (Quraan, 2:11-12,

Translation by Pickthal)
There are no problems and no hurdles in initiation of action. A day before
the invasion of Iraq The News wrote: The very language of the Bush
ultimatum, however, makes it clear that the US leader does not suffer any
hurdles like the UN Security Councils inability to pass the desired Resolution,
the failure of the weapons inspectors to find the smoking gun evidence or the
reluctance of allies to support the war. The Bush Administration made up its
mind on the basis of what it considered was correct, not what was legitimate
according to a universal moral yardstick.
The leader-turned-bully took the first shot on United Nations. Tariq Aziz,
as quoted by Robert Fisk, said: the truth is that Bush is dismantling the United
Nations, like the Third Reich in the 1930s nullified the League of Nations.
Some optimists having eye for the silver lining saw an encouraging
noting that the UN stood against America. In future it will not be subservient
to superpower. The fact is that America has been using this organization for
selfish ends and when it tried to act otherwise, America by-passed, exposing its
worth.
The UN has become the victim, because it tried to hinder bullys hunt for
culprits. The Muslims are the culprits and America wants them to take to task.
Iraq just happened to be the first; more will be targeted after that. The freedom
movements of Muslims have almost been crushed. Muslim rulers have been
forced to disown the rights of self-determination.
The Crusades will now focus on Muslim countries suspected of acquiring
military strength. These will be invaded and destroyed to save the civilized
world from perceived threats. No Muslim State will be permitted to possess
this capability.
In addition to their disarming these countries will be democratized. The
democracy will be implanted through surgery to be carried out with use of
precision instruments of daisy-cutters and cluster bombs.
The religious beliefs of people of these countries also require face-lifting.
Islam has to be made acceptable by making it tolerant and pragmatic. This
can be done by removing the wrinkles of Jihad or militancy. This too will
require plastic surgery.
The methods preferred by the Crusaders would surely result in territorial,
ideological and physical destruction of the targeted countries, but that is
inescapable. The destruction by itself is the remedy for many ailments.
The method of destruction facilitates physical subjugation and
administration of medicine of democratization and pragmatism helps in

subduing the subjects psychologically. The rhetoric of reconstruction and

rebuilding has to be used to make these people believe in necessity of the
destruction.
Burhanuddin Hasan has said it more convincingly. The drive behind this
war is ideological in nature, a crusade to reform the religion of Islam as it
exists in both government and society within the Middle East. Once it is
accomplished, the road to empire will be open, ten lanes wide and stepping out
over the line.
He then listed the aims of Iraq War as drawn by a think tank founded in
1997 of which men like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are founder
members:

To acquire control of the oil heads so as to fund the entire enterprise.

To fire a warning shot at every leader in the Middle East.

To establish in Iraq a military staging area for the eventual invasion and
overthrow of several Middle East regimes, including some that are allies
of the US.

In the context of Middle East the holy war remains an extension of evil
policy of US on Israel/Palestine. All noble looking vows of the Crusaders are
nothing but lies. The gentlemen like Rasul Bakhsh Rais have unnecessarily
pondered about their vows.
It looks nonsensical to think of post-war Iraq as liberal, democratic and
progressive Arab country and becoming a model for rest of the region to
emulate. The rosy picture that the Americans are drawing may turn out to be
very ugly. Internal ethnic, sectarian and political confrontations in Iraq may
sharpen and even threaten territorial integrity of the country and trouble all its
neighbours.
This is exactly the aim of Americans. Virtual disintegration of
Afghanistan is the proof. After Saddam Iraq will be left at its own as
Afghanistan has been left after Taliban. Americans may not create an
autonomous region of Kurdistan as anticipated by General Aslam Beg, but
occupation forces through puppets will control key centres and the rest of the
country will be neglected. Then the Crusaders will march on yet another
country. This is worrying even for hawks like Shireen M Mazari.
Meanwhile, it is indeed a frightening message for the rest of the world,
for tomorrow the US can attack any state it chooses to - and Muslim states had
better be on guard. This is new kind of terror now being unleashed on the world
- terror of the militarily powerful. Bush has referred to Saddam as the tyrant
who will soon be gone. But how will the world deal with the new tyrant in the
shape of Bush?

She continued: One aim (of war) is clearly the redrawing of the map of
the Middle East - but the fallout will be in the Gulf region also. One should
expect boundaries to alter in many states in the Iraqi neighbourhood.
Mahathirs perception enlarged the scope of redrawing of the map
beyond the region. So may be after the attack on Iraq, their next target will be
Iran and other nations like Sudan and Libya. The assignment of the surveyor
general of the world may be extended even further.
After Second World War Muslims were liberated from colonialism and in
this war many of them will be liberated from the shackles of their cruel rulers.
The political disgruntles of these countries will be seduced to destroy their own
homelands with temptation of bright future. The Crusaders will always find
plenty of Jaffers and Sadiqs in the form of Tajiks and Kurds.
Rulers of Muslim Ummah have wasted more than half century by not
doing anything to acquire the strength to defend them. The situation has
changed so drastically that now they will even shun the idea of acquiring the
strength. They will willingly opt to give up their arms to save themselves from
the wrath of the Crusaders.
The weak and disunited Muslim rulers will tend to reconcile with the
inevitable. Each one of them will try to save oneself by stalling the threat as
long as possible. Unfortunately they will work for delaying rather than averting
the threat and consequently keep falling one by one.
The weak and disunited Ummah could do nothing to prevent Iraq War.
The opposition to war originated from elsewhere for reasons other than the
safety of Ummah. This is likely to mislead ever-optimistic Muslim rulers. Their
unfounded optimism will obscure their vision and they will not be able to notice
that the Crusaders have differed on the methodology, not on the aims of war.
The supporters as well as the opponents of war wanted to disarm a Muslim
country, but they differed on modus operandi.
This difference of opinion was quoted as an opportunity for those who are
convinced that they can do very little to defend their interests on their own.
Therefore, they were advised to avail this opportunity by joining hands with
China, Russia, Germany and France, the countries which had shown concern
about peace.
In case of Afghanistan the war was next door to Pakistan in terms of
geographic proximity. With the invasion of Iraq it has apparently moved away,
but in view of the pretexts used by America, the attack on Iraq has brought it
much closer. Its presence can be felt nearby and the bully can knock at the door
any time.

Pakistan remains the bastion of religious militancy, it possesses WMD

and its map merits redrawing on ethnic basis. The Crusaders can use any of the
above as justification to roll forward. The Government of Pakistan is aware of
it. That is why it has consistently tried to be on right side of America. That,
however, may not help in averting the inevitable.

CONCLUSION
The logistics stamina of beleaguered Iraqi will not last for indefinite
period. As and when it is exhausted the strong fortresses of defence will start
crumbling. The sudden collapse of resistance may surprise the world as much as
its stiffness has.
Bully and his buddy boy will overcome Saddam and his gang. Victory
will come as has been vowed by Bush. It may be as fictitious as his victory in
elections, but he wont be satisfied with anything short of victory for America.
It does not matter how it comes.
Those who want the war to be short like Jamali and Kasuri or those who
desire it to be stopped being unequal match like General Arif, only wish an
easy victory for the bully. An easy victory would further egg on this strange lot
of American neo conservatives to wreak havoc and agony on the world as
Shafqat Mahmood has put it across.
If America wins it without being hurt or without paying some price, it
will become more arrogant. It will be tempted to indulge in more adventures
despite worldwide opposition. If the price becomes more than America has
anticipated, only then it can cause hesitation in future.
MAK Lodhi has compared America with the lion king, which is ailing
after an accidental wound in the stomach. One would like to add to his comment
that only the wounded and ailing lions become man-eaters, because they find it
is easier to hunt human species.
America has thrown international system and its moral basis into an
uncontrollable spin in words of Rais. It has started acting as accuser, judge and
executioner against the weaker. It is for the inhabitants of the global village to
decide that whether the security of the beast is more important or that of entire
humanity.
The elders of global village must note that Saddam is only alleged of
having Weapons of Mass Destruction with suspected intentions of using these.
On the other hand Bush has more weapons than anybody else in the world has.
He is also ever ready to use them. They must decide as who is bigger threat to
peace; men like Saddam or Bush?

To the victims of the beast, Anwar Ahmad advised them to keep their
anger cold. To out last tyranny, therefore, the anger has to be cold - like of the
Vietnamese and black Zimbabweans and South Africans. To keep it cold and
consistent, anger needs to be tempered with wisdom and sustained by
unbreakable will. This is where leadership comes in. Nelson Mandela is a living
icon of leaderships role in changing a nations destiny.
These few lines are worth a gold mine. The war will definitely add to the
anger of Muslims, but who would try to keep it cold. Is there any Mandela in
entire Muslim Ummah?

27th March 2003

WAR IS NOT OVER

On twenty-first day of invasion triumphant American forces entered
Baghdad marking the end of Saddams regime. Pleased Bush and delighted
Blair cautiously welcomed the visible victory. Both cautioned, the war is not
over.
The victory was celebrated by pulling down the giant statue of Saddam
Hussein in central Baghdad. A US Marine set up an iron chain and a rope
around the neck of statue and covered its face with US flag. The decision was
quickly reversed and US flag was replaced with Iraqi flag by Corporal Edward
Chin, from New York, of the 3rd Battalion of 4th Marines Regiment.
A crane then pulled the statue to the ground along with Iraqi flag, which
bears the writing of Allah-o-Akbar. In a ceremony to mark the toppling of yet

another regime, the soldiers of superpower on the planet Earth did not care
about the superpower of Heavens.
The ceremony would have been more befitting if the statue of liberty had
been used as replacement. But soldiers did not care about rhetoric of liberation
of Iraqi people to celebrate the conquest of Iraq.
The people and their leaders in Muslim World saw the ceremony
through courtesy of electronic media. It must have pricked the conscience of
only a few of them. This was the duty ordained upon them by Divine Authority,
but they have resorted to idol worship instead. Therefore, the task of pulling
down the idols or statues has been assigned to other people.
On the same day the electronic media showed the Iraqis indulging in
looting. This was shown to highlight the negative character traits of a Muslim
nation. Ironically it also reflected the character of the conquerors. They did not
bother to stop the looting, which ought to be the moral responsibility of the
conquerors. How could they? They themselves had come to this land to plunder
the wealth of oil and destroy the rest which could not be plundered.
The victory was also celebrated elsewhere in the world. In Afghanistan
the occupation forces did it by bombing and killing eleven civilians. Israelis
celebrated by raiding and killing five Palestinians in Gaza. India had celebrated
in anticipation by expressing its desire to follow the precedence set by
America. Bush and Blair were right in saying that the war was not yet over.

THE FIGHTING
The fight for securing entry to Baghdad lasted for three weeks. This
period was far more than the expectations of those who boasted about the
strategy of shock and awe. At the same time it was much less than the Iraqi
leaders had hoped.
On Day-Eight Allies opened a new front by dropping one thousand US
troops in northern Iraq to capture airfield north of Arbil. It implied that Kurds
had given the signal of all clear. More than fifty civilians were killed in Mosul
due to bombing.
Six hundred day light sorties were flown over Baghdad and 3 rd Division
moved towards the capital. Fighting around Najaf and Nasiriyah continued. Till
that day Iraqis had made at least three attempts to breakout from Basra. British
forces claimed destroying fourteen Iraqi tanks. America moved 30,000 troops to
Gulf as reinforcements.
Missile fired towards Kuwait was destroyed by a Patriot missile. A
convoy of 80 vehicles carrying logistics was ambushed by Iraqis. Iraq claimed

killing nine in Nasiriyah and Basra, and destroying ten tanks and thirteen APCs.
Thirty-seven US troops were injured in friendly fire.
US Envoy walked out of SC debate. Bush and Blair vowed to take war to
victory. Bush vowed that it was not matter of timetable, it was matter of
victory. Blair said the same in British accent. It is not set by time; it is set by
the nature of the job.
America to oppose reduced role in postwar Iraq vowed Powell. UK
stepped up tirade against al-Jazeera. Blix saw no evidence about Iraq using
banned weapons. Hoon however observed that Iraqis were ready to use
Weapons of Mass Destruction.
On Day-Nine fierce fighting raged around Nasiriyah and Basra. Col
Veron admitted that British forces were nowhere near capturing Basra. Kurds
advanced towards Kirkuk and captured Chamchamal. B-2 Stealth bomber
dropped bunker-busters. Fifty five civilians were killed and 47 injured in
Baghdad and 26 in Najaf. Iraq claimed destroying 33 tanks and APCs and
killing four invaders in Najaf area.
On Day-Ten Allies denied pause in operations. In Basra two hundred
Iraqis were killed in attack on Baath Party building. In Karbala fifty-five
soldiers of Republican Guard were killed and 25 vehicles were destroyed. In
Baghdad sixty-eight civilians were killed as massive pounding continued. Kurds
closed on to Kirkuk.
Four US troops were killed in Najaf suicide attack carried out by army
officer. Taha Yasin vowed that such attacks would become routine military
policy. A Silkworm missile hit the Kuwait City injuring two. One British
soldier was killed and five wounded in friendly fire.
Bush claimed that Saddam controlled only a small portion of the
country. Pentagon announced, US forces now control 600 oil wells in the south
of country. The covert forces hunting Saddam did not meet any success till that
day.
On Day-Eleven fighting continued in Basra, Najaf and Karbala. Massive
explosions rocked Baghdad as Allies continued targeting missile batteries,
intelligence complex, training facilities and Republican Guards positions. In the
north Kurds and US troops kept advancing.
British troops claimed capturing Iraqi General and five others and killing
a senior officer. Iraq denied. A British soldier was also killed; Iraq claimed four.
Sahhaf claimed shooting down of Apache by a tribesman and two pilots were
killed. America denied.
Three crewmen died in US helicopter crash at a refueling point. Two
Marines were killed and fifteen hurt in separate accidents. British TV reporter

was found dead in northern Iraq. Two UK troops were sent home for refusing to
fight.
Rumsfeld warned that dangerous days were still ahead, but denied any
pause in war. He accepted that so far 32 US and 23 British have been killed.
Myers vowed that US forces would tighten the noose on Baghdad, but wont
hurry to confront Saddams army defending the capital. Franks denied change of
plan referring to deployment of additional troops.
On Day-Twelve British troops claimed capturing Baath Party
Headquarters near Basra. 101st Division attacked Najaf from north and south
killing or wounding 100 Iraqis. Hindiyah, a key Euphrates river-crossing about
80 kilometers south of Baghdad located between Karbala and ruins of Babylon,
was captured and twenty Iraqis were killed. Allies claimed that heavy bombing
has left units defending Baghdad at less than half strength.
In Rumeila region a British brigade attacked two companies and
destroyed seventeen T-55 tanks and five artillery pieces. In the north Kurds
captured some territory near Kalak. Iraq claimed killing 54 allied troops in last
24 hours.
On Day-Thirteen Najaf airstrip was captured. Marines seized key canal
bridge near Hilla. Fighting in Basra, Nasiriyah and Karbala continued. In Hilla
48 civilians were killed and in Baghdad nineteen were killed and hundred
wounded in bombing.
Iraq claimed killing many UK troops near Mosul. Americans had pushed
the British to do that (landing) as if it was an experiment to be implemented on
the British to see what the results are. The results were very tragic for the
British said Sahhaf. Rumsfeld ruled out talks with Iraqi government except on
surrender. Bush showed complete confidence in Rumsfeld.
On Day-Fourteen US forces closed in on Baghdad. Saddam urged people
to fight and Iraq refuted American claim of destroying its two divisions. Allies
denied bombing of holy places in Najaf and Karbala. Lynch was rescued from a
hospital; she had been taken prisoner by Iraqis. Turkey allowed movement of
supplies to US forces.
On Day-Fifteen US 3rd Infantry Division seized part of Baghdad airport.
Iraq claimed capturing five US tanks. Dozens of people were killed in Furat
located near airport. A palace located ninety kilometers outside Baghdad was
raided and documents were found. Bombing killed 27 people in Baghdad.
America claimed that 500 Iraqi troops were killed in clashes with US
forces for a key bridge some thirty kilometers southwest of Baghdad. US troops
moved into the centre of Najaf. In the north town of Khazer, located on road to
Mosul, was attacked by Kurds supported by US forces. Iraqis shot down a

Hornet ex Kitty Hawk near Karbala and destroyed three tanks, one APC and an
Apache. A Marine was killed in accidental fire near Kut.
A senior Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who had been held
under house arrest by Saddams government, ordered local people in a FATWA
not to interfere with the US-led invasion. US military termed his statement as
major breakthrough. Rumsfeld ruled out deal with Saddam. America planned
setting up temporary embassy in a hotel till construction of new embassy in five
years.
On Day-Sixteen Baghdad airport was captured by US forces. British
troops claimed killing eight Iraqi soldiers in Basra. In Kut 2,500 Iraqis
surrendered. In the north fighting for a bridge near Khazer continued. Iraq
claimed destroying eleven US tanks and eight APCs in battle for the airport and
seven more tanks and five APCs in other parts of the country. Three US troops
were killed in suicide attack. Iraq threatened unconventional hits. Saddam
visited streets as Baghdad came under heavy bombardment.
On Day-Seventeen US tanks made foray into Baghdad. Iraq claimed
pushing back attackers, retaking control of airport and killing hundreds of
American troops. In Karbala US troops fought street-to-street battles with
Iraqis. Bush could see liberation near.
In Basra house of Chemical Ali was struck and in the north US troops
moved towards Mosul while the air force bombed the city. A Strike Eagle
fighter accidentally hit US artillery position south of Baghdad killing one
soldier. To date 75 American troops were killed in the war.
On Day-Eighteen US troops faced stiff resistance in Baghdad. Sahhaf
claimed killing fifty US troops. First C-130 landed at Saddam airport. Russian
envoys convoy was attacked. Allies troops claimed thrust into Basra and
Karbala. In the north Kurd and US forces closed on to Mosul and 18 fighters
were killed as US plane bombed Kurdish convoy.
On Day-Nineteen US troops entered Baghdad from west and southwest
and raided palaces of Saddam. Two US soldiers and two reporters were killed.
Sahhaf claimed that Baghdad was safe and US soldiers were slaughtered.
British troops claimed that battle for Basra was almost over and believed that
Chemical Ali was dead.
On Day-Twenty Iraqi forces launched unsuccessful counterattack across
Tigris. Fifty Iraqis were killed. Fighting in parts of Baghdad was reported. One
A-10 warplane was shot down. Three journalists were killed in US attacks and
25 media men were caught in cross-fire. Robert Fisk reported that it seemed that
Baghdad would fall within hours.

On 9th April Saddams government collapsed. The game was over

accepted Iraqs Envoy to UN. War was not over as yet blurted Bush and Blair.
The invaders encountered isolated resistance. Russia denied that Saddam was
hiding in its embassy. Rumsfeld accused that Iraqi leaders were fleeing to Syria.

COMMENTS ON FIGHTING
This was an unequal war. The wars have generally been unequal
throughout the history and will be more so in the foreseeable future. Despite
being unequal this war has useful lessons for those who have been lined up by
the Crusaders for execution.
One must not decline to learn from invasion of Iraq, like Kamran Shafi,
who refused to accept it as war. War, my toe - quite like a grown-up beating a
five-year old. If I were an American I should be deeply ashamed of myself.
Well, if America has grown up having born centuries after those who still
pretend to be 5-year-old, then these kids should also be ashamed of for not
growing up.
In the absence of information about war plans of warring sides, which
would remain Top Secret till long after the war, it is difficult to analyze their
merits and demerits? However, some aspects of the plans were revealed by the
conduct of war though it must have been slightly different from the original
plans.
The unfolding of operations of war too was smoke-screened by
propaganda and cover up stories. The facts about combat action remained
ambiguous, despite wide coverage of the war. Both sides told lies or at least
tried to conceal the unwanted facts.
The embedded journalists, who were in bed with the military, constantly
admired their bed-partners. Those who were not impressed were thrown out of
the bed. The independent correspondents concentrated more on human, rather
than military aspects of the war.
Iraq War was planned in advance disclosed Blix. It is true. In fact both
sides had ample time to plan, war-game and refine their respective plans.
Therefore, it is right to conclude that they joined the battle with the best plans
they could formulate. The rest depended on their execution.
At the end of initial manoeuvre, which lasted for about two days, the US
and British troops contacted Basra, and reached the outskirts of Nasiriyah and
Karbala. This manoeuvre was devoid of any action as no enemy was contacted.
The first encounter took place in the form of attack on logistic columns
along the main supply route. Americans, perhaps, had not expected such threat

in Shia dominated southern Iraq. Therefore, forward push could not be pressed
on unless the lines of communication were secured. This implied that the towns
held by Iraqis along lines of communication were either to be cleared or
invested to deny the defenders the ability of sallying out and disrupt the
movement of logistics.
Americans decided to invest rather than risking fighting in built up areas.
The attempts to capture towns could have resulted in casualties and unwanted
delay. The investment was considered workable in view of complete air
supremacy.
America preferred to be patient rather than being rash in pursuit of the
original strategy of shock and awe, which had not worked due to unforeseen
threats. They waited for the destruction of enemys fighting ability through air
and indirect means of fire.
They exercised caution and waited for exhaustion of Iraqi logistic stamina
and breaking of Iraqis will to fight by ruthless application of air power. Next
ten days or so were spent on investing the towns situated along lines of
communication. This also allowed the time to move reinforcements.
The slowing down after initial manoeuvre was taken as a change in the
original plan. In military terminology it could not be termed as change. At best
it was a modification to cater for the unforeseen, yet it invited criticism from
those who wanted immediate results.
The media blamed military planners for miscalculations, exercising too
much restraint and not assembling an overwhelming force. This led to pushing
of the buck right and left. Pentagon blamed the CIA for feeding it wrong
information. CIA denounced the lack of preparation and equipment. Generals
denounced Rumsfelds dictatorial behaviour and his refusal to heed their advice
to put off military action. These allegations showed impatience of those who
wanted the game to be over in no time.
The strategy of shock and awe had been publicized too much and when
it did not work, political and military leaders started rendering unnecessary and
unconvincing clarifications; instead of accepting the plain truth. Howard hopped
like a Kangaroo and said, war has been slowed down to avoid civilian deaths.
Britains Army chief felt the need to educate the critics about military
campaigns. Armies cannot keep moving forever without stopping from time to
time to regroup and to ensure their supplies are up. Myers assured that war
plan was on track. Similarly Rumsfeld had to praise the plan and say that he
would be glad to take credit for it.
The criticism of the plan, though unfounded, yet forced the commanders
to cut short the waiting period for their push towards Baghdad. The bombing of

Iraqi positions was intensified along with launching of probing attacks to show
continuity of forward thrust.
The destructive capability of the air power constituted the golden strand
of the plan. In that US commanders followed the teaching of Clausewitz. He
said:

War is an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfill our

will.

Violence must be pushed to its utmost bounds.

War without spilling blood is a real business for Brahmins. (He had not
seen todays Brahmins)

To introduce into the philosophy of war a principle of moderation would

be absurdity.

Let us not hear of Generals who conquer without bloodshed.

Americans followed his teachings more rigidly than he would have ever
anticipated. The Yankees proved to be impulsive shooters. To them fighting was
nothing but drawing fast and shooting sharp. Shooting first enhances the
chances of survival.
Who is killed in the process can be identified later. The mistakes can be
covered by the phrases of collateral damage and friendly fire. American
soldiers invented their own phrases. Iraqis are sick and we are cameo therapy,
though in the process they administered some therapy to the Brits as well. The
Brit who survived the fatal dose could only call the American pilot a cowboy
and families of those who were killed could only accuse own Prime Minister of
lying.
The privileged soldiers of the civilized world were allowed to commit
some mistakes deliberately. They fired on miscreants working in the guise of
al-Jazeera reporters, who misused the freedom of expression beyond limits of
tolerance.
The media persons, who reported facts to the disliking of America, had to
be targeted. Abu Dhabi TVs team was fired at. Reuters was punished with
firing by US tanks at its office in Palestine Hotel, killing a cameraman for
producing photograph of armless Ali Ismael Abbas.
They also attacked convoy of diplomats, but without intending to cause
any harm. An army that had some mercenaries in its ranks, who were fighting
to get US passports, could be ordered to commit any heinous act.
The threat of suicide attacks was countered by resorting to cold-blooded
murder of children and women on slightest of suspicion. The Americans treated

every citizen as potential suicide bomber as was evident from the incident of
killing seven women and children at Najaf checkpoint. This was the first
incident and more could follow.
Buses carrying human shields were bombed, perhaps suspecting them as
contingent of fighters entering Iraq from other countries. Robert Fisk compared
these incidents in these words: The Americans bomb a passenger bus close to
the Syrian border and dont even apologize. An Iraqi soldier kills himself
attacking US Marines and it is an act of terrorism.
Some experts opined that US might use Israeli-style warfare in Baghdad,
but need for that was not felt due to sudden collapse of Iraqi defence. However,
in case of suicide bombing they have already done it. The issue that whether it
was an Israeli-style or Yankee-style remained unresolved. There are reasons to
believe that this style has been learnt by Israelis from the Yankees.
In short the war in Iraq was pushed through sheer destruction with the
help of high-tech military might. In that even warehouses containing food
supplies and hospitals treating civilians wounded in collateral damage, were
not spared. Some critics might observe traces of war crimes in all these acts,
but these fitted well in the strategy of shock and awe.
Initial success of Iraqis in disrupting lines of communication of the
invaders was a shocking surprise. Disruptions of supply lines in Nasiriyah,
Sharat and villages to the south were much fiercer than military planners had
visualized. General William Wallace admitted that an unexpected threat was
being encountered.
The enemy were fighting is a bit different than the one we war-gamed
against, because of these paramilitary forces. The major failure of this war so far
is the Americans underestimation of the Fedayeen and the peoples resilience
due to an absence of tactical intelligence. If they had stopped to ask anybody
whod ever actually been to the place, they would know that whatever people
feel about the leader, they wont support an invasion.
It appeared that the military planners were misled by pre-war propaganda
about Iraqis. There were no large or even medium scale defections. Like
Wallace, Hoon too was surprised to note that there were still no defectors from
Iraqi regime. There were no refugees as Iraqi people preferred to stay home
despite the worst and indiscriminate bombing. Camps established for them
remained empty. There were no queues to receive humanitarian aid.
According to Moonis Ahmar Saddam outwitted Americans in exploiting
Iraqis. America has tried its level best to separate Iraqi people from Saddam
Hussein, but the latter has cleverly exploited the feelings of patriotism and Arab
nationalism in order to remain in power.

Western Media reported that Saddams followers forced people to join

fighting. If anybody refused, they were made to go along, or they were killed.
Astonishingly nobody was prepared to appreciate Iraqis love for their country
despite Saddam factor.
The aim of Iraqi defence planners was to drag the war as long as they
could. Iraqi Defence Minister had said, we feel that this war must be prolonged
so that the enemy pays a high price. Unfortunately the plan did not work to the
desired effects.
Any defence which forfeits the ability to manoeuvre can never last for
long, because it permits sustained pounding of the fixed positions and their
outmanoeuvering. Iraqi plan was too rigid against an enemy with superior
firepower and mobility.
Under adverse battlefield conditions faced by the Iraqis, effective
employment of large formations was not possible. Extensive employment of
small combat groups and teams should have been preferred. Inability to cause
delay by impeding the mobility of the invaders with the use of mines,
demolitions and inundations, was conspicuously missing. Effects of sandstorm,
which neutralized many of the advantages enjoyed by the invaders, were also
not availed by the Iraqis.
Iraqis had planned to draw enemy into fighting in built-up areas, but kept
the bulk of troops outside or on fringes of towns. Once allies surrounded a town,
they nibbled Iraqis enticing them to react in the form of counter attacks. The
invaders then took them on with weapons having longer ranges and better
accuracy.
Iraqis invariably resorted to quick counter attacks with weaker forces on
stronger enemy and suffered the losses. Close quarter fighting in built-up areas
is a game of patience. Once the defender plans to draw enemy in, he must not
react prematurely to push back the intruder. He must display the patience to
draw the enemy to killing zones. Iraqis frequently reacted against the essence of
their plan and in the course exposed themselves.
Iraqi troops were defenceless against air threat. For more than a decade
UK and US have been bombing Iraq to enforce no-fly zone and in that they
focused on targeting and destroying Iraqi air defence system. Resultantly a wellknit AD system was not allowed to be developed.
The collapse of Baghdad was quite intriguing for some. The fierce
resistance put up by Iraqis till the contact of main defences in Baghdad, created
an impression Republican Guards would make the invaders bleed profusely, but
the sudden collapse of Baghdad surprised everyone.

The defection of the senior commanders was the reason of unexpected

collapse. Why did the commanders desert their troops? It will take time to
identify the facts. At this juncture it could be said that the commanders read the
inevitable and decided to save their lives by quietly slipping away. In the
absence command structure the battle for Baghdad, which was feared by US
experts as nightmare, did not materialize.
Iraqi military leadership also failed in utilizing foreign fighters who were
able to reach Baghdad with pledge of never returning to their homelands. The
decision to fight in civil clothes remained a riddle. Though Americans blamed
Iraqi soldiers for being unscrupulous enough to hide behind civilians, yet it
gave the invaders a pretext to kill any civilian. It went to the advantage of the
invaders.
At the end one may ask that was the Iraqi plan based on the defence on
interior lines? Not in its classic sense. Was it based on the concept of fortress
defence? Not exactly; it was mixture of both the ideas. In fortress defence of the
distant past, the besieged town could expect reinforcements from other
provinces. In case of defence on interior lines the defender enjoys the ability to
shift forces with ease and without wasting time.
In the face of overwhelming air superiority of the invaders none of the
concepts enumerated above were likely to work. Moreover, Iraqi commanders
chose to fight on the last line of defence right at the outset. It was a matter of
do-or-die battles in case of each garrison.
Constant surveillance by satellites, drones, video recording by every
attacking warplanes and human intelligence allowed the allies to have accurate
picture of dispositions of Iraqi forces. Learning from the experience of the Gulf
War, the invaders had worked hard on establishment of human intelligence
nets. Therefore, they were able to read the events in the battlefield correctly and
took timely decisions.
The war carried a clear message for the weaker nations. They must
submit to the military might of the superpower and in case a nation has the
courage to stand against state terrorism then it has to rehash its strategy. In view
of potent air threat the weaker nations dont have to rely more on tanks and
other heavy equipment. Emphasis should be on enhancing anti-tank and antiaircraft capability with short, medium and long range weapons.
Night fighting capability has immense importance for the weaker, which
must be enhanced through suitable equipment and intensive training. The battle
formations should be as small as possible to avoid presenting lucrative targets to
air.

The main cause of Iraqs defeat has been its isolation as was in case of
Afghanistan. Muslim World in general and Arab countries in particular
disowned Iraqis for self preservation. Some of them even supported the
aggressor.
According to Shireen Mazari one of the most shameless aspects of the
present US aggression against Iraq has been the support lent to the US by Iraqs
other Arab neighbours who have enabled the US and Britain to conduct their
military operations against the Iraqi people. Instead of opposing unjust war,
some quarters urged Saddam to step down.

THE EFFECTS
The lack of determination demonstrated by the entire world to oppose an
unjust war will prove tonic for Bush, the bully. It will increase his appetite for
war. He will be tempted to follow the foot-steps of Mongols and Nazis more
frequently.
He will cause more devastation than the warriors of the past. Genghis
Khan and Hitler had the ability to exercise control over their generals, but Bush
is no more than a pigmy in the company of men like Wolfowitz, Perle,
Rumsfeld, Feith and others. The formers were the lions leading their prides, but
Bush is following a pack of wolves.
It is difficult to prepare a conclusive list of possible effects of the ongoing
hunting-spree of this pack of beasts. They will be a constant threat to the
mankind. However the learned people, purely for academic pursuits, keep
talking about possible political, economic and other fallouts of war.
The political effects will be numerous and far reaching. Economically the
war has already rattled global recovery according to World Bank. The
economic and political fallout will engulf the entire world, not to mention that
another country has been destroyed for reconstruction.
Saudi print media lashed at cowboy-style destruction. In Punjabi such
kind of destruction is explained with the example of a wild boar in sugarcane
field. The destruction will not end here, because those who are causing it have
plans ready for more.
The death and destruction in future adventures will be justified on the
same pretext on which Jack Straw has legitimized it in this war. He argued that
by killing some civilians, this military action will be to have spared the
hundreds and thousands of Iraqis who would have otherwise faced death at the
hands of Saddam Hussein and his people.

This reflected the mindset of the Crusaders. They think that there are
many people awaiting such actions in other parts of the Muslim World. Had the
Iraqis hurt the invaders to the extent that they had endeavoured by prolonging
the war, the things would have been different, but now the future adventures
have become certainty.
Military balance in the region has been tilted in favour of American
imperialists. The beasts are better poised for future hunting. The weaker nations
will tend to accept that the might is always right. The weaker will never be right
in disagreeing with the strong, even on the basis of holiest of the reasons.
The rulers of the region will be more interested in preserving their power
than in democratizing their governments or respecting human rights according
to Abla Amawi of Gulf News. The growing tensions between them and those
they govern may soon pose an unprecedented challenge. And their only means
of containing their restive populations may be sheer force, not democracy. It
will present America yet another opportunity to intervene in the name of
democracy.
The chances of war spreading to other countries have undoubtedly
increased. That was why China and Russia were eyeing new checks on US
power and Europe thought about political realignments. However, it will be
foolish on the part of Muslims to bank upon realignments of others.
Russia opposed the war, but then seeing the inevitable it decided not to
side with Iraq. Russian officials warned Muslim cleric after his call for Jihad.
Russian navy moved out but had no plans to enter Gulf. Similarly Canadian
Parliament debated motion for backing war.
The rulers of the Muslim World have to rely upon their people. They must
trust their people. If oppressed people of Iraq could put up strong resistance to
the worlds only superpower, then what kind of resistance could be put up by
those who genuinely cared for their leaders?
Amr Mohammed of Arab News wrote that the kind of resistance put up
by Iraqis leads to the conclusion that a strong relationship between a people
and its leadership is the real guarantor of a regimes survival and safety. The
resistance would have been more if Saddam had not alienated a vast majority of
his nation.
Muslim rulers dont have to beg for ending the war. They must act to
check the initiation of aggression against them remaining mindful of intentions
of their enemy as identified by Sheikh al-Hunud of Gaza. The US wants to
Americanize the region, Americanize the religion, Americanize the Quraan,
Americanize Muhammads message.

Cook visualized that attack on Iraq would result in a long term legacy of
hatred for the West. The war has caused hatred and anger in Muslim World.
The leaders of Ummah must preserve the anger of their people by keeping it
cool by acting prudently so that it does not turn against them.
The war has further highlighted the importance of media. The monopoly
of the West has been definitely encroached upon. Despite jamming of
unwanted telecasts and deliberate attacks on hostile reporters and journalists,
Bush had to scorn the talk of a quagmire. Muslim countries should invest more
in electronic media so that their voice is heard.
As regards possibility of guerrilla war in Iraq against illegal occupation,
Aslam Beg saw an opportunity for Russia to avenge its defeat in Afghanistan.
In the absence of outside support the chances of guerrilla war are quite bleak.
Russia does not seem to be interested in taking revenge. The neighbouring
countries like Iran and Syria will not support such struggle due to the fear of
America.
The resentment shown by common Iraqis to occupation of their country
indicated their love for independence. This indicator has led Paul Beaver to say:
I believe at the moment there are very clear indications that, independent of
whether the Iraqis like Saddam Hussein, they like an invasion force even less.
Americans will win this war. The question is; will they win the peace? The
peace will remain elusive much more than it had been in Afghanistan.

CONCLUSION
America has won another victory, but in the process has damaged its
image and earned hatred of billions of people around the globe. Khatami viewed
both Saddam and US-led coalition as losers. This has been explained by Gunter
Grass.
No, it is not anti-Americanism that is damaging the image of the United
States; nor do the dictator Saddam Hussein and his extensively disarmed
country endanger the most powerful country in the world. It is President Bush
and his government that are diminishing democratic values, bringing sure
disaster to their own country, ignoring the United Nations, and that are now
terrifying the world with a war in violation of international law.
Anglo-American axis is heading for disaster. Whatever the military
outcome might be, politically and morally the US and Britain have already lost
the war according to Patrick Seale of Gulf News. They have not removed the
evil, but only replaced Saddam with Garner.
In Iraq War US lost only about hundred soldiers and about four hundred
were wounded. These casualties were more than those suffered in Afghanistan,

but too less a punishment for an illegal and immoral act. The habitual criminal
wont be deterred from committing more offences.
Fall of Baghdad should act as an eye opener for Muslim rulers. At least
they should now understand as to why Saddam was spared in 1991. Irrespective
of what Saddam did in the past, the present suffering of Iraqi people at the
hands of the Crusaders justify a unanimous call for ending the occupation.
They should not be misled by the condemnation of war by the Pope and
people of the West. Their condemnation was not for the love of Muslims. They
feared repercussions and tried to forestall them. They should also not be misled
by the peace-loving intellectuals of Islamic World, who still refuse to see the
reality of the Crusades.
13th April 2003

PROVED BY PILLAGE
America waged an immoral, illegal and unjust war against a sovereign
state and member of the United Nations. The war was opposed by majority of
the world and by many people of those countries whose leaders formed the socalled coalition for attacking Iraq.
The condemnation of war by the people and governments continued.
Millions of people across the globe protested against US-led war. Turkish
villagers showered eggs and stones on US soldiers. Saudi intellectuals refused
to meet US Envoy. A Saudi company declined to supply trucks to US army. The
war intensified anti-US sentiments even among Chinas Muslims.
Mubarak warned that Iraq War could produce 100 bin Ladens. ExJordanian prime ministers asked king to declare Iraq War illegal. Indonesian
Vice President dubbed Bush as king of terrorists. Many governments formally
asked US to end of hostilities.
The Pope opposed the war on Iraq. He asked the Christians to pray for
safety of Iraqis. He denied the existence of any confrontation between two
great religions. He advised: Let us not permit a human tragedy to become a
religious catastrophe. Only a Pope could separate religion and human beings
from each other.
Scores of anti-war protesters were arrested in America. Some senior US
diplomat and officials resigned accusing their government of endangering the
world peace. Bush and Blair were termed as Axis of Evil by London rally.
Protesters in America demanded impeachment of Bush.

Bush and Blair could disregard the protests and appeals of other people.
They could also ignore the Pope as he simply wished the well-being of
Christian minorities in Muslim World. He was not at all worried about
annihilation of Muslim minorities in Christian World.
But they could not brush aside the opinion of their tax-payers and the
voters. Therefore, even if Bush and his partners did not care about the world
opinion, they had to satisfy their political base. They had to come out with a
proof justifying attack on Iraq.

FAILURE IN FINDING EVIDENCE

America has been looking for evidence on three counts, i.e. WMDs,
Iraqs link with terrorism and about Saddams repressive rule. These were the
pretexts of attacking Iraq on the basis of which Bush and Blair convinced own
people and tried to seek approval of the world body.
The issue of existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction was kept alive.
The possibility of use of chemical weapons by Saddam was hyped so
loudly that many believed that Iraq had such weapons for sure. Even in the heat
of battle American troops searched for the evidence. In a raid conducted on
palace located outside Baghdad the raiders succeeded in finding suspicious
powder. They were able to recover something in one raid, which the inspectors
could not find in more than a decade. This surely reflected poorly on the
competence of the inspectors.
In Basra the British were able to capture the dress for chemical warfare,
which was made in UK. From the heaps of captured arms and ammunition they
were able to recover short range FROG-7 missiles capable of carrying 25
gallons of chemical agents. In Najaf, however a smoking gun site turned out to
be a pesticide store.
The failure resulted in untenable arguments. Saddam had twelve years to
hide his weapons. He might have destroyed those or sent across to Syria.
Keeping these possibilities in view a reward was offered to those who came
forth with some evidence.
Blix feared that America might resort to planting evidence. He warned
US not to do so and also about drawing conclusions on WMDs. Perforce US
and Britain started recruiting UN inspectors to help in finding the proof. IAEA
opposed US plan to monitor Iraqi disarmament.
America was determined to find the evidence as was indicated by the
statement of Blix. He said, I rather had the feeling, before they decided to go to
war, that our work irritated them. They wanted us to present certain results,
which would have allowed them to obtain a (UN) Resolution.

American wanted to discover or recover WMDs, even at the risk of those

being dubbed as fictitious. The possibility of placing some chemical or
biological material by America and then recovering it cannot be ruled out. They
are mean enough to do it and have means enough to prove the validity. But it
has not been able to lay hands on any evidence. The evidence-hunters have yet
to recover or produce a video tape, may it be as fake as the one found from the
rubbles of Afghanistan.
The world asked time and again about the weapons. Putin blasted US for
failing to recover WMDs. Americans also could not prove Iraqi link with
terrorists, except destroying a compound suspected of being used for training of
terrorists near Iranian border. The world already knew existence of such camps
on either side of the border since Iran-Iraq War and their purpose.
Two of the three charges against Iraq could not be proved; therefore,
Anglo-American Axis concentrated on the third. The invaders wanted evidence
about the cruel rule of Saddam. This would justify the liberation of Iraqis.
Iraqis, despite their hatred for Saddam, came out with evidence to the
contrary. Their hatred for Saddam was overshadowed by their love for their
country. They refused to accept the invaders as liberators. The leaflets dropped
urging Iraqis to rise against Saddam failed to subvert patriotic feelings of Iraqis.
Frisk questioned: Where were the panicking crowds and food queues?
There were no refugees and no queues for food. The food packets had to be
placed in houses and then photographed, whether or not those packets were
welcomed by the residents.
The signs of Iraqis anti-Saddam feelings and their eagerness for arrival
of the benefactors or liberators remained hidden. Blairs spokesman came out
with excuse that after two-and-a-half decades of Saddam, fear has been a major
factor in the response of the local population.
Then the British soldiers, like their Prime Minster, who always had some
secrets up his sleeves before the war, discovered a mass grave in the form of a
mortuary. The coffins containing years-old remains of dead were found stacked
in piles of fours and fives. This too did not impress the world.
Then the invaders started talking about war crimes. Fighting in civil
clothes was termed as a war crime. When asked that US soldiers too have been
and are still fighting in civil clothes in Afghanistan and Iraq, the General
conducting the daily briefing refused to entertain the question without being
ashamed.
Showing of US dead soldiers and prisoners of war by al-Jazeera was
another crime committed by those who allowed them to be photographed.
America also vowed to try those Iraqis who directed suicide attacks.

Nothing worked, because a good deal of informed opinion worldwide

regarded the Anglo-American invasion and conquest of Iraq as an illegal act of
aggression, in the course of which it was Coalition forces that had perpetrated
numerous war crimes while pulverizing Iraqi resistance according to Richard
Overy of the Guardian
He continued, the sad truth is that prosecution has always been a
function of power. No one seriously believes that Bush and Blair will be
indicted. International law works only against weaker states. Big powers have
an unmerited, but unassailable, immunity.
The operation of double standards has been evident throughout the
campaign. What the Coalition does with impunity is hailed as a war crime when
it is committed by Iraqis. The image of crude American gun law, evident in the
efforts to kill Saddam, has been justified by American international lawyers. In
the unlikely eventuality that either Bush or Blair are blown up or shot, there
would be outrage.
America did not budge from its plans of war crimes trial, as was evident
from the statements of its spokesmen. We are of the opinion that an
international tribunal for the current abuses is not necessaryWe believe that it
must have some indigenous roots to reinstate the rule of law. By adopting this
course, America wanted to ensure that the issue of crimes committed by US
troops wont be raised at any stage of the trial and at the same time anti-Saddam
forces would have the chance to take revenge.

ENGINEERED PILLAGE
At last America found a uniquely immoral way to prove its case. On 10 th
April Baghdad descended into anarchy. Ministries were set on fire. Villas
belonging to Saddams son Uday and Deputy Prime Minister Tareq Aziz were
ransacked. French cultural centre and German embassy were damaged. Basra
too plunged into chaos by turning into a town of thieves and criminals.
Baghdad and Basra, the two major cities liberated by the invaders
experienced worst kind of lawlessness. The looters and the owners fought street
battles. In Baghdad one person was killed and 25 injured on 11 th April. The
owners protected their belongings. We want the law to rule and if the
Americans dont defend us then well defend ourselves with our own weapons.
All this was engineered willfully to prove the point which shall be seen
little later. Before that it would be better to glean through some reports to
comprehend the problem in correct perspective. It should be noted that most
reports were dispatched by journalists of the civilized world.

On 11th April US soldiers shot and killed a shopkeeper in Baghdad with

heavy machine guns, who was defending his shop with a Kalashnikov assault
rifle against looters. The Marines planned to start patrolling by Friday night
thereby allowing a week for celebration by plundering.
Fisk reported that a day after the liberation Baghdad was overwhelmed by
arson, anarchy, fear, hatred, hysteria, looting, revenge, savagery, and suspicion.
To all this, the Americans have turned a blind eye. Indeed they had as they had
no intention of preventing liberation of the property. One can hardly be
moralistic about the spoils of Saddams henchmen, but how the government of
Americas so-called New Iraq is supposed to operate now that the states
property has been so comprehensively looted he asked.
He being from the civilized world did not dilate further. Once the
looting-spree will be over, the Americans will take over and start plundering the
wealth of Iraq. They were busy in securing oil-fields and refineries. They would
plunder the wealth in so refined a style that their crime wont even fall in the
category of white-collar crime.
Fisk continued, I found the owner of a grain silo and a factory ordering
his armed guards to fire on the looters who were trying to steal his Lorries. This
desperate and armed attempt to preserve the very basis of Baghdads bread
supply was being observed from just 100 meters away by eight soldiers of the
US 3rd Infantry Division, who were sitting on their tanks doing nothing.
In a way it was fortunate that they did nothing. Had they done anything, it
would have resulted in killing of the factory owner and his security guards, as it
had happened in case of the shopkeeper.
US troops called to assist replied that they had no orders to intervene.
They must have been instructed not to do so. According to Fisk not only the
looting, but willful destruction has been encouraged:

I watched the looters throw petrol through the smashed windows of the
ground floor (of Ministry of Trade) and the fire burst from them within
two seconds.

I was standing outside the Central Bank of Iraq as each window flamed
like a candle.

The army of child thieves sent into the building (al-Sadeer hotel) had
already stolen the bed linen
Another report from him dispatched after destruction of museum revealed

more:

Our feet crunched on the wreckage of 5,000-year-old marble plinths and

stone statuary and pots that had endured every siege of Baghdad, every

invasion of Iraq throughout history only to be destroyed when America

came to liberate the city.

Why, yesterday morning they were recruiting Saddam Husseins hated

former policemen to restore law and order on their behalf.

It is the Sunnis who are now suffering plunder at the hands of the Shias.
So conflicts between looters and the owners are a conflict between Shias
and Sunnis.

Baghdad is already a city at war with itself, at the mercy of gunmen and
thieves.

He quoted Abdul-Jaber, the guard: We have to defend ourselves because

the Americans have let this happen.

I briefly mentioned the extent of the anarchy to a US Marine officer who

promised to tell his colonel about it. When I saw him later, he said hed
seen the colonel, but hadnt had time to mention the looting and burning.

The reports on American forces attitude towards looting poured in

continuously:

Troops could be seen waving looters through checkpoints and standing

idly in front of buildings while they were being pillaged.

US soldiers stood by at the presidential compound as looters some 400

yards away

Only the Oil Ministry seemed intact with a heavy US military presence
inside.

The journalists observed that the British troops, like their Americancounterparts, were either unable or unwilling to stop it. They too hoped to
restore order in a few days. There is no one to stop them reported Andrew
Gillion of BBC radio.
In Basra Blairs best in the world was a step ahead of the Yankees. They
protected the looters upholding the cherished values of the civilized world.
Major Damian Hoskins of the Royal Tank Regiment said his Land Rover
convoy came on a mob in the process of stoning a man to death.
The British troops stopped the crowd and brought the man to hospital,
barely alive. They stopped throwing stones when they saw us, but some of them
still had stones in their hands. One had a broken bottle. They were beating him
with sticks and punching.
He knew he was facing death. He was more than terrified. He had
resigned himself. They shouted, he broke into our friends shop. They kept

shouting Ali Baba, thief, thief. We couldnt get a man killed for steeling, it was
rough justice.
At last the plunderer from the civilized world came to the rescue of a
thief and saved him from rough justice. Bush, Blair and their best in the world
had administered very polite and refined justice by killing of hundreds of
innocent people, including children and pregnant women for the crime
committed by their leader.
Hoskins went on to express his mind and in that revealing the sinister
designs of his superiors right up to those residing in White House and 10
Downing Street. Looting of banks, hotels and other official and semi-official
buildings had gone on unabated, while residents resorted to vigilance justice
against looters who targeted private houses or shops.
He guessed there had been about a dozen lynching of thieves in the city
since its capture. British forces would interfere if they could to save a life, but
could do little to stop the looting. Did somebody require more explicit
confession than that of this Major to give a verdict that the occupation forces
were involved in committing crimes during war if not the war crimes?
There is looting of government stores, people going out into the streets
without-seemingly-any fear, chanting anti-government slogans, reported Rageh
Omaar of BBC television. Some of the embedded journalists highlighted the
intended aim of the entire exercise.
Crowds are no longer afraid to show their feelings for Saddams feared
regime reported a journalist. One man rushing from a government building
took of his shoe to hit poster of Saddam reported another. Another looter said,
No to Saddam. Thank you Mr. Bush.
This has been in the air for days. People have just been waiting for a sign
that the Americans are in the city said Reuters correspondent. He, perhaps, was
trying to compensate for mistake committed by Reuter regarding Ali Ismail
Abbas.
Earlier General Buford Blount commander 3rd Infantry Division had
declared that by securing Baghdad weve set the conditions to ensure the
regime is no longer appeared to be functioning. A Major of his Division had
said, its a shame to see it happening but were on the ground for military
operations, not for policing.
The engineered looting in Baghdad was a matter of shame for this officer.
But during the same period a comrade of the major in Japan stole few cans of
noodles from a store. He did not do it on somebodys behest. His deliberate act
brought no shame to anybody in the civilized world.

The above reports indicated that pillage of conquered cities was

deliberately allowed and even encouraged. Generally the offices and homes of
government officials were looted to show that they enjoyed no respect. The
embedded journalists asked leading questions from the looters to prove that
they hated Saddam regime.
The band of plunderers mostly consisted of children who were too young
to understand the implications of their acts. According to Fisk the Shia Muslim
were in the forefront of looters. Entire Shia community could not be blamed for
that. They could only be those who had worked as human intelligence during
invasion.
Justification of liberation of Iraqi people was not the only aim of the
Crusaders. The plunder also marked the end of Saddams control over Iraq. It
was a warning for those who still desired to resist the occupation. The selection
of targets for plundering conveyed a message to those who opposed attack on
Iraq. It also had a warning for other rogues states of the region.
In any military campaign the conquerors are responsible for ensuring
security of life and property in captured areas and to accomplish this task all
armies of the world have integral setups. The occupation forces could have done
it with minimum of effort. If they could kill kids for suspected attempts of
suicide attack, they could also disperse the looters by firing few shots in the air
or even at them. They would have been justified in taking such action. It was
not done. To the best in the world the war starts with death and destruction and
ends up in pillage and plunder.
The invaders allowed plunder and destruction of property and killing of
innocent people to justify their illegal and immoral war. It was disgusting to
note as to how low the civilized people could stoop to justify the unjustified.
In Afghanistan they produced a recorded video and in Iraq they arranged the
live stuff. Once they thought that the point had been proved, the evidence for
prosecution was closed.
The invaders were blamed for their acts and neglects during plunder of
Baghdad and other cities. The News in its editorial dated April 12 criticized the
invaders. Almost as if there was an official policy to look the other way, the
occupation soldiers have looked on impassively as the demolition of all that
what was once Iraqs state apparatus takes place at the hands of pillagers. Even
hospitals and other beneficial utilities are not being spared.
The looting, which could have been prevented, was thus intentionally
licensed to prove to the audiences back home that the Saddam regime was hated
so intensely that the ransacking was no more than a reflection of the peoples
anger. The Coalition states increasingly stand to be charged with violation of

Geneva Convention that the maintenance of law and order in newly occupied
areas is the responsibility of the occupying force.

IT BACK FIRED
Saudi media urged US to end looting and destruction. The innocent
Bedouins asked US to end for which their rulers had invited the Yankees to
come all the way from other side of the globe.
The people of Baghdad, Basra and other places did not take long in
identifying the real force behind the looters. Unfortunately they were not in
position to lynch a few of them. They, like entire Ummah, were helpless in this
regard.
During the war Bush had boasted that the citizens of Iraq were coming to
know what kind of people we had sent to liberate them. Soon after the
liberation they came to know as to what kind of people had replaced Saddam.
On 12th April an anti-US rally was held in Baghdad. Glimpses of this rally as
reported by the print media proved what Iraqis thought about their liberators:

A silent majority was offended at the blights to national pride.

Sabah Najib, a protester, said that the looters make up only a miniscule
percentage of the Iraqi people. The majority of Iraqis were pained by all
these obscenities.

They try just to protect the oil companies and the oil ministry and
everything else is destroyed. They dont do anything, they just watch.

A banner read, Bush supports the looters. It was a polite way of

condemning a man who in fact is the leader of the elite bunch of
international plunderers.

The criminals who were kept in check by Saddams authoritarian regime

had the most to celebrate when the US troops arrived.

I am against Saddam, but Bush lied to us. Im with my country and Im

afraid for the future.

The true Iraqis are not those who have attached white banners to their
cars to avoid being shot by US troops, but those who are waving the Iraqi
flag. Today Im ashamed to say Im Iraqi. Honest Iraqis, even those who
are against Saddam Hussein, would never cheer for the Americans.

One day or another honest Iraqis are going to force out the Americans,
not for the sake of Saddam Hussein, but for the sake of Iraq.

Anti US protests continued. The protesters equated Bush with Saddam by

showing banners, Bush + Saddam = One. Iraqis asked questions from the

journalists. Whos in-charge of Baghdad? Please tell me what is going on?

Where is our government? To whom do we belong now? Fisk reported that a
woman shouted at him. You are American, wrongly assuming I was from the
US. Go back to your country. Get out of here. You are not wanted here. We
hated Saddam and now we hate Bush
Within five days the press observed that things were going wrong faster
than anybody could have imagined. The army of liberation had already turned
into the army of occupation. Some of the reports about protest rallies held on
17th April were:

Go away! Get out of my face! screamed an American soldier at an Iraqi

protester with rage.

I would become a suicide bomber shouted a woman at me. And all

across Baghdad you hear the same thing, from Shia clerics to Sunni
businessman.

Very soon a guerrilla resistance must start. No doubt the Americans will
claim that these attacks are remnants of Saddams regime or criminal
elements, but that will not be the case.

America, yes, it got rid of Saddam. But Iraq belongs to us. Oil belongs to
us. We will keep our nationality. It will stay Iraq. Americans must go.

Next day huge rallies demanded US to quit Iraq. Marchers came from
various mosques carrying banners and shouting slogans:

A banner read, leave our country, we want peace. Another, No Bush,

No Saddam, Yes, Yes to Islam. Yet another read, No to America. No to
secular state. Yes to Islamic State. We reject American hegemony.

This is not America we know, which respects international law, respects

the right of people shouted a protester. He perhaps did not want to
recognize the real face of America.

A Shia cleric urged the people to unite with each other and send
American and Britain out of your country. It is a duty for the Iraqi
nation.

On 19th April Fergal Keane of the Independent reported following about

resentment of Iraqis:

Slogans which, if Bush could hear them, would surely cause him to
revolve with anxiety. With our blood and our souls we will defend
Islam.

An Imam said, if they dont leave soon there will be queues of

Mujahideen lining up to drive them out.

An American soldier told a protester. Look, buddy, Ive got the gun now go back. Go ahead and shoot me. Go ahead replied the man.

A woman shouted into my face. Its about our pride. Its just about our
pride.

The stunt to legitimize the naked aggression failed; it back fired. The
prosecution witnesses turned hostile in mass. They had to, because apart from
plunder, there were other reasons to come out with facts rather than narrating
tutored statements.
Americans could not incite love for liberty or democracy with
indiscriminate use of MOABs, Massive Ordnance Air Burst or mother of all
bombs. It could earn only one thing; the hatred for its user.
The reports about an Iraqi soldier kissing the boots of US soldier before
surrender could not arouse respect for a nation to which the soldier belonged.
The soldiers who continued bombing even after the besieged residents were
willing to surrender could not be taken as civilized irrespective of their place
of origin; nor those who killed in dozens and wounded in hundreds just because
the victims protested against pro-US remarks made by a puppet.
The soldiers, who were so scared that they opened fire on cars they
thought posed a threat, deserved no respect. And those who screamed at
motorists to stop, and the one who did not, an old man in an old car, was shot in
the head in front of two French journalists. The same was true for Marines who
killed children by mistake.
I watched hundreds of Iraqi civilians queuing to cross a motorway bridge
at Daura yesterday morning, each man ordered by US soldiers to raise his shirt
and lower his trousers - in front of other civilians, including women - to prove
that they were not suicide bombers reported Fisk.
He added, an American Marine sniper sitting atop the palace gate
wounded three civilians, including a little girl, in a car that failed to halt - then
shot and killed a man who had walked on to his balcony to discover the source
of firing. Within minutes, the sniper also shot dead the driver of another car and
wounded two more passengers in that vehicle, including a young woman. A
crew of Channel 4 Television was present when the killings took place.
To save the values of the civilized world from being tarnished the crew
of Channel 4 must have turned their faces other way round. Such brutalities
were not worth the telecast in civilized world. These acts, however, could not
go unnoticed by those who were at the receiving end.
America did not realize that despite Iraqis dislike for Saddam, they did
not approve his Yankee-style ousting. James Fox quoted a resident of Basra in
this context. Even if I do not support Saddam, I do not want the invasion. They

want to change the system but this is not the way. This way there will be only
death, the death of children and women.
The moment US troops entered Iraq, they lost their bid to win hearts and
minds of Iraqis. After supervising the looting in Baghdad, the liberators
degenerated to unwelcome occupants. Astonishingly after subjecting Iraq to
plunder the kind of which couldnt be carried out by Saddam in his entire
tenure, America still tried and hoped to when hearts and minds of Iraqis.
According to Masood Hassan the mighty have made grave
miscalculations in attacking Iraq. These have been further aggravated by their
misconduct. In their arrogance and blinding whiteness that comes with
absolute power, they have failed to understand that although Saddam is a tyrant,
he is an Iraqi tyrant. In his worst manifestation, he is still acceptable, far more
than an army that seeks to kill them so that it can liberate them. An army that
rains bombs on them and offers them a bottle of water and a packet of biscuits is
not an army anyone can love. The Coalition may play a football match in Basra
and lose to the locals 9-3, but that hardly nets them the game of winning hearts
and minds - another sordid string of words that the west has gifted to us.
Iraqis will not only reject Americans, but also try their utmost to end
occupation of their country. The Americans will soon understand that however
bad Saddam Hussein may be, any invader who comes in to take away the
wealth of Iraq will be opposed tooth and nail observed I Hasan. Now that teeth
have been extracted the nails would do the job.
They are doomed to lose the battle for hearts and minds. Rafsanjani
foresaw that the Iraqi police will not cooperate with them, the army will not
cooperate, and regular people will not cooperate. The blood they are shedding
will not be forgotten. The hunger, displacementof Iraqi people will all be
recorded as things America has caused. They will not blame Saddam any more.
Americans not only earned the wrath of Iraqis, but also the condemnation
from the entire world, which had sincerely sympathized with America after
9/11. Under the influence of this sympathy the world accepted American attack
on Afghanistan, but after witnessing the ruthless conduct of war in that country,
their sympathies vanished. The world saw the Americans doing the same what
terrorists had done to them.
By invading Iraq, Americans exceeded in commission of crimes against
humanity far more than the terrorists have done. All that happened on 9/11 now
seemed to be what America deserved. Perhaps it deserved more than that.
The occupation of Iraq will be opposed, not only by the people of Iraq,
but also by other peoples of the region. Iraqs neighbours Saudi Arabia, Jordan,
Syria, Turkey, Iran and Kuwait plus Egypt and Bahrain have already demanded

pullout of American troops. The students of a friendly country like Egypt have
warned US of suicide attacks.

CONCLUSION
Head of Museum in Baghdad accused US troops of committing crime of
the century. His dedication and devotion to his profession restricted his vision
only to the crimes committed against cultural heritage. So was the case of
Bushs cultural advisor, who resigned in protest at US failure to stop looting.
The list of crimes committed by America was quite long.
By promoting plunder Americans endeavoured to prove that people hated
Saddam regime; instead they substantiated the allegations leveled against them.
They confirmed as to how much they cared for human values and international
law. They confirmed their understanding of liberty when it meant for other
nations. They confirmed as to what extent they could go to prove themselves
right and others wrong. They confirmed their urge to commit war crimes and
the reason as to why America opposed constitution of International Criminal
Court.
A British analyst argued, as stupidly as Blair did before war, US forces
lack training to deal with looting. What about the British in Basra? In fact the
invaders were blinded by the feeling of self-righteousness. They forgot that
cheering crowds (looters to be more prcised) dont make an unjust war right.
The Yankees have not realized the futility of search for evidence.
America has planned to field 1,000-member WMD force in Iraq. This force
would surely commit more acts of stupidity. Who cares? It is for others to be
wise and save them from the harms caused by the acts of strong and stupid.
The events since liberation of Iraq indicated bright chances of Iraqis
resistance against occupation of their country. Their struggle may not fall in the
category of guerrilla war, but it will be on the lines of resistance of Palestinians.
It will originate not from political forums, but from mosque.

20th April 2003

NEXT FIT CASE

No sooner Iraq was conquered they talked about the next target. The
Crusaders were not deterred by the criticism of an illegal and unjust war,
because mission of the holy war was not yet accomplished. Disarming of
Muslim World has to continue.
There are quite a few countries which possess reasonable capability to
threaten peace and there are others which aspire to acquire such capability.
These countries have to be invaded and conquered to eliminate the possible
threats to peace of the civilized world.
Why Americans have not desisted from bullying and belligerence? To
answer this question one has to bear in mind the American psyche. America will
not hesitate in availing more opportunities presented by the tragedy. The events
since 9/11 prove this contention.
Afghanistan was attacked to topple Taliban regime that sheltered
terrorists of al-Qaeda; after that a victory against Pakistan was won without war;
and then Iraq was invaded with complete disrespect to world opinion. This trend
is likely to continue. Who will be the next target? It will be very difficult to
specify the next fit case, because the long list of evil forces provides wide
choice to the Crusaders.
America, however, will take time to consolidate in Iraq while concocting
pretexts for attacking another country. The pause in holy war is also needed
for cooling of worldwide anger against unjustified pursuit of the biased war. But
American psyche will not change in matter of few months or years.

RECALLING AMERICAN PSYCHE

American psyche was briefly described in the first article. Now that it is
in naked display, it would be appropriate to look the savages of modern times
once again. Anwar Ahmad in his article titled Civilized Savages recalled the
character traits of Europeans, who exterminated the Indians to become
Americans. Excerpts from his article are reproduced:

Bigotry, deceit, genocide and biological weapons thus became the

earliest ingredients of the great American civilization.

There was insatiable greed for land as well, and treaty after treaty with
the retreating savages (as Red Indians were called by settlers, who are
now called Americans) was broken in the westward march.

After the massacre at Little Big Horn the surviving savages were herd
into reservations to drown their humiliation in drink and become the
symbol of nothingness. Civilization had triumphed.

When the civilized man arrived, to serve God and also to get rich, his
greed seemed despicable and destructive to the savages.

The shocked savages saw the settlers as mechanical-soulless creatures

who wielded ingenious tools and weapons to accomplish their ends.

To support his observations he the quoted the famous letter the Red
Indian chief whose tribes land the settlers wanted to acquire in 1834. Chief
Seattle, the savage, replied to the civilized man in these words:

How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land? This idea is
strange to us. If we do not own the freshness of the air, and sparkle of the
water, how can you buy them? Every part of this earth is sacred to my
people. Every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every humming
insect, is holy in the memory and experience of my people. The perfumed
flowers are our sisters; the deer, the horse, the great eagle, these are our
brothers. The rocky crests, the juices in the meadows, the body heat of the
pony, and man - all belong to the same family. I am a savage and do not
understand any other way.

Our ways are different from your ways. The sight of your cities pains the
eyes of the red man. There is no quiet place in white mans cities. No
place to hear unfurling of leaves in the spring, or the rustle of an insects
wings. The clatter only seems to insult the ears. But perhaps it is because
I am a savage and do not understand.

I have seen a thousand rotting (wild) buffaloes on the prairie, left by the
Whiteman who shot them from a passing train. I am a savage and I do not
understand how the smoking iron-horse can be more important than the
buffalo that we kill to stay alive. What is man without the beasts? If all
the beasts were gone, man would die from a great loneliness of the spirit.
For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. I am a savage
and do not understand any other way.

And what is there to life if a man cannot hear the lonely cry of the
whippoorwill or the argument of frogs around a pond at night; or the soft
sound of wind darting over the face of the pond, and the smell of the wind
itself, cleansed by the midday rain, or scented with pine. I am a red man
and do not understand.

The air is precious to the red man, for all things share the same breath the beast, the tree, the man. The air shares its spirit with all the life it
supports. The wind that gave our grandfather his first breath also received
his last sigh. Teach your children, what we have taught our children, that
the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the
earth. If men spit on the ground, they spit on themselves. This we know:

the earth does not belong to man; man belongs to earth. This we know
all things are connected like the blood which unites one family. Even the
Whiteman, cannot be exempt from the common destiny. We may be
brothers after all. We shall see.

One thing we know, which Whiteman may one day discover - our God is
the same God. You may think now that you own Him as you wish to own
our land; but you cannot, because He is the God of man, and His
compassion is equal for the red man and the white. The earth is precious
to Him, and to harm the earth is to heap contempt upon the Creator. The
whites too shall pass; perhaps sooner than all the other tribes.
Contaminate your bed, and you will one night suffocate in your own
waste. I am a savage and do not understand any other way.

All the leaders of Muslim World, assisted by the hordes of peace-loving

intellectuals, cannot frame a better worded appeal to Americans to stop availing
the opportunities. They all know that the touching appeal of the Red Indian
chief did not stop the settlers from fulfilling their urge to usurp the land of the
natives.
The peace-lovers also know that the present civilized Americans are
descendents of those settlers. To them the war is nothing but a continuation of
political intercourse. They firmly believe that war should not be commenced
without determining the objectives to be attained. The first step should not be
taken without thinking what may be the last.
They also consider those who want to end the war midway as fools or
trying to fool their people. With strong belief in such principles, America is not
likely to stop availing the opportunities presented by the tragedy. The ultimate
aim of disarming Muslim World, whether under the pretext of defeating
terrorism or destruction of WMDs or redrawing political maps or controlling oil
wealth is far from having been achieved?
Americans believe that when anybody other than a leader from the
civilized world speaks of peace it is to be taken as double talk. During Cold
War the communists were indulging in double talk, since then its the followers
of Islam. Fuller wrote, there would be no need for Western Presidents, Prime
Ministers, and superannuated Field-Marshals to rush to Moscow to discover
what is in the mind of the Kermlin, any more than there is for them to race to
Mecca to discover what is in the mind of Islam.
On the other hand the civilized world used the ploy of peace more
effectively than Communists or Muslims. The slogan of peace has been harped
so frequently that even some parrots in Muslim World have memorized this
word and keep repeating it without understanding its implications. They cannot

comprehend that by chattering about peace they cannot avert the war and
consequent destruction of their lands.
Russian press observed that after success in Iraq US appetite for war is
growing. The victory has intoxicated the ordinary Americans as well. The
support for war has increased to 75 percent. This will encourage Bush to
embark upon further adventures, despite the fact that majority opposed
expansion of the war. Those who thought that American people will be able to
control their leaders to wage unjust wars must be disappointed.
Above all America has the capability to fulfill its imperialistic designs.
According to Nauman Naqvi of Columbia University, it has the important tools
at its disposal to do it:

Global policing instruments like satellite surveillance and US intelligence

agencies.

Global political instruments like the UNSC.

Global propaganda units such as Fox TV and CNN.

Global military instruments.

Global financial and economic instruments like the IMF and the WB.

ROGUES IN NEIGHBOURHOOD
After Afghan War Bush came out with idea of Axis of Evil and before
the end of Iraq War, he started accusing Syria and Iran on various counts.
Powell bracketed Iran and Syria with Iraq. Both countries denied the charges.
Arab League feared that Iraq War might spill over. The threats to Syria were
reaction to Syrian support to Iraqi people. Basher had said, Arab resistance had
begun and top Syrian Mufti asked for carrying out suicide missions against
invaders of Iraq.
Rumsfeld accused Syria of sending night vision goggles to Iraq. These
deliveries pose a direct threat to the lives of Coalition forces. Syria is
accountable for such shipments. Sahhaf denied saying that Rumsfeld made
such lies on a daily basis. This man is the most despicable creature. Rumsfeld
is ridiculous. He is a strange case.
The allegation was repeated. Syrian interest is to see the invaders
defeated in Iraq. The resistance of the Iraqis is extremely important. We have
information of shipments of military supplies crossing the border from Syria to
Iraq. We consider such trafficking as hostile acts and will hold the Syrian
Government accountable for such shipments.

Rumsfeld insisted on accuracy of his information on which these

allegations were based. I have accurately advised that they should not provide
military assistance to Iraq. They seem to have made a conscious decision to
ignore that he added.
After the fall of Baghdad Bush asked Syria to expel Saddam aides. Syria
just needs to know that we want full cooperation. Two days later he alleged
that Syria has chemical weapons. Each situation will require a different
response. Syrian Government needs to cooperate with the United States and our
Coalition partners. It must not harbour any Baathists, any military officials who
need to be held to account for their tenure.
Rumsfeld opined that Syrian Government was making a lot of bad
mistakes, a lot of bad judgments in my view. A spokesman declared Syria
terrorist. They do, indeed harbour terrorists. Syria is a terrorist state. The
United States, for a considerable period of time, has said through diplomatic
channels that nations that are rogue need to clean up their act. They should not
produce Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Some commentators opined that Syria was threatened by Allies after
sudden realization that its hostility could destroy their attempts to stabilize Iraq.
Others tried to fit in greater Israel theory. Now it is the only Arab State which
challenges Israel. This led to the fear that Damascus is next on Washingtons
list.
That suspicion was fueled by a wave of warnings from various members
of the Bush Administration since the war started. The idea of sorting out
Hizbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad also fitted well in the hypothesis. Israel
feared that long-rang missiles were provided to terrorists by Iran through Syria.
The extension of war to Syria was opposed. Arab League chief warned
against targeting other Middle East states, despite knowing well the effects of
similar warnings served before the invasion of Iraq. Saudi Arabia rejected US
charges against Syria. Six Gulf States sought end to US threats. Riyadh summit
slammed US threats to Syria.
Iran would back Syria if attacked said Khatami. Earlier an excommander of Revolutionary Guards had made similar statement. We will not
be neutral if the US attacks Syria. We will not engage in military confrontation
with the Americans but will employ all our nonmilitary facilities to prevent such
an attack or to support Syria.
Russia and EU expressed their worries over anti-Syria drive. Chirac
warned US not to attack any other country of the region in the name of
democracy. A UK minister said, Syria war will be intolerable. Ease up on
Syria, advised US media to Bush.

Damascus denied US charges and expressed its willingness for

inspections. Later on it refused to allow arms inspections. Syria decided to
move UN for WMD-free Middle East and cited cooperation with US in Iraqis
interest. It was a prudent diplomatic move, which was supported with
tightening of visa restrictions for Iraqis.
Bush and Blair toned down. No US plans to attack Iran and Syria said
Blair. US will not attack Syria and Iran declared Powell. The recent warnings
did not mean that war is coming to these countries he added. We believe that
all these nations - Syria, Iran and others - should realize that pursuing Weapons
of Mass Destruction, supporting terrorist activities, is not in their interest.
There are consequences to this kind of behaviour.
America needed time to set up example for other Gulf States in Iraq.
Powell denied war plan against two Middle East states. Bush cooled down and
Syria hailed the change in his attitude. We started the 21 st Century with hope
it would be a century of peace, but then we were surprised with wars and the
wars were not launched from Damascus said Syrian Foreign Minister.
Iran was also accused for interference in Iraq by Rumsfeld. Hundreds of
Iranian-backed Iraqi rebels had been seen coming into Iraq. The Badr Corps is
trained, equipped and directed by Irans Islamic Revolutionary Guard and we
will hold the Iranian Government responsible for their actions and will view
Badr Corps activity inside Iraq as unhelpful.
Iran rejected US charges. Those only reflected failure in Iraq. At the
same time it pledged not to allow entry to Iraqi leaders. America also thought
it wise to keep the Iran option at low key. This was necessary to win over Shia
population of Iraq.
Some experts felt that Syria was yet not off the hook. Opposition of
Arabs and Iran had no deterrence value. The past experience told that once it
came to real action all of them provided the launching pads.
American media only advised to ease up. In other words it told Bush not
to hurry, but wait. William Pfaff opined, Iraq will be used as staging platform
for regime change, spontaneous or otherwise, in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria,
Egypt and Libya. (North Korea is another problem) Wolfowitz is the man
behind this idea.
North Korea was indeed another kind of problem as it did not fall within
the purview of the Crusades. Apprehensions of North Korean Envoy to UN and
of Japanese and South Korean NGOs about North Korea being the next target
were unfounded. America has already agreed to have dialogue with North
Korea.

The recent events pointed towards Syria as the most likely next target.
Arabs saw deeper plot in invasion of Iraq. It was only a first step to pave the
way for removal of Syria as the last strategic opponent of Israel. To conclude
one may say that Syria may not be attacked immediately, but pressure will be
maintained on this rogue as was done in case of Pakistan soon after Afghan
War.

AN OLD ROGUE
As criminals of Iraq were being executed, India asked for a date of
hearing in the case filed by it soon after 9/11 against a rogue in its
neighbourhood. The winning of a victory without war in 2002 had not
redressed its grievances against Pakistan. Sinha pleaded that it was a fit case
for immediate execution.
Sinhas remarks raised undue alarm in Pakistan, though he had said
nothing new. Pakistan has been accused of nuclear proliferation, violation of
missile control regime, promotion of extremism and perpetration of crossborder terrorism since long. The charge of nuclear proliferation has been harped
frequently by the Crusaders and proxy crusaders since January 12 this year.
Vajpayee blamed Pakistan for nuclear-race. India alleged that Pakistan
was an irresponsible nation to have this dangerous capability. According to
Advani Pakistan has put India under constant warlike threat. Sinha urged the
Crusaders to hurry up as Pakistani nukes were already in wrong hands.
Pakistan rejected the charge of nuclear-ties with North Korea terming it
rubbish. EU was asked to remove reference on nuclear-transfer. Pakistan
tightened security of strategic assets and declared that its nuclear programme
was in safe hands. Kasuri called for expansion of nuke club to have legal
protection for Islamic bomb.
Pakistan was also blamed for violating missile control regime as well.
Advani accused Pakistan of arms proliferation to cover up Indias acts in this
regard. In second half of January India test fired Akash missile twice, trial of
supersonic missile systems was announced, and Indias military prowess was
displayed on Republic Day.
In February India disclosed its plans to test nuclear capable missile. AgniIII will be tested in September. India test-fired cruise missile on 14 th, anti-tank
missile Nag on 22nd and increased defence budget by 17 percent. During first
half of March India announced that it was producing nuclear-capable Agni
missiles and tested home made torpedo.
These acts of proliferation earned no wrath of the civilized world.
Instead defence cooperation with India kept increasing steadily. In second half

of January Indo-US talks on strategic missile defence were held. Fernandes

opened military talks with Russia and signed military accord. France and India
agreed to sign $ 4.2 billion submarine and missile deal, and another on Mirage
2000-5.
In February Israel agreed to train Indian Special Forces. India was offered
F-16s and transport aircraft. Italy and India inked defence cooperation pact. US
military sales to Delhi exceeded $ 190 million and America eased high-tech
export to India. Twenty high altitude helicopters were provided. Russia and
India signed nuclear fuel deal. India was close to getting Israeli Arrow missiles.
India and Poland signed defence pact. India and US resumed nuclear-safety
cooperation.
Jamali drew the attention of Muslim World towards India-Israel nexus.
Nobody listened to his cry. Only Brutus heard it and resultantly India and Iran
agreed to conduct joint naval exercises in Arabian Sea.
Pakistan has been dubbed as breeding ground for terrorism. Mishra said,
extremists were growing in Pakistan. Vajpayee said, Pakistan is centre of
terror. He alleged Islamabad was using Nepal and Bangladesh for terrorism
against India. He saw practice of double standards on terrorism. Advani
alleged that Pakistans support to Taliban led to 9/11 attacks.
General Franks responded to Indian calls and held talks on terrorism in
Islamabad. Lashkar was included in Russian terror list, while Pakistan pleaded
not guilty. All charges of terrorism were termed stupid and ludicrous. AntiIndia activities in Nepal and Bangladesh were denied.
Musharraf resorted to counter allegations and blamed India for blocking
peace moves and creating trouble in Sindh. Pakistan advised Indian pot not to
call a kettle black. Pakistan could not say that America was a bigger pot than
India.
Cross-border terrorism has been the concern of India. On 23 rd January
Nancy asked Pakistan to stop infiltration across Line of Control. Later on she
blamed the media for misquoting her about infiltration, but Washington backed
her statement saying that infiltration had increased.
Her statement was to the liking of Blackwill who predicted that all but
India and US may fade in terror war. Washington and Delhi face threat from
rogue states. He passionately expressed the intensity of Indo-American love
affair, which has grown beyond the limits of sanity. His statement conveyed the
wish of SAHIBAAN, who prayed, SUNNIAN HO JAAN GULLIAN TEY
WICH MIRZA YAR PHERY.
Mirza blamed that Pakistan has failed to stop incursions. Pakistan was
accused of misleading FBI, whereas there were 70 militant camps in AJK. He

did not realize that AJK does not have enough space to accommodate so many
camps.
MMA grilled US Envoy for abusing diplomatic license. Kashmir Action
Committee of Pakistan expressed concern over her statement about infiltration.
Religious leaders demanded expulsion of Nancy Powell. Shaikh Rashid
promptly rejected their demand.
Rashid denied the allegations of ISI role in held Kashmir and existence of
training camps in Kashmir. He reiterated that Kashmir struggle was not
terrorism. America was told that there was no infiltration across Line of
Control. During his visit to Washington Kasuri briefed US officials on Kashmir
dispute, as if they knew nothing about it.
In addition to the above irritants, India created more to irritate Pakistan.
After exchanging charges of harassment, India expelled four Pakistani
diplomats on 22nd January. Next day Pakistan gave marching order to the same
number of Indian High Commission officials. Delhi asked Islamabad to further
reduce diplomatic strength.
On 27th January Fernandes threatened that Pakistan would be erased
from world map in nuclear war. Pakistan was accused of misguiding US plane,
which was forced to land by India. Pakistani Envoy was booked under POTA
and India warned of deep repercussions and subsequently Pakistan and India
expelled top diplomats.
Both countries cut visas for each others citizens. India boycotted SAF
Games. SAARC ministers meeting was postponed due to uncertainty about
Indian participation. Pakistan condemned violation of diplomatic norms, Indian
campaign of disinformation, and rejected charge of funding of APHC.
The doors for defusing of tensions were closed by continuously refusing
to talk with Pakistan. Jamali urged India to hold meaningful dialogue;
Musharraf offered friendship to India; British MPs called for resumption of PakIndia talks and Rashid asked US to press India for talks.
Pakistans relations with America remained restricted to discussions on
peace and easing Pak-India tension; whereas Indo-American strategic
partnership aimed at much more than that. Even then India rapped US for close
ties with Pakistan. America was told that Pakistan was trying to catch India by
the throat. America is too weak to influence Pakistan accused Vajpayee. It
worked and Bush assured India of exerting more pressure on Pakistan.
Musharraf visited Moscow and coaxed Russia for playing pivotal role in
resolving Indo-Pak disputes. Putin obliged and stressed upon the need for PakIndia dialogue. But he had discussed everything with Vajpayee before
Musharraf arrived in Moscow and soon after the visit he apprised him again.

These events amply revealed Pakistans position in war on terror. The

day Iraq was attacked a report warned Pakistan, India and Israel of dirty bomb
threat. The intentions of the originator of this report were quite clear.
It was followed by imposition of ban on trade with KRL under MTCR.
Foreign Office claimed that ban wont have any material impact on KRL.
America understood this point, but imposing the restrictions to convey US
concerns about Pakistans endeavours to cope with genuine defence needs.
Pakistans Defence Minister vowed not to allow nuclear inspections.
Not realizing that inspections have become redundant since attack on Iraq. The
possession of all such weapons by Muslims has been prohibited by the
unilateral decision of Crusaders.
Pakistan sought the evidence. Seeking evidence was equally nonsensical.
US Embassy replied that curbs were imposed because of Kahuta plants
contributions to efforts of foreign country or entity to use, acquire, design,
develop and secure Weapons of Mass Destruction. Pakistan reiterated, it has
neither imported nor exported this sensitive technology. What we have
indigenously developed is solely for our defence.
Rao condemned US sanctions and said, the case has been taken up and
you will hear good news in near future. The good news came the same day. US
accused Pakistan and North Korea of missile trade. Changgwang Sinyong
Corporation transferred missile related technology to KRL. The United States
made a determination to impose penalties on both Changgwang Sinyong
Corporation and KRL as a result of this specific missile related transfer.
The US sanctions on KRL cannot be dubbed as frivolous merely because
Washington failed to substantiate nuclear-technology transfer. These sanctions
relate to missile technology as explained by US spokesman. The timing of the
embargo made it more mischievous, because these came when India tested
Pirthivi missile.
The ban resulted in issuing of familiar statements. Musharraf claimed that
nuclear-capability guarantees Pak sovereignty. Foreign Office stressed that
missile and nuclear programmes were indigenous. Rao assured that nuclear
plan was for peaceful purposes. Jamali vowed that Pak nuclear status would
remain unchanged. Rashid ruled out compromise on N-assets indirectly
confirming existence of such pressure. India told the Crusaders not to believe
them. Pakistan is most irresponsible country.
Accusations of WMDs and terrorism were hyped simultaneously. Advani
and Sinha blamed neighbour for continuing violence after the incident of mass
killing of Kashmiris. Sinha ridiculed US advice of dialogue. Advice to India
about resuming dialogue with Pakistan in the aftermath of the killings of Hindus

in Kashmir this week was just as gratuitous and misplaced as we asking them to
open dialogue with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
Pakistan equated his comments with those of a sick man. Sinha is not a
sick man. He was only trying to irritate one of the sick states of Ummah,
following the foot-steps of Crusaders, who were doing the same to other sick
states elsewhere.
On 2nd April Sinha warned Pakistan of pre-emptive action. We derive
some satisfactionbecause I think all those people in the international
community realize that India has a much better case to go for pre-emptive
action against Pakistan than the US has in Iraq A pre-emptive strike or any
other kind of strike is the sovereign right of every country in its own selfdefence recognized as such by the UN Charter. This was followed by a
statement that India wanted to deal with Pakistan with determination.
Jamali reaffirmed that Pakistan never favoured terrorism and Kasuri
tried to remind India about Pakistans status as key member of anti-terror
coalition. Kasuri was deflated very next day. America demanded that Pakistan
should do everything in its power to prevent extremist groups operating from its
soil from crossing Line of Control.
These events led to the apprehensions that Pakistan could be the next
target. Rashid vehemently denied it. We stand tall and respected among
Washingtons friends and not foes. Whosoever thinks that Pakistan is the next
after Iraq, should rest assured that we are invincible and unconquerable. If
anybody ever dares to cast an evil eye upon our soil, we will respond forcefully
and teach a befitting lesson. It was a statement quite similar to rhetoric of
election campaign.
India asked Pakistan to end politics of terrorism. The statements of
Pakistani leaders were termed as knee-jerk reactions that arose out of
Pakistans sense of vulnerability, which in turn arose out of its sense of guilt.
At last the statement for which Islamabad had been waiting restlessly was
issued in Washington. Any attempts to draw parallels between the Iraq and
Kashmir situations are wrong and are overwhelmed by the differences between
them. In other words drawing such parallels was the prerogative of headman of
the global village.
Sinha reiterated, we drive some satisfaction because I think all those
people in the international community must realize that India has a much better
case to go for pre-emptive action against Pakistan than US has in Iraq. BJP
demanded, the government must act in a manner that showed that Pakistan has
paid a price for its continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism. US have not
been able to rein in Pakistan.

Rashid again dismissed Pakistan-turn theory while accepting that it was

basically Western Medias propaganda, which has launched a psychological war
against Islamabad. He did not identify the country or countries on whose behest
this campaign has been launched. Western Media never says anything which is
not desired by the Crusaders.
On 6th April Sinha insisted that Pakistan was a fit case for attack. But he
expressed Indias limitation to do it without approval of the Crusaders. We
cant go to someone and ask them to attack another country. We will keep
pointing out the activities of Pakistan He talked in language of the watchman
of the village, who was not happy about inaction of the Lambardar. The same
day Mahathir apprehended that Pakistan could be the next target.
Rashid reacted violently. India is a fit case for pre-emptive strikes - there
is ample proof that India possesses biological, chemical and other Weapons of
Mass Destruction. He warned, our offer for dialogue should not be taken as
weakness.
Reportedly US cautioned India against attacking Pakistan. Powell asked
not to draw parallel between South Asia and Iraq, acknowledging that we do
have a very difficult and a dangerous situation with respect to actions across the
Line of Control (in Kashmir) and United States will stay engaged. But we dont
believe there is need now for military action of any kind. I dont think there is a
direct parallel to the two situations.
The statements issued from Washington encouraged Pakistan to blame
Indian for war-mongering, but India kept insisting. On 11th April Fernandes
renewed strike threat. There are enough reasons to launch such strikes against
Pakistan, but I cannot make public statements on whatever action that may be
taken. Pakistan has a habit of lying and the issue of cross-border terrorism is a
serious issue. Mufti too accused Pakistan of creating unrest in the Valley.
Next day Fernandes challenged Pakistans role in anti-terror war. One
cannot believe that Pakistan is a member of the anti-terrorism coalition, formed
to root out the terrorism from the globe after the terrorist attack in the US. It is
now a well-known fact that Pakistan is sponsoring terrorism to India for over
two decades. Subsequently Vajpayee said India wanted peace, but we cannot
clap with one hand.
Foreign Office called Fernandes statement a lie. Senators condemned
his doctrine. Pakistans envoy to UN rejected Indian claim. Jamali vowed to go
to any extent if attacked. Musharraf boasted that Pakistans defence was
impregnable. Rao elaborated that nuclear assets were enough to thwart Indian
designs. On 19th April Vajpayee surprisingly offered conditional negotiations.

COMMENTS
While commenting one has to keep in mind the ambiguous stand of
Pakistan on Iraq War. Pakistan deliberately tried to play down the rhetoric of
Ummah to safeguard its national interests. Pakistans reluctance to formally
condemn attack on Iraq was aimed at avoiding annoyance of the superpower. It
led to drawing of wrong inference. Ambiguity breeds contradictory views and
comments.
Jamali denied supporting US in war against Iraq without admitting that
it supported none. In the Senate US aggression was assailed. Mushahid accused
US taking world back to 18th Century. Noorani warned that war was to
accomplish greater Israel plan. These overtures were nothing more than the
freedom of expression as the ultimate outcome, in the form of a Resolution,
was devoid of condemnation.
But statements of the leader of the majority party were quite
contradictory to official stand. Hallakos. I say not one but two Hallakos, Bush
and Tony Blair have invaded Iraq. A few days later Shujaat predicted that
America would disintegrate soon. Faisal blamed US for polarizing world. A
provincial minister termed UK and US as the biggest evils.
Such statements could only hasten the phenomenon of anything that can
go wrong shall go wrong. Similarly the voice of opposition and the people
might not have been heard in Islamabad, but it wont go unnoticed in
Washington. The people of Pakistan can be punished for talking too loudly
about concerns of Ummah.
Huge MMA rallies termed US biggest terrorist. Protesters called for
Jihad against aggressors. ANP rally urged Musharraf to announce Jihad against
US and Bilour called for boycotting US-UK goods. PPP leader termed US
attack unjustified. Even PML-Q wanted US forces to pull out of Iraq, according
to Salim.
The statements of political parties could be ignored being political
rhetoric, but not of students, who chanted death to America, Britain, Bush and
Blair. Doctors, lawyers and traders also expressed their anti-war feelings in
unambiguous terms.
The resentment was so widespread that even Jemima felt angry and
ashamed to be British. As a dual national of Pakistan and Britain, it is the loss
of British credibility I find hard to stomach. She would have never felt it so, if
she had not come to Pakistan to look at injustices of the civilized world from a
different, but correct angle.
To analyze the possibility of attack on next target one has to first answer a
simple question. Have America achieved the aims of holy war? Answer is; No.

A lot has yet to be done about terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction,
which are parts of the main aim of disarming Muslim countries.
American onslaught is aimed at Muslims and only they can do something
to stop it. In case of Iraq and Afghanistan they failed miserably. According to
Farhan Bokhari if the worlds community of one billion Muslims could not
muster enough clout to resist the US-led war on Iraq, the chances are that such
an Islamic leadership would not be able to protect assaults on fellow countries
in future.
It was hoped that Iraq might hurt the aggressor to the extent that it would
be hesitant in undertaking future adventures. Maqsudul Hasan Nuri opined that
future of US pre-emption strategy will depend how the US emerges from the
current Iraq war: triumphant or badly mauled.
Unfortunately America has not been hurt much by the Iraqis, despite
putting up resistance more than the expectations of many. The easy victory is
likely to act as appetizer, provided America quickly takes control of the
conquered land.
If there has to be a next target then why should it be Pakistan when the
choice is so wide open? Since Sinhas threat America has repeatedly condemned
terrorism in Indian Held Kashmir. US have expressed its frustration. We are at
times disappointed and frustrated with that reality. The message conveyed was
clear. It was up to Pakistani leaders to read it. In addition America has also
warned Pakistan of its Afghan interests recently.
They should not take it ill if someone tells them to read it correctly as
advised by Masud A Shaikh. Basing their arguments on the available
indicators, a large number of sincere Pakistani intellectuals and political leaders
have been visualizing the American guns and missiles focused on their
motherland in the not too distant a future. It is pity that responsible leaders like
Shaikh Rashid have branded such people as agents of Israel.
There are plenty of excuses to attack Pakistan. As a nuclear power,
Pakistan has always been as much of a sore in the eyes of the Crusaders and
proxy crusaders. Pakistanis are ever-ready to call for Jihad anywhere in Islamic
World and such a nation of militants is too irresponsible to possess WMDs.
The beef-lovers are also on the look-out to slaughter the sacred cow of
Pakistan.
The events of last year, wherein Pakistan kept bending lower and lower
under pressure, have definitely nourished Indian belligerence. While referring to
Iraq Fernandes said, the war proved that powerful nations could set aside all
prescribed norms to bully others

The possibility of aggression against Pakistan is acknowledged by the

rulers as well, but they deny it publically. When Rashid rebuffed India by
calling it the biggest terrorist, which has WMDs, martyred Muslims, killed
Sikhs, and burnt Christians alive, he indirectly accepted Indian belligerence.
America is even bigger terrorist as has been proved by the events of the recent
past.
Kasuri termed Indian pre-emptive doctrine ridiculous and contradictory.
India should not harbour any illusion of launching pre-emptive strikes against
Pakistan as it would constitute a major miscalculation on Indias part leading to
grave consequences. The mention of consequences precludes the possibility of
act.
After establishing the intent of aggression, one has to address the next
question. When will be the next target subjected to aggression? It depends on
the sweet will of the aggressor; however, it may not come soon for two reasons.
Firstly, the illegal and immoral attack on Iraq was condemned strongly the
world over and secondly, Iraqis have rejected the occupation of their country.
America would require time to absorb these.
During the waiting period Pakistan will remain under constant pressure as
envisaged by Shireen Mazari. It is not an issue of being next in terms of US
military aggression, but an issue of coming under increasing US pressure to fall
in line with US policy aims in the region. These aims relate to freezing of
nuclear capability, acceptance of status quo on Kashmir and accepting Indian
hegemony.
According to the other lady, Nasim Zehra, a paper trial against
Pakistans nuclear programme has already begun. Washingtons sanctions on
KRL amount first ever accusation that Pakistan is exporting nuclear technology.
These sanctions would actually establish in Washington against Pakistan when
Pak-US going gets bad.
Today when there is absence of confrontation between the Bush and
Musharraf governments this sanctions step may appear harmless. It also may be
tangibly inconsequential. Yet politically it points towards continued US attempts
to keep each Pakistani government under pressure on nuclear issue she added.
Going had gone bad many times in the past. It may not go bad necessarily
for any fault of Pakistan. America can make the going bad for flimsy reasons.
American leaders, Indians too, in their present frame of mind can do anything
illogical, illegal and immoral at any time.
Who will lead the aggression, when it comes? Shafqat Mahmood gave a
plausible answer to this question. I was stuck by the fact that when the Syrians
expressed their support for the Iraqi people it was not the Americans who

chastised them but the Israelis. If we fall out of line our nemesis would be the
Indians. This is what is called strategic partnership.
The above realities leave no room for being complacent. The learned
Foreign Minister of Pakistan should not hope to convince others on the strength
of law and logic. He argued that the Government of India and the people had
been against the ongoing military strife against Iraq by the US based on this
(preemptive) doctrine and now it was turning around and finding this doctrine
fit to be used against Pakistan. He must understand the character of present day
international relations. Too much faith in logic can lead to disappointments in
this field.
He should recollect that Sinha never wanted to denounce US attack on
Iraq. The media men had forced him to say few words about rejecting US
attack. In reality India never opposed invasion of Iraq, even if it had; so what?
Pakistan should also not be deceived by optimism, which springs out of
frequent American appreciations for its role in war on terror.
The argument of S Mahmood is based on pure logic. I dont believe we
are next on the list. And we may never be on the list because we are not
challenging American power. If any thing we are its partner and we are
faithfully carrying out many of the tasks assigned to us. As long as this situation
remains we will not be on the list.
The comments of Farrukh Saleem fall in the same category. Pakistan is a
different ballgame altogether. If we had oil then oil plus our bomb plus our
unstable leadership would have made us a target even before Iraq. He meant
that Musharraf would have received an ultimatum instead of choice- offering
phone call after 9/11. This can happen without oil too; attack on Afghanistan is
the proof.
Those who do not expect any aggression should know that unexpected
threat is always the most dangerous. Pakistan may not be impressed by any of
Indian provocations, but cannot drag India on to the negotiation table. It cannot
brow-beat the threat as well.
Jamali can ridicule Sinhas threat by boasting, Pakistans armed forces
and the people are fully prepared and capable to defend their country, if
someone is thinking of the so-called pre-emptive strike. Kasuri can claim that
Pakistan is not a soft target for enemy. But both must remember that the
enemy has read their statements as knee-jerks.
Kasuri was right in pointing out that Pakistans defence in the ultimate
analysis depends on the unity of its people, on the preparedness of its armed
forces and on the unity between people and the armed forces of Pakistan. He,

however, did not mention the unity of political forces and the unity in thoughts
and acts of the rulers and the ruled.
Without being pessimistic one can say that neither the armed forces nor
the nation is ready to face the challenge of the magnitude to which Afghanistan
and Iraq were subjected. Both of them should be readied in the light of lessons
brought out by the two recent wars. It will be shame if a nation of 140 million
having nuclear capability does not bleed the aggressor profusely.
The inevitable cannot be averted, even if Pakistan stresses upon the issue
of evidence; rejects the notion of regime change and selective rule of law; asks
for use of tool-kit of dialogue as enunciated in the UN charter; and rejects the
notion of pre-emptive strike as suggested by Nasim Zehra. She recommended
that Pakistan must look for other measures.
Beyond China there are countries in the Middle East including Iran,
Turkey, Syria and Egypt which increasingly understand that only collective
security is sustainable in the long run. With US emerging as a global bully, outof-region powers like France and Germany and Russia too recognize the need to
forge a common front, political and diplomatic, to confront Washingtons
aggressive ways. There is an expanding force that is emerging in the global
arena rejecting the illegal ways of Washington. Pakistan indeed should derive
hope from this.
Her conclusion appears to be convincing in view of the differences
amongst the Crusaders. But France and Germany will never join a front against
America. Russia and China will also avoid confrontation for the sake of
Muslims, who are not prepared to do anything for their survival. At best a small
common front can be forged by reviving RCD that too if Turkey is willing to
turn its face away from Europe.
The hope alone cannot solve the problem. Pakistan should strive for
forming political and diplomatic front, but it must not bank upon any outside
help. It should be prepared to face the onslaught at its own as and when it might
come.

CONCLUSION
The pack of Wolf-o-witz is out for hunting. Every sheep in the herd can
only hope that this time it may not be his turn, but one of them will be hunted
sooner or later. The body formed to check the beasts has already passed-away.
The students, who represent the coming generation, have buried UN coffin at
an anti-war rally.
It was hoped that only American people can stop their leaders from
adventures or misadventures. American superiority in arms is so overwhelming

that it can overpower any country in the world. Out of 900 billion spent all over
the world on defence, United States alone spends 450 billion. It is also
technologically far ahead of anybody else. So the question whether it can win a
military campaign has only one answer, yes. The only problem the US has is
selling a military adventure to its own people wrote Shafqat Mahmood. This
hope has diminished with the increase in American peoples support of the war.
Others hoped that American leaders might be hesitant in future due to
discord in the ranks of the Crusaders. That too is not deep-rooted despite
unpleasant statements issued against France. There was yet another hope that
America may run short of justifiable pretexts. David Hare of the Guardian has
dampened that as well. Dont look for a reason. All the explanations for this
war are bogus; Bush only invaded Iraq to prove that he could.
The rulers of Ummah have made no move for the unity of Muslims. Each
one of them has submitted to American will unconditionally to save his regime
from being the next target. They continue believing in double-talk of peace
ignoring the clear intent of the Crusaders.
The frustration of the people of Muslim World may compel them to turn
their attention towards their leaders instead of wasting time in anti-America
protests and rallies. They may see the remedy in bringing those leaders to power
who represent their aspirations. Only that kind of leaders may ban the use of
word peace in Muslim World. This rhetoric has done more damage than war
cries.
Pakistan has been seeking solitude in American appreciations for its role
in war on terror. Participation in Americas biased war in not a matter of pride
according to Masooda Bano. Pakistan is named, along with Israel, as
beneficiaries of US aid. What a prestige it is to know that we who claim to be
the Islamic Republic of Pakistan are providing the same services to US which
Israel, the Zionist State threatening the entire Arab World, is providing.
America understands the motive behind Pakistans support better than
most the Pakistani leaders do. Bush knows as to why rulers in Islamabad are
serving American interests so earnestly and obediently. Their submission may
help in saving Pakistan, but not for long.
After bending too low under pressure the rulers of Pakistan now want to
straighten their back, but they cannot intimidate India by telling that neither
will the birds sing, nor will the grass grow, nor will the temple ashes be
removed any longer. They should concentrate on more important issues,
leaving these utterances for a teenager in the street.
They seemed to be confident that Pakistan is not the next, not even 100 th
on the target-list. Such confidence can be demonstrated only by those, who are

prepared to rub their noses in front of Uncle Sam. They believe that this is the
only way to save them from kissing the shoes of American Marines. But the
people of Pakistan are too illiterate to comprehend the logic behind this kind of
pragmatism.

22nd April 2003

LIBERATED TO BE LIBERATED
The aim of destroying Iraqs military strength and its administrative
infrastructure has been achieved. Threat to Zionist, if there was any, has been
eliminated. The path to promote American interests has been paved. This has
been achieved with the consent and indirect support of Arabs.
The vacuum created by the destruction of Iraqs military strength has
been filled with US forces. Saddam has been replaced by US Administrator
marking the beginning of colonization of the region. The countries in the
neighbourhood have been told to stay away and they will.
Nobody has the ability or will to stop the Americans from redrawing the
map or maps, if they so desire. But it may not be done at this juncture for
obvious reasons. The immediate goal of the occupation forces is to control the
oil wealth and use it as they wish after getting it legitimized through auspices of
the UN.
Iraqis will be left, like Afghans, to enjoy the fruits of liberation. Internal
forces will have the freedom to cut each others throats, while the invaders will
concentrate on gulping the wealth of Iraq.

Post-war period presents a fluid situation adding to the uncertainties

about the future. Rasul Bakhsh Rais framed a list of questions in this context:

What will be the post-war political arrangement?

How long will the interim authority last?

Who will really govern Iraq, Americans or fractious Iraqi opposition?

What will be the pace of economic reconstruction?

Will the Iraqis after the regime is overthrown switch loyalties and
embrace the Americans as their benefactors?

Will the Iraqis fight a guerrilla war or just go home and adapt to the new
circumstances of their country?

Answers to most of these questions are known to those who came to this
region with a definite purpose. As regards others, they will keep scratching their
heads only to know the answers as occupation forces unfold their plans. Most of
the answers will not be to the liking of Muslim World in general and for Arabs
in particular.

DOMINANT ROLE
US and British Coalition which led the war would also take the lead role
in post-war Iraq declared Rice as early as 6 th April. Four days later William
Pfaff reported, the government of Iraq will undoubtedly be taken over by a
former General Jay Garner - a protg of Rumsfeld and a unilateralist. Garner
also has close ties with Israel.
America has planned long-term military ties with Iraq. Bush however
announced that Iraqs occupation would take two years. This could be another
lie in the context of holy war. America considered the occupation necessary,
because:

US liberated Kuwait twelve years ago but it hasnt yet opened up

upstream oil to foreign companies. Therefore, direct control on Iraqi oil
has to be exercised.

In Venezuela democracy did not bring in a friend of Washington.

Moreover, acceptable number of people is not willing to work with
Americans.

The idea of monopolizing Iraq was first opposed from within the
Coalition. UK-US rift surfaced over Umm Qasr well before entering Baghdad.
America wanted to give the contract of rebuilding the port to a US company,
Britain insisted on returning it to Iraqi control.

Blair clarified the point. Iraq in the end should not be run by the
Americans, should not be run by the British, should not be run by any outside
force or power. Post-war Iraq should be run by Iraqi people on the basis of a
broadly representative government that protects human rights and that is
committed to peace and stability in the (Gulf) region. He backed UN-sponsored
government in Iraq after war.
America wanted to keep away from Iraq all those who opposed the war.
US Congress while approving $ 80 billion for Iraq War excluded France,
Germany, Russia and Syria from Iraq contracts. It was to tell them to mend their
ways.
Americans took time to understand the rationale behind Blairs
suggestion. While insisting upon the lead role of the Coalition in determining
the way forward it agreed that the work of reconstruction and rebuilding will
require the entire international community to join together. There will definitely
be a UN role, but the exact role of the United Nations remains to be seen.
Having realized the need for legitimizing the illegal war, a US official
declared that there was no division with UK over post-war Iraq. America
planned to seek UN Resolution on new government and oil, but still insisted on
no leading role for UN in Iraqi set-up. On 21 st April Garner took the charge of
conquered land and assured Iraqis, I would say to you in all honesty, we will
help you but it is going to take time.
Bush asked UN to lift embargo imposed on Iraq for more than 12 years
arguing that Iraqis have been suffering for years from the harsh effects of
international sanctions This reality had dawned upon Bush all of a sudden,
not for the love of Iraqis, but for the promotion of American interests.
Abdul Hamid Ahmad of Gulf News reminded Bush that it was the US,
which always stood like a great wall against all attempts to issue another
Security Council Resolution to lift the sanctions. This was done despite reports
of various agencies about suffering of Iraqi people, particularly children.
Indeed America wanted to punish all those who declined to issue NOC
for Iraq War. France was named more than once to pay for opposing war, but
the opponents were also cognizant of US limitations in this regard. Bush needed
an endorsement of the authority. An endorsement of what were doing in order
to begin selling oil in due course and in order to make sure that the
humanitarian supplies continue to flow in the oil-for-food programme. Jack
Straw urged UN to legalize Iraqi oil sales.
The victory in Iraq placed Chirac and other opponents in awkward
position, but they had the cards to be played in the game. France and Russia

opposed lifting of curbs without certification on WMDs. Annan irked US by

telling Coalition to respect Geneva Convention.
The scope of punishing France at NATO or through any other forum,
was quite limited. Powell could not force France to face the music for opposing
war without facing some of it for waging an illegal war. Similarly Russia too
could not be forced to lose Iraqi oil contracts without repercussions. Russia
and France had already vowed to boost defence ties. Putin and Chirac stressed
upon UN role and so did Germany and China. EU asked that UN must play
central role in post-war Iraq.
US realized that its relations with France were damaged, but not
beyond repair. The doors for compromise were always open. Chirac and Blair
wished to work together closely on post-war Iraq. They held a very positive
meeting on 16th April. Putin and Bush agreed on need for talks. US senators and
the press urged Bush to involve UN in rebuilding of Iraq. Chiracs party claimed
France as best friend of US. Sharing of benefits from US conquest was too
lucrative to be ignored.
There was too much at stake as observed by Nadim Malik. Iraq had used
the last four-year period in extending its diplomatic and oil-relations with
Russia and France. According to some reports Iraq had concluded $ 38-40
billion contracts with the French and Russians and to some extent with the
Chinese companies, to boost its production capacity to 4.7 million bbl/d.
These countries will do their best to ensure that these contracts are
honoured, even if the US might not like to recognize agreements signed by the
government of Saddam. They cannot afford to leave the field vast and open for
American firms to reap the gains by pumping more oil.
Tripartite summit for central UN role in Iraq was primarily held to mend
fences and share the war booty amicably. Lilia Shevtsova of the Moscow Times
brought this point out. My hunch, however, is that the president did not expect
to go so far in opposing Washington, but was pushed or rather seduced by smart
French diplomacy.
She continued, but now that Western partners have started to find their
way out of the debacle, he has to take steps to prevent Russia from being left
behind, when the train with America and old Europe pulls out of the station. It
meant that the disagreements to date were no more than growling and grabbling
of the beasts before gobbling the flesh of recently hunted victim. The beasts will
ultimately end up as friends.
Chirac phoned Bush and promised to be pragmatic. He also told him
that France welcomed the brevity of war and, like all other democracies,
welcomed the fall of the Iraqi dictator. The vultures have started gliding and

landing around the carcass. Hereafter making of rattling noise while spreading
and fluttering their wings wont be for expressing their anger or agony, but
sheer joy and ecstasy.
To cut short it is certain that America will seek new mandate on UN role.
The News dated 6th April touched upon this issue. Ultimately, however, the US
would need the UN to legitimize its handiwork in Iraq and, possibly, to
indemnify its officials against any future criminal charges. Whether in obliging
the UN would be legitimizing the fruits of aggression is one of the many
questions the international community will need to ponder in grappling with the
uncertainties unleashed by the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq.
If the UN grants legitimacy to US attack, it will be most unfortunate for
entire humanity. The chances of this are quite bright as indicated by Annan, who
has sought UN role to legitimize new Iraqi government. In doing so the illegal
action of the aggressor would be automatically condoned. Illegal war would
become legal war and in future US may not even bother about referring a case
to UN. It may first carry out pre-emptive strike and then ask UN to provide
legal cover.
The differences amongst Crusaders will be resolved. Muchkund Dubey
of the Hindu visualized that the most likely scenario would be that the
traditional western allies would patch up their differences by making suitable
gestures to each other.
Richard Falk elaborated these points further. France and Germany will undoubtedly for historical and economic reason - be eager to reach a new
accommodation with the US. It is quite likely that the UN will be selectively
used to the extent it is helpful for improving the atmospherics of the global
setting without undermining the achievement of American strategic objectives.
But in future occasions where the US seeks the use of force, it is unlikely to
repeat the mistake of accepting advice that it needs first to obtain the collective
authorization of the international community. As long as this present leadership
is in control of the US Government, the UN will be bypassed when it comes to
war-peace issues.
Thus the dialogue between civilizations will continue as mentioned by
Papandreou. All of us stressed the importance that we place on the UN role in
all phases of the Iraqi crisis, and certainly from now on. This is not a clash of
civilizations; this is a dialogue of civilizations. The glaring feature of this
dialogue is that most of the talking is done by the guns of the Crusaders.
The end result of the ongoing dialogue has been predicted by Masud
Akhtar Shaikh. Any Arab country considered as a threat to the security of the
Jewish entity is going to be ruthlessly brought down to its knees, if not totally
wiped out from the world map.

He continued, America would also like to keep Iraq under its control for
many more years as a part of its strategy to acquire a total monopoly of world
oil so that it can strangulate the economies that can pose a threat to the US
economy. Apart from the Iraqi oil, America has its eyes glued to the Saudi and
Iranian oil as well. Sitting snugly in Iraq, it can easily subdue both these
countries and lay its hands on their rich oil resources.

SUBSERVIANT ROLE
Bush and Blair have agreed on future political set-up in Iraq. We will
move as quickly as possible to place government responsibilities under the
control of an interim authority composed of Iraqis from both inside and outside
the country. The interim authority will serve until a permanent government can
be chosen by the Iraqi people.
Powell explained, well start it in the region that we have the greatest
control over, and the part of the country where people have now the greatest
freedom to speak up and stand up. It meant that US control was the most
important factor, rest will be subservient to it. Bush and Blair pledged
governance to Iraqis and promised withdrawal of troops only after full
control was established.
To this end US planned round table conference of Iraqi politicians. We
want to include in the power structures the migr community and the antiSaddam opposition which have had so much difficulty in abolishing the
dictatorship of Hussein. We also know that you have to invite the people who
live in Iraq to cooperate so that the new power structure should be
representative of all the nation and should not be seen as imposed from outside.
America, however, depended on Iraqis in exiles, which were eager to
return even if Americans were still there. Most prominent of these is Chalabi.
He is Dick Cheneys man and a convicted fraudster and fugitive from justice.
Apart from these credentials he is reportedly also hated for his political vision.
Irrespective of his credentials he is liked by many American leaders,
because he is a Shia from a notable family. He is leader of Iraqi National
Congress, which opposed Saddam; above all he wants to see de-Baathification
of Iraq. He has announced not to take any office in post-war Iraq and eyed
swift transfer of power with religious parties role. He landed in Baghdad with
Franks on 16th April.
Baqer Hakim is another prominent Shiite leader in the reckoning. He is
main Shiite opposition leader. During exile he remained in contact with
Americans. In his own words since the beginning he had advised the
Americans to cooperate with opposition groups, but they insisted on launching

the operation alone and thats why they have so many problems on the ground.
That meant the Shiite fighters were ready to attack Iraq in collaboration with
US, if some of their demands were met.
We are also discussing with the Americans post-Saddam Iraq; stressing
the role that must be played by the Iraqi opposition in the transitional regime he
added. On 5th April he gave five-point plan to end war:

An immediate end to hostilities.

The departure of Saddam Hussein.

The UN entry in Iraq to take over Iraq administration.

The departure of Coalition forces based on a fixed schedule by the UN.

Arranging for free general elections under UN auspices to form a

government that represents all Iraqi people.

Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim returned on 7th April after 23 years

in exile. The leader of SAIRI received warm welcome on his arrival in city of
al-Amarah on 19th April. The Shiite clerics generally stressed for Sharia or
Islamic law.
Bush Administration needed a Karzai in Iraq. No leader with as clean
hands as of Fahim and Dostum has been found as yet. The big tent theory
practiced at Nasiriyah did not work. Bush aides remained wary of autonomy as
autonomy to Sunnis, Shias and Kurds would lead to disintegration of Iraq.
Rumsfeld ruled out Iranian-style government in Baghdad.
Allies had made the first move involving resident Shias by sending Ali
Khoei to Najaf to generate support for the invasion. He had earlier urged his
followers to cooperate with Coalition troops. He was killed and White House
strongly condemned the assassination. Sistani was also besieged in his house
by gunmen, but Central Command did not intervene declaring the incident as
an Iraqi situation. Shias accused the US occupiers of trying to ignite religious
and clan wars. The events revealed existence of rifts, though it was denied that
there was no vengeance between Sistani and the brothers of Sadr.
Shias condemned invasion declaring it unjust and immoral. Hakim and
Sistani rejected US imposed rule, indirectly opposing appointment of Garner as
Iraqs administrator. Shiites availed the occasion of Chehlum of Imam Hussein
to show the post Saddam force. SAIRI (Supreme Assembly of Islamic
Revolution in Iraq) decided not to take part in US-sponsored government, but
SCIRI (Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a Shia group) agreed to
attend the meeting scheduled for 28th April.
Garner has close contacts with Kurds because of his previous assignment
in Iraq after 1991 war. He wasted no time in holding talks with Kurdish leaders,

and had the feelings that most people were backing US forces presence. At the
end of his visit a body was formed to settle Kurd-Arab disputes.
Turkey closely watched the developments in Kurds area. Kurd advances
in northern Iraq caused concern to Turkey, but immediate need to send forces
was not felt. It cautioned Iraqi Kurds and US over oil-rich towns and also feared
that Kurds might take advantage of US-Turkey rift. Turkey warned against any
bid by the Kurds to retain permanent control of Kirkuk. Ankara feared that
control of local oil resources could embolden Iraqi Kurds to move towards
independence, encouraging fellow Kurds across the border in Turkey to make a
similar bid.
Washington immediately announced that its forces would take control of
the city. When Garner referred to Kirkuk as Kurdish city; Turkey summoned US
Envoy over this. Turkey got the required assurance. It was interesting to note
that Pakistan had also desired a similar action in the context of Northern
Alliance entering Kabul. Nobody cared.
Kharrazi also opposed creation of Kurdish state. The common concern of
two large countries of the region, Iran and Turkey, neutralized the value of
Kurdish card. Nevertheless the Kurds remained the only community which
could be trusted by the occupation forces.
Sunnis were the power-base of Saddam. After toppling of his regime they
now represent the Pushtoons of Afghanistan. They, with the exception of a few
Karzais, will be on the receiving end for long times. Each one of them will be
treated as Baathist, as Pushtoons are treated as Taliban, irrespective of their
involvement.
The vacuum created with the destruction of Iraqs administrative
infrastructure was filled at local level by opportunists. British appointed a tribal
leader as civil administrator of Basra. Tribal chiefs took control of Najaf.
Karbala had a new elected governor. Abbas took control of Kut, but American
troops down played him, because he was supported by Iran. Baghdad had a selfproclaimed mayor, who was later detained by occupation forces.
Thus the uncertainties about formulation of interim set-up persisted.
Speculations about future of Iraq continued. The News observed in its edition
dated 6th April that American plan of military pacification and political
purification was running into difficulties. How long this will take remains
unspecified and what role the UN might play in the interregnum and thereafter
is also imponderable.
The Independent wrote, nothing is settled yet, and it may be at least a
year before an Iraqi government is in place. In the meantime, nothing can be
ruled out - including the possibility that this imposed revolution brings forth a

government that looks rather more like those of Iraqs neighbours than the
regional beacon of democracy forecast by President Bush.
Robin Cook warned US against imposed administration. The reason was
explained by Praful Bidwai. The Iraqi situation is more fluid and volatile than
post-war Afghanistans. The Iraqi people will be even more sensitive than the
Afghans - and allergic - to a puppet regime. Ultimately, installing the likes of
Chalabi as arbiters of Iraqs fate could boomerang violently.
In view of the prevalent state of Ummah nothing is likely to boomerang
as apprehended by Bidwai. Arabs have called for government by Iraqis, but they
are likely to keep calling for want of concrete action. To Americans nothing
matters except the control of occupied land, no matter how it is achieved.
Everything else belongs to liberated Iraqis.

RECONSTRUCTION AND RESISTANCE

Bush said that rebuilding of Iraq will require the support and expertise of
the international community, but for destruction of Iraq US had plenty of
integral resources and expertise. This was what America had told the world
community after conquering Afghanistan. I destroy, you reconstruct, if you so
desire.
Masud Akhtar Shaikh wrote, the people of Afghanistan had been
promised liberation from the clutches of the uncivilized Taliban rulers and a
glorious future after a much-publicized massive reconstruction programme.
Long after the liquidation of the Taliban regime, they are still waiting for the
promised liberation, reconstruction, and a glorious future.
He continued, leaving these unfortunate people to lick their wounds in
leisure, the gracious liberators and benefactors of Afghans have moved on to
liberate the people of Iraq from the ruthless regime of Saddam Hussein. He
feared that this trend was likely to continue.
Wolfowitz foresaw that the reconstruction of Iraq is going to be one of
the most important projects for the international community in many years.
Mahathir disagreed with him and proposed that UK and US should reconstruct
Iraq.
America wont mind, as it would grant flexibility to undertake selective
reconstruction. Reportedly contracts worth $ 7 billion stretching over the next
two years have already been awarded to put out the oil fires in Iraq. Dick
Cheneys old company will be making a profit of something like a million
dollars a day. Australia aimed to run Iraqs post war agriculture. Another
reconstruction contract worth $ 680 million has been awarded to US Bechtel
Group.

Doling out of contracts to US companies unleashed an international and

domestic uproar. Abdul Hamid Ahmad of Gulf News wrote:

This leads us to conclude that the move was not because it cares for the
Iraqi people, as it might be seen, but because the US wants to give its
companies a free hand to work in Iraq and enjoy complete supremacy
once the sanctions are lifted. This will be so-called reconstruction of
Iraq.

America has asked for lifting of sanctions without saying anything about
reasons for which these were imposed.

This administration is busy today with deals, contracts and controls over
oil rather than ensuring the liberation and safety of the people. The
coming days will prove that the interests of the American Administration
are different from the interests of the Iraqis whom the forces came to
liberate.

The possibility of resistance, armed or unarmed, has been discussed

earlier. The protests which started against pillage continued. The people
apprehended that America would set up a government of thieves and outlaws.
The invaders had come to profit from our wealth. They started saying, thank
you US, theres the door.
On 15th April residents of Mosul protested against pro-US speech of the
newly appointed governor. We want American and British forces to go chanted
protesters. US troops fired on crowd killing twelve of them. Resultantly the
intensity of anti-US protests increased.
Iraqi Shias have agreed on peaceful resistance to US occupation. Rallies
denounced US and Chalabi. A muted anti-US rally was held during massive
Karbala pilgrimage. Shia leader al-Fartusi declared that US forces were worse
than Saddam. While rejoicing at the fall of Saddam, many Shias - from
secularists to fundamentalists - have shown a deep mistrust of US efforts in
Iraq, and its intentions for the countrys future.
A big anti-American demonstration was held in Baghdad on 25 th April.
Iraqi Sunnis vowed to launch Jihad, if US did not quit soon. Ammar at Abu
Hanifa mosque challenged US at Jummah congregation. We are running out of
patience with the Americans. We can rule ourselves. We dont need the United
States. If America stays here too long it will see how the real Iraqi people fight
said a protester after prayers.
On 26th April fourteen civilians, including women and children, were
killed in Baghdad blast and over 50 were injured, when US soldiers mishandled
an ammunition dump in Baghdad. Angry protesters stoned American troops.

On 27th April two incidents truly reflected the feelings of Americans and
Iraqis for each other. Four US soldiers were injured in an ambush and a
Scandinavian reporter released a film showing US troops forcing Iraqis to walk
naked. The first incident indicated the esteem in which the liberators were held
and the second revealed the American understanding of the word liberation.
The resentment shown by the Iraqis prompted Abdul Hamid Ahmad of
Gulf News to raise a pertinent question. It will be interesting to see how the
Americans react when the Iraqi people stand against the occupation and ask the
foreign forces to leave - as they have started to do - to choose their government
and representatives in complete freedom?
Americans are not that staunch followers of democracy that for the sake
of its principles they would forego their interests. They have so far dealt with
protesters ruthlessly and in doing so they also tried to prevent the media from
covering anti-US protests in Baghdad.
Robert Fisk felt that real story for Americas mastery over Arab World
starts now. In no way these incidents could be taken as prelude to the real
story. These merely constituted expression of resentment, which couldnt be
taken as beginning of the resistance. The resistance has yet to take a start. Even
after its start it is likely to remain peaceful, despite warning of Hezbollah of
revenge over Iraq.

CONCLUSION
The events to date have made the formation of future political set-up in
Iraq extremely unpredictable. The delay in carving out an interim administration
caused concern to men like Fergal Keane. To invade Iraq without having a
well-thought-out political plan was an extraordinary miscalculation.
It is not so. America has no desire to rule Iraq with the strength of
democratic principles. It has the strength to control the conquered land using
imperialist methods. This was confirmed by the attitude of US troops. They
have no shame to be in the role of occupation force.
Whatever the ultimate solution for political participation of Iraqis might
be, Americans will ensure that they have full control over oil. They will follow
Arthur Balfour who after British occupation of Iraq in 1918 said, I do not care
under what system we keep the oil. But I am quite clear that it is all-important
for us that this oil should be available. It will be available in plenty despite
Irans warning not to pump oil beyond quota.
America could find no evidence to justify the pretexts used for attacking
Iraq, except some suspected chemicals and an undisclosed proof of link
between Saddam and al-Qaeda. The world will keep talking of international

law and American credibility for some time and then forget it once the crime is
condoned by the world body.
The occupation forces will not run short of pretexts to prolong their stay
in Iraq. The disunity and weakness of Ummah will make their task easier. Iran
has already asked US and UK to treat Peoples Mujahideen like terrorists.
Sunnis will keep pointing their fingers towards Shia groups.
This will provide America the time to re-arrange footprint in Gulf
region to the liking of Israel, who played major role in pushing US to attack
Iraq. Arabs like Syria will be told to cut support for Hezbollah. Iraqis will feel
the need of genuine liberation after having been liberated by aliens.

28th April 2003

PARALLEL PATHS TO PEACE

The roads to peace and prosperity in Afghanistan and Iraq ran from
destruction to reconstruction. The destruction of Iraq has been completed
recently. Afghans and Iraqis can now march on side by side on roads to
democracy, peace and prosperity.
The contracts of roads to peace in Chechnya and Philippines have been
assigned to Moscow and Manila. Russia has acquired Chechens approval of
constitution, which would pave the way for its control over Chechnya rather
than guaranteeing the sweeping autonomy to Chechens. The Crusaders are
confident that Moscow will suppress Chechens spirit of Jihad by committing
odious war crimes.
The case of Philippines is different, because MILF keep ignoring peace
moves and staging attacks. During last five weeks rebels have killed more than
fifty people in four attacks. Therefore, Philippines require technical support and
guidance from the Crusaders.
Paths to peace in Korea Peninsula and Latin America are paved with
table-tops. In their case dialogue has been preferred to military option, because
terrorism in Latin America is internal affair the Christian World and Korean
MWDs do not fall within the scope of Crusades.
North Korea has been demanding direct talks, whereas America favoured
broad diplomacy. Pyongyang slammed US military option in standoff, refused
to make concessions in nuclear crisis, rejected US charges of human rights
violations and any UN Resolution on its nuclear programme. And instead it
termed US a kingpin of state terrorism.
China has been trying to rein in North Korea by making efforts to end
nuke row. It sincerely worked to avert military conflict in its vicinity and
arranged tripartite talks from April 23-25. North Korea refused nuclear
inspections and declared that it was reprocessing nuclear fuel rods. Washington
saw talks in jeopardy, but on second thought it agreed to talk on schedule.
Right at the outset of talks America insisted on no nukes and Korea
confirmed having N-bomb. America insisted that Pyongyangs global ties
depended on no nukes and for that North Korea wanted considerable
diplomatic, political and economic concessions and demanded US assurance of
aid as precondition.
A US Senator considered North Korean nukes greater threat than Iraq.
Despite the magnitude of the threat America has not gone for military option,
because there was no oil, no Israel, no Islamic militants in Korean Peninsula.

Above all the regional countries strongly opposed military option. While DPRK
kept talking tough, Powell could do no more than calling North Koreans
masters of ambiguity.
The progress on roads to peace in Palestine and Kashmir has been
hampered for more than five decades by the highway men of Israel and India.
Every now and then these roads were blocked by highway men. Their demands
have been increasing.
PEACE FOR PALESTINIANS
The road to peace in Middle East has been soaked in blood of
Palestinians. Israelis have been doing it not to make the going difficult, but to
make the road firm and durable. The summary of Palestinians slaughtering
since middle of March 2003 is:

Israel killed ten in Gaza raids on 17 th March and next day two senior
Hamas leaders were killed.

On 21st March thirteen Palestinians were arrested in West Bank and four
days later Israelis killed four more.

Three Palestinian security men were killed by Israelis on 27 th March and

next day another Palestinian was killed in West Bank.

On 3rd April seven Palestinians died in Israeli raids and 1,000 were told to
leave homes.

Seven Palestinians were killed in Israeli air strike on 8 th April and next
day five were killed in Gaza.

On 10th April six Palestinians were killed in violence and five days later
three more were killed.

Young Palestinian was killed in West Bank on 17 th April and two days
later Israeli troops killed a Palestinian cameraman in Nablus and a
militant surrendered.

On 20th April five Palestinians were killed in Gaza. Two days later Israelis
blew up two homes and arrested twelve.

A Palestinian was killed in mysterious explosion on 23 rd April and four

more were killed next day in shooting and suicide attack.

On 26th April a Palestinian died of wounds sustained during raid in Gaza

and four were wounded in Nablus. Two days later a teenager was killed in
shootout.

Two-year-old child and Hamas leader were among twelve Palestinians

killed in Gaza on 1st May. Two days later a British journalist was shot
dead by Israelis and 14-year-old boy was killed next day.

Mubarak accused Israel of using Iraq War against Palestinians, but there
were no indications of Jews taking any undue advantage. The killing of
Palestinians did not exceed the routine carnage. War or no war, Israel never
hesitated in implementing its plans.
Occupation of Iraq has been a setback to Palestinian resistance. It has
almost died down. They could inflict very few losses on Israelis as compared to
the past. On 30th March thirty Israelis were wounded in suicide attack in
Netanya. Two Israelis were killed on 10th, three more on 15th and one on 20th
April. A suicide bomber killed three as Abbas took oath on 30th April.
Meanwhile Powell announced that Middle East roadmap would be
published at the end of war after consulting Israel. Arafat and Abbas locked
their horns on formation of the cabinet and at last succeeded in ending the
deadlock. US welcomed the deal as Arafat battled to hang on to power and
Israel warily eyed end of Arafat era.
As announcement of peace plan neared Israel worked to isolate Arafat. It
urged envoys not to meet Arafat. Abbas tried to win Arafats freedom to move
by threatening to refuse Bush invitation. Hamas rejected Abbas drive for
surrender of arms and Hizb assailed US terror tag.
The new roadmap to peace prepared by the experts of US, EU, UN and
Russia was presented to Palestine and Israel. Three phased peace plan will come
into force once Palestinians undertake an unconditional cessation of violence.
In first phase Palestinian will crackdown on terror groups and Israel will freeze
Jewish settlements. It emphasized that the steps must be parallel, but time
schedule remained unclear.
The plan master-minded by the Crusaders has unwritten preamble in
which Palestinians have been identified as aggressors and Israelis as the victims
of terrorism. Russia and UN were cleverly involved in formulation of the plan
to give it a touch of neutrality.
The plan demanded from Palestinians to initiate action immediately. On
the other hand Israel objected to carrying out of actions simultaneously with
Palestinian crackdown on militants. It stressed that an end to violence was a
precondition for any progress.
The peace plan was received by tens of thousands of Palestinians
mourning killings in Gaza and by Israelis busy in demolition of more houses.
Washington urged Israel to work to stop deaths of Palestinian civilians, but its

spokesman reiterated that Israel has the right to self-defence in response to

ongoing terrorism.
By accepting the plan Palestinians have finally succumbed to internal and
external pressure, primarily American, according to George S Hishmeh of Gulf
News. If the Palestinians have gone a long way toward meeting national and
international demands for reforms and transparency, nothing has been clear
about Israeli or American intentions or significant steps to start the ball rolling
toward establishing a Palestinian State next to Israel.
Palestinian militant groups shrugged off US threat, making the job of
Abbas difficult, who is keen for instant execution of Middle East roadmap.
Despite his keenness the intended aim of creating independent state of Palestine
is likely to remain elusive. One thing is certain; the process of regime change in
Palestine has begun.
PEACE FOR KASHMIR
The road to peace in Kashmir is no different from that of Palestine with
only difference that it has received less attention of the world. Indian armed
forces have been spilling the blood of innocent Kasmiris unhindered. In the
month of January 215 Kashmiris were martyred. Since 12th January following
killings have been reported:

On 13th January ten Kashmiris were killed in clashes and two brothers
were among nine gunned down next day.

Seven were killed in clashes and explosion on 15 th January and ten more
were gunned down next day.

On 17th January two were killed and six more were killed on the
following day.

Nine were killed in violence on 21st January and four on Indias Republic
Day. Editor was among four killed on 31st January.

On 1st February ten fighters were killed and another journalist was killed
next day.

Indian troops killed five fighters on 5th February and seven more were
killed next day.

On 7th February a girl was among six killed in gun battles and seven were
killed next day.

Three were killed on Eid day and four more were killed next day. Three
suspected fighters were killed on 21st February and six more next day.

On 25th February four Hindus and a fighter were killed and five more died
in bomb blast and attack next day.

Nine suspected fighters were killed on 12th March and three days later
thirteen Kashmiris were killed.

On 16th March two civilians were killed and twelve fighters were among
seventeen killed next day.

Hizb commander was killed on 20th March and seven Kashmiris were
gunned down next day.

On 22nd March eight were killed in gun battle and next day an ex-Hizb
commander was shot dead in Sopore.

Six were killed in violence on 26 th March and a fighter was killed next
day.

A Hizb commander was among nine killed on 29 th March and a day after
nine fighters were among twelve killed.

Top Hizb commander was gunned down on 2nd April and a three-year old
girl and her parents were killed next day.

On 6th April Indian troops killed Harkat chief and a day later eight
Kashmiris were gunned down in clashes.

On 9th April eight more were killed and seven fighters died in clashes on
11th April. Eight more were killed in violence next day.

On 14th April eight were killed in shootouts and a lawyer was among
three killed next day.

Three Kashmiris were killed on 16th April and six more were on the
following day.

On 18th April Javed Mir was held and six were killed in violence and four
more killed next day.

Twelve were killed in violence on 20th April and two commanders were
among seven fighters held next day.

On 22nd April 26 were killed in blast and gun battles and two more were
killed next day.

Eighteen were killed in attack and clashes on 25th April and five persons
died in suicide attack on 26th. Nine more were killed in other clashes the
same day.

Indian army killed four Kashmiris on 27th April and six fighters were
killed next day.

On 29th April 25 were killed in gun battles and nine more were killed in
clashes next day.

On 1st May two persons were killed in the Valley. Two days later fifteen
were wounded in grenade attack. Next day Indian forces killed four
fighters.

In the month of March 253 Kashmiris were martyred, whereas only 78

were reported by the press. The discrepancy spoke of the limitations of
Pakistani press. Apart from dispensing death and destruction Indian troops took
other measures to suppress Kashmiris. Travel ban was imposed on leaders
following Israeli footsteps. Leaders and even ordinary Kashmiris were detained
unlawfully.
Budgami and his wife were stopped from proceeding to Hajj. Mir was
among six held during demonstration against shifting of detainees. Shabir Shah
and 16 others were arrested on Solidarity Day. Indian police arrested Yasin
Malik. Later on eight APHC leaders were arrested. Relatives of Gilani were
denied permission to meet him by a government, which had promised measure
with healing effects.
Policemen carried out fake encounters to kill captured or detained
Kashmiris. Mufti had to request them to refrain from such brutalities.
Reportedly 3,744 civilians were missing in the Valley, which has been admitted
by the puppet regime. Mehbooba called for probe into custodial killings, but
there was no response to her call.
Indian agents let loose a reign of terror. They abducted and disgraced two
sisters. India threatened to sell migrants property to stop them from fleeing
across Line of Control. Mysterious incidents of killing of Hindus continued.
These engineered killings compelled Hindu families and 105 Kashmiri Pundits
to migrate. Vajpayee acknowledged manipulation of Kashmir polls, which the
civilized world had accepted as fair.
Pakistan was also punished for its diplomatic and moral support to
Kashmiris. India violated Line of Control at will:

On 1st February two civilians were injured in Indian firing across Line of
Control and shelling claimed two more lives next day.

Father and daughter were killed in Indian shelling on 4th February and
two women were wounded next day.

Nine civilians were wounded in firing on 9 th February and seven more

two days. On 25th February Indian firing claimed three lives.

On 18th March Indian firing claimed one life and three days later three
women were killed.

One civilian was killed in Indian shelling on 26th March and three days
later two more died in shelling. On 30th March one person was killed in
Indian firing.

Two civilians were killed on 6th April and four days later Indian shelling
claimed four more lives.

On 12th April Indian shelling claimed one life and another next day and
yet another on 15th April.

Two brothers were killed in Poonch on 21st April and three were wounded
next day. On 28th Indians shelled Authmaqam destroying twelve shops
and two houses.

Retaliatory actions by Pakistan were few and far apart. On 27th January
five Indian soldiers were killed in artillery duel and four were killed in Line of
Control clash on 13th March. By 30th April India had lost 1,874 soldiers during
standoff, but intensity of Mujahideen strikes has been decreasing constantly:

On 18th January an Indian army captain was killed and a week later a
policeman died in blast. On 29th two Indian troops were killed in another
blast.

In February a Major was killed on 8 th, another officer died in mine blast
on 17th and on 20th explosives hidden in snow killed six soldiers.

In March three policemen were killed on 15 th, nine more perished in

Jammu next day, an Indian informer was killed on 20 th, on 27th two
soldiers were killed and five more died in avalanche on 31st.

In April a policeman was killed on 16 th, a soldier on 23rd, another on 28th

and ministers home was attacked on 30th.

Mujahideen groups rejected UK call to end fighting. Kashmiris vowed to

resist interference in Madaris. On 25th January shops were closed and streets
deserted on APHC call for protest against detentions of political prisoners.
Indian Republic Day was observed as black day.
APHC asked the world to pressurize India to stop terrorism. Kashmiris of
UK urged Labour Party to check human rights abuses. Pakistan informed OIC
of human rights violations. America admitted that India committed serious
human rights abuses in Kashmir.
India kept trying to woo Kashmiris for direct talks to sideline Pakistan.
Mufti sought solution through talks with participation of all groups. Delhi
showed its willingness to talk with Jehadi groups, but Kashmiris insisted on
tripartite talks as it was only way to Kashmir solution.

Mirwaiz felt no need to hold talks with Mufti. APHC termed Vohras
appointment as eye wash and refused to hold talks. Duplication of effort by
New Delhi undermined Jethmalanis mission and he had to suspend peace
initiative. Gujarals parallel effort met the same fate.
Pakistan pleaded for solution of the dispute through dialogue. No
Kashmir solution sans Pakistan said Kasuri. At NAM conference Musharraf
asked the meeting to help Kashmiris and no one should be allowed to
manipulate anti-terrorism fight to de-legitimize just struggles. His remarks
enraged Vajpayee. NAM asked Pakistan and India to negotiate disputes.
Jethmalani backed talks with Pakistan. Ultimately Vajpayee surprised
many by offering talks to Pakistan during his visit to Kashmir. Jamali promptly
welcomed the offer as if he had been waiting for it. Rashid announced that PakIndia talks would focus on Kashmir.
India reacted cautiously to Pakistans exuberant response. An Indian
minister termed the call for talks serious and predicted that dialogue would
be held in June. A day later Vajpayee imposed the precondition; talks only if
incursions end.
Foreign Office blamed India for undermining own peace offer by laying
down condition. Rao said that Pakistan would set no pre-condition for talks.
Kasuri saw tensions in South Asia easing and called for world observers at Line
of Control.
I am waiting for Pakistans response said Vajpayee. He insisted on the
pre-condition. Stopping cross-border infiltration and destruction of terrorist
infrastructure can open doors for talks. He apprehended that there were also
indications to suggest that the level of infiltration may increasewhen the
snow over the mountains in Kashmir melts. He indirectly cautioned Pakistan
not to be irresponsible while moving towards dialogue. Advani meant the
same when he said, conditions for talks remain unchanged.
On 28th April Jamali talked to Vajpayee on telephone and offered to visit
India for peace. He also invited Indian PM to visit Pakistan. Vajpayee remained
non-committal on visit to Pakistan. BJP spokesman claimed invitation was
rejected. Jamali remained optimistic about Indian response.
Indian MPs sought debate on Pakistans offer. On 2nd May Vajpayee made
last move for peace with Pakistan, while rejecting Jamalis visit offer and
external mediation over Kashmir. He talked of resumption of diplomatic and
sports ties; restoration of air links; enhancing of economic cooperation; revival
of cultural exchanges and people-to-people contacts:

We want to give Pakistan one more chance, not out of weakness but out
of self-confidence. We want to give peace another chance.

The third attempt will be decisive and will be the last in my lifetime.

The conflict between India and Pakistan is fundamentally over Kashmir

and we cannot take our eyes off global changes. We should have
confidence that there would be attitude changes and we have to contribute
to that.

The same day Musharraf and Jamali discussed Indian offer. They surely
took Vajpayee seriously. Musharraf reiterated that Pakistan stood for peace
with India and Islamabad was ready for talks with New Delhi at any time,
anywhere. Jamali hoped talks would be fruitful. Kasuri termed Vajpayees move
exceptional and wanted dialogue to start quickly. On 3 rd May Jamali formally
invited Vajpayee, who urged careful planning for Islamabad talks.
Peace move was applauded by Kashmiris. Mirwaiz hailed Vajpayees
offer and Hurriat welcomed resumption of Pak-India diplomatic ties. Qayyum
said, we are ready to talk with India at any level, though nothing was said
about participation of Kashmiris in dialogue. World powers praised Indo-Pak
moves. Powell phoned Jamali and Sinha. UK welcomed talks between Pakistan
and India. China and Bangladesh hailed Indo-Pak thaw.
Thus the hopes for peace were revived, but not without reservations. BJP
allies censured Vajpayees peace move and Noorani warned government against
deal on Kashmir. Analysts like MAK Lodhi commented that Vajpayees offer
carried limited agenda.
The reason of cautious optimism lied in the fact that the move was
initiated under pressure, though both the countries denied existence of any
pressure. Sinha told the parliament that there was no US pressure on foreign
policy. State department also clarified that peace initiative was made by parties
themselves.
The events preceding the peace move belied their claims. On 26 th April
Powell had phoned Musharraf on the issue of incursions after seeing mixed
result of pressure on Pakistan. He, however, denied that US was contemplating
action in the Subcontinent. He said that it was part of remaining in touch with
his counter-parts in countries that were cooperating. He used the word
counter-part with no intention of up-grading himself or down-grading
Musharraf, most probably.
Earlier General J Garner disclosed that US has set December 2004 as
deadline for Kashmir solution. The move aimed at rooting out the Weapons of
Mass Destruction because these constitute the gravest aid to (the spread of)
terrorism.
The pressure certainly existed. The move was not the outcome of sudden
realization of importance of peace by India. Even if it was, the realization has

been caused by someone, who could neither be Indian nor Pakistani nor
Kashmiri.
In view of the strategic partnership of India and America, this offer was
long due. India and America have agreed to settle the issue once for all. India
would like to settle it to its liking. Failing which Pakistan will be blamed for
uncompromising attitude. America is interested in settlement, so that Pakistan
could be told that it no more required any nuclear weapons.
On 4th May Musharraf said that Pakistan and India could mutually make
South Asia a nuclear free zone. He has been talking about this off and on,
primarily assuming that India will never give up its nuclear programme, not
realizing that once the core issue is resolved, justly or unjustly, Pakistan could
be asked to roll back its programme; whereas India would be allowed to
continue in view of Chinese threat.
Pakistan should work for settlement of core issue in accordance with UN
Resolutions and wishes of Kashmiris. The draft agreement of Agra, which was
not signed for unknown reasons, should be the start point for future dialogue.
India will again try to rigmarole taking advantage of the long list of options.
Most of these options have been floated by design to undermine the just stand of
Pakistan and Kashmiris. Emphasis on implementations of UN Resolutions
should nullify all these options.
Some of these options have already been rejected by Kashmiris,
particularly the one relating to making Line of Control as permanent border, as
it meant acceptance of status quo. Various formulae about division of Kashmir
have also been rejected. Kashmir cannot be equated with Ireland. Independent
Kashmir has its own implications. Whatever the solution might be the final
decision must rest with Kashmiris.
Pakistan should have no doubts about legitimacy of its stand as
inadvertently expressed by Kasuri after NAM conference. He rejoiced that
NAM had legitimized Pakistans stand on Kashmir. Pakistans stand has
always been legitimate even before the birth of NAM. It is most unfortunate that
some of our leaders were still in search of legitimacy.
FOR OTHERS PEACE
The road to peace in Afghanistan runs through Pakistan. It has been busy
in hunting the militants scattered across Durand Line as result of Afghanistans
occupation. The manhunt is also essential for the security of the civilized
world. Since middle of January Pakistan achieved the following in this context:

A suspected al-Qaeda man was held in Wana on 12 th January and the

same day a bomb was defused inside KFC in Hyderabad.

On 15th January police arrested second suspect involved in attack on

French engineers. On 16th at least three Islamic schools were raided by
FBI agents.

Troops searched two villages in Waziristan on 20th January and three days
later four militants were arrested in Lahore.

On 29th January 21 Harkat men were held while offering funeral prayers
in D I Khan. Next day a guerrilla trainer was arrested in Toba Tek Singh
and South Waziristan Scouts recovered big arms cache and arrested five
accused.

A top al-Qaeda man Khalid Shaikh was among three held in Rawalpindi
on 1st March. Seven suspects were arrested in Karachi, who had attacked
to punish police for protecting Americans.

On 8th March two sectarian terrorists were gunned down by police in

Multan. Three days later one LJ man was held for killings in
Imambargah.

Another senior al-Qaeda suspect, Yasser al-Jazeeri, was held on 15 th

March and three days later two Arab students were held in Peshawar.

On 30th March Dr Aafifa was held in alleged al-Qaeda link and two days
later Lashkars chief commander was arrested.

Two al-Qaeda suspects were held in Karachi on 2 nd April and three more
were arrested in Peshawar next day. On 22 nd April 120 rockets and
missiles were seized near Miranshah.

On 30th April six al-Qaeda men were arrested in Karachi, including

Khalid al-Attash involved in attack on US warship Cole.

Two al-Qaeda suspects were arrested in Karachi on 2 nd May and four

more were held next day.

The arrest of Khalid Shaikh was a major breakthrough in hunt for alQaeda men. He is believed to be the mastermind of 9/11 attacks. Bush was
elated at his arrest and FBI rushed to interrogate him. US termed Khalids arrest
a blow to al-Qaeda. He was immediately taken over by US, yet his extradition
was contradicted. No US request for Khalids extradition said Faisal; whereas
the same day a US official claimed having the suspect in custody. Foreign
Office insisted that Khalid was still in Pakistan.
Next day Khalid was flown to Bagram. Pakistans agencies extracted all
the required information so quickly that he was no more required by them,
despite the fact that accused kept changing his statement on Osama. Faisal
claimed that Khalid provided vital information. US interrogators, who are
unnecessarily hanging on to hundreds of prisoners for more than a year, should

learn from their Pakistani counter-parts, the techniques to extract vital

information in no time.
Faisal denied involvement of foreigners in raid. Reportedly son of
Egyptian cleric arrested from Quetta had helped in arrest of Khalid. Apart from
9/11, France wanted Khalid in connection with suicide attack on a Tunisian
synagogue last year.
It was expected that the interrogators would extract some information
about whereabouts of Osama. The world buzzed with news of Osamas catch
as nine al-Qaeda men were arrested near Pak-Afghan border. Unnamed officials
claimed Osama or his son was among the captured.
Suspected border areas were searched from Iranian border to Chitral. ISI
said that it was hours behind Osama, despite denying his presence in Pakistan
many times in the past. Musharraf too was made to believe that Osama might
be in Pakistan. Osama remained elusive.
The manhunt in Pakistan was justified by Musharraf saying that foreign
extremists were harming US interests. Faisal pledged to declare al-Qaeda as
terrorist group. Kasuri vowed not to spare any terrorist and interior minister
wanted the same to ensure peace and stability.
Pakistans successes against al-Qaeda earned appreciations of the
civilized world. Bush thanked Musharraf for cooperation. CIA chief visited
Pakistan to thank Musharraf. US House rewarded Pakistan by passing trade bill
aiding Pakistan and others, which eliminated duties on hand-made rugs. US
terror report lauded Pakistans cooperation. UK also hailed Pakistan for nabbing
al-Qaeda activists.
Nevertheless Pakistan was continuously subjected to pressure for the sake
of peace and stability of Afghanistan ruled by puppets of the Crusaders. The
pressure has been in the form of appreciations, rewards, and demands for more.
Bush hailed Pakistans support in anti-terror fight. America considered
Pakistans role vital in war against terrorism. EU lauded Islamabads
contribution to fight global terrorism. Applaud and praise was meant for urging
the player to keep performing well.
The rewards in the form of making Pakistan principal beneficiary of US
war assistance and signing of debt write-off accord. The promise of broadening
of ties; assurance about extra $ 47 million assistance; increase in annual aid;
hopes of another $ 1 billion debt write-off; and grant of one time waiver on
curbs added to the pressure.
Some rewards were given purely to improve overall performance.
Provision of surveillance gadgets to FC, installation of screening system at

airports, financing of law enforcement in FATA, sending of fingerprint experts

to Pakistan fell in this category.
French experts held talks with Pakistani officials on Karachi suicide
attack case and expressed their unhappiness over blast probe. America
demanded more raids, free access to detainees for interrogation and their speedy
extradition. Inclusion of LJ in the list of terrorist organizations enlarged the
scope of crackdown against militancy.
American meddling in Pakistan under the pretext of its war on terror
resulted in pressure on government from within. Operations by FBI were
resented the most. Qazi censured activities of FBI and urged Musharraf to stop
helping US. Noorani demanded withdrawing of support. MAK Lodhi advised
FBI to pack up and Chitralis resented hunt for al-Qaeda in their area.
Government denied allegations of US involvement with cleverly worded
statements. Kasuri denied presence of foreign troops in Pakistan. Faisal said,
no mandate has been given to FBI. Jamali claimed, FBI was not involved in
raids. These half truths could not cover up the simple facts like enrollment of
hundreds of Pakistanis as agents by FBI and interrogation of detainees like
Khawajas for days.
Arrests and handling of detainees in contravention to law was another
cause of resentment. Three al-Qaeda suspects were freed on 18 th February
months after their arrests. Khawajas case was worst example of governments
high-handedness, wherein it refused to release three Khawajas and pressed for
their trial in jail though Supreme Court reminded the government that all
arrests, detentions and trials of al-Qaeda suspects were being carried out
without issuing a notification to call al-Qaeda terrorist. UN too lashed out at
the secrecy of arrests of al-Qaeda suspects in Pakistan and their transfer to US
custody without charge or trial.
The line of least resistance adopted against American demands for
extradition has been a source of concern since long. At times handing over of
detainees coincided with issuing of official statements claiming that no US
request for extradition has been received.
INS became yet another cause of resentment against America as reports
of humiliation of Pakistanis in US poured in. Qazi met Ashcroft and raised
concerns over INS. Shujaat ignored advice over his letter, rejected soft worded
letter sent by Foreign Office and wrote his own urging Bush to review policy.
US not alone seeking INS requirements replied Bush. Nobody should take it
as Pakistan specific.
Kasuri requested US not to disgrace Pakistanis in consideration of
Pakistans role in war on terror. After discussion with Powell and meeting

Ashcroft, he hoped that there would be no major expulsions of Pakistanis from

US. He met US high ups, including chance meeting with Bush, during his visit
to Washington, claimed progress on registration issue and expected changes in
US security law. Musharraf however saw no easy solution to INS issue.
During his battle against INS Kasuri warned US that the new law would
benefit religious parties. His argument showed that the government opposed
the law not as insult or humiliation to Pakistanis, but to protect its political
interests. He should have said it in plain words that the law would fan anti-US
feelings.
Powell clarified, immigration rules were not targeting Pakistan.
According to a congressman exemption from law was possible and Kasuri
expected US to be flexible on Pakistanis. The exemption plea was politely
rejected and instead Pakistan was assured of soft attitude on INS.
INS was not Pakistan specific, but overall attitude of the civilized world
has been quite discriminatory. On 31st January 28 Pakistanis were held in Italy
for terror link. Police claimed detainees possessed explosives. Pakistani Envoy
rejected the charge and Islamabad termed allegation as baseless.
Pakistan lodged protest. Rashid saw plot against Pakistanis. Hilali
alleged that rights of detained Pakistanis were being violated. Rome reacted
against Pakistans harsh tone and tenor. Meanwhile interrogation of arrested
Pakistanis continued and three more Pakistani suspects were held. Italian judge
freed 28 Pakistanis. The court order spoke high of rule of law in the civilized
world and at the same time confirmed the prejudices of the people responsible
for its enforcement. Because of that Pakistan urged the civilized world to
ensure dignity of Pakistanis. America responded by expelling 105 Pakistanis on
13th March.
The people and the opposition resented in all manners they could. In
settled areas anti-US rallies were staged, whereas the tribesmen fired rockets at
scouts post in Wana and on a helicopter in Baluchistan injuring three US
citizens and four men of Pakistan army. Durrani demanded that Americans
should leave Pakistan. Some people suggested retaliatory measures. The
government rejected demand for fingerprinting and HIV testing of Americans.
The rejection was immaterial as the demand amply reflected the intensity of
resentment.
CONCLUSION
The roadmaps prepared by the civilized world have many highways
running parallel to the destination of peace. These can be traversed only by
those who are ready to submit to the will of the Crusaders. Others can venture at

the risk of being intercepted by highwaymen and losing their lives and
possessions.
Rumsfeld issued a general warning to all such adventurers. Saddam
defeat has message for every rogue. The effect of that (defeat) was a
demonstration to the world that an awful lot of countries dont think its a good
idea for countries to have Weapons of Mass Destruction, (real or imaginary) or
to be on the terrorist list, or
Powell was more specific. He warned Syria of consequences and Iran of
isolation. Rice asked Syria to dismantle Hezbollah. Damascus desire that
Syria and Lebanon should be included in Middle East roadmap can be fulfilled
if they are prepared to follow the guideline spelled out by Rice.
Vajpayees offer of dialogue coincided with issuing of roadmap for peace
in Middle East. His offer constituted a roadmap for peace in the Subcontinent. It
has been prepared in consultation with the Crusaders without making it public
like the one for Middle East. Revelation of its contours will correspond with
actions of Pakistan.
The aims of both the maps, one released and the other kept secret are
quite similar. Middle East roadmap is considered as last chance for peace.
Similarly Vajpayee has declared that forthcoming dialogue will be the last
attempt for journey on road to peace.
If Pakistan takes some unconditional and immediate steps, as
Palestinians have been asked to take, then the peace could be assured; failing
which it has to face the consequences. Vajpayee is confident that the Crusaders
will support India. The tutor of democracy can be asked to adopt other methods
of teaching as MPs of Pakistan have refused to attend Nancys lecture on the
subject.

5th May 2003

NO END TO TERROR
Rumsfeld rejoiced over occupation of Iraq. He claimed that he and his
companions were justified in invading and conquering Iraq. He then snubbed
the critics and opponents of war. Never have so many been so wrong about so
much.
He visited the conquered land, claimed victory and boasted about
righteousness of the cause of invasion. Iraq is now rid of Saddams truly brutal,

vicious regime What is significant is that large numbers of human beings,

intelligent and energetic, have been freed.
He asked Iraqis to form an interim government. He assured them that
the Coalition would stay in Iraq as long as would be necessary. They could
form a free government of their own choosing while remaining under US
subjugation.
The print media recollected his last visit to Baghdad in December 1983.
During that visit he had held a secret meeting with Saddam, which led to closer
relations between the United States and Iraq during its war with Iran. The
purpose of visit in 1983 and the one concluded recently appeared to have
changed, but American intentions had always been noble.
After visiting Iraq he stopped over in the country conquered about a year
earlier and declared end to major Afghan combat. During the same period
Bush claimed that al-Qaeda was on the run and it was not a problem any
more. About a fortnight later a US official admitted that no end to war on
terrorism was in sight. Why did he refute his president?

TERRORIZING THE OPPONENTS

The war against terror has focused on terrorizing those who dared
disagreeing with America. They were blamed for sponsoring or supporting
terrorism and attacked. Iraqis were the recent victim. They were accused of
possessing Weapons of Mass Destruction; therefore they were liberated from the
cruel rule of Saddam.
Iraqis have not accepted the rationale behind military occupation of their
land. They have refused to take the medicine of liberation for curing their
social, political and economic ailments; and instead have started yelling at
Americans to go back. The sick and ignorant people are now being
administered the requisite dose of medicine with brute use of force.
On 30th April thousands of people of Fallujah answered a call by local
Muslim religious leaders to demonstrate against shooting that had left thirteen
dead in a pro-Saddam rally. US troops riding on jeeps and armoured vehicles
opened fire after children in the crowd pelted them with shoes and stones.
American troops claimed that they had opened fire in response to Iraqi gunfire;
whereas eye-witnesses denied any exchange of fire.
The top religious leader, Ali al-Mohammadi, asked Americans to
withdraw to the outskirts, because they were a bad influence on people.
Another Imam warned that it would be difficult to contain the people if such
killings continued. A resident termed Americans really cowardly to kill people,
innocent people, with heavy weapons and tanks. Another vowed that protests

would continue until American occupation is ended. They have no business

here.
Next day the protesters asked Americans to satisfy the families of the
murdered people; otherwise their relatives would start taking revenge with guns
and bombs. There would be no peace in this city as long as Americans were
here. We would decide what to do if they didnt leave. Next day an Iranian
cleric suggested suicide attacks to expel US from Iraq.
On Friday the Imams in Fallujah pleaded for peace in their sermons. One
said, I want to tell you, to tell all of the people here in Fallujah, not to attack
Americans. If you do they will kill you. Do not fight themthey have tanks,
how can you fight tanks. The change in tone was the result of talks between
mayor and representatives of the occupation forces.
Despite the change the Imam still talked about Jihad. We know what the
Jihad is because we are Muslims. We will follow it until Judgment Day. But
now we cannot do anything because the Americans are here in our city But
having American and British troops is not for ever. We will wait for a new life.
God will bring us angels.
The liberation provided no relief to the people of Iraq. They now faced
much brute force, applied more indiscriminately, as compared to that of
Saddam. During conquest the invaders used variety of lethal weapons, the
effects of which would be felt for long time.
IAEA contemplated to probe radiation sickness due to use of depleted
uranium munitions. Unexploded bombs continued causing casualties. In one
incident nine Iraqi children were killed. Nobody termed these terrifying
incidents as acts of terrorism.
Occupation forces harped a lot about Geneva Conventions, but ICRC
waited for access to POWs held by the Coalition forces. The Crusaders violated
these conventions frequently, yet they didnt tolerate anybody talking ill about
their conduct. Al-Jazeera aired a wrong report and its personnel were beaten
by the best in the world.
The atrocious acts committed by the civilized people couldnt be called
terrorism. These acts were part of the holy war and automatically became
noble. Some Iraqis and Jordanians, however, thought otherwise. They decided
to sue them for committing war crimes.
On their behalf a human rights lawyer filed a case with federal
prosecutors in Belgium with the purpose to arraign Franks for committing
crimes against humanity. The charges fell into four categories: the use of cluster
bombs; the killing of civilians by other means; attacks on infrastructure
essential for public health; and the failure to prevent the looting of hospitals.

All these were crimes under protocol II to the Geneva Conventions and
there was plenty of supporting evidence. America responded to the suit with
outrage and threatened to punish nations which permitted their laws to be used
for political ends.
Belgian Government immediately amended the law, which had permitted
filing of a case about crime committed anywhere in the world. The lawyer who
had filed the case was denounced. It was done by a government, which had
opposed attack on Iraq. Undoubtedly, the Crusaders stood united to protect each
others interests, despite their disagreements.
The civilized world once again obstructed administration of justice in
cases having plenty of evidence. According to Fisk the crime of killing of a
Ukrainian, a Spaniard and an Arab journalist was alone sufficient to convict the
criminals. They all died within hours of each other. I suspect they were killed
because of the US, someone in the Pentagon thought not, Im sure
The Coalition tried to divert the attention of the world by discovering
mass grave in Babylon. The discovery encouraged Blair to claim that mass
graves showed Iraq War was justified. Americans were equally responsible for
killing of Shiite rebels in 1991, as they first incited Shias to revolt against
Saddam and then abandoned them.
What Bush and Blair did to terrorize Iraqis, Sharon had been doing the
same to Palestinians since years. Between September 2000 and May 2001, 156
children 18 years or younger were killed by Israeli soldiers or settlers, yet they
committed no act of terrorism. They simply exercised the right of self-defence.
Five Palestinians were killed on 8th May, the day Bush expressed his
optimism about chances of Middle East peace. On 21 st Israeli troops killed two
Palestinians, another was shot dead on 24th, two boys were killed two days later
and another Palestinian was killed on 28th. Meanwhile the Palestinians were
continuously blamed for terrorism and Bush discussed peace and fight against
terror with Abbas.
Iran demanded for government of people in Iraq; condemned US deal
with MKO (an armed opposition, Peoples Mujahideen); and Rafsanjanis
pledged not to remain neutral if US governs Iraq. These Iranian overtures
earned American threats to Iran.
Iran was declared greater threat than North Korea. Washington
announced that Tehran failed to clear up concerns about nuclear issue. Bush
personally voiced these concerns and US called for thorough inspections.
Peoples Mujahideen also accused Iran of ambushing troops.
Iran rejected the isolation threat, dispelled fears about its nuclear plan and
pledged to work with IAEA. It however softened its stance and offered to assist

democracy in Iraq. It also urged America not to allow terrorist attacks from
Iraq and accused US of trying to create quasi-crisis. Iran supported Syrian
proposal for keeping Middle East free of WMDs.
Nevertheless Iran secretly held direct talks with Washington, but several
rounds of meetings failed to make a breakthrough. Iran denied restoration of ties
with US. Khamenei said that thaw in ties with US would tantamount to
surrender. Khatami again asked America to get out of Iraq.
Deadlock in dialogue coincided with suicide attacks in Riyadh. America
saw another opportunity in tragedy of Riyadh. Rumsfeld accused that al-Qaeda
leaders were busy in Iran. Washington Post reported that Pentagon officials
were pushing Bush Administration to use this pretext to destabilize the Iranian
government.
Kharzai denied the allegation about al-Qaeda. There is no way that
Iranians would support al-Qaeda because we have been fighting with al-Qaeda
since before even the Americans were engaged with (fighting) them. A day later
Iran announced that it was holding low-rank al-Qaeda men, reiterated that it was
serious about confronting al-Qaeda and asked Washington to follow logic and
wisdom in international relations and avoid making interfering remarks.
Pakistan, a stalwart ally in war on terror arrested seven terrorists with
suspected links with al-Qaeda and froze assets of a Kuwaiti charity during last
three weeks. Despite unflinching commitment to war on terror it was accused
of abetting terrorism. Allegations of cross-border terrorism continued unabated.
America included Hizb and Jamiat in terror list; both organizations support
freedom movement of Kahmiris.
America took special interest in suppressing the freedom movement in
Kashmir. The House of Representatives International Relations Committee
unanimously adopted a Resolution on 7th May, requiring the Bush
Administration to reveal to Congress the extent to which Pakistan was fulfilling
its commitment to stop cross-border terrorism, shut down terrorist camps in
AJK and prevent nuclear proliferation.
According to Shireen Mazari this political success for India was the
result of the lobbying efforts of the US-India Political Action Committee
(USINPAC) which is similar to the US-Israeli Political Action Committee
(AIPAC).
India, the proxy crusader, availed the opportunity and asked Bangladesh
to close down 155 terrorist camps, which according to India were operating
with the help of ISI and al-Qaeda. India also demanded deportation of 85
insurgents, who were hiding in Bangladesh.

AFP commented that India appeared to be acting on Chankias Mandal

and Matsynyaya (way of the fish) policies. Mandal policy is that all
neighbouring countries are actual or potential enemies. Matsynyaya policy
holds that big fish eat up the small fish. America is following the same policy
with slight change that it considers all Muslim countries as actual or potential
enemies and no fish is bigger than the US.
Russia linked attacks in Saudi Arabia to Chechnya to create an
opportunity to terrorize Chechens. China also earned backing of Kabul to curb
Turk terrorist force. Malaysia too feared that it might be penalized by US over
Iraq War. Pakistan was already so terrorized that it disallowed ICTA to hold
public hearing against Bushs war crimes committed in Afghanistan.
In Philippines hunt for MILF rebels was reinvigourated. Arroyo
demanded that MILF must give up terror, failing which she was ready to shut
option of talks. Before leaving for America Gloria ordered air attacks on
Muslim guerrillas and fifty rebels were killed on 18th May.
She claimed that MILF was linked to al-Qaeda. Bush praised services of
Arroyo and planned to designate Philippines as major non-NATO ally,
inadvertently revealing the aims of this military alliance. NATO is meant for
nothing, but waging the Crusades. On the whole the Crusaders should be
satisfied with the progress of the war on terror on all fronts.

MILITANTS RETALIATED
The biased conduct of war on terror was bound to result in violent
reaction from those who remained determined to fight against the unjust
policies of the superpower. The inevitable happened in Saudi Arabia on 13 th
May. Fifteen attackers carried out suicide bombings killing twenty-nine in
Riyadh, including seven Americans and Saudi deputy governors son. Three
residential compounds of expatriates were targeted by suicide bombers with car
bombs. It was first major terrorists attack since invasion of Iraq.
Powell blamed al-Qaeda for attacks. This is criminality, terrorism at its
worst; there is no justification in any way, shape or form. But as a soldier he
acknowledged that the attack was very well executed and it showed the nature
of the enemy the Americans were fighting against. FBI team was tasked to
assist in investigations.
The attack coincided with IISS report which declared that al-Qaeda was
still greatest threat. Four days later suicide bombers hit Morocco killing fortyone, including at least seven Europeans; two Spaniards, two Italians and three
French. About one hundred people were injured. A Jewish community centre

and old cemetery, the Belgian Consulate, a Spanish restaurant and a major
downtown hotel were targeted.
This time attackers did not use car bombs. A bomber slashed guards
throat before blowing himself off. America offered help for probing the attacks
and the same day al-Qaeda threatened more stunning blows. Terror threat
warnings resulted in suspension of flights to Kenya.
Suicide attack by Palestinians had already clouded Sharon-Abbas
meeting. Next day nine persons were killed in Jerusalem in two incidents of
suicide bombing. Sharon postponed his visit to US. Israel hinted at action
against Arafat, blaming him for abetting hard-line groups in a bid to scuttle
peace efforts led by Abbas.
Three days latter Osamas deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, urged more
attacks:

O Muslims! Muster your resolve and hit the embassies of America,

England, Australia and Norway, their interests, their companies and their
employees

The Crusaders and Jews understand only the language of killing and
blood. They can only be persuaded through returning coffins, devastated
interests, burning towers and collapsed economies.

Here is Saudi Arabia (allowing) planes to take off from its airfields, here
is Kuwait (hosting) huge armies marching (on Iraq) from its territory,
while the campaigns command is based in Qatar, Bahrain hosts the Fifth
Fleet and warships sail through Egypts (Suez) Canal Crusader ships
are refueling from its (Yemen) ports and Crusader armies have deployed
in Jordan.

After all this they profess in all hypocrisy to oppose the war on Iraq.
(Indirectly pointing out that targeting a hypocrite is as important as
attacking Crusaders.)

Assuring Iraqis, he said, you are not alone in the battle. Your Mujahideen
brethren are lying in wait for your enemies.

The Mujahideen in Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya and in the heart of

America and the West are inflicting various kinds of death on these
Crusaders God willing the coming days will bring you heartening
news.

The above message was telecast by al-Jazeera. America was irritated by

the telecast and criticized the network for voicing the concerns of enemies of
the civilized world. We have to question why a network would air this kind
of inflammatory rhetoric.

Retaliation by militants continued in Pakistan. They carried out bomb

blasts outside Christian hospital in Tank and missionary school in Bannu. Ten
persons were injured in Hyderabad blast. On 16th May they carried out an
unusual attack. Ordinary marriage bombs were exploded with the help of time
devices at 21 petrol pumps in Karachi. All petrol pumps belonged to foreign
firms.
Use of fire-crackers remained mystery till an unknown group owned
these blasts. Muslim United Army described these explosions as small glimpse
of its capability. It warned that major attacks could follow if Pakistan did not
stop action against Mujahideen.
In Chechnya one person was killed in a blast in Grozny on 9 th May. Three
days later forty more were killed in a suicide attack on a government building.
Two days later a woman bomber struck Muslim gathering killing fourteen and
injuring more than one hundred. Ten days later fourteen Russian troops were
killed.
In Philippines a child was slain as Christians attacked Muslims. Two days
later Muslim militants retaliated and killed thirteen in a bomb blast. As
pressure of the Philippines army increased MILF declared 10-day unilateral
ceasefire.

REVIEW
The world leaders condemned terrorist attacks. The Washington Post
slated the attacks in Riyadh in these words: Images of dead children and
decimated families have revealed the true character and moral bankruptcy of alQaeda.
The images like the one mentioned by the Washington Post were quite
common and more gruesome during invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which
were not shown in the civilized world for civilized reasons. Those images
surely spoke high of the character and moral ascendancy of America as these
were linked to Mullaism of Omar and madness of Saddam. Bush and Blair
couldnt be blamed due to despondency of Muslim rulers.
Towing the line of Washington Post, the Jordan Times wrote. It is a
difficult task to stop people who are so blinded that they would blow themselves
up for any cause. It requires considerable resources and political will. The
paper upheld the royal tradition by not saying a word about the causes of their
blindness. Their grievances were pushed under the carpet of any cause.
The attacks, however, once again forced the conscientious people to
ponder about the menace of terrorism. A US Senator blamed his government

for overstating success against al-Qaeda. He said that there was evidence that
one of those who escaped from Tora Bora planned the Riyadh attack.
Another lawmaker accused White House of being too secretive with
information pertaining to September 11 attacks. Until we get it, all the
attempts to make America safer in this age of terrorism are bound to be
incomplete he added.
Mary Riddell had different views on the issue. She doubted the very aim
of the so-called holy war. Let us drop the pretence that the Coalition fought to
get rid of Weapons of Mass Destruction, or for morality, or for democracy
transplant, or for glamorous impact, or even for strategic interests or for oil. Our
leaders went to war because they couldnt think of what else to do. Al-Qaeda,
by contrast, has no lack of ideas.
The leaders of Mary believe that application of military means is the only
way to solve all terror related problems. They have adamantly refused to
address the causes of terrorism, not realizing that indiscriminate use of force is
not the civilized way to do it. This is more akin to terrorism. Misconceived
strategy to defeat terrorism has promoted state terrorism.
Salama Ahmed Salama, an Egyptian columnist wrote, those who speak
today of atrocities committed by Saddam Husseins regime and the absence of
justice under the Baath authority will realize that what the Bush Administration
is committing through Rumsfeld is not less brutal nor less unfair than what
Saddam Hussein did.
Acts of Saddam were cognizable, because he committed those without
attaining the status of superpower and without the consent of his Muslim or
Arab brothers; whereas Rumsfeld enjoyed the immunity, because he was doing
it on behalf of a superpower and with the consent of fellow Crusaders.
Mahathir supported this viewpoint. War is a bid to out-terrorize the
terrorists. Now countries are being threatened and invaded even though there is
no proof of their involvement in terrorism. We can expect no protection from
international organizations like the UN since powerful countries like the United
States and Britain can attack Iraq without the sanction of the UN.
He criticized Americas high-handed unilateralism for waging the war on
terror. Americans commit excesses and justify those under various pretexts. The
militants have more sound justifications for carrying out suicide attacks as
compared to America had to attack Iraq and kill hundreds of innocent people.
The roadmap of militants to achieve their goals is blood-stained; they have
blood on their hands, but not more than the Yankees have on their hands.
Why are the acts of militants considered more gruesome than killings
resulting from state terrorism? Why so much of hue and cry over attacks

launched at intervals months apart than operations carried out almost

everyday? What is so extraordinary about victims of these attacks and nothing
so special about the victims of collateral damage? Answers to all the questions
lay in discriminatory attitude of the civilized world. If crimes committed by
the state agencies are criticized, condemned and checked, the terrorism might
automatically diminish.
Bush has been vowing to smoke out the terrorists, but he never talked
about causes of terrorism according to Linda S Heard of Gulf News. One thing
he has never promised so far is an investigation into the causes of terrorism and
burgeoning anti-Americanism. These extremist groups have definite grudges
against the US, Israel and their allies, but the only causes so far mentioned by
Bush are that they are jealous of our freedoms or they hate democracy.
Michael Naumann of German Weekly Die Zeit in an open letter
addressed to Powell pointed out a cause. We must arrive at a common strategy
towards peace, prosperity and security in a world without terrorism - a world
which currently is threatened by an ever growing gap between rich and poor
nations. There are more important causes than the gap pointed out by him and
all the real causes are too obvious and most revolve round American bias as
brought out by Linda.
The words of wisdom carry no meanings for arrogant people. Rumsfeld
while referring to al-Zawahiris tape resolved to go on fighting against them.
The prince of a Muslim state standing by his side agreed with him. I think these
guys are the enemies of free people anywhere. We must work together with all
of the coalition in the war against terror to ensure their capability to finance, to
transport and to execute acts of terror are significantly diminished. Then the
prince thanked US leadership, we support (the war on terror) and are proud to
be a part of.
The prince, perhaps, had not heard about Dorans documentary film,
Massacre at Mazar, which told as to who were the real terrorists in this world.
He might not have read comments of Bush immediately after 11th September.
Islam was kidnapped by the terrorists in its initial stage and is still in the hands
of terrorists meaning thereby that through the ages Islam has been nothing but
terrorism.
The West has been obsessed by animosity with Islam to the extent that
even EU felt the need to deliberate on Islamophobia. The deliberations
resulted in following conclusions:

Participants admitted the growing propensity of intolerance towards

Muslim community in Europe.

Inflammatory political rhetoric has created tide of hostility towards

Muslim community in Europe.

The fight against crime and terrorism should not turn into racism;
admitting that it has.

There has been intense scrutiny and evidence of stereotyping and hostility
against Muslim community.

The militants have been criticized for sending wrong message about
Islam by resorting to terrorism. It has become a fashion for those, who support
the war against this evil, to blame terrorists for everything. The Muslim rulers
tend to forget that Islam and its followers were not treated with much respect
even before the advent of terrorism. This is a new excuse to perpetuate the
Crusades against Muslims.
Human rights have been the most regrettable victim of the war on terror.
The recent report of Amnesty International revealed horrendous facts in this
context. In all these violations Muslims have been at the receiving end:

US-led war on terror has made the world more dangerous and left
people feeling less secure. Human rights have been threatened,
international laws have been undermined and governments have been
shielded from scrutiny, all in the cause of fighting terrorists.

What would have been unacceptable on September 10, 2001, is now

becoming almost the norm.

There is a real risk that Iraq will go the way of Afghanistan if no genuine
effort is made to heed the call of the Iraqi people for law and order and
full respect of human rights.

In India religious minorities, particularly Muslims were increasingly

targeted for abuse. Muslims were victims of massacres allegedly
masterminded by nationalist groups with the connivance of state
agencies. The report resented misuse of POTA.

The AI criticized the round-up of some 400 al-Qaeda suspects in Pakistan

last year as arbitrary detentions devoid of human rights safeguards. The
report slammed transfer of al-Qaeda suspects to America.

In Saudi Arabia gross human rights violations continued and were

exacerbated by the government policy of combating terrorism in the
wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Israel committed crimes against humanity. At least 1,000 Palestinians

were killed by the Israeli army (in 2002) and most of them unlawfully.
They included 150 children and at least 35 individuals were killed in
targeted assassinations.

There were grave rights abuses in Chechnya. Russia committed serious

human rights violations and breached international humanitarian law with
almost total impunity.

The civilized world too could not escape from the adverse effects of the
war. Peter Preston of the Guardian wrote: We fight the threat of terror - real and
imagined - by abandoning liberties, tightening the states grip, and cutting the
corners of freedom.
The stringent laws for improvement of security pinched the Muslims
more than the civilized people. Fazal Karim of Pakistan was convicted in Dallas
of carrying razor blades, which were declared as concealed dangerous weapons
(CDWs). In Orlando Sultana Freemans veiled license was revoked when she
refused to provide an unveiled photo. The civilized world had no shame in
punishing the savages for petty reasons.
Ironically with this biased attitude America hoped to win war against the
evil of terrorism. The optimism of men like Martin Woollacott has no limits.
According to him by carrying out suicide attacks al-Qaeda is spending its men
and blowing its network. He hoped that because of suicide bombings the terror
setup will exhaust its human resources one day.
The war on terror in no way has made the world more secure. Even
those who claimed successes, frequently raised alarm about more terrorist
attacks. Immediately after attacks in Riyadh and Morocco, America hinted at
imminent terrorist attacks and closed its Embassy and Consulates in Saudi
Arabia.
In London concrete blocks were placed around parliament in the wake
of terror alert. Australia set up new office to deal with terrorism. Saudi Arabia
and Kenya intensified hunt for the terrorists. Analysts predicted that terrorism
may now target Southeast Asia. OPCW foresaw the possibility of chemical
weapons attack.
Dr Fatma of Gulf News apprehended more attacks in the Arab World. She
thought that since the Iraq invasion, anti-American sentiment has risen in the
Middle East This state of events is dangerous and unhealthy for both the US
and the countries of the Middle East alike

CONCLUSION
The latest trend of terrorist attacks indicated that causing damage to
interests of United States and Israel will remain the main aim, but the targets
will be chosen away from the lands of the enemy. The Muslim states which
support the ongoing Crusades, guised as war on terror will receive special
attention. Infidels and hypocrites will be treated alike.

The terror perpetrated by America has completely terrorized the rulers of

Muslim World. The terror of the bully has usurped their ability to think
rationally. By towing the line of the Crusaders, they have landed in the
territories of hypocrisy.
They, like Amr Mussa, see terrorism as an enemy for all of us, an enemy
for our societies, an enemy for our religion and enemy for our culture. He
failed to understand that terrorism was not that serious a threat as the
discriminatory use of this word. So far only Jehadis have been treated as
terrorists, but one fine morning he may find himself tagged as terrorist. The
Foreign ministers of Muslim countries will assemble again to reject another tag
of terrorism.
The supporters of holy war from within the Muslim World must take
note of the flagrant bias as Malaysian Foreign Minister, Hamid Albar did. He
warned that terrorism wont be defeated by military action. On the contrary,
such action would only serve to provide fertile breeding grounds for furtherance
of terrorism activity.
The crimes committed against humanity during this war have been so
many and so heinous that even a court of the civilized world accepted a case
against Tommy Franks. It was obvious that there would be no conviction, but
the existence of ample evidence to prove the case could not be disputed.
As regards Americans, who talk of winning hearts and minds of the
people of conquered lands, they must learn to listen to others. They must have
the moral courage to face the facts, made bitter by their own deeds. The right
of expression should not be denied merely because someone is suspected of
having contact with Saddams intelligence setup. Such contacts are common in
investigative reporting. Al-Jazeera should not be pressurized to keep shut on
this flimsy excuse.
They must intently listen to Dr Fatma. Ultimate responsibility rests on
America to end the threat. It must pursue a policy that will assuage the Arab
anger for grievous harm caused by the western act of imposing Israel in their
midst. She being an Arab and a Muslim has not blamed rulers of Arab and
Muslim countries for abetting the above crime.
Pakistan while sinking deep into the quick sand of war on terror vowed
to closely watch Indo-Israel nexus. It must look at the whole to understand the
part. This is Indo-Israel-US nexus. Strategic partnership of America, Israel and
India has been conspicuously at play in war on terror.
Praful Bidwal, an Indian, wrote about this partnership. The BJPs
fascination with Zionism is rooted in Islamophobia (and anti-Arabism), and
hyper-nationalism. Its ideology is Sharons machismo and ferocious jingoism. It

sees Hindus and Jews (plus Christians) as forming a strategic alliance against
Islam and Confucianism.
Generally Jews and Hindus are mentioned as active anti-Islam forces, but
in reality and historically the Christians have always led the assault against
Muslims. Therefore, the spirit of Crusades serves as binding force of this nexus.

29th May 2003

ILLEGITIMATE IS LEGITIMIZED
In one of the preceding articles social values of the civilized world were
referred to. One of those relates to personal liberty in which couples first
produce illegitimate children and then legitimize those by solemnizing
matrimonial ties. That value has been practiced at state-level in case of Iraq.
Most of the world had deplored the rape of Iraqs sovereignty by the
gang of Coalition led by Bush and Blair. Once the orgy was over, the civilized
people gathered in marriage hall of UN and legitimized the outcome of
unfortunate incident, despite the fact that many of them had vehemently
opposed the immoral act.
Russia, France, Germany and others brushed aside the rationale on which
they had termed the invasion of Iraq illegal. This was necessitated due to reevaluation and re-consideration of their respective fortunes. Their interests
were more important than all the principles of morality. They voted for
legitimization of the illegitimate just to earn profits from reconstruction of
Iraq.
The planners of 9/11 attacks had evolved a criterion to select the targets.
Pentagon and World Trade Centre emerged as obvious choice. Had they
deliberated a bit more, the building accommodating UN Headquarters would
have emerged as the first choice.

This is the place where use of force and perpetration of state terrorism
against weaker nations is legitimized. This is the place where peace and
interests of weaker nations are usurped for peace and prosperity of the strong.
This is the organization, which has been facilitating the practice of double
standards. This hub of hypocrisy should have been attacked and destroyed
instead of World Trade Centre.

ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
Invasion of Iraq was opposed for want of justifications and not giving
chance to peaceful means to resolve the dispute before resorting to use of force.
America invaded Iraq without the cover of UN Resolution, thus the occupation
became illegal.
Once Iraq was conquered, none of the opponents of invasion had the
desire or will to undo the occupation. These countries started worrying about
safeguarding their interests in changed geo-political scenario. They wanted
face-saving before joining the plunder of Iraqs resources. On the other hand
Bush and Blair needed legitimization of their illegal act.
Aims of either side could be achieved through auspices of United
Nations. The invaders asked for lifting of sanctions imposed on Iraq to exercise
control over wealth of Iraq. Blair warned the opponents of war about the
consequences of global rift over Iraq war.
This provided an opportunity to the opponents to press for their demands.
Putin opposed lifting of UN curbs. Chirac declined to accept the idea without
approval of the UN. This marked the beginning of pressure tactics for earning
maximum benefits from reconciliation. America tried to seduce Europe with the
idea of peacekeeping role for NATO.
The issue of WMDs caused embarrassment to the Coalition. Paul
Krugman of the New York Times called these as Bushs Weapons of Mass
Deceit. Geoffery Wheatcroft of the Guardian termed them Weapons of Mass
Distortion. According to him the very concept of WMDs was dishonest. When
they are in friendly hands we call them defence forces. If Geoffery had
deliberated little more, he would have discovered that many concepts of the
civilized world about terrorism, peace, human rights, interests, freedom, etc
are equally dishonest.
The opponents exploited the Coalitions failure in finding any proof of
WMDs. Putin snubbed Blair when the latter went to Moscow for support for
lifting UN sanctions. Putin asked about WMDs and Saddam and then
sarcastically answered himself. Perhaps hes hiding in a bunker sitting on a
crate of them. EU parliamentarians also demanded proof of weapons.

Before war America kept shifting its stance on pretexts of invasion and
after war it has been doing the same about WMDs. It was reported that bioweapons were destroyed before war. Then America claimed finding a mobile
laboratory of weapons mounted on a tractor trailer.
America ruled out UN role in search for weapons and rejected UN
request for access to nuclear site, because finding WMDs was no more a
priority, perhaps it had never been. Then a diplomat reported that US might let
IAEA inspectors back in Iraq followed by announcement of cash rewards and
assurance of protection to Iraqis for information on WMDs.
These contradictory statements led Polly Toynbee of the Guardian to
blame Blair for lying about WMDs. This was not the only issue about which he
and Bush had lied. Even now Bush insists that Iraq had Weapons of Mass
Destruction. Similarly Blair said UK did not invent WMD evidence. Australian
Foreign Minister had earlier claimed that clear evidence had been found that
Iraq had biological weapons, though no armaments were found.
Despite disagreements the Crusaders never lost the sight of importance of
unity. The leaders of anti-war group agreed on European defence union; without
specifying the threat against which such union was needed. Fifteen EU nations
met in London to evolve common position on Iraq and stabilization force
required for the newly conquered country.
Trans-Atlantic division on Iraq was dubbed as a thing of the past.
Russian, US, UK and German foreign ministers talked on Iraq. Schroeder tried
to build bridges to US. Poland hinted that France and Germany have role to
play in Iraq. NATO agreed to provide support for Poland peace mission.
Annan urged UNSC to lift sanctions to end isolation of Iraq. Powell
visited Moscow to repair Russia-US ties damaged during Iraq War. Though
Moscow was not convinced over sanctions, yet Duma ratified nuclear arms
treaty with US.

UN RESOLUTION
Reassessment of effects of diplomatic efforts encouraged America to
move ahead. The time for seeking legitimacy for illegal occupation had come.
US pushed a Resolution in UNSC. Russia sought compromise and expected
UN deal on Iraqi sanctions within a week.
America revised the proposed Iraq Resolution, although there was little
resistance to US-British draft on Iraq. Drafting and redrafting of Resolution
revolved around the control of oil wealth and benefits to accrue to various
interested parties. Reconstruction of Iraq and involvement of UN were
mentioned only to facilitate misappropriation of Iraqi assets.

On 22nd May UN lifted sanctions imposed on Iraq and Okayed US-led

control. Salient features of the Resolution were:

It tacitly acknowledged that US and British forces had replaced the UN

arms inspectors by assuring to keep the council informed of their
activities in this regard.

US and Britain to report every three months on Iraq administration.

The oil-for-food programme was extended for six months, which has
swollen into 10-billion-dollar-a-year business.

It made exception for claims for ecological accidents in relation to France

and Spain, which suffered oil spills along their coastlines.

All countries were ordered to immediately freeze any funds or other

assets belonging to the regime or family of Saddam.

The Resolution earned mixed reaction. Immediately after its passage,

Annan said that it was the product of a compromise. When asked whether it
justified the war or not; he replied, I dont want to get into the debate of a post
facto legitimization.
In fact US and Britain cleverly conceded on legal and financial points
during twelve days of negotiations before the vote. In the bargain they secured a
Resolution that gave them far more authority for occupation forces than is
permitted under the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
In drafting the Resolution, US and Britain resisted the pressure to set a
time limit to the occupation. The council had to agree on review the situation
after a year. All those who had opposed the war, ultimately condoned the
crime to scrounge a few bucks.
Bush was pleased that an agreement was reached. He thought that
Resolution would help the Iraqis recover from the huge damage that Saddam
Hussein did to their country. Blair hailed the Resolution; it was very important
day in the UN which had now reunited after its split over the war. It was
extremely important that we put the past behind us now. He was happy the
Crusaders had reunited and the UN had started serving their cause once again.
Referring to Frances yes vote Powell said, I think its a step in the right
direction of moving forward together. Everybody voting for this Resolution
today will join in that effort, in that crusade, really, to help the Iraqi people - not
a crusade for conflict but a crusade for peace, a crusade to help people to a
better life.
Putin declared that Russia was ready to work with US on all fronts.
There are many things that unite us than questions that bring us apart. We can
consider that the UN is back, and at bottom of that is now the key issue: to make

sure that the UN can resume its place This Resolution does not legitimize
war; it opens the way to peace that we must build together said French Foreign
Minister.
Munir explained the reasons for which Pakistan supported the Resolution.
Our position on this Resolution has been guided by the objectives of promoting
the welfare of the Iraqi people, peace and stability in the region and restoring
the international rule of law in accordance with the Charter of the UN.
Syria boycotted voting, but subsequently signed the Resolution out of
concern to improve the living conditions of brotherly Iraqi people subjected to
many years of an unjust embargo. It clarified, the vote in favour of this
Resolution does not mean Syria has changed its stand on the war against Iraq
and still considers it was an illegal war which led to the occupation of a country
by force.
Syrian press slammed the Resolution. It is to control Iraqs wealth and
manage it contrary to the will of its people. It expedites the lifting of sanctions
on Iraq and neglects the basic issues in the Iraqi crisis - mainly the occupation
of Iraq and the pretexts which were used for this occupation, such as accusing
Iraq of possessing Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Saudi daily al-Watan expressed similar feelings. The United States seem
to have obtained an international mandate in the UN Security Council vote (on
Thursday) to occupy Iraq and control its (oil) riches and revenue sources.
Dubais al-Bayan wrote, this Resolution also allows the United States to
take control of Iraqi oil while handing the United Nations a marginal and
worthless role in this country. Al-Khaleej apprehended, Bush will dictate to the
Iraqis how to live, what to eat, what army they must form and what doctrine
they must adopt.
Qatars al-Raya observed, the Resolution seems to give the occupation
troops all legitimacy to manage the economy of Iraq, its oil and decide its
political future. Sharjahs Gulf Today wrote, the floodgates have been opened
for big business. The bait of reconstruction was too sweet to refuse even for the
rich, let alone the dwindling economies of Europe.
The Crusaders, like the pack of wolves, calmed down after going through
the fit of excitement during the kill. They were now all set to feast on flesh of
the dead. Annan named special representative to supervise the arrangements of
the feast. A US company was allowed to have the first bite on port of Umm
Qasr.
Baghdadis showed indifference to end of UN sanctions. Ali Saad said,
the United Nations decision did not surprise me because America came to Iraq

to control oil and this Resolution gives it the right to administer oil revenues
We expected this to happen.
The Coalition has established control over oil wealth of Iraq to start the
business of reconstruction. It will be carried out to earn maximum profits
rather than benefiting the people of Iraq. The Resolution has re-stamped the US
supremacy over world body and legitimized the occupation. Undoubtedly the
passage of Resolution has been the most conspicuously visible success since the
start of the holy war.

LIBERATED BUT NOT FREE

The Resolution formalized the subjugation of Iraqis for indefinite period.
America has been empowered to control the assets of Iraq to rebuild what has
been destroyed by the invaders. The destruction was carried out with urgency,
but reconstruction will be undertaken leisurely.
Mention of time schedule has been deliberately avoided. The colonial
powers never come with time table of their departure. Americans should be no
exception. They will do what they want and at time deemed fit by them.
Nevertheless they will maintain ambiguities about duration of their stay in Iraq
to forestall criticism.
Rumsfeld declared that America had no plans to have long-term bases in
Iraq. It would rather reduce its troops size in Gulf. A few days later he stated
that stay in Iraq might be longer than a year. He took about a week to come out
with reason. Transition to democracy will take time and patience. US wont let
Iraq be made into new Iran.
The agent to the regency, Khalilzad, announced, we will stay with the
Iraqis until they can consolidate a new orderthat will put Iraq firmly on the
path towards democracy, stability and prosperity. The promise of provision of
good governance through democracy will be used to keep the expectations of
Iraqis alive.
The transition to democracy would require an interim government
representing the cross-section of Iraqi people, preferably like-minded.
Apparently America has wide choice in Massoud Barzani, Kurd; Jalal Talabani,
Kurd; US backed Ahmed Chalabi; Aziz al-Hakim of SAIRI and leader of a
secular group, Iyad Allawi. Factually, Americans have faced problems in finding
the persons who could be acceptable to them as well as to Iraqis.
America by toppling Baath Party, has removed secularism from power,
which is synonymous to western democracy; thus made the conditions less
conducive for a democratic process to flourish. In any future setup Shias, being
in majority, have to play dominant role. Although Shias claim to be more

democratic and secular as compared to Sunnis, yet they are more

fundamentalists as could be seen from their rule in Iran.
This has limited the options for ruling Iraq. America has to either patch
up with Shia fundamentalists of Iran and Iraq or reconcile with Baathist Sunni
Sheikhs to exercise control over oil wealth. It has to choose one out of the two
evils.
America will avoid making a bad choice no matter how limited the
options might be. If it could go to war unilaterally there was no reason as to
why it cannot rule the country single-handedly. Americans were under no
obligation or pressure to expedite giving representation to Iraqis. They wont
have to reward anyone, like NA in Afghanistan, as no Iraqi group rendered any
meritorious services during conquest of Iraq.
The Crusaders have demonstrated the solidarity, but Arabs and Muslims
are in complete disarray, thereby in no position to exert any kind of pressure.
Saudis were satisfied in overcoming transition of their ties with US smoothly.
Gulf ministers could do no more than holding closed door meeting.
The envoy of Britain made it clear that there would be no Iraqi
government until elections. Most of Iraqis in any case did not believe
Americans. They saw US promises on democracy no more than a mirage. But
Iraqis, like most people in the world, do want their own government.
The prospects of having their own government were quite bleak. A
superpower has occupied their country and got it legitimized through the UN.
Their leaders stand distinctly divided as Shias, Kurds and Sunnis. The masses
have been rendered destitute by the destruction and plundering. Who would
provide them the government they want and how?
Shias are the strongest entity on democratic counts. They have political
organization in the form of SAIRI and ready-made leadership of Ayatollahs.
They enjoy the support of neighbouring Iran. They also had close contacts with
the invaders before war, but Americans would take time in reposing trust in
them.
Al-Hakim has been the most active Iraqi leader politically. He came back
to Iraq triumphantly on 10th May. Immediately after return he rejected foreign
occupation and SAIRI has been raising concern about length of US stay in Iraq.
A protest rally was held in Baghdad, which blamed US for spreading chaos in
the country and demanded end to occupation immediately.
On 24th May al-Hakim questioned US rule over Iraq in a sermon in Imam
Hussein Mosque. He raised series of questions begging for only one answer.
Let the Iraqis elect who they want. We reject occupation. He rejected religious
extremism and asked Iraqis to reject imposed government. He declared that

Iraqis wanted Islamic government and called for broad-based, secular and
democratic government.
Kurds, the sons of Salah-ud-dins tribe, actively supported the Crusaders
for occupation of Iraq. They enjoy trust and support of Americans. Their
emergence to power and autonomy of Kurdish region is strongly opposed by
Turkey and by Iran as well.
Kurds have been willingly working with US for which they have been
amply rewarded. Mosul got elected council on priority. Kirkuk was the next
town to be democratized wherein Americans supported Kurds amidst ethnic
tensions and Arabs alleging US for favouritism. Soon after the elections in
Kirkuk, the Coalition started envisaging enlarged Kurdish region.
With the toppling of Baath party, Sunnis have lost politically. Shias had
suffered a lot at the hands of Baathists as a result of that the divide between the
two is too deep. Kurds also hate them for similar reasons. Iraqis are conscious
of the adverse effects of their political divide on ethnic and sectarian bases.
They also understand that occupation forces would like to exploit this divide.
For this reason America has been warned against provoking religious or ethnic
imbalance.
As part of reconciliatory effort, Sistani issued Fatwa forbidding murder of
members of Baath party. Al-Hakim appealed for unity in Friday sermon. Former
Iraqi leaders met in Baghdad for similar intent. But the complete devastation of
Iraq has rendered the people hapless despite comprehending the rationale
behind such appeals.
Millions of people lost their jobs with the disbandment of armed forces
and other government organizations. Destruction of electric and water supply
systems further added to the miseries of Iraqis. Resultantly the people remained
pre-occupied in protesting and demanding role in post-war Iraq. Similarly
hundreds of students also carried out protest rallies. Iraqis sought formation of
government and withdrawal of occupation forces.
At the same time pro-monarchy and pro-democracy demonstrations were
held. Some Baghdadis organized pro-US demonstration. These incidents
indicated that Iraqis were far from being a united nation; therefore, America
should face no serious problems in ruling them. There is no major challenge
from any quarter and America is set to rule Iraq for indefinite period. However,
maintenance of law and order will be problematic, because of the rivalries
amongst three main ethnic and sectarian groups and anger against occupation
forces.
The new rulers will try to lull Iraqis with talk of rebuilding and
reconstruction and promises of benefits of vast oil reserves. At the same time

they will endeavour denying means of resistance to Iraqis. To this end an

important decision was announced on 23 rd May to abolish Iraq army and two
ministries including ministry of information. These actions were part of robust
campaign to show the Iraqi people that the Saddam regime has gone forever.
The decision will facilitate achievement of the real aim of the invasion.
Afghanistan and Iraq were attacked to deprive them from capability of resisting
imposition of American will and the means to speak against the civilized
world.
Both the countries have been debarred from having their own armed
forces. Karzai was promised an army in a time-frame spanning over three
decades. At some stage Iraq may also be allowed to raise its own armed forces
through a process which would take at least half a century to complete. The
disbandment of ministry of information was aimed at silencing the critics of the
illegal occupation.
The robust campaign continued even after Bush declared that major
fighting in Iraq was over. This meant that subjugation will be completed
through policing by the Coalition forces. The aim and the means will remain
the same, only bearing the new name.
The occupation forces pledged to strengthen patrolling. Rumsfeld
vowed to use more muscle in Iraq after his boss had announced that major
fighting was over. The use of muscle was essential to suppress lawlessness,
which according to an ex-Iraqi foreign minister had resulted due to deliberate
negligence of US.
The application of muscle resulted in killing of Iraqis either suspected as
supporters of Saddam or protesting against occupation or for other reasons.
Some were shot dead merely because they did not stop at a check point manned
by US troops.
The Coalition forces captured large number of leaders and officials of
Saddam regime, including Mrs. Anthrax, Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash; Iraqs Dr
Germ and Saddams brother-in-law. A mid-level al-Qaeda associate was also
arrested. Saddam, along with his Weapons of Mass Destruction, however
remained elusive. US troops used their muscle beyond the scope of mopping up
by detaining members of Palestinian mission in Baghdad.
Apart from arrests resulting from raids on Baathist hideouts, many men
linked to vanquished regime were persuaded to surrender, including ex-oil
minister and governor of Basra. Occupation forces also concentrated on
disarming the Iraqis.
MKO (Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organization) handed over checkpoints to
US forces. Peoples Mujahideen and MKO agreed to disarm. Possession of

heavy weapons was banned and Iraqis were ordered to surrender weapons by
mid June, but the loyal Kurds were exempted. Shia leaders expressed their
anger over Kurds exemption to arms ban.
Resentment and retaliation against illegal occupation of Iraq has not yet
ended. Although whereabouts of Saddam remained a mystery, yet he managed
to send taped message to Iraqis urging them to fight against foreign forces. He
suggested the use of mosques for resisting US occupation. Even the loyalists
like PKK vowed to retaliate against Turkey and US crackdown.
The occupation forces suffered following casualties during the month of
May due to retaliatory attacks:

On 1st May seven US troops were injured in grenade attack. Two US

Marines died in an explosion on 13th May.

On 26th May a US soldier was killed in ambush near Hadithah.

Two US soldiers were killed and nine wounded in an attack in Fallujah on

27th May. Al-Jazeera reported shooting down of a helicopter as well.

In addition to the above, the occupation forces suffered casualties due to

accidents and mishaps. Three soldiers died on 9th May in helicopter crash.
Another was killed in Baghdad in an accidental blast on 18 th May. Five US
Marines perished in helicopter crash near Karbala on 20th May.
Al-Farooq Brigade of the Iraqi Armed Resistance and Liberation Forces
claimed laying the ambush in Fallujah, which led to speculations that US
troops were caught in guerrilla strikes. The isolated attacks could not be taken
as part of guerrilla warfare. These attacks were natural retaliatory reaction to the
excesses committed by the occupation forces.

CONCLUSION
Opponents of war have surrendered to the will of American. Russia
extended olive branch to US over Iraq. According to Vaiju Naravane of the
Hindu, France, Germany and Russia have decided that it is futile and
counterproductive, even hurtful to their own interest, to publicly oppose
Washington.
Their surrender resulted in legitimization of an illegal act without
bringing any shame to anyone. The Guardian felt that at least the UN should
have been ashamed. The world body provided retrospective sanction to a preemptive strike. Its ill-fated predecessor, the League of Nations, at least had the
decency to collapse after its charter was serially raped.
As regards liberation of Iraqis, Clare Short took it as yet another lie of
Blair. While resigning from the cabinet he said, I am afraid that the assurances

you gave me about the need for a UN mandate to establish a legitimate Iraqi
government has been breached. But as devoted Crusader, Blair was ready to
answer to God for his decisions on Iraq.
Powell too was prepared to explain to Divine Authority the rationale
behind the conquest of the seat of human civilizations. It was to keep the
Islamists away from political power. Anybody who dared to interfere in Iraq
would face armed action.
Iraqis, after having been liberated, have to wait for long to be free. The
people, who fight amongst themselves and seek help from enemies, are destined
to be unfortunate. They have to be made an example for others. Iraqis have
been liberated to begin their quest afresh for peace, democracy and freedom.

30th May 2003

ROADS AND ROADBLOCKS

The Crusaders have assumed the responsibility of preparing roadmaps for
peace for Muslim World. Two roadmaps for peace have been prepared of late;
one has been unfolded and the other kept secret. Both the maps are meant to
revive hopes and expectations for peace in respective regions, but both have
caused apprehensions and speculations. The optimism has been undermined by
the arrogant proxy crusaders.
Either map has thin red lines representing the roads leading to peace. The
alignment of each line has been marred by the black crosses representing the
roadblocks. The Crusaders drew the lines in red and the proxy crusaders have
put the crosses in black.
The Crusaders boasted that the roads lead to peace. The proxy crusaders
remained steadfast on the terms on which the destination of peace would be
reached. On stage both seemed to be countering each others efforts, but behind
the scene both have complete understanding about the purpose of peace ploy.
Palestine and Pakistan will get peace, but not without paying its price. In
bargaining for peace Palestine and Pakistan represent the buyers; whereas Israel
and India are the sellers. The price in case of Palestine will be spelled out by
Sharon and in case of Pakistan it will be spelled out by Vajpayee.
America, as broker of peace, will facilitate striking the deal. During the
process of brokering America will never tell the sellers to make some
concessions. A skillful broker has to extract maximum price from the interested
buyers.

BARGAINING IN MIDDLE EAST

The Crusaders took more than half a century to think of peace for the
people whose land was usurped to create the Zionist State. Even in the belated
realization they have been mindful of Israels interests as was evident from the
latest roadmap. Their peace plan envisaged:

A final and comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

by 2005.

The settlement will include an independent, democratic and viable

Palestinian State living side-by-side in peace and security with Israel.

Without mentioning specific final borders, the plan seeks to end the
occupation of territories since 1967, i.e. West Bank, Gaza and east
Jerusalem.

To reach a solution the Palestinians need leadership acting decisively

against terror.

The Quartet will meet regularly at senior levels to evaluate the parties
performance.

The journey to peace will be phased and in Phase-I the Palestinian

Authority must:

Issue an unequivocal statement reiterating Israels right to exist in

peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional
ceasefire.

Undertake visible efforts on the ground to arrest, disrupt and restrain

individuals and groups conducting and planning violence on Israelis.

Dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure and end all

incitement against Israel.

Bring all security organizations under control of the interior minister.

Hold free elections.

In Phase-I Israel should:

Issue an unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the twostate vision; of an independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian State
(and) calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians
anywhere.

Freeze all construction in Jewish settlements and immediately

dismantle illegal settlement outposts built since March 2001.

End demolitions of the homes of Palestinian militants and withdraw

progressively from the Palestinian autonomous zones that it
reoccupied during the conflict.

In Phase-II, which is to be completed by the end of 2003, following

actions should be taken:

Israel to take steps to enhance maximum territorial contiguity for the

Palestinians and Palestinian Constitution to be ratified.

An international conference will launch the process leading to the

establishment of a Palestinian State with provisional borders.

Quartet members will promote international recognition of the

Palestinian State and UN membership.

Phase-III will be completed by the end of 2005, during which second

international conference will finalize the permanent-status for the
Palestinian State, including settlement of borders, Jerusalem, refugees,
Jewish settlements and peace between Israel and other Arab states.

America, EU, UN and Russia constitute the Quartet. Apparently all these
are neutral parties, but first two are the Crusaders, the third is an organization
meant for serving the interests of the Crusaders and the last is the co-opted
member willing to cooperate with the Crusades. German Foreign Minister
rightly termed the roadmap a European baby.
It is aimed at solving Middle East dispute to reduce world terror. That
was why Powell stressed upon dismantling of terror network out of entire
peace plan. To this end he sought new peace deal with Palestinian Prime
Minister.
The Quartet claimed, the roadmap is not a vague formula for
negotiations and that not one word, not even a comma, will be changed. Sharon
negated this claim and saw the roadmap as a draft, subject to change and
revisions and sought US guarantees before the summit.
Powell promptly changed his stance and said, the roadmap is
controversial. Israel presented a list of 14 reservations. The United States
promised to address 12 of them. On receipt of assurance, Sharon said, I dont
like the roadmap either, but its a lesser evil. Israel approved US-backed
roadmap, provisionally and conditionally. It denied Palestinian refugees the
right to return. Washington welcomed the move.
Powell played down hopes for major breakthrough at the forthcoming
summit at Aqaba, because the tensions are great and the mistrust is high. Bush
however vowed success of Middle East summit. All concerned must shake off
the old arguments and the old ways and act in the cause of peace. And I will do
all I can to reach an agreement and see it enforced.
On 2nd June he arrived in Egypt to kick start Middle East peace process,
but he too expressed some reservations. I fully understand this is going to be a
difficult process I fully understand we need to work with our friends such as
France.
Sharon was advised to give up the rigidity he had shown in dealing with
Intifada and to be flexible regarding peace-plan. He agreed to meet Abbas and
asserted Palestinian self-rule. The meeting of 30th May was reported to have

ended on positive note, but Sharons adviser viewed it differently. The question
is, will the Palestinians disarm and dismantle the terrorist organizations that
have been killing Israeli civilians over the last two-and-a-half years?
Israel on its part had no such intentions. It continued aggression despite
its army chiefs claim that worst of Intifada was over. More than a dozen
Palestinians, including two boys, were killed since second week of May.
Nevertheless Israeli forces withdrew from northern Gaza town and eased travel
curbs on Palestinians.
Abbas opposed changes in peace plan, which came in the form of
guarantees sought by Israel, yet he remained optimistic and hoped that Hamas
militants would agree to stop attacks on Israelis next week. He, however, was
in no position to seek guarantees from anyone; therefore he accepted the
resignation of Erekat.
Palestinians saw the roadmap as yet another reflection of US double
standards. They doubted Israeli move. Sharon doesnt want to comply with the
roadmap said Yasser Abed, head of Palestinian negotiating team. He wont go
any further than the White House forces him to Sharon is counting on support
from certain persons inside the Administration and Congress, and counting on
Bush to lose interest as the (US) election nears.
Hamas vowed to continue attacks and announced that it would only stop
suicide attacks if Israel halted all aggression against the Palestinians. What
our people want is the release of every prisoner, the restitution of our land and
holy places and a halt to the (Israeli) aggression.
There was no change in Arabs plight as observed by Moonis Ahmar.
The Arab League failed to muster support to resist the Israeli reoccupation of
Gaza and West Bank and all such realities encouraged Israel to continue with its
policy of suppression. After the US-British occupation of Iraq and Americas
warning to Syria and Iran, it has become more difficult for the Arab states to
stop Israels blatant violation of human rights and put pressure over the United
States to save the peace process from total destruction.
Some of the helpless Arabs were happy that the roadmap has once again
brought them in the limelight. At least Jordan will be in the centre of such
Arab efforts due to its proximity and its direct involvement in the peacekeeping
efforts. This too is likely to prove false.
The peace-plan was glaringly biased. Reiteration of Israels right to
exist meant that Palestinians must accept illegal state of Israel unconditionally.
In saying that Palestinians need leadership to act against terrorism decisively
two evil intentions were expressed, i.e. Intifada was dubbed as terrorism and
regime change was urged.

Whereas armed struggle of Palestinians was formally declared as

terrorism, the state terrorism perpetrated by Israelis was ignored by calling it
violence. Another anomaly of the roadmap was omission of return of Golan
Heights.
Americans have shown no signs of recovery from their chronic ailment of
partiality. By linking the pullout from occupied areas with ceasing of hostilities
by Palestinians, a victory for Israel has been guaranteed. Either the normalcy
will return or Israel will retain the option of reoccupation at any later stage.
The Crusaders will never press Israel for the sake of peace for
Palestinians. In case the plan does not ensure an outright victory for Israel,
they will start talking in the language they know better. This will allow
complete freedom of action to Israel.
Ahmad Y Majdoubeh of Jordan Times has mentioned the language used
in such eventuality. The minute the US Administration starts talking about the
parties themselves settling matters, the minute it starts talking about giving
parties time to examine and reflect, and the minute it starts describing its role as
that of a facilitator, it becomes clear that the US is neither unwilling to push for
peace or is unable to do so.
There are others like William Pfaff, who thought that the roadmap was a
futile attempt to befool the opponents of recent war. Who is the US trying to
fool? Not the people of civilized world and not even the people of rest of the
world. American leaders fully understood that, but they were confident of
fooling at least the rulers of Arab World.
Israels sincerity about implementation of peace-plan has been doubted
even by Nahum Barnea, editor of Yediot. A government of any other
composition than the present would adopt the plan with enthusiasm. But most of
the ministers in the current (Israeli) cabinet are prepared to support a peace
initiative only if they are assured that it will never be implemented.
The realities of the past are too bitter to be forgotten easily. Both sides
have been blaming each other for aggression. The comparative statement of
aggression reflects that since the beginning of Intifada in September 2000,
Israelis have killed 2,468 Palestinians as against only 742 Israelis killed by the
terrorists. State terrorism has excelled three times as compared to ordinary
terrorism. Destruction of hundreds of houses and other buildings and arrest of
thousands of Palestinians is in addition to the killings.
Apart from bitter feelings, mutual mistrust, American bias, Arabs
helplessness and Israeli insincerity, Iffat Idris Malik pointed out American
elections as yet another reason for shunning optimism. George Bush Junior will
be running for office again in 2004. He will need the support of many of the

factions in the pro-Israel lobby, most notably the Christian Right, to ensure he is
re-elected. It is most certain, therefore, that he will not anger them by pushing
Sharon to follow the roadmap... the roadmap to peace in Middle East has a good
chance of ending in failure. In such eventuality the Palestinians will be blamed
for the failure.

BARGAINING FOR BANIA

Peace for Pakistan has been hostage to Indian belligerence since long.
India increased the ransom after 9/11 and has been revising the amount since
then. Each payment of ransom was followed by additional demand. India now
wants to bargain afresh through dialogue.
The kidnapper of peace has complete understanding with the Sheriff of
the global village; therefore, he is in no hurry to start the bargaining. It has been
and will keep making the moves to its convenience displaying usual arrogance.
Vajpayee acknowledged Jamalis invitation by asking Pakistan to create
suitable climate for talks. A few days later he reiterated the demand for end to
cross-border terrorism. He welcomed ban imposed on Hizb and hoped that it
would make the atmosphere more conducive for peace.
He warned to quit if his peace overtures failed and asked Islamabad to
resolve differences through talks. India and Pakistan are partners against
terrorism The geographical location of the two countries alone makes it
essential for India and Pakistan to have good relations. We all only stand to gain
by no longer exhausting ourselves in a nonsensical confrontation.
His threat to quit was to silence the hawks, who opposed his peace
manoeuvre right at the outset. VHP had warned against peace with Pakistan.
Most of the pressure came from his own party. One of his ministers refused to
travel to Pakistan to attend SAARC meeting on education.
Official stance of India indicated that the secret roadmap has been drawn
by the hardliners. Sinha declared that roadmap for talks was ready. He was for
sustained talks with Pakistan and no summit until bilateral issues were solved.
The game of brinkmanship has been resumed with revised tactics. Sustained
talks have replaced sustained pressure.
He was confident that all issues would be resolved and peace with
Pakistan was the goal of India. Advani too was optimistic about Indo-Pak
friendship. He was prepared to go to the table without asking Pakistan to
change its stand.
India welcomed release of fishermen by Pakistan, but termed the CBMs
completely inadequate. On its part India nominated envoy to Pakistan, agreed

to resume Delhi-Lahore bus service and promised to release 130 Pakistani

fishermen and civilians; rest of the measures were to be considered in due
course.
In the context of confidence building India considered cross-border
terrorism as the core issue. Parliament was told that 1400 militants were ready
to cross Line of Control. Advani asked Islamabad to stop infiltration. Indian
army alleged continuation of infiltration. As Islamabad had not lived up to
promises, therefore, Fernandes refused ceasefire in the Valley.
India reiterated joint monitoring of frontiers and proposed sharing of
intelligence. So, let us have intelligence-sharing under a joint mechanism. If, as
they (Pakistanis) claim, these things are happening outside their control, then
they should have no problem in agreeing to cooperate with us. The proposal
was based on the utility of intelligence-sharing about Sikhs between Rajiv and
Benazir. Once again India wanted to out-wit Pakistan.
Perpetration of state terrorism against Kashmiris is one of the ways to
show arrogance. Indian Parliament was informed on 7th May that 570 guerrillas
were killed in six months. Indian army claimed killing 100 Mujahideen in last
six weeks. Ten thousand Kasmiris have been killed in three years. In month of
May alone 296 were martyred.
Announcement about killing of guerrillas was made when confidence
building measures taken by Pakistan were dubbed as superficial as if to convey
that steps taken by India constituted the real stuff. It was followed by the
decision to send six new battalions to IHK to participate in the ongoing carnage:

On 5th May seven Kashmiris were killed in blasts and clashes. Next day
thirteen more were killed.

Fourteen including four Indian soldiers were killed on 7th May. Next day
two soldiers were among nine gunned down in IHK.

On 9th May an NC activist was among five killed and eleven more were
shot dead next day.

A policeman died in Jammu on 11th May and next day nine civilians were
killed in clashes.

Eight fighters were among twelve killed on 13 th May and next day two
soldiers were among nine killed.

On 16th May five fighters were among nine killed in gun battles and next
day nine more were killed in violence.

Six of a family were among sixteen killed on 19th May. Two days later a
female teacher was killed.

On 22nd May seventeen were shot dead in the Valley and India claimed
killing a Lashkar man in Delhi. Three days later five more were killed in
IHK.

On 26th May fourteen, including eight fighters, were killed and next day
eight more were killed in violence.

Indian troops killed six fighters on 28th May. Next day six more were
killed in operation launched in occupied Kashmir.

On 30th May five fighters were among seven killed. Next day sixteen
were killed and twenty-one injured in shootouts and blasts. On 2nd June
eleven more died in violence.

Kashmiris residing across the Line of Control were also not spared. Seven
civilians were killed in Indian shelling on 7th May. Two days later the shelling
killed three children in AJK. Next day a boy and a girl were injured in Neelum
Valley. On 17th May one civilian was killed and four injured. A week later a
woman died in Indian shelling.
India also showed its arrogance by continuously enhancing its military
prowess. On 8th May it tested the satellite launcher and four days later it placed
communication satellite into orbit. During last four weeks it carried out about
half a dozen missile tests.
Pakistan displayed keenness for dialogue much more than the prevalent
environments warranted. Somehow the leaders of Pakistan have been obsessed
with the idea of proving their love for peace or their desire for peaceful coexistence. Disproportionate exuberance can produce disproportionate
disappointments.
Jamali was quick in getting the mandate from the parliament for parleys
with India. He was ready to go to India for peace. Travel and sports ties with
India were restored and he announced release of detained Indian fishermen. He
wished the start of Pak-India peace process and found Vajpayee serious about
peace. Jamali desired resolution of all issues with India amicably.
Kasuri also wanted talks with India in weeks, but without any preconditions. He sought regular Pak-India dialogue. Rashid wishfully speculated
that Pak-India talks were likely in June. The desires expressed in official
statements were confirmed by reports from inner circles that Pakistan wanted
talks with India soon.
PIA waited for a nod for India flights. Pakistan was ready to start trade
with India said Humayun. Pak Envoy to US wanted that India should be
granted MFN status at once. Kasuri said that intelligence-sharing with India
was possible. Jamali desired that Pakistan and India should be one compact
bloc.

Pakistani leaders stampeded for peace by suggesting disarmament. They

wanted serious talks for nuclear and strategic stability. Rashid announced that
Pakistan was ready for limited arms cut. India remained cool to nuclear test
moderation offer. Its annual defence report said, every Indian city is within the
reach of Chinese missiles. It was a shut up call to those who wanted to equate
Pakistan with India on nuclear issue.
Undue keenness of the government for dialogue invited criticism from
opposition leaders. They feared compromise on Kashmir. Jamali assured that
Kashmir solution was the only goal of Pakistan. Musharraf said that Kashmir
was not to be sidelined.
Pakistani leaders were shaken from the fits of optimism by Indian
attitude. Jamali accepted that he had no magic wand to stop incursions. Kasuri
denied that Pakistan was supporting Jehadi groups and asked India to keep up
peace moves.
Kashmiris did not show undue impatience or optimism about Vajpayees
offer. Mufti asked Mujahideen to order ceasefire for peace. Hizb leader ruled
out immediate truce; it is possible only if India pulls back. Lashkar rejected
talks with India and Hurriat called for roadmap to resolve Kashmir.
AJK government backed Pakistans steps on Vajpayees offer. Sikandar
however forecast gives and takes on Kashmir and saw Chenab as natural
partition line for division of Kashmir. His suggestion was widely criticized.
The world leaders welcomed resumption of Pak-India contacts. EU
lauded Jamalis peace initiative. Annan hoped tensions will ease. China hoped
Pakistan and India will resolve issues. Muslim World welcomed peace moves.
US, Russia and China agreed on Indo-Pak peace.
The existence of pressure for talks was denied by all concerned parties.
Vajpayee did it more than once and Jamali also denied external pressure behind
talks with India. America rejected all reports about exertion of pressure on
either party.
The ground realities refuted these claims. India has been constantly
seeking more and more American pressure on Pakistan for curbing crossborder terrorism. America has been relentlessly obliging India for the last
eighteen months. The pressure had been yielding the desired results.
India asked for more, but America realized that further pressure would
amount to be being conspicuously unreasonable. America has already been
blamed for bias and asking for more from Pakistan would confirm this
allegation. That will be against the interests of America.
Iraq War has exerted pressure on America in this context. The prevalent
situation dictated the need to salvage rather than aggravating it further. America

was constrained to ask India to prepare a roadmap for peace similar to the one it
had unveiled for the Middle East.
Till consolidation of victory in Iraq, America wanted to resort to
bargaining on negotiation tables. The option of military means had to be
deferred for sometime. It did not mean that the aims of disarming and
defeating terrorism have been aborted as was indicated by recent discussion on
arms control and security concerns with Pakistan.
India acknowledged American concerns. It was also in Indias interest to
adopt revised line of action suggested by the superpower. This could also help
in promoting India-US-Israel partnership and lifting of discriminatory curbs
on technology-transfer.
Pakistan has been urging US to pressurize India for easing tensions. Its
weaker position and accusations of sponsoring terrorism were the main reasons
for its longing for peace at any price. India and America understood its
compulsions and saw no harm in giving peace a chance.
Persistence of the pressure on Pakistan was confirmed by the following
statements:

On 5th May Powell said, moment of opportunity in Pak-India ties has

come.

Next day America desired that more was needed to lower India-Pak
tension. Armitage ruled out mediation, but urged Musharraf to act by
calling him man of his word.

On 8th May Musharraf asserted that if there were any camps those would
be gone by tomorrow. US agreed to facilitate Pak-India talks, but
refused to spell out time-frame for solution of Kashmir dispute.

Jamali denied the plan for division of Kashmir on 9 th May there by

revealing the nature of pressure. Five days later Pakistan sought US
mediation in Kashmir dispute.

On 23rd May Musharraf claimed that back of miscreants has been

broken. Kashmiri freedom fighters were included in the list of
miscreants.

On 1st June India announced that Bush would further press Musharraf on
terrorism.

Next day Vajpayee was asked whether Bush gave assurance about putting
pressure on Musharraf or not. He replied, it is difficult to express in
words. (The Yankee must have used slang while assuring Vajpayee.) I
also told Bush that preliminary discussions have started. The real and
substantive talks will take time.

On 20th May Commonwealth upheld Pakistans exclusion. It wanted more

progress on restoration of democracy. This was done to pressurize Pakistan for
the noble cause of democracy. Reportedly India lobbied to keep Pakistan out
of Commonwealth. It was unfortunate that some wise Pakistanis thought that it
was due to India as if Pakistan has never been treated discriminately without
Indian lobbying.
India too had to be pressurized to give up belligerence to pursue the aims
through peace ploy. Once India agreed, Armitage praised Vajpayees
statesmanship. Bhandara, acknowledged that US was behind Indo-Pak peace
bid.
Even in pursuit of peace America will remain biased. Bakhtiar Hakeem
commented on this veiled roadmap in these words:

This will not be based on the superior values of equality of people and
nations. This will not be based on euphoric Charter of UNO. This will not
be based on the UN Resolution of January 1948.

This will cater for Indian interests more than that of Pakistan. People of
Kashmir would play the last fiddle. They would be asked to feel happy
with whatsoever is coming their way. Just see how American might has
liberated the people of Iraq. And how satisfied should they be today with
marine boot on their bottom.

It will suit American interests at first place. What will be those interests?
The path to peace must lead to neutralization of Weapon of Mass Destruction in
the context of the Subcontinent. Solution of Kashmir dispute is must for
planned disarmament through negotiations. Information Minister of Pakistan
has already indicated this by promising disarmament after Kashmir solution.
During this period Pakistan has to be pressed for curbing of extremism as
well. The Crusaders have not been pleased by the smashing of billboards by JI
activists and quitting of Khawajas by ATC and their release by SC Review
Board.

CONLCUSION
The roadmaps have promised peace for Palestine and Pakistan. Both
will get it in bits and pieces, provided they pay the price of each bit in advance.
The first step towards peace will be the acceptance by both that they have been
perpetrating or sponsoring cross-border terrorism. Both have no way out. Abbas
has been confident about Hamas giving up resistance for peace. Musharraf has
already broken the back of militants.

Sharon will not give up Israels right of self-defence even if it amounted

to subversion of the peace-plan. Similarly India will intensify counterinsurgency operations in occupied Kashmir. Both India and Israel will have no
pressure to expedite the peace process or to check violence.
Pakistan will keep blaming India for delaying talks and Palestinians will
accuse Israel of not reciprocating the measures taken by them. Their adversaries
enjoy plenty of guarantees to act in manner they deem necessary. They are
privileged to move slow or not to move at all. Palestine and Pakistan can do
nothing about it.
At the end of journey to peace both are likely to be disappointed.
Vajpayee has already declared that Kashmiris want to be with India. Sharon
has long list of reservations on the plan formulated by the Quartet.

7th June 2003

AGONIES OF AFGHANS
Afghans have been Enduring Freedom for the last eighteen months.
They no more suffered from the cruel rule of Taliban, but negligence of the
liberators has been quite agonizing. Some unfortunate actions of the
liberators have further added to their agonies.
As the Crusaders marched on to liberate Iraqis, about a dozen prisoners
from Guantanamo Bay were released after establishing that these captives were
not a big threat any more. The critics of Iraq War unnecessarily dubbed this

noble gesture as a ploy to deflect criticism and blamed America for taking too
long to establish innocence of the released captives. These ignorant critics
were not cognizant of the commitments of the Crusaders.
Rumsfeld visited Kabul and assured Afghans that America still
remembered them earnestly. It was interested in peace and prosperity of
Afghans who had suffered a lot during the rule of savages called Taliban. He
vowed hunting of their remnants remained top priority.
Taliban were to be hunted to the last man for restoration of peace. To this
end US urged Afghan rulers must play their role. The same was applicable to
the neighbours, particularly the one who wanted peace at all costs.

PEACE AND PROSPERITY

Peace remained a challenge for Karzais Government. Worsening security
environments caused him concern. The reaction of foreigners in Afghanistan to
the situation was generally indifferent. When aid agencies were attacked they
closed their offices and suspended relief work. America barred its diplomats
from attending Afghan military parade. Australia contemplated sending a team
to assess security needs.
Karzai was left at his own to improve the darkened outlook of
Afghanistan. He threatened to become tough with law and order. The only
tough action he took to address pressing security problems was naming of a
body to probe Masoods killing.
Factional fighting were the main cause of security related problems.
Tussle between Dostum and Atta in Mazar, Ismail and Amanullah in Herat, and
Padshah Khan and Kabul resulted in major fighting:

Son of Padshah Khan was killed in fighting on 24 th March. Two days later
seven persons were killed in factional fighting in Baghdis province near
Turkmenistan.

On 9th April six Afghans were killed in Faryab and next day seventeen
more were killed in clash between Atta and Dostum militias.

Dostums commander and two bodyguards were killed on 15th April.

On 5th May five were killed in tribal clash in Khost and two days later
three Afghans were killed in factional fighting.

Five were killed in northern Afghanistan on 16 th May and two more were
killed in exchange of fire next day.

On 18th May six were killed in factional fighting near Mazar and three
days later one more was killed and two were wounded.

Eleven persons were killed in factional fighting on 12th June. On 17th June
six were killed in clash between Niazi and Piraan tribes in Khost and
forces of Amanullah and Ismail clashed in Herat next day.

Efforts were made to end factional fighting. Karzai traveled to Paktia for
talks with governor. A team was dispatched to resolve dispute between Dostum
and Atta. Karzai summoned Dostum to Kabul and appointed him as adviser.
His move to keep Dostum away from Mazar did not work. Dostum refused to
go to Kabul.
In southern and eastern Afghanistan US planes were called to stop
factional fighting. Afghan authorities, particularly the commanders in various
provinces, taking lead from Coalition forces, dubbed all the victims of their
aggression as Taliban.
Karzai vowed to quit if he failed to bring unruly provinces in line. He
once again pledged to launch a drive to disarm private armies of warlords;
instead of doing that he advised the Coalition forces preparing to invade Iraq.
Take very special care that security is immediately provided. Ensure that in the
political process that no factions with arms are supported. He said all about his
helplessness.
Law enforcing agencies were incapable of meeting the colossal security
requirements. Expansion of ISAF beyond Kabul was once again urged and
denied. After death of 62 Spanish peacekeepers in plane crash in Turkey, the
chances of expansion further diminished. NATO was asked to take command of
the force as rest of the world was reluctant.
Raising army was delayed due to indecision on its size, composition, role
and composition of command structure. Afghans shied away from joining an
army with uncertain future. Perforce governors were asked to contribute recruits
for army. Police too suffered for similar problems. The existing police force was
slammed by Amnesty International for abuses on human rights.
The menace of narcotics added to the law and order problems. Four tones
of Hashish were seized in Kandahar. Aerial spray to destroy opium killed five
Afghans, though US denied spraying poppy crops. Heroin factories were
destroyed in Jalalabad area. Measures taken by the government failed in
checking the rise in poppy cultivation. Office of anti-drug agency was attacked
in Jalalabad. Seven anti-drug workers were killed in Uruzgan. Afghan Foreign
Minister appealed for global support to curb drug trade.
Heroin was seized on Tajik-Afghan border. Russian guards nabbed ten
drug peddlers disguised as shepherds. Blair accused Afghan drug traders of
funding terrorists. Some analysts felt that the menace of narcotics might strain
relations of Afghan Government with the civilized world.

Landmines remained a security hazard. A US vehicle was destroyed near

Kandahar. Two Afghan troops were killed and another was wounded in Khost in
separate mine blasts. A German soldier was killed in Kabul. De-mining was
hampered by frequent attacks on de-miners. One de-miner was killed and two
were injured in firing. Attacks on de-miners resulted in suspension of UN
missions in southern Afghanistan. Perforce police was deployed along KabulKandahar road to resume mine clearing.
Overall security environments in Afghanistan have been sliding
backward according to Lakhdar Brahimi:

The issue of security arises at every turn. It casts a long shadow over the
whole peace process and, indeed, over the whole future of Afghanistan.

Rivalries between factions and local commanders, impunity for human

rights violations, and the daily harassment of ordinary Afghan citizens by
both commanders and local security forces are all too common.

John Sifton of Human Rights Watch confirmed observations of Brahimi.

Violence, stealing, looting, rape are the result of scores of thousands of
unprofessional, untrained and undisciplined troops running wild.
The peace was essential for rehabilitation and reconstruction without
which the promised prosperity could not materialize. Repatriation of refugees
markedly slowed down, despite signing of deal with Pakistan and establishment
of special cells for refugees.
Apathy of donors and insecurity were generally quoted as impediments in
repatriation. In fact the occupation forces did not want an influx of returnees. If
Afghans could be pushed out of Europe despite criticism, then repatriation from
Pakistan would have been no problem.
Rehabilitation of state institutions was the most important task for
provision of good governance. Reorganization of judiciary made little progress,
as Chief Justices position became controversial. His qualifications were
questioned, because of his insistence on Islam as the only source of law in
Afghanistan.
Drafting of Constitution for Afghanistan progressed steadily. Women
were assured more rights and a Hindu member was included in the commission.
Ex-king opened new body to review the draft. UN hailed constitution of new
commission.
Mass consultation drive was launched as some aspects of the Constitution
were to be debated. It was however feared that debate could be hampered due to
prevalent violence. International Crisis Group observed flaws in the process of
drafting. Hekmatyar rejected draft constitution. Despite difficulties, the final
draft will be ready on schedule in September after its scrutiny by a Swiss team.

While the Constitution was being framed for stability of the future
political setup in Afghanistan the present regime experienced problems in the
same context. The Crusaders appeared to be losing faith in Karzai as was
indicated by reports that prospects of stability under Karzai were remote and
Zahir Shah was ready to accept Afghan leadership.
Government services for public health remained non-existent and
Afghan women and children suffered the most according to UNICEF. Karzai
estimated that twenty years would be needed to raise health standards. AlShifa, a Pakistani NGO, organized an eye camp at Jalalabad and US health
official opened refurbished hospital in Kabul.
Cultural emancipation remained a worry for the civilized world. Major
issues of concern were social status of women and persistence of conservative
traditions. America resumed cultural exchanges with Afghanistan to make a
breakthrough; a private radio came on air on 15th June; French first lady
reopened archaeology library and UNESCO vowed to protect cultural heritage.
During the period two journalists were arrested on charges of blasphemy.
Both the journalists were involved in publication of an article against Islams
place in future Constitution of Afghanistan under caption of Holy Fascism.
Their arrest caused lot of concern to the West. RSF (Reporters sans Frontiers)
asked Karzai to release the journalists. HRW condemned, UN expressed
concerns and journalists appealed for free press.
Insecurity and corruption were identified as reasons of unexpectedly slow
progress in rehabilitation. Karzai repeatedly vowed to eradicate corruption and
nepotism, but improvement of overall environments seemed to be beyond the
capabilities of his government.
Lack of funds was another reason. On 12 th May Afghan workers protested
and demanded salary in Kabul. Afghan civil servants got pays only when some
revenue trickled in. Karzai failed to ensure regular generation of revenues,
because most of it was pocketed by the warlords. He asked governors to hand
over tax revenues and planned to replace provincial customs and finance
directors. He then pressed warlords to hand over cash. EU welcomed Kabuls
decision on revenue.
The media seldom mentioned the real cause. The Crusaders were not
interested in rehabilitation or reconstruction of Afghanistan. America and
Europe have not stepped beyond making promises. Bush and Blair only kept the
hopes alive by vowing to fulfill pledges on reconstruction.
Karzai went to London to discuss reconstruction, constitution and drugs.
The host however emphasized on the last issue. Japan was the only exception as
it regularly fulfilled its promises.

THE MANHUNT
America claimed that abilities of al-Qaeda had severely diminished, but
CIA warned that al-Qaeda was preparing for chemical and nuke attacks. The
contradictory claims were needed to meet conflicting requirements of the war
on terror. The former was for satisfying own people about success of the
ongoing war and the later was to justify its continuation.
During hunting US troops focused on areas around Kandahar and Spin
Boldak in southern region; Paktia and Paktika in the east; and surrounding areas
of Kabul. On 20th June US troops were deployed for carrying out operations
against Taliban in Nangarhar adjoining Mohmand Agency. Pakistan agreed to
do more and assisted the operation by deploying its troops along border.
The man-hunters achieved following successes during three months:

On 24th March US troops held two suspected Taliban. Two days later four
ex-Taliban officials were held in Ghazni province and four militants were
captured after rocket attacks in Kandahar.

American troops arrested a Taliban suspect on 27th March and two days
later US planes pounded Taliban hideouts north of Kandahar.

On 30th March ten Taliban were killed in Kandahar operation. Next day
eight more were arrested in Ghazni.

A suspected Taliban base camp near Spin Boldak was attacked and
captured on 4th April. Eight Taliban were killed.

On 9th April US bombing killed eleven Afghan civilians in Paktika and

four days later four suspected bombers died in blast in Khost.

One person was killed in US raid in southern Afghanistan on 22nd April.

On 7th May US troops held two Afghans with suspected links to

Hekmatyar and four days later two attackers were killed near Khost. Two
more were killed on 17th May.

On 21st May US troops killed four Afghan soldiers and injured four
outside embassy building on suspicion.

Five suspected Taliban were held in Kandahar on 25 th May. Two days

later Taliban commander, Mulla Ghausuddin and his comrade were killed
in gun battle in Zabul province.

On 4th June US and Afghan forces attacked Taliban ten kilometers north
of Spin Boldak. The attackers killed 47 and captured 21 in nine-hour
battle.

US troops killed four near Pak-Afghan border on 10th June and detained
fifteen Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in Uruzgan nine days later.

On 23rd March US troops claimed seizing weapon cache. In April

Romanian troops seized another near Qalat. In June US troops recovered blowpipe missiles. The pressure exerted by the Coalition troops forced Taliban to
abandon two districts in Zabul province.
Contribution of Afghan Government in manhunt increased significantly
during last quarter. It appeared that admonishment of Karzai by US Senators
during his trip to Washington proved effective in saving the blood of US
soldiers.
He threatened government officials who shirked fighting Taliban. He also
tried to address the problem directly and invited Taliban leaders for talks, but
his endeavour to woo Taliban was not likely to succeed according to Yusufzai.
Similarly Gul Agha ordered Taliban to leave Kandahar or face severe
punishment.
Afghan security forces intensified their efforts as governors urged them
on. They also assisted US forces in operations conducted in southern
Afghanistan. The achievements were as under:

On 25th March Afghan authorities arrested ex-Taliban minister, Maulvi

Shahidkhel and by the end of March 150 Taliban were killed in Herat.

Afghan authorities claimed killing twenty Taliban on 3 rd April and five

days later twenty more were captured in Kandahar.

Afghan soldiers killed ten Taliban in Zabul on 27 th April and two days
later two rocket attackers were arrested in Kabul.

On 3rd May ten Taliban suspects were arrested in Zabul and two days later
eight more were held for shooting at worker of a de-mining agency.

Two Taliban officials were held in Spin Boldak on 2 nd June and next day
four were killed in Kandahar.

On 8th June Afghan forces killed two Taliban in southeast Afghanistan.

Operations by the forces of Coalition and puppet regime could not quell
the amber of revenge and Afghans love for freedom. Attacks on occupation
forces were constantly on the rise. UN was concerned over deadly Afghan
attacks. America extended the ban on diplomats travel in Afghanistan.
Some actions of the occupation forces proved to be counter productive.
Amnesty International called for probe into killing of eleven Afghans due to US
bombing. America closed the matter by terming it a tragic incident.

On 21st May US soldiers guarding its Embassy in Kabul killed four

Afghan soldiers and injured four more. Afghans, handling some stores in nearby
compound, were suspected of mischief and fired upon by jittery Yankees. US
spokesman blamed heightened tension for the incident and the Embassy
regretted the loss of life. Afghans however resented the incidents. A rally in
Kabul raised slogans against Bush. Violent demonstration resulted in closure of
US Embassys main entrance.
Taliban were blamed for exploiting Iraq War, who condemned illegal
invasion. Hekmatyar warned Bush that he would face thousands of Osamas in
the wake of Iraq War. But the rise in attacks on US forces had nothing to do
with Iraq War.
The war might have affected the morale of US troops. They were
refrained from watching TV pictures showing their comrades captured and
killed in Iraq. The war also increased the chances of their staying away from
homes much longer as they continued feeling the heat of amber:

On 25th March rockets were fired on post near Khost and two days later a
Pakistani oil tanker was blown up near US base in Kandahar.

On 29th March two US soldiers were killed in ambush in Helmand. Next

day rockets hit ISAF headquarters, an Afghan air base and a military
division in Nangarhar. Taliban vowed to launch strike against US troops
in coming days.

On 1st April Taliban claimed capturing three posts. Next day two Afghan
soldiers were killed in clash, three guards perished in ambush in Nimroz
and US base in Kunar was attacked.

Taliban claimed killing fifteen Afghan security men in Helmand on 3rd

April and rockets landed near US military base in Khost.

Karzais friend was gunned down in Uruzgan on 4 th April. Next day

armed Taliban torched a school in Kandahar and an Afghan deputy
commander was injured in bomb blast in Jalalabad.

Coalition bases came under rocket fire in Khost and Gardez on 6 th and 7th
April.

Attackers fired rockets at US base in Orgun on 10th April. Two days later
three US troops were killed in Kunar. A landmine was found at Bagram
base as Franks visited troops.

On 13th April nephew of Kandahar Governor was killed in Chaman and

an explosion took place near US Embassy.

Three Afghans were injured in blast in Kabul on 14 th April, two Afghan

troops were killed and Italians were attacked in Khost.

A soldier of Afghan Militia was killed in rocket attack on 16th April. Next
day a bomb exploded in Kabul, grenade blast rocked UNICEF office in
Jalalabad and four Afghan soldiers were killed in Zabul.

On 21st April gunmen fired at US-led command base in Bagram. Two

days later Taliban killed nine Afghan militiamen in Zabul and captured
eight pro-government men. Two Afghan de-miners were wounded the
same day.

Two US troops were killed east of Shkin near Pakistan border on 25th
April and Coalition and Afghan forces were attacked in Bamiyan. Four
days later three Afghan soldiers were killed.

On 4th May a driver of de-mining team was killed and two more were
wounded in an ambush south of Kabul. Next day US troops were
subjected to rocket attack near Gardez.

Two Afghans and deminers were wounded in an attack on 6 th May. Four

days later a cleric close to Karzai was shot dead in southern Afghanistan.

On 20th May US base in Orgun came under rocket attack. Three days later
Taliban burnt down a tent school.

US troops were attacked near Gardez on 24th May. Next day two workers
of aid agencies were injured in bomb attack in Jalalabad area.

On 28th May US military vehicle was hit by remote controlled bomb.

Next day US and Afghan military base in Gardez came under rocket
attack.

Missiles hit check post at Pak-Afghan border on 1st June. Two days later a
blast damaged home of Karzais brother.

On 7th June a car bomb hit bus carrying German soldiers killing four.
Reportedly peacekeepers were forewarned of suicide attack in Kabul.

Six were killed in bus attack in Helmand on 12 th June and US forces in

Paktia exchanged fire with attackers. Four days later rockets were fired at
three US bases.

The collateral factor also caused some damage to American troops. Six
soldiers died in helicopter crash on 23rd March and another crashed in southeast
Afghanistan on 3rd June. One was wounded during exercise and another shot
himself.
The increase in intensity of attacks indicated the revival of command
structure and regrouping of resistance forces. A senior Taliban leader, Dadullah
vowed to throw out foreigners. Ex-Taliban governor of Kandahar pledged to
continue Jihad. Hekmatyar urged Muslims to fight US.

Mulla Omar issued fresh call for Jihad. There are only two symbols left
in the world today: One Islam, which is a religion of peace, and the other
symbol is Bush, who is a symbol of terror and hatred. This was followed by
distribution of leaflets urging Afghan soldiers to join Taliban.
The conduct of retaliatory attacks revealed shortcomings of the resistance
groups. The incidents, like exploding of car bomb killing two fighters and
premature blast in Kabul killing three, spoke about lack of training. Preferring
pitched battles over hit-and-run tactics pointed out tactical misconceptions at
command level.
Occupation forces too had some misconceptions. They still tend to
believe that anti-government militants were paying Afghans to attack US bases.
They refused to acknowledge the indigenous nature of resistance and its causes;
instead they suspected foreign hand in suicide bombing.

RELATIONS WITH NEIGHBOURS

The clashes between aggrieved Pushtoons and occupation forces were
bound to spillover to Pakistan. Afghanistan was concerned about actions of
Taliban, probably operating from bases across border of southern Afghanistan.
On 16th April Pak-Afghan border guards traded fire in North Waziristan.
Tense-calm prevailed till Musharraf and Karzai talked to defuse tension. Karzai
denied rift with Pakistan. Both the leaders reiterated their resolve to fight
terrorism.
During his visit to Islamabad Karzai sought Pakistans help against
Taliban. He named Mohammad Usmani, the closest confidante of Mulla Omar;
Mulla Dadullah, one legged former intelligence chief; top military commander
and internal security chief, Mulla Brader; and former Kandahar intelligence
chief, Hafiz Majeed. They are criminals of war against the Afghan people
and we want to have them arrested.
Afghan Foreign Minister alleged that wanted Taliban were hiding in
Pakistan. Islamabad rejected Kabul charge, but Karzai repeated the accusation.
The challenge that we face in Afghanistan is the continuation of terrorism and
their presence along the borders of Afghanistan and the occasional activities that
are happening inside Afghanistan, and it is extremely important for both
Afghanistan and Pakistan to strategically address this question of extremism and
terrorism in the interest of people of the two countries.
Abdullah urged Pakistan to act against Taliban. FBI too asked for
Pakistans help in Afghanistan. On 27th April crackdown against Taliban was

launched. Troops arrested two persons linked to attack on US soldiers.

Musharraf sought ties of trust with Afghanistan.
Situation again took an unpleasant turn. On 5th June Afghanistan sent
seven dead bodies of Taliban killed near Spin Boldak. Pakistan protested
dumping of the dead bodies and returned those. Exchange of messages using
dead bodies was a deplorable act. Dumping of dead bodies of Taliban
frightened Afghan refugees who hoped to return. Pak-Afghan relations were
once again strained. Pakistani, Afghan and US officials held a meeting to
discuss the related matters, but the end of mistrust was not in sight. Another
operation in Nangarhar and Kunar was in the offing.
Karzai and his companions forgot what Pakistan had done in facilitating
the toppling of their adversaries who had driven the present rulers out of the
arena. Pakistan played important role in elevating Karzai from running a
business of Afghan food to throne of Kabul and freeing Tajiks from the
confinement of Panjsher Valley.
According to Centcom report displayed on website Pakistan provided five
air bases with permission to land anywhere in emergency. A total of 57,800 air
sorties were carried out from Pakistans space/soil and 0.4 million litres of fuel
per day was provided along with other services. The extent of cooperation
revealed by the report caused stir even in Pakistan, but the beneficiaries
proved to be thankless people.
The issue of prisoners remained an irritant in Pak-Afghan relations. Fifty
Afghans were freed on the eve of Karzais visit and he promised to release more
Pakistani prisoners soon. On 14th May Jamali ordered release of all Afghan
prisoners, but for release of Pakistani prisoners Sherpao had to visit Kabul. At
last Afghanistan freed 66 more Pakistanis on 26th May.
Pakistan always accommodated the trade needs of its land-locked
neighbour even at the risk suffering from smuggling done in the name of trade.
On 2nd April Afghanistan hailed trade facilities extended by Pakistan. Possibility
of opening of more trade routes was discussed. Pakistan also offered free
industrial zones near Chaman and Torkham.
Pakistan was keen to participate in rebuilding Afghanistan. Musharraf
repeatedly reminded Washington to do more for reconstruction of Afghanistan.
Kabul awarded a contract worth $ 25 million to Pakistani firm for construction
of road from Chaman to Kandahar.
Pakistan agreed to provide training to Afghans as part of rehabilitation
process. Sherpao discussed repatriation during his visit to Kabul. Afghanistan
sought help in banking sector. Islamabad and Kabul agreed to hold talks twice
every year and Pakistan backed Karzai to root out drug production.

Karzai praised Irans contribution towards rebuilding. Afghanistan, Iran

and UN signed agreement on refugees. Khatami, Karzai and Karimov signed
trans-Afghan road link deal. Afghanistan facilitated holding of secret US-Iran
talks.
Russia was interested in checking the revival of Islamic fundamentalism
in Afghanistan. It warned of guerrilla groups and offered cooperation to NATO
in Afghanistan. Indian Envoy also visited Moscow for talks on Afghanistan.
Central Asian states agreed on reconstruction plan for Afghanistan.

CONCLUSION
America will not forget Afghanistan and instead remain committed to
it. This commitment has not been influenced by the interests of Afghans, but by
the interests which are far superior them. In pursuit of those interests America
will not hesitate in sabotaging Karzais moves if so required. Brahimis
apprehensions wont deter them.
The questions raised by IISS will cause them no worry, no matter how
pertinent those might be:

How long can President Hamid Karzai maintain legitimacy if he cannot

curb Fahims power?

How long would the people accept the existing Afghan setup if the
warlords arent brought to heel?

How long would Pushtoons accept second class status under defence
minister Muhammad Qasim Fahims Tajik-based leadership without
rebelling?

How long would Pakistan refrain from intervening in Afghanistan while

Russia, Iran and India consolidate their positions in that country?

America has enough strength to deal with Pushtoons and Pakistan if they
pick up courage to act irresponsibly. The necessity of legitimacy will be
rendered redundant when the superpower decides to apply the principle of
might is right.
Pushtoons should learn to adjust to new realities. If they care
safeguarding their interests, they have to upgrade their status. For that they
have act according to the wishes of the superpower. Similarly Pakistan must
learn to adjust with emerging geo-political realities.
Poverty, disease, illiteracy and insecurity have been there in Afghanistan
since ages. No one should be perturbed if these persist for another fifty years.
Afghans should learn to live with their agonies like the people of Stone Age did.

26th June 2003

IRAQ: AN EXAMPLE
America had vowed making Iraq a model for the countries of the region
so that they follow and benefit from the western style of governance. The events

since fall of Saddam indicated that America was not sure about the outline of
that model.
An ex-soldier was selected to construct a model of democracy for the
Arabs. Learning from the experience of the third world countries, it thought that
a soldier was the right person to accomplish this task. It did not work.
Garner was replaced by Bremer, who had plenty of experience of serving
in intelligence. The neutral looking Bremer found the task too tedious, but
succeeded in collecting a bunch of like-minded anti-Saddam migrs and
labeled them as Iraqi Council.
The pace at which the model is being constructed it would take long time
for its completion. Bush has already extended the occupation period for at least
four years. Further extensions remain his exclusive prerogative.
The Council has not been welcomed by the vast majority of Iraqis. They
want a representative setup and early end to occupation. The world too has
started murmuring for end to illegal occupation as Bush and Blair have not been
able to convince even their own people about the pretext of attacking Iraq.
The coalition of the willing has started paying the price of their illegal
act. It has not been able to make the Iraqis believe that they have been liberated.
The quagmire, most despised by American leaders, has almost become a reality.
Arrogant American Administration wont be discouraged by the
unpleasant developments. Bush and his companions have come to the region to
avail certain opportunities and they would try their best to avail the most of
those.

RESISTANCE BY THE LIBERATED

The calls for resistance came from Saddam. He threatened foreigners in
Iraq vowing days of hardship for them. A taped message warned that war was
not over and America acknowledged that the Saddams message was authentic.
His messages were supported by Sunni religious leaders, who defended
Jihad and urged US to quit. The Coalition accepted that mosques were being
used for attacks. Elders of Fallujah were quite vocal in issuing the call for
resistance against infidels till victory. The sacked troops could be easily enticed
to respond to such calls.
The resistance has been much fiercer than expected. The Coalition troops
have suffered following casualties since 31st May, most of which were combat
related, unlike Afghanistan:

On 31st May third US soldier died of road crash injuries and next day a
soldier was killed in Baghdad attack. US planes came under fire while
landing on 1st June.

A US soldier was killed in attack in Balad on 3 rd June and four days later
another soldier died in attack near Tikrit.

On 9th June 29th US soldier was killed since 1st May, the day Bush
declared that major operation in Iraq was over. Next day four US soldiers
were wounded.

American paratrooper was killed in grenade attack on 11th June. Next day
an Apache was shot down and F-16 crashed.

On 13th June two explosions set oil export pipeline ablaze and a US
soldier was critically wounded in Mosul. Two days later a soldier was
injured in ambush of a convoy.

Several American soldiers were wounded on 16th June and one was shot
dead in Baghdad on 17th June. Next day two more were killed in grenade
attack.

On 19th June a soldier was killed in Baghdad and next day two soldiers
were injured in grenade attack in Fallujah.

A US soldier was killed in grenade attack near Baghdad on 21st June. Two
days later six UK troops were killed in an ambush.

On 26th June two US troops were killed in attacks and next day one more
was killed and another injured.

Missing US soldiers was found dead north of Baghdad on 28 th June.

Rocket fire destroyed US armoured vehicle in Fallujah.

On 29th June two US soldiers were injured in Baghdad and America

troops were also attacked in Fallujah.

Four US soldiers were killed in Baghdad on 1st July. Next day a Marine
was killed in mine blast.

On 3rd July ten American troops were hurt in violence and next day a
soldier was killed and 18 injured in attacks.

Seven Iraqi police recruits perished in bomb blast on 5 th July. Next day a
US soldier was killed in Baghdad.

On 7th July two US soldiers were shot dead in Baghdad. Next day seven
were wounded in three different incidents and two Iraqi cops were injured
in grenade attack.

Three US soldiers were killed on 10th July. Next day two were wounded
in mortar attack.

US trooper was killed on 12th July and next day one more died in road
accident.

On 14th July a soldier was killed in rocket attack in Baghdad. Two more
were killed a day after and a missile was fired at US plane.

Two soldiers were killed on 18th July. Two more were killed a day later
and another died in road accident.

On 21st July a British officer died in Iraq. Next day a US soldier and
ICRC worker were killed in Baghdad.

Two soldiers were killed on 23rd July and three more were killed next day.

On 26th July three US soldiers were killed in Baquba and next day five
more were killed in different incidents. Two US soldiers were killed in
attack and road accident on 28th July.

Existence of armed struggle was acknowledged by America. US troops

face danger in Iraq said Bush. He admitted security problems in Iraq and asked
American troops to be tough. Rumsfeld feared violent summer for US forces in
Iraq.
Mostly the Sunnis have been resisting the occupation. Shias have
restricted their opposition to protest rallies. Kurds of the north are cooperating
with the Americans. If all three had joined hands against illegal occupation, the
resistance would have been much fiercer even in the absence of foreign support.
In addition to armed struggle against occupation the people carried out
protest rallies asking US troops to leave Iraq. However, most of the rallies were
organized by Shias for solution of local problems. They protested against arrest
of Shia leader, Jassem al-Saadi. A protest rally was held at nuclear site. Ten
thousand Iraqis protested for self-rule in Basra. In Baghdad people
demonstrated for recovery of varsity student. Angry Shias protested across Iraq
after US forces besieged home of a cleric. Violent demonstrations against US
troops were held in Najaf. In all the rallies protesters also asked Americans to
quit.
The occupation forces were surprised by the intensity of resistance.
Rumsfeld observed that uncertainty about Saddam fueled attacks on US
troops. Bremer blamed Baathists for sabotage acts. Analysts from the
civilized world tried to term the resistance differently. It was crime, crime and
crime; purely criminal to the political, and quasi-political. Others felt that it was
put up by guns for hire, which was result of general lawlessness.

The neutral observers commented that Iraqi anger brew against US due to
inhuman treatment during searches. Irrespective of the causes the intensity of
resistance forced the Americans to admit existence of organized guerrilla war
in Iraq.
The killing of the best in the world perturbed the Brits. The soldiers died
in clash with crowd, but Britain accused that they were executed after
surrendering to mob. This was yet another attempt to blame Iraqis for naked
brutality.

COUNTERING RESISTANCE
America and Britain vowed to stay in Iraq despite attacks. Bremer asked
for more troops, but Franks did not agree with him. Bush threatened stern action
against attackers of American troops. US pledged to hunt Saddam loyalists and
rewards for information on attacks was announced.
Mopping up operations continued in which the occupation forces
achieved the following:

On 31st May US troops uncovered a cell of Baath Party in new police

academy and arrested 15 senior officers holding conference. A child was
crushed by US military truck the same day in collateral damage.

Two Iraqis were killed in Baghdad on 1 st June as US-led forces started

collecting small arms.

On 8th June US troops killed an attacker in Fallujah. Three Iraqis were

killed in arms dump blast in Diwanyah two days later.

Two wanted-Iraqis were arrested on 11th June and next day 400 suspects
were captured in massive operation.

Ninety-seven Iraqis were killed in raids on 13 th June and seventy-four alQaeda sympathizers were detained.

On 16th June US troops arrested nine Iraqis. Next day arms dumps were
blown up in Fallujah and more than 400 Iraqis were detained in Operation
Desert Scorpion.

Saddam aide was captured on 18th June and two Iraqi protesters were
killed in Baghdad.

On 21st June troops searched Headquarters of SAIRI and arrested three

persons. Three days later five were killed in separate incidents.

Coalition forces detained 900 Saddam loyalists on 28th June and next
day another major operation was launched. An Iraqi was killed in a blast
in Baghdad.

On 30th June US forces detained 180 Iraqis. Next day six died in an
explosion in Fallujah mosque and head of Saddams tribe was gunned
down in Tikrit.

Three Iraqis were killed on 3rd July. Next day eleven more were killed
north of Baghdad.

On 9th July US army seized 500 rocket-propelled grenades and four days
later another operation Ivy Serpent was launched.

Coalition forces fired at UN vehicle on 20 th July. Next day Saddams

sons, Uday and Qusay were killed in raid on a house in Mosul. An excommander of Special Republican Guards was captured the same day.

On 27th July an Iraqi was killed as protesters clashed with US troops in

Karbala.

Two-third of most wanted Iraqi leaders have been killed or taken as

captives. One of the conspicuously visible success was the killing of Uday and
Qusay in six-hour fight in Mosul. Americans showed their dead bodies to
reporters. Powell felt that killing of Saddam sons would bring stability. Many
Iraqis rejoiced and others vowed revenge to Uday and Qusays death.
Anwar Ahmad observed that this gruesome incident was political murder.
He did not accept the encounter as genuine. Why were they huddling together,
and in Mosul which has an inimical Kurd majority with no real protection for
them? Could it be that they had been killed earlier, separately, some place else,
in less dramatic circumstances and the Mosul drama was staged for maximum
politico-military effect?
He opined that Americans could have easily captured them alive, but for
some reason they preferred to kill them. Syria also felt that US could have
captured Saddams sons alive. He then referred to killing of 14-year old grand
son of Saddam. Why Mustafa was not taken prisoner, is a question not yet
asked of the Americans? It only reinforced the belief that they (Americans) are
capable of as much, if not greater, savagery as the enemies they accuse of being
barbarians.
The release of photographs was yet another act to get political mileage by
showing bruised and battered dead bodies of Udhay and Qusay. This was done
by Americans who had cried Geneva Conventions when the Iraqi TV had
shown American war dead and POWs.

The hunt for Baathists spilled over to Turkey, which had closed the
border with Northern Iraq for commercial traffic. On 5 th July US troops arrested
eleven Turkish soldiers manning a border post. On the other hand Turkey
remained worried about Kurds. PKK rebuffed Turkeys offer of amnesty and
threatened war. US and Turkey discussed ridding of PKK, resultantly US Envoy
warned Kurds to leave or face attack.
The pattern of military operations after the end of war has been similar
to that of manhunt in Afghanistan. Operations Desert Sidewinder, Desert
Scorpion and Ivy Serpent were aimed at breaking the will of Iraqis resisting
occupation of Iraq. The use of force was similar to that of Israelis.
Family of a shepherd was shot dead by US tanks during operation in
Fallujah. In another incident a family was killed as it worked in their wheat field
to extinguish fires set by US flares. These actions of the liberators were bound
to result in a cycle of action, reaction and counter-action. Iraqi shepherd planned
to sue Rumsfeld and Franks over deaths of his family.
America had been farsighted in seeking immunity for its soldiers, though
Annan opposed giving US troops immunity from ICC. America was rapped for
using dirty tactics to undermine new global court. Amnesty International
denounced US for inhuman treatment meted to Iraqi prisoners.
The occupation troops tried to disarm various factions through
negotiations. SAIRI agreed in struggle to end US occupation. Hakim said, we
have to make every political effort possible to hasten end of the occupation.
But Badr forces were no longer armed as arms needed for Saddam were no
longer required; therefore SAIRI urged end to attacks on US troops.
Abizaid, the successor of Franks, planned to raise 7,000 Iraqi Militia. It
was for pitching Iraqis against each other as has been done in Afghanistan. It
would save Americans from shedding their blood. The militia could also be
employed to guard the oil pipelines. The killing of police recruits could however
shrink his plans.
Spanish Foreign Minister claimed that world has become a safer place
since fall of Saddam, but a British minister thought that Iraq was not safe
enough for Brits. He delayed the trip due to fear of attack. Amnesty flayed
British forces on failing to control the liberated Iraqis of Basra.
According to Anwar Ahmad the aim of media coverage to killing of
Saddams sons was to sap the morale of Sunnis. He however was of the view
that even the present intensity of resistance would be unbearable for the
occupation forces. Another three monthsA-Yank-a-Day could cook the
Bush-Blair goose.

Whether the goose is cooked or not; America surely finds itself trapped in
quagmire. Noman Safdar, while commenting on post-war situation, pointed out
the problems faced were the outcome of for not listening to the words of
prudence at the time of invading Iraq:

Winning the war was the easy part in Iraq, winning the peace is the
tough part, as many had pointed out earlier, and as has become obvious.

The US does not realize that at the much trumpeted dawn of 21 st

Century, you cannot run another countrywith huge, educated middle
class.

It cannot afford to withdraw for fear of losing face and credibility. It has
to stay as it has come so far, and it realizes that the withdrawal would
lead to chaos and mayhem in Iraq.

STICKING TO MISTAKES
The events since invasion of Iraq have amply highlighted the mistakes
committed by the superpower. M H Ansari of the Hindu observed that the entire
plan of invasion was riddled with mistakes and miscalculations:

Misinforming the world about the real reason for going to war.

Miscalculating the reason of the United Nations Security Councils

opposition.

Misjudging Turkeys reaction.

Failure to decapitate the Iraqi leadership or capture most of its important

members.

Misjudging the calibre and the following of the Iraqi dissident groups in
exile.

Failure to plan for the post-war period. In that:

To anticipate that the power vacuum would be filled by Islamist

groups.

To appreciate the implications of bypassing the Security Council

peacekeeping operations, a direct result of which is the unwillingness
of many countries to participate.

Unwillingness to appoint an interim Iraqi administration immediately

after the war, and install a democratically elected government at the
earliest.

Failure to establish a rapport with the Shia religious leaders and above
all, failure to communicate with the Iraqi people and understand the
public mood.

American pretexts to attack Iraq have not been substantiated. Rulers of

Muslim countries, particularly the Arabs, should have been the first to ask
America to end illegal occupation of Iraq, but none of them said anything, in
fact some of them were ready to assist America in prolonging its stay in Iraq.
Once again non-Muslims were the first to question and criticize Bush and
Blair for lying. Russia urged US to come out with facts to end speculation on
weapons. France wanted disarming process to be completed.
UN watchdog denied Iraq had nuclear programme since 1991. Reuters
reported sarcastically, missing in action, Saddams nuclear programme.
Former weapons inspectors said, US intelligence on WMDs was rubbish.
They urged US and Britain to admit lies about weapons.
British people demanded probe into WMD claims. Inquiry began with
testimony by Cook and Clare. Meanwhile BBC disclosed bundle of lies; the
Iraq dossier. It accused British Government of distracting attention from war by
attacking BBC and also of pressurizing its broadcaster. The source of BBC
report was found dead soon after BBC disclosure.
Blair vowed, Iraqs weapons secret will be publicized. Straw dismissed
charge on Iraqs WMDs. Blair stood 100% behind Iraq weapons claim. He
termed BBC report about Iraq dossier absurd and denied misleading lawmakers
on Iraqi weapons. Blair refused to resign and showed no regrets over Iraq War.
Howard stood firm with his cousin.
Bush and Blair were involved in the same criminal act; however the
former was under no pressure from within America. Gary Younge wondered
that they fought the same war and both lied about why, yet Bush marches on
while Blair has been fatally wounded. Gary should have known that Americans
belong to higher class of the global village, who stand above law.
At worst Bush could feel some pressure in the context of global
credibility of America? His men were aware the eventuality, therefore they kept
insisting upon the credibility of their lies. WMDs not a figment of anyones
imagination said Powell. It was followed by fresh US appeal for WMDs
information. Times endeavoured to prove the point by pretending to come out
with half truth and half lie. Saddam ran chemical labs, but made no WMDs.
Republicans in Senate resisted Democrats call for WMDs probe.
Secret unit of US army scoured Iraq, but found nothing, yet Powell
defended intelligence on WMDs. Men of Secret unit could have done it by

placing some evidence and then recovering it. Somehow they have resisted it so
far.
Bush tried to justify Iraqs occupation. History and time will prove that
the United States made the absolute right decision in freeing the people of Iraq
from the clutches of Saddam Hussein. America will be proved right over war
on Iraq he said next day. He indirectly acknowledged that so far the world had
not accepted his lies.
The allegation of terror-link was also not proved. Top al-Qaeda detainees
in US denied links with Iraq. No link between al-Qaeda and Iraq said UN
experts. US press tried to rescue Bush by distracting from the issue. It came out
with yet another lie. Iraqi intelligence had ordered sabotage, looting and
murder after defeat.
American Media learnt no lessons from the futility of lying during war.
Annual conference of investigative reporters and editors (IRE) was held at
Washingtons National Press Club to deliberate on biased coverage of Iraq War
and casual dealing of different faiths, particularly the religion of Islam. Ansar
Abbasi reported the following about its proceedings:

The participants agreed that the embedded journalists, who accompanied

US troops, were actually used as propaganda tools for the US
Government.

Selection of embedded journalists was done cleverly, mainstream

journalists were ignored.

Fox News came under heavy criticism, followed by CNN and BBC.

It was questioned as to why media was not holding US Government

accountable for its failure to recover WMDs, for which the war was
fought. Answer was that more time will now be devoted to this aspect.

The panelists disclosed that 62 percent of Americans do not have faith in

their media. Giant corporations which own the US Media (mostly the
Jews) had compromised professionalism and undermined truth.

After 9/11 Islam and Muslims became the main targets of media. There
was talk of bad guys around. Where are those?

These views were expressed by participants invited by State Department.

The aim of the conference was to re-discover the lost credibility of the Western
Media. It was not for undoing the damage done to followers of Islam, but for
continuing it in credible manner.

NO CONSCIENCE NO PRICKS

It has been established that Americans, like all the mighty people, are
above law and are immune to pricks of the conscience or perhaps they have
nothing known as conscience. Somehow a few Americans asked as to who
misled Bush about Iraq.
The query was based on the presumption that Bush was incapable of
taking a decision independently. The events since 9/11 also proved that he
hardly took any decision at his own. All decisions were dictated by the hawks.
He obediently followed the suggested course.
Instead of realizing the mistakes America wants more troops to counter
the resistance put up by Iraqis. Reinforcements mustered from own resources
would mean more political and economic pressure. In view of that America
asked other countries to send peacekeepers. The response to the call was rather
disappointing due to eroded credibility of America.
Nevertheless America claimed that thirty governments were willing to
help, but so far only Poland, Japan, Span, Bulgaria and New Zealand have
agreed to send troops for peacekeeping. Nepal and Turkey were still
considering. France decided to send troops only under UN mandate.
Rumsfeld discussed the problem with strategic partner. India sought
clarifications, showed reluctance and rejected the request. The reason of
declining the request of the superpower was explained by Praful Bidwai. There
is no reason why a single Indian soldier should shed blood in support of US
interests in Iraq. Indian troops arent being invited to keep or enforce peace.
They are being asked to impose law and (despotic) order on behalf of the
occupation power - not in some neutral manner, but in ways that suit those
powers interests.
The point brought out by Bidwai was important, but the real cause was
that India did not want to strain its relations with Arabs. Pakistan should ponder
about this rather than obeying the orders issued from the White House blindly.
Reportedly Pakistan was asked to send two brigades. Musharraf was
ready to work out modalities, but it wont be easy for him to decide on this vital
issue unilaterally. Qazi and Sami warned against sending troops to Iraq. Kasuri
declared that troops to Iraq would be sent only under UN umbrella.
America reminded Pakistan and India of troops for Iraq and General
Myers visited the Subcontinent to further press the point. Only the most
obedient servant of US interests is likely to obey the instructions of Uncle Sam;
whereas India wont be pressed hard.
According to Noman Safdar the best option for America was to
subcontract its obligations to the world body. America allowed UN and IAEA

inspectors to return after having refused to do so earlier. But Blix was

disappointed over US and British spy data.
He lashed out at US Administration members; I have my detractors in
Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who
planted nasty things in the media. He paid these complements to those, who
had criticized him for not producing the required evidence before the war.
The Coalition wanted UN role to untangle itself from the quagmire, but it
wont be easy according to Matthew Parris of the Times. The UN and
permanent members of the Security Council will not accept the role of stretcherbearers to an American-led operation, nor will they send their soldiers, aid
workers or police to be shot at in the name of a US occupation.
Despite the opposition America will try its best to secure involvement of
other nations in Iraq. Anwar Ahmad apprehended that America will
internationalize the occupation to parcel out most of its pain and some of its
profits.
UN special representative, de Mello desired that Iraqis should rule
themselves as quickly as possible. America collected some Iraqis to serve as an
interim advisory council rather than convening a large national conference to
create a transitional authority. Democracy in Iraq cant be rushed said US.
Wolfowitz asked Iraqis to be patient. EU accepted the Iraq Council as first
step. The move was aimed seducing the world body for getting international
support for peacekeeping.
These moves failed to impress the world or liberated Iraqis. Barzani and
Sistani dicussed Iraqs future, the former opposed drafting of a constitution by
US-named body and the latter opposed Bremers political plans. Mehdi
demanded representative Iraqi government. The first decision taken by the
council related to setting up of war crimes tribunal and declaring a national
holiday the day Iraqs occupation began.
An Iraqi paper observed that the new governing body made a false start.
The Council on Sunday inaugurated its work by proclaiming as a national
holiday the day Iraqs occupation began and the day its status as member state
of the United Nations ended. This decision combined with holding of trials
spoke of the intent of the men collected to provide good governance.
The liberators were aware of Iraqi print medias possible opposition to
their plans. They banned any gatherings, pronouncements or publications that
call for opposition to the occupation of Iraq. The country is just too fragile for a
journalistic free-for-all. There is no room for hateful and destabilizing messages
that will destroy the emerging Iraqi democracy.

Journalists deplored the new media code. Thats not democracy. It

sounds like the same old thing; Eshta Jassem Ali. As long as raping, killing,
burning and looting continue under Americas watch; Ill fight any attempt at
censorship said Mohammad Jubar.
Despite suppressing Iraqis America has to keep knocking at the door of
UN, because a-yank-a-day has sapped the moral of its troops. The liberators
have started searching their own liberty as was indicated by their statements
broadcast by ABC in Good Morning America:

If Donald Rumsfeld were here, I would ask him for his resignation.

Most Wanted. The Aces in my deck are Paul Bremer, Donald Rumsfeld,
George Bush and Paul Wolfowitz.

Jim Lobe touched upon some other problems faced by America in postwar situation:

Indias rejection of Bushs request for 20,000 troops to act as mercenaries

for US foreign policy struck a devastating blow to the imperial dreams of
the Pentagon.

Bushs own economic and political advisers have begun whispering. The
United States cannot by itself afford the burdens - either economically or
politically - of occupying Iraq.

They are clearly fed up with the arrogance and hubris of the hawks
centred in the offices of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President
Dick Cheney who in their view have driven the country into quagmire. CIA
Director Tenent pointed finger directly at hawks in the White House and the
Pentagon as the parties who pushed hard for to include point of uranium from
Africa in State of the Union speech.
General John Abizaid, the new commander of allied forces in Iraq handpicked by Rumsfeld, explicitly contradicted his boss in his first appearance
before Congress. He said, US forces are facing a classical guerilla-type
campaign that is becoming more effective and may be organized at the regional
level.
Will the United Nations bail out Bush? It seemed improbable in view of
the long list of wrongs committed by him. It appeared even more difficult in the
light of Annan asking US and UK to end occupation. But Bush seemed to be
determined to muster the required support with the use of stick and carrot. There
is no dearth of those who are scared of the stick and can be enticed by the
carrot.
The Crusaders will soon rearrange their rank and file. Bush and Blair
were condemned, not for attacking and destroying Iraq, but for telling lies. The

civilized people accused them of doubting their zest for the Crusades. How
dared they think that the Christian World wont have approved the Crusades had
they not lied?
Blair advised that it was time to head divisions over Iraq. Blair and
Chirac sought to turn page on Iraq row and so did the French Envoy to
Washington. Britain and Russia discussed Iraq and Iran. Rumsfeld wanted
transatlantic efforts to deal with WMD. Wide ranging plan to curb spread of
WMDs was unveiled. America and EU agreed upon a doctrine of interdiction
and authoritative prohibition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Castro rightly
termed EU as superpowers Trojan horse.
The Crusaders have now focused on Iran in the context of nuclear
proliferation and terror. Bush expected Iran to crackdown on al-Qaeda. His
Administration expressed serious unhappiness about Tehrans alleged
harbouring of al-Qaeda operatives.
Iran denied arrest of Abu Gaith and rejected all terror charges, including
the one related to Riyadh attacks. It asked Washington to apologize for past
support to al-Qaeda and then confirmed holding top al-Qaeda operatives. Saudi
Foreign Minister visited Tehran for talks on al-Qaeda captives. Iran accepted
that some of the captives were Saudis.
IAEA blamed Iran for not honouring nuclear agreements. US found the
report deeply troubling. EU urged Iran not to develop nukes. Straw visited Iran
and pressed for signing of NPT protocol. He warned that Irans trade might
suffer over nuclear issue.
Iran showed willingness for nuclear inspections on condition of lifting of
sanctions, but refused to give up nuclear capability. Tehran invited US firms to
join its nuclear plan and vowed to resist pressure over nuclear research. US
rejected the offer for nuclear monitoring.
Rowhani denied that nuclear arms had any place in Irans defence plan.
Iran rejected IAEA charge of not honouring NPT and refused allowing tougher
probe. Kharazi however offered conditional acceptance of tougher inspections
and signing of NPT protocol. Later on he denied any plan to sign nuclear
protocol.
Russia and America made limited headway on Irans nuclear plan. Putin
refused to cut nuclear ties with Iran and decided to continue supplying nuclear
fuel. He snubbed Israeli Foreign Minister over Iran and assured that Tehran had
no plan to develop nuclear arms.
Russia and France however urged Iran to allow tough UN inspections. G8 warned Iran and Korea to comply with nuclear safeguards. EU pressed Iran

and North Korea over nuclear activities. UN and EU called on Iran to allow
stricter nuclear inspections.
Iran was also asked not to meddle in the affairs of US-occupied Iraq.
Bremer vowed to stop meddling by neighbours. Khamenei countered by
accusing US of stirring trouble in Iran and Kharazi demanded end to
interference. Iran felt that talks with Washington in prevalent conditions were
not possible. Tehran again warned Washington not to meddle in its affairs and
Rafsanjani cautioned US against military action.
A court reminded Iran that it was still liable for 83 Beirut attack.
America banned Chinese and Korean firms for arms sales to Iran. Rice wanted
to have different kind of regime in Iran. Reza Pehlavi predicted religious
regimes fall.
America definitely wanted to avail the opportunity to pressurize Iran.
According to a report Saddams defeat had made Iran to rethink. Powell
however was unaware of tough new US policy on Iran, but was in favour of
encouraging Iranian protests.
US attack on Iran to be suicidal said Khamenei. Islamic government
cannot be toppled claimed an Iranian cleric. Washington denied considering
war against Iran or Syria. Bush said, talk of Iran as US military target was pure
speculation. Yet America reserved the right to take military action against Iran
as US hawks recklessly kept talking of the threat from Tehran.
The Brits seemed to be reluctant in this regard. Straw said, UK and US
differed over stance on Iran. Britain opposed foreign role in changing the
Iranian government. Isabel Hilton of the Guardian advised the government that
Britain must hold the line over Iran stance.
When America was busy in intimidating Iran, France tried to win
sympathies of Tehran. It launched a crackdown on MEK, which has been
working against the present Iranian regime and arrested Maryum Rajavi, a
former guerrilla fighter.

CONCLUSION
Subjugation of Iraqis in the name of liberation has not been as easier as
was anticipated, though only Sunni Arabs of central Iraq are resisting American
occupation. Casualty-scared Yankees find themselves entangled in hostile
environments for indefinite period. Thus the dream of making Iraq an example
for the rogue states of the region would take long time to be realized.
Bush after having acted unilaterally was eager to internationalize the
occupation of Iraq. America wanted troops from other countries to save the

precious blood of its soldiers. To this end it would be compelled to keep

knocking at the door of United Nations.
At home White House was accused of hiding cost of Iraq War. Bush
Administration wanted the world to share the cost of reconstruction of Iraq.
Therefore, many countries were being pressurized or seduced to participate,
including those which had opposed Iraqs destruction.
Despite facing difficulties in Iraq, Americas urge to avail opportunities
presented by the tragedy has not been dissipated as yet. Iran and Syria were
being addressed in the same tone in which Iraq was threatened before war.
Saudi Arabia too has been accused of not helping on terror front.
Syria expressed its desire to resist US imperialist plans with the help of
Iran and Turkey. Mubarak warned that chaos in Iraq could endanger the whole
region. OIC Summit in Malaysia planned to focus on ME and Iraq issues.
Mahathir urged Muslims to put fear into hearts of enemies. To do it the
Muslim rulers have to first put His fear into their own hearts.

29th July 2003

ORDEALS OF THE ALLY

Musharraf visited four countries of the civilized world in June. He first
went to the two active participants of holy war against evil of Islamic militancy
and then visited the two sleeping partners.
Since 9/11 such visits are generally taken as pay-day for the employees
of the Crusaders. Pakistan expected handsome remunerations for the services it

rendered in war on terror. It was time to be rewarded monetarily rather than

showering of verbal appreciations and pats on the back.
Musharraf earned lot of praise, but rewards were restricted to promises
only. In acknowledgement of his commitment to the cause of holy war, he was
however assigned fresh tasks, i.e. recognition of Israel and sending troops to
Iraq.
The pressure of already assigned tasks and the demands of doing more
in the context of Middle East were too much for the fatigued Pakistan. The new
tasks could weigh heavy even on the shoulders of the democratic government
having support of the uniform.
Back home his troops carried out operations in Mohmand Agency in
conjunction with US forces hunting Taliban and al-Qaeda men in adjacent
Kunar province of Afghanistan. Establishment of posts by Pakistani troops
along Durand Line was resented by some elements in Kabul, who ransacked
Pakistans Embassy.
India kept availing the opportunity in more than one way. A terrorist
attack, which from the face of it looked like an act of sectarian militancy, was
carried out in Quetta. While indulging in subversive activities against Pakistan,
Indian continued blaming it for cross-border terrorism.

GAINS AND PAINS

The agenda for Bush-Musharraf meeting at Camp David was not made
public. Hence some speculated that anything under the sun could be discussed.
These speculators perhaps saw Pakistans interests linked to everything on the
earth and the President of America had time to discuss all those with Musharraf.
Of course the discussions were to cover wide ranging aspects, but only of
one subject; terrorism. The aspects relevant to the subject were to be crossborder terrorism in Kashmir, nuclear proliferation, Islamic militancy, al-Qaeda,
Taliban, Iraq and roadmap for Middle East. Pakistan however could not be
denied its right to eye at some handsome rewards.
Before the visit Musharraf declared that Kashmir roadmap was not on
visit agenda. He said it knowing well that selection of the agenda was not his
prerogative. He said it to forestall the issue of cross-border terrorism, fearing
that the Crusaders would surely talk about this.
Despite being not on visit agenda, Kashmir was the subject on which he
talked about the most. Kashmir cannot be ignored in Pak-India talks he said at
the start of visit. He asserted that nothing was happening on Line of Control.

He vowed to go extra mile for peace. If India takes one step, Islamabad will
take two. Its time for conflict resolution.
In America he sought Indian pledge for peace. In Germany he discussed
Kashmir with Schroeder and urged that all Pak-India issues be solved. He asked
the world to focus on human rights in held Kashmir. In France he said that
bilateral talks were the best way to solution of Kashmir dispute and linked the
ties with India to Kashmir.
Bush backed peace process in South Asia and Musharrafs approach on
Kashmir. Germany was expected to offer hosting Pak-India talks. France
assured facilitating Pak-India dialogue. But there was no public mention of
cross-border terrorism, the real concern of the Crusaders.
Religious extremism and militancy in Pakistan was another concern of
America. MMAs recent acts of passing a bill in NWFP and removal of
billboards in Peshawar were not liked by the civilized world. Musharraf had
already condemned MMA in his speech while inaugurating the Kohat tunnel. In
London he announced that government was in total action against extremism.
In Washington he claimed that there was no danger of Pakistan becoming
Islamic fundamentalist state. Bush welcomed his reforms and efforts for
making Pakistanis a tolerant society.
He claimed that al-Qaeda was on the run and claimed that war on terror
was succeeding. He believed that Osama was still alive and hiding in Pakistan;
thereby telling that Pakistan was still important for the Crusaders. He promised
resolute fight against terrorism, and stressed upon the need for addressing the
causes of terrorism. Christopher lauded Musharrafs role in fighting terror.
No threat to the security of the civilized world is considered more
dangerous than Islamic bomb, which has been given a new name of dirty
bomb. Musharraf tried to down play the dangers of this bomb. Nuclear option,
a last resort he declared.
It was obvious that Musharraf and Bush would discuss denuclearization.
As the two leaders met Foreign Office announced that Pakistan would never
denuclearize. Musharraf assured that Pakistan was committed to nonproliferation and nuclear assets were in safe hands. He was prepared to talk to
India on nuclear issues on the basis of sovereign equality. Nuclear cooperation
with North Korea and Iran was denied.
Other issues of interest for the Crusaders were hunting of al-Qaeda and
Taliban, troops for controlling the liberated Iraqis and recognition of Israel to
promote peace in Middle East. These will be discussed little later, but first about
expectations of Pakistan for rewards.

A US based think-tank reported that Pakistan might get F-16s and loan
write-off. It was the minimum it deserved for the services it had rendered. India
opposed F-16s supply and Pentagon denied the deal. US was unlikely to
release F-16s to Pakistan said Advani with confidence. Finally Bush
categorically rejected it.
Musharraf argued that military imbalance was threat to peace. He
suggested arms embargo on India if curbs on Pakistan couldnt be lifted. He
sought US drones to track al-Qaeda. America agreed to provide C-130s and
Cobra helicopters and Germany lifted ban on military spares.
He was confident that Congress would not block aid package. Shaukat
claimed that no conditions would be attached to aid, but some observers felt that
it would be linked to non-proliferation. Rashid expected more US attention; he
perhaps meant affection, not attention. Finally an aid package for next five years
worth $ 3 billion was signed, half of which was meant for defence needs. Trade
and S&T pacts were also signed.
Rocca felt that the visit was a turning point in Pak-US ties. It was a
routine courtesy statement. There was no noticeable change in the attitude of
the Crusaders. Pakistan was still under pressure to control cross-border
terrorism.
Soon after the visit US Senate discussed new law on Pakistan, which
asked the President to certify the following before release of every installment
of promised aid:

All known terrorist training camps operating in Pakistan and Pakistani

Kashmir are dismantled.

Pakistan has established serious and identifiable measures to exhibit to

check the infiltration of Islamic extremists across the Line of Control.
(It was not about terrorism but about Islamic extremism which clearly
referred to freedom fighters.)

And ceased the transfer of Weapons of Mass Destruction, including any

associated technologies to any third country or terrorist organization.

Pakistans request for US role for peace with India was not accepted
beyond facilitation. Its concern about conventional balance was addressed only
to the extent that America agreed to assess the needs of military spares, yet
Musharraf was hopeful that Pak-US military ties would grow.
Musharraf had sought aid without strings, but less than a month later
Islamabad had to regret US bill on aid to Pakistan. According to Nadeem Malik
America attached the strings of no onward proliferation of nukes and effective
monitoring and export controls; vigorous support against terrorism; and

functional democracy to aid package. PML-N alleged that aid package was
linked to freezing of nuclear plan.
Musharraf publicly vowed not to compromise on Kashmir and nuclear
plan. Public statements are never the true reflection of discussions held indoor.
Like him the Crusaders too seemed determined not to compromise on
terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Only he could tell as to what
extent he was pressed for rolling back or freezing the nuclear programme and
how many peanuts were offered or threats of dire consequences were served.
After summit meeting in Camp David Bush and Musharraf exchanged
complements for each other. Bush made special mention of Musharrafs
bravery. It was needed to nullify the impression that he was softened by one
midnight telephone call.
Musharraf invited Bush to visit Islamabad to allow him to reciprocate the
warmth he and his spouse had been getting in Washington. Blackwill had
different ideas. He disclosed that Bush might visit India. His warmth will be
reciprocated in New Delhi.

FRESH ASSIGNMENTS
The visit bestowed upon Pakistan two new assignments apart from asking
to do more on the already assigned tasks. Another opportunity was provided to
Musharraf to remain with the mainstream. He immediately responded; ready to
send troops to Iraq to help people. His hurried response to American demand
was not approved by his own people.
Why did America need troops from Pakistan? The present situation in
that country shows all the signs of low-level guerrilla warfare. Frustration and
anger are mounting on the Iraqi side, while US troops know only one answer.
With next years US presidential election approaching, George W Bush is keen
to get others to do the dirty work for him Hans B Bremer answered the
question.
Additional troops were required, preferably from Islamic countries, to
legitimize the illegal act of occupation and to pacify the liberated Iraqis.
America would like Pakistan to be its arm. Musharraf while consenting to send
troops said, we want to help our Muslim brothers in rebuilding their country.
One should ask him as to what would be his feelings if troops from another
country were sent to Pakistan for the same noble purpose?
The Government hesitated because of the intensity of opposition to
sending troops. Troops to Iraq after taking OIC into confidence said Rao.
General Abizaid visited Pakistan to stress upon the requirement. Myers sought

troops for Iraq praising Pakistans role against terror and promising bright
future of Pak-US defence ties. Iraqi Council was also counseled to ask Pakistan
to send troops.
I Hassan advised the General to know that by sending troops to Iraq, he
may ensure his Gaddi in Pakistan vis--vis US but he will have lost all regard or
respect in the hearts of Pakistanis. We will not do the dirty work of the Holy
Washington Emperor.
Praful Bidwai covered various aspects of occupation and requirement of
troops as under:

Three-and-a-half months after liberation there have been widespread

chaos and lawlessness; destitution is rampant; and women are much more
insecure than they were under the Saddam regime.

US approached 90 countries and only 19 have agreed to send troops.

Only one-fourth of NATO countries have agreed.

A total of 13,000 troops have been promised as against the requirement

of 158,000.

US soldiers morale is extremely low and falling. A sergeant felt

betrayed abut return home. A soldier said, our morale is not high or
even low; our morale is non-existent.

America wants to relieve its glum, tired and demoralized soldiers by

recruiting troops from other countries. It should be denied for four
reasons:

The case of war on Iraq was based on a hoax - falsified evidence,

sexed up intelligence, and fanciful inferences. No WMD have been
found in Iraq. A war mired in such dishonesty, fraud and deception
could only have been grossly unjust. Equally immoral and illegal is
the resulting occupation.

In bypassing the Security Council to wage war, the US mocked at the

United Nations, violated its Charter and undermined the principle of
multilateralismIraqs invasion was the consequence of the new,
dangerous US doctrine of pre-emptive or preventive war.

The US is desperate to put a multi-lateral, multi-ethnic, plural-lateral

gloss on Iraqs essentially First World occupation force. It would be
extraordinarily foolhardy for South Asians to oblige it and become
targets of Arab nationalist resistance. Joining hands with insolent
Superpower, which the Arab masses hate, will compromise our people
and migrant workers safety and security.

US actions in and plans for Iraq cannot be isolated from the agenda of
the Neo-conservatives who now rule Washington. The Neo-cons have
spelled out their goal: a US global Empire based on military
supremacy.

It would be suicidal for Pakistan, India, or Bangladesh to collude with

the US Empire. Iraq is already turning sour. It could become a gigantic
misadventure. Only the foolhardy would want to become Americas
partner in disaster.

The News condemned Pakistans willingness to send troops. It seems

clear enough that the Pakistan Government is indecently keen to oblige the US
in Iraq. What is less clear, though, is what great favour the US has done to
Pakistan to deserve such a hazardous undertaking by the latter to shore up Bush
Administrations illegal and unpopular occupation of Iraq.
However, Pakistan can help the Iraqi people by rebuilding and running
their health, education and other basic facilities. India is already doing that, as it
is in Afghanistan. Pakistan too needs to learn the value of reaching out to the
people of Iraq and Afghanistan rather than to their occupiers and oppressors.
The only argument in favour of sending troops could be that once it has
been decided to submit to the will of America the submission has to be
complete. Any reservations in this regard could result in imposition of penalties
or award of punishments or even paying the price. Pakistan is not India that it
can disagree with America and still escape the repercussions.
Recognition of Israel was not mentioned in the possible list of agenda
points at the time of his departure to the West. It came up during the visit, which
meant that the hosts wanted to fully exploit the guest for his willingness to
cooperate.
He must have been advised to recognize Israel in view of the changing
realities. The toppling of Saddam, sidelining of Arafat, and unveiling of the
roadmap for Middle East warranted that the reality of Israel should be accepted
well before the planned establishment of Palestinian State.
He started talking about recognition of Israel. Qazi saw Camp David
deals on Kashmir, nuclear plan and Israels recognition. Nation will not
recognize Israel said Maulana Aziz. The government hesitated and felt the need
of consensus on recognition of Israel.
Nation and Parliament to be taken into confidence promised Prime
Minister. Ties with Israel after peace in Middle East said Musharraf.
Palestinian Foreign Minister consented that decision about Israel was
Pakistans prerogative.

The above tasks were assigned when Pakistan already had its hands full
in hunting Taliban and al-Qaeda. In the recent past there has been rise in
encounters of the occupation forces with terrorists in areas close to Pakistan
border. America believed that they operated from the bases in adjoining tribal
areas of Pakistan.
America planned an operation in Kunar province and asked Pakistan to
block the escape routes leading to Momand Agency. Pakistani troops moved
into the Agency with the consent of tribal elders and established posts along
Duran Line to tighten of the noose.
Some tribesmen clashed with troops resulting in death of a soldier.
Afghan and Pakistani forces traded fire in which three Afghan soldiers were
wounded. An Afghan General claimed pushing back Pakistani troops. Pakistan
refuted his claim. Pakistani tribesmen warned Kabul against any aggression.
America declared anti-Taliban border operation a success.
Presence of Pakistani troops on Durand Line was resented by the vested
interests in Kabul. The governor of central bank led a mob and ransacked Pak
Embassy. Pakistans flag was burnt. The staff escaped harm by hiding in the
basement. Embassy was closed and Pak Envoy held Karzai government
responsible.
Karzai apologized to Musharraf on phone and promised stern action
against perpetrators. Abdullah regretted the attack. Pakistan showed willingness
for composite dialogue. Diplomacy with Kabul was under way said Jamali.
Talks with Afghan government were on to improve border situation stated
Faisal.
Three Afghans involved in attack on Pakistan Embassy were arrested in
which the governor central bank was not included. UN offered mediation to
Islamabad and Kabul. Iranian Envoy and Brahimi discussed Pak-Afghan
tension. It was agreed that Pak-Afghan-US body would verify ground situation.
The same day Pakistani troops came under fresh attack by Afghan Militia as
those manning the posts were accused of border violation.
Faisal denied intrusion into Afghan areas and conveyed security concerns
to Kabul. Afghan minister said ties with Pakistan were based on noninterference. Jalali accused Pakistan of border violations. Karzai invited
Musharraf to Kabul and Foreign Office declared the situation at Afghan border
as stable. On 27th July Karzai told on Geo TV that Musharraf has pledged antiTaliban action.
India was blamed for fanning anti-Pakistan sentiments amongst Afghans.
India summoned Pak Envoy and asked Pakistan to desist from propaganda

against Indian Consulates activities in Afghanistan. In reply India was told to

rein in Consulates.
ISPR blamed Afghan warlords for border clashes. A pro-government
military official of Nangarhar was promoting the attacks. Once again Pakistan
failed in talking straight. Americans were responsible for everything that
happened, because they had been supporting this warlord since occupation of
Afghanistan.
Attack on embassy was termed as move to sabotage Pak-Afghan
relations. India must have worked behind the scene, which might have quiet
approval of Iran and Russia. America being the occupation power was
responsible more than others.
Karzai, under pressure of the Northern Alliance, could be blamed for this
irresponsible act. The incident spoke volumes for Karzais helplessness
according to Mariana Baabar. He has been virtually rendered as stooge by US
backed Northern Alliance. Yusufzai was of the view that attack was stage
managed.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais observed that the relations between the two countries
have been on the roller coaster for the past 16 months. One day we see things
moving in the right direction, on the other, the horizon becomes pretty cloudy.
Besides, psychological barriers, there are number of problems that the two
countries have yet to resolve. Repatriation of refugees, release of Pakistani
prisoners from Afghan jails and transit trade facility are going to be on the top
of agenda in the coming years.
Afghan regime dominated by Tajiks has held refugees and prisoners as
hostages to press for maximum concessions, fair or unfair, in the context of
transit trade. Karzais noble intentions are nullified by his inability to influence
the events. The negative forces, subversive to be exact, were definitely at play
about which he could do nothing. America too wont like two Muslim countries
enjoying cordial relations.
Pakistan could be blamed for more than one reason. First, it neglected
establishment of the sanctity of Pak-Afghan border. Pakistan has been
respecting boundary between settled and tribal areas more religiously than
Afghans respected the Durand line. The movement across it has been frequent
and unobstructed, which was tolerated for socio-political considerations.
Because of that smuggling across Pak-Afghan border flourished for more
than half a century. Nomads or Pawindas crossed the border twice a year. Soviet
occupation of Afghanistan resulted in flux of refugees due to porous nature of
the border. The movement across border was practically encouraged by Pakistan
during Jihad against infidels.

Second, due to constant hostility of India, Pakistan has been going out of
the way to have friendly relations with Kabul. Pakistans support for Jihad
against the Soviets was the result of this ambition. After Soviet withdrawal it
backed Taliban for the same reason.
Pro-Taliban stance antagonized all the non-Pushtoon ethnic groups,
particularly Tajiks. After 9/11 America told Pakistan to sever its relations with
Taliban; Pakistan obeyed. By supporting the invaders, it lost the goodwill of
Pushtoons. Today Pakistan hardly has any friend in Afghanistan.
Third reason was the off shoot of the second. Pakistan in its desire to
have friends in Afghanistan has been accommodating nonsensical demands of
Kabul. Afghans shrewdly exploited Pakistan without reciprocating the friendly
sentiments.
Pakistans out of the way interest in Afghanistan was doubted by other
neighbours. It was accused of interfering in internal affairs of Afghanistan,
although after Soviet invasion and 9/11 attacks Pakistan was forced by America
to act as it did.
The Pushtoons due to inadequate representation in Kabul have started
causing trouble to the puppet regime. The occupation forces and the puppets
prefer to call the Pushtoons as Taliban. They mostly operate from the bases in
tribal areas and Pakistan was blamed for overlooking their activities.
Pakistan entered Mohmand Agency to support American operations in
Kunar, but establishment of posts along Durand line was seen as an effort to
hinder free movement of Afghans. Ironically Pakistans sincere act once again
back fired.
Pakistan has suffered for Afghan brothers for more than half a century,
either willingly sacrificing for them or standing with them to fight against those
who frequently came to thrash them. It is high time to deal with Kabul firmly.
America should be told in unambiguous terms that Pakistani soldiers carried out
an operation not for their urge of conquests, but to meet the demands of a
conqueror to do more.
Karzai vowed to take stern action against attackers, though he has not
been able to do so against anyone in his entire tenure. Pakistans Envoy
reminded Kabul about action against attackers. However, the arrest of three
persons seemed to be end of the stern action.
In addition to tension along Pak-Afghan border, the war on terror
elsewhere in Pakistan has been going on unabated. Al-Qaeda remained the focus
of attention. Pakistan has been absolutely splendid with well over 500 arrests.
Four more suspects were arrested in Peshawar on 18th June and one of the latest
al-Qaeda captive was full of information according to Faisal.

On 4th July six al-Qaeda suspects were arrested in Karachi including

Osama aides, al-Jazeeri and Abu Naseem, who were involved in arranging
money transfers. Al-Jazeeri was flown out of country. Three accused of killing
Frenchmen were awarded death sentence.
Jehadis, Islamic militants and religious extremists were hunted. A
suspected Harkat activist was held in Karachi on 6th June. Jaish leader was
arrested for attack on Christians. FBI was assisted in picking up Kashmiri
engineer; Ahsan Aziz. Four LJ militants were held and weapons seized on 9 th
June. Five more were arrested in Multan two weeks later. Another LJ activist
was apprehended on 25th June. Ten days later an LJ leader was among seven
held on suspected involvement in Quetta attack.
The targeted evil forces reacted violently, providing excuses to the
Crusaders and their allies to keep blaming Pakistan for terrorism:

On 8th June thirteen trainee policemen were shot dead in an ambush in

Quetta. The victims belonged to Hazara community. Next day DIG Sibi
and four cops were killed in an ambush.

On 4th July forty-four were killed and sixty-five wounded in attack on

Quetta Mosque. Next day a priest was shot dead in Okara.

On 11th July a blast killed two in Karachi. Nine were injured in another
blast in Hyderabad hospital five days later.

Bomb exploded at UN-Funded office in Chillas on 17 th July and two were

hurt in bomb blast in Miranshah ten days later.

Blast claimed one life in Jhang on 28th July. Four days later one more
person was killed in Balochistan in rocket attack.

Out of the above incidents, the attack on Mosque in Quetta was the most
gruesome. It seemed to be an act of sectarian terrorism, but no sectarian link has
been established so far. Faisal hinted at Indian hand in the attack. If that be so
then Indian agents could not reach Quetta without assistance from Afghanistan.
RAW was also involved in explosion of 11th July in Karachi.
Musharraf assailed Islamization of NWFP. He asserted that there was
no room for Talibanization in Pakistan. He was referring to ban on western
dress in schools and MMA Government urging people to grow beards. MMA
resented his remarks by observing two minutes silence in NWFP Assembly.
The issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction was not ignored by the
Crusaders. Washington expressed concern over Pakistani and Indian nukes.
Musharraf assured that nukes were under strong custodial control and these
were no threat to Israel. (In the wake of Crusades these were no threat to
anyone except Pakistan.)

Jamali vowed to fight terrorism and sectarianism. No room for foreign

terrorists on Pakistani soil said Musharraf. As a reward Nancy pledged more
aid to combat terror, but Pakistanis abroad continued to be targeted as part of
war on terror.
On 24th June a British-Pakistani in London was charged for terror and a
Pakistani was charged for lying to FBI. On 3 rd July a US judge ordered
detention of Lashkar-e-Taiba suspect. Two Pakistanis, Hammad and Saeed both
students in Maryland, were sprayed with bullets.
FBI probed for hate-crime link to the killing of Pakistani students in
Mayland. The act of terrorism committed by the civilized people was
condoned as normal crime right at the start of investigations; whereas a normal
crime in Muslim countries is invariably termed as act of terrorism.
The rounding up of illegal Pakistanis continued all over the world.
During first week of July eighty Pakistanis were flown back from Italy. Fifth
batch of seventy-five deportees arrived from US during last week of July.
Earlier Iran returned 123 illegal Pakistanis on 26th June and twenty-four were
arrested in Sri Lanka five days later.
However, Italy gifted fifteen Pakistanis held for terror link. On 17 th July
thirteen Pakistanis were gifted to Musharraf ex-Guantanamo Bay. These
innocent detainees returned after experiencing the values of the civilized
world. Rashid hoped that all Pakistanis would be freed from the captivity. At
this speed it should take ten to fifteen years for the last prisoner to come home.
The civilized people took about two years in establishing their innocence.
The champions of human rights made them sleep, eat, pray and toilet in wire
mesh cells of 6.5x8ft. They were tortured to the extent that many of them tried
to kill themselves. Reportedly the released prisoners planned to demand
damages from America, but the entire wealth of America cannot compensate for
the injustice dispensed to them.
On 9th June three plotters confessed before the court that they wanted to
kill Musharraf as they considered him a murderer of (a) Muslim nation
because he sold out Pakistan to America and bargained on Kashmir with India
and US. Musharraf, however, thought that he was serving the cause of Islam and
Pakistan by collaborating with the Crusaders.

ADAMANT INDIA
India after mention of peace waited for Pakistan to take appropriate
confidence building measures. India was to be satisfied before the start of
dialogue with Pakistan. The confidence building measures began with

resumption of Delhi-Lahore bus service on 11th July. Abbas and Mehbooba

demanded similar service between Srinagar and Rawalpindi.
Pakistan was ready to resume rail link with India. This service is
generally utilized by Sihkhs to visit their religious shrines, who go back
unduly impressed by Pakistans fair dealing with minorities and hospitality of
Pakistanis. Therefore, India was not very keen on resumption of such service.
On the other hand India offered air link and over-flights facilities but Pakistan
was not much interested, because India was to benefit more from it. Pakistan
wanted Indian guarantee that it would not close its space in future.
Similarly India urged Pakistan to open bilateral trade. Islamabad did not
respond encouragingly. However, Ishrat favoured direct trade with India. A
provincial head should have desisted from suggesting anything related to
foreign affairs. Indian foreign secretary blamed Pakistan for going slow in
economic cooperation.
Aziz arrived in New Delhi breaking the ice to resume diplomatic ties.
India agreed to attend moot in January. Pakistan welcomed finalization of
summit date and declined to accept Indian conditions. Indian team arrived to
discuss release of fishermen.
People to people contacts were initiated by parliamentarians of either
side. Six Indian MPs were accorded warm welcome at Wagah on 17th June.
Indian parliamentarians sought trade ties with Pakistan. Parliamentarians of
either side backed tripartite talks on Kashmir. Pakistani businessmen also
visited India.
Fazl embarked upon goodwill visit to India on 14 th July. On reaching
New Delhi he rejected US mediation in Pakistan-India peace process. He was
for liberal talks and political solution to Kashmir issue. He discussed peace with
Hindu Council and faltered. His statement about Kashmir was condemned by
APHC. Mujahideen showed their resentment by attacking military garrison in
Akhnoor.
During visit he met Vajpayee after which he hoped that Indian Prime
Minister would visit Pakistan in January. He claimed that his visit helped soften
Indian stance, though he felt that peace process was slow. On return he briefed
Jamali on Indian visit.
India demanded confidence building measures from Pakistan while
indulging in confidence shattering actions. It pursued missile programme in
intimidating manner. Akash missile was test fired on 10th June, surface-to-air
missile was tested on 22nd and Trishul was tested three days later. Agni missiles
were in induction phase said Fernandes.

Kasuri responded by saying that Pakistan was in no competition with

India over missile testing. Pakistan asked India to stop arms build-up. Vajpayee
boasted, Pakistan would lose fourth war. Kasuri countered, war was no
solution to resolve Kashmir dispute.
India lobbied to block Pakistans entry into ASEAN and imposition of US
terms for aid to Pakistan. India criticized Musharrafs remarks about elections in
Kashmir. ISI was accused of trying to revive Sikh insurgency and blasts in
Mumbai and Banglore were linked to Pakistan by Advani.
Talk of talks went on. Kasuri said, Pakistan was ready for talks at short
notice and wanted uninterrupted dialogue sans conditions. Jamali hoped that
India would agree on peace and expected meaningful talks. Islamabad was
prepared for secretary level talks.
The worlds eyes were focused on Pak-India thaw, according to Sinha.
Russia wanted solution of Kashmir dispute through dialogue and welcomed
Indo-Pak peace moves. Armitage was optimistic about peace in South Asia and
US vowed to continue efforts for talks. Britain can facilitate Kashmir
resolution said UK Envoy. China, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and ASEAN welcomed
Pak-India peace initiative.
Talks success hinged on Indian reciprocity said Jamali. Talks after
cross border terror ends replied Fernandes; Musharraf-talk not good for
parleys resumption told Advani and Sinha said, no talks at SAARC meeting.
He also ruled out early talks with Pakistan. Indian attitude was disappointing.
Jehangir Qazi felt that acrimony impeded Indo-Pak talks, yet Jamali was
hopeful of meeting Vajpayee within this year.
Vajpayee observed decline in Kashmir attacks, but India wanted more
Pakistani checks on Line of Control. Advani presented charge-sheet against
Pakistan before the World Affairs Council:

The epicenter of international terrorism lies in Indias immediate

neighbourhood. It gives me no joy in pointing fingers, but the
involvement of Pakistan can no longer be ignored.

India and the United States have to work in active partnership to defeat
the menace of terrorism fuelled by religious extremism.

This is an important component in the strategic relationship between our

two countries, because Jehadi terrorism is a threat not only to the security
of our two countries, but to peace and tranquility in the world.

I would urge Pakistan to heed the voices of sanity and give up its futile
path of confrontation with India.

India accused Pakistan of sheltering terrorists. Fernandes repeated

infiltration charges and Indian General feared more suicide attacks in the Valley.
Pakistan denied involvement in cross-border terrorism. India on the other hand
continued perpetrating state terrorism:

Four Kashmiris died in violence on 3rd June. Five more were gunned
down two days later.

On 6th June twenty-one were killed and three days later three cops were
among seven shot dead.

Nineteen died on 12th June and Yasin Malik was arrested. Next day three
of a family were among nine killed.

Ten fighters were among twelve killed in gun battles and two days later
an Imam Masjid and his son were gunned down.

On 17th June PDP politicians son was among three killed. Next day three
Indian troops were among seven shot dead.

Six were killed and thirty injured in violence on 20 th June. Three days
later sixteen more were killed in blast and shootouts.

On 24th June five persons died in violence and a minister complained

about being roughed up by soldiers.

Three top fighters were among twelve killed on 26 th June and next day six
more were killed in violence.

On 28th June fourteen died as fighters stormed an army camp and in

retaliation sixteen Kashmiris were killed next day.

Five were killed and seven injured on 1 st July in shootouts and four more
died two days later.

Seven were killed on 7th July and a top Hizb commander was killed next
day. On 9th July a PDP worker was among three killed.

Seven persons died on 10th July and ten more were killed in violence next
day.

Six were killed on 12th July. Next day two APHC leaders were detained in
Srinagar and fifteen persons were killed.

On 14th July ten perished in violence. Next day Yasin Malik was again
held in terror-funding case. Eight more were killed two days later.

Eight were gunned down in separate incidents on 17th July and a woman
constable was among six killed next day.

Seven Hindu pilgrims were killed in Jammu blasts on 21 st July and Indian
forces reacted by unleashing savage operations.

On 22nd July a Brigadier and seven troops were killed and two Generals
were wounded in attack by militants on a military garrison in Tanda near
Akhnoor.

Six persons were killed on 23rd July and two days later two Indian
soldiers were among eighteen killed in the Valley. On 26 th July three more
were killed in violence.

On 27th July six died in attack and fifteen were wounded in different
incidents. Three more were killed three days later.

Eight were killed on 31st July and five more were killed in separate
incidents next day.

On 2nd August three Kashmiris were convicted and six were killed next
day.

India followed Israeli example in perpetration of state terrorism and at the

same time asked the victims to give up their struggle. Mufti urged Mujahideen
to declare ceasefire as atmosphere was building up for resolution of Kashmir
issue. Upsurge in violence could sabotage peace process he argued.
Ansari, like Abbas, appealed to India and fighters to announce ceasefire.
APHC repeated this appeal a few days later. India encouraged talks with
government intermediaries to this end. Kalam called for end to violence in
occupied Kashmir.
So far only one Hizb commander, Zafar Akbar, has renounced violence
and decided to join politics. This revealed that Mujahideen faced some
problems in maintaining unity. This encouraged Mufti to ask police to deal with
Mujahideen firmly.
Pakistan was also punished through punitive actions taken across Line of
Control:

Nine civilians died as a jeep was hit in Indian shelling in AJK on 3 rd June.
Shelling claimed two more lives next day.

On 6th June Indian shelling killed one person. One more was killed two
days later.

A civilian died in Indian shelling across Line of Control on 1 st July. Next

day one more was killed and four wounded.

On 12th July one person was killed and five days later Indian shelling
claimed a boys life. Six civilians were killed in Indian firing a few days
later.

Sikandar asked the world to take note of the Indian shelling. He was
trying to invite the attention of the civilized world not realizing that all the

killings were carried out with the consent of the Crusaders. Kashmiri Muslims
are part of the evil forces against which the holy war has been waged.
Musharraf claimed that Kashmir was dead before Kargil thereby
boasting about the revival of the issue. Vajpayee was prepared to avail the
opportunity of revival. Talks must include whole of Kashmir he demanded.
Kasuri promptly consented, entire Kashmir is a disputed territory.
Pakistan expected solution of the dispute and APHC desired its resolution
in two years. Both seemed to be oblivious of the ground realities. India has
only mentioned about dialogue, but with a condition that can never be met
hundred percent. The allegation of infiltration can be leveled anytime without
any proof.
The prioritization of the disputes will remain an irritant by itself. Sinha
said that Kashmir is not core issue; whereas Pakistan considered centrality of
Kashmir issue as indispensable. Pakistan remained keen to start dialogue
anywhere and anytime, but at the same time was apprehensive about the
usefulness of bilateral talks.
India followed the role-model of Israel in curbing the evil forces of
terrorism, but refused to equate its peace plan with roadmap for Middle East.
That meant India intended to be more non-accommodating than Israel.
For Pakistan it is also not easy to choose the right option from the socalled ten to twelve existing solutions to Kashmir, though one of them
regarding turning Line of Control into permanent border has been rejected by
APHC. Musharraf felt the need of compromises for peace. He must be ready to
make some compromises, but India is not likely to budge from its stand of
ATTOT ANG.
The strategic partnership with the Crusaders has been proved further by
US warships visit to India; US firms offer of stratospheric airships; floating of
Blackwill doctrine in which India would lead Asian version of NATO to contain
potential adversaries; and Indian Defence Secretarys visit to Washington to
finalize year long schedule of joint exercises. The extent of Indo-US
partnership was enough to shadow the one-sided willing cooperation of
Pakistan. Mediation or no mediation; the Crusaders will support India all the
way.

CONCLUSION
The events since 9/11 revived the Kashmir issue, but only to the extent of
exerting pressure on Pakistan and Kahmiri freedom fighters to give up their

struggle. Like Palestinians they have to end terrorism. The end of terrorism
will not be applicable to Indian armed forces.
The Crusaders will never press for settlement of the dispute. They will
fully support Indian contention no matter how unfair it might be. They were
already considering deployment of heli-borne global force along Line of
Control. This could be aimed at anything, except granting right of self
determination to the Kashmiris.
The Crusaders will press Pakistan to send about a Division of Pakistan
Army to Iraq. It will be quite difficult for the government to accept or reject
American demand. In either case Pakistan would pay the price for remaining
with the mainstream.
The recognition of Israel is not inspired, but dictated. The opposition has
warned Musharraf against any unilateral decision in this regard. He is not an
elected president, he has no right to represent Pakistan in the world and make
vital decisions against national interests about Israel, Kashmir, nuclear
programme, US aggression and sending Pakistani troops to Iraq.
The fear of FBI has doubled the remittances by expatriates, which totaled
$ 4.24 billion during last financial year resulting in accumulation of forex
reserves. These reserves have been kept in US allowing the Crusaders to use
these for securing continuous cooperation of Pakistan.

5th August 2003

TERRORISM IN IRAQ
Pentagon adviser admitted mistakes in Iraq War planning, i.e. the failure
in forging close ties with the Iraqi opposition. Other than that American
leadership had no regrets or remorse. Only a few Democrats blasted Bush for
lack of candor.
The US troops have been presenting themselves as readily available
targets to insurgents. The Yankees could be saved of harm if somehow other
countries were convinced to send their troops to Iraq or militancy could be
steered to ethnic or sectarian strife.
The first task could be done through services of Annan and his company.
To this end Bush showed some flexibility in has stand on UN role in Iraq. The
option of pitching Iraqis against each other must have been assigned to the
intelligence agencies.
The killing of a-Yank-a-Day can have sobering effect on the bully.
America will become more accommodating if the resistance continues for few
more months. Therefore, those who had opposed invasion of Iraq have decided
to move slowly on the new Resolution, which America planned to present in
Security Council.
Meanwhile American viceroy worked on establishing contacts with Iraqi
opposition to undo the damage caused by the initial mistakes. He also tried to
label the resistance with tags of terrorism and sabotage and warned that these

acts were only hurting Iraqis. Despite his efforts the resistance seemed to be
gaining momentum.

RESISTANCE
The resistance put up by the Sunnis of Central Iraq has been taking steady
toll since 30th July:

Two US soldiers were killed on 31st July. Two days later another US
soldier was killed and three were hurt in ambush.

On 5th August two American soldiers were injured. Next day a US soldier
was killed in Mosul and another died of heart attack in Kuwait.

Eleven Iraqis were killed and 65 hurt in a powerful truck bomb explosion
outside Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad and two US soldiers were shot
dead in gun battle the same day.

On 8th August an American soldier was killed and three more were injured
in separate incidents.

US soldier was killed in bomb attack on 11th August and two Iraqi
policemen were shot dead. Grenades were hurled near UK Embassy the
same day.

On 12th August US soldier was killed and nine were hurt in attacks. Next
day another soldier was killed in blast.

Major Iraqi oil pipeline was blown up on 16 th August. Next day a Danish
soldier was shot dead in Basra and six Iraqis were killed in attack on a
prison.

Twelve Iraqis were killed in blast when ex-soldiers were looting the
ammunition dump in a village near Tikrit on 18th August.

On 19th August twenty persons were killed and over one hundred
wounded in suicide attack in a truck on UN Headquarters. Top UN
official, de Mello was among dead. American troops were attacked in
Tikrit the same day.

American soldier was killed on 20th August and one more was killed next
day.

On 22nd August two US soldiers were killed. Next day three UK soldiers
died in Basra when gunmen opened fire on a convoy.

On 24th August two US soldiers were killed. Two days later three more
were killed and more next day.

Al-Hakim and about one hundred Iraqis were killed in Najaf blast, US
soldier was killed in Baquba and Bulgarian troops were attacked in
Karbala.

On 5th September an American and a Briton were killed in attacks. Next

day eight US soldiers were injured in different attacks.

A US soldier was killed and fourteen were hurt in attacks on 9 th August.

Next day four US soldiers were killed and a policeman was shot dead in
Fallujah.

On 31st August a US soldier drowned. Two days later three US soldiers

were killed in blast and helicopter crash. Another American soldier was
killed on 9th September.

During this period US troops death toll crossed the number killed in
combat. Washington Post quoted some interesting figures about US casualties in
Iraq:

Number of soldiers wounded as of 1st September since 19th March totaled

1,124.

Many injuries go unreported by design. About ten troops a day were

injured on the average during August. Fifty-five Americans were
wounded in the last week of August alone.

From March 19th to April 30th, 550 US troops were wounded in action in
Iraq. Since May 1 the number totaled 574 as of September 1.

The toll of battlefield wounded continues unabated, with an increasing

number being injured through small arms fire, rocket-propelled grenades,
remote-controlled mines and what the Pentagon refers to as improved
explosive devices.

The number of (US) troops wounded in action in Iraq is now more than
twice that of the Gulf War in 1991.

It could be inferred from the number of casualties that Americans were

pitched against well-organized resistance. Notwithstanding Saddam tapes
urging Iraqis to fight and drive out US troops, the attacks were primarily the
acts of aggrieved Sunnis, who were targeted by the invaders like Pushtoons in
Afghanistan. These were acts of small groups operating independently with
possibility of some ex-soldiers joining them.
The Sunnis conveyed a timely and strong message to the informers
working for occupation forces. Father of Sabah Salim was told; kill your son or
whole family will die. Reportedly he implemented the decision of Tribal
Council and killed his traitor son for providing information to US forces.

Shia leaders have opted for peaceful struggle to end occupation. Moqtada
al-Sadr son of Ayatollah Mohammad Sadiq al-Sadr backed peaceful resistance.
Iraqi Council member and a minister have also asked US and UK to quit within
six months. Some cynics felt that battle-scared Baghdadis wanted the US
troops to quit.
Most of the agitation in the form of rallies, demonstrations and riots was
the outcome of local problems like shortage of power, scarcity of water, and
detention of tribal and religious leaders. These rallies were not part of
resistance, though invariably end to occupation was demanded.
The existence of struggle against the occupation was acknowledged by
the invaders. Bremer accepted that militants were returning to launch attacks.
A report claimed that about 5,000 guerrillas were operating in Iraq. Bush saw
threat of terror attacks. America tried to dub Iraqis struggle as terrorism. The
blast in UN Headquarters and assassination of al-Hakim were termed as terrorist
acts. Talabani, a Kurdish leader, supported American contention; he accused
Muslim fundamentalists and suspected foreign hand in bombing.
UN used the same language for Iraqis armed struggle. Defending
terrorists attacks was impossible said UN security chief after attack on UN
Headquarters. Annan however grilled America for not ensuring the security of
its men working in Iraq.
Some mourners blamed supporters of al-Sadr for the assassination. The
group refuted the allegation and condemned the attack. Some SAIRI leaders
also suspected involvement of Baathists. Saddam denied hand in Najaf car
explosion. As regards foreign hand Khamenei and Hezbollah condemned the
attack and Saudi Arabia denied militants cross border movement into Iraq. The
report about arrest of Pakistanis in Najaf was also wrong.
Hakims son on Governing Council held occupation forces responsible
for the incident. He showed his resentment by refusing to meet US forces. A
Shia cleric suspended his membership of the Council. US security policy was
generally slammed.
At the scene of tragedy American remained spectators as the civilians and
police tried to recover the dead and wounded. They were not concerned over
tragedies inflicted on Iraqis. The incidents of anarchy suited them as such
tragedies created opportunities to accuse Baathists.
The incident suited for arousing sectarian bitterness. Hawza warned of
dire consequences of attack. Badr Brigade re-emerged and it was operating
with Coalitions blessing said Bremer. Two persons were killed by Shia clerics

guards in Najaf. Sunnis too accused Shias of ethnic cleansing though SAIRI
denied the charge.
The allegations and counter allegations could provide opportunities to US
for working on Shia-Sunni confrontation on the lines of warlords and Taliban
confrontation in Afghanistan. Zinnia rightly feared civil and religious war. He
perhaps was longing for it.
Efforts were made to prove involvement of foreign terrorists in the
resistance against occupation. Hezbollah fighters were accused of being active
in Iraq. Al-Qaeda provided strength to American contention by announcing that
its fighters were moving from Afghanistan to Iraq.
Abu Zafar said, I am helping them to move from Afghanistan to Iraq
because most of them were asked by their leadership to go there as it is easy to
target Americans in Iraq than in Afghanistan. Osama urged guerrillas to bury
Americans in Iraq.
US intelligence-based media reports maintained that US occupation of
Iraq has propelled another international Muslim outrage. The Egyptian haul of
23 men heading to fight US troops included Bangladeshis, Turks, Indonesian
and Malaysian. Others prevented from going to Iraq included German Muslims,
Algerians, and Tunisian Based on these reports Nasim Zehra opined that
Iraqi resistance to US occupation could be de-legitimized through al-Qaeda
label.
The News dated 31st August summed up both the aspects of precipitating
ethnic strife and dubbing resistance as terrorism. Like the attack on the UN
office, the Najaf blast may also carry positive fallout for the occupation forces.
It has already led to finger-pointing at the Baathists, attempting thereby to paint
them as mindless terrorists and to drive a wedge between the Iraqi resistance
and the Shia majority. This is the last thing the resistance, Baathists or
otherwise, would want. Some fingers have also been pointed at the more
militant anti-US Shia factions. A schism within the Shia population, or between
the Shia and Sunni communities, will certainly not be good for peace and
security in Iraq. But such divisions might make the occupation somewhat easier
by diverting and diluting the resistance.

SUPPRESSION OF RESISTANCE
The hunt for Saddam and Baathists by the occupation forces continued.
On 2 August two key Saddam associates were captured. Taha Yasin,
Chemical Ali and a former general were held during second half of August.
Saddams hometown remained the focus of attention of American troops as they
thought that he might be hiding in Tikrit.
nd

Collateral damage has been the hallmark of operations carried out by US

troops. Iraqi children continued paying price even after their liberation. The
troops did not spare the friends as well. Dana was shot by soldiers riding an
American tank as he filmed outside Abu Ghraib prison in western Baghdad
where a mortar bomb attack had killed six Iraqis the day before. On 23 rd August
two Turkmen were killed in northern Iraq. Bush had shown deep concern
about the plight of this ethnic group while justifying the need to invade Iraq.
Bush vowed no flinching from war on terror but a poll showed that US
will be bogged down in Iraq. Ramzy Baroud predicted that the US will not win
an unconventional war in Iraq for following reasons:

In traditional war, military strategies and planning are essence. In a nontraditional war, guerrilla warfare or a popular uprising, a military solution
only stiffens the resistance and rallies the masses behind its leadership.

The US army is indeed qualified to fight and win any traditional war, on
any front and against any enemy. But the US war in Iraq against a
resistance movement that manufactures its own bombs and uses its losses
to reassert the motives for which it fought, a war of such magnitude can
only result in torment, bloodshed and bitter defeat.

Another reason is the sapping morale of US troops:

I dont give a damn about Rumsfeld. All I give a damn about is going
home said Specialist Rue Gretton. He continued, the only thing his
visit meant for us was we had to clean up a lot of mess to make the
place look pretty. And he didnt even look at it anyway.

If I got to talk to Rumsfeld Id tell him to give us a return date. Weve

been here six months and the rumour is well be here until at least
March said Major Josslyn. (On 9 th September tour of duty of some
troops was extended.)

I aint happy. This tour is hard, real hard. Its too much. It should
be six months said Specialist Devon Pierce.

Straw claimed that US and UK were not losing control in Iraq. Britain
planned to send 1,000 troops to Iraq despite 61 percent of Brits favouring
troops pullout. American people too were getting skeptics on Iraq. Bush was
constrained to work for international involvement.
During the period Poland began deploying the peacekeepers. Hungary
and Romania were willing to send more troops. Philippines contingent departed
for Iraq. Turkey mulled sending troops despite 60 percent Turks opposed it.
Fallujah Governor and Iraqi Foreign Minister opposed Turkish troops for
reasons of their own.

NATO was divided on the issue and its chief wanted international
involvement. Germany ruled out sending troops and its Foreign Minister urged
leading UN role in Iraq. France renewed call for UN role. Coalition was
responsible for security in Iraq said Russia. Schroeder and Putin wanted joint
strategy for Iraq.
Japan was reluctant after having shown willingness to send troops
initially. Arab League refused sending peacekeepers. The reasons for shying
away from Iraq were; the intensity of Iraqi resistance, the concocted pretexts to
invade Iraq, and inadequate steps taken to ensure participation of Iraqis to rule
post-Saddam Iraq.
The criticism of lies about WMD continued. Top Blair aide doubted level
of threat from Iraq and a report claimed that the evidence on WMD was based
on hearsay. Hoon accepted the blame for Kellys death, but told the inquiry that
the deceased had backed policy on Iraq. Blair would have quit if Iraq charge
was true. However, one of his aides resigned amidst deepening row over Iraq.
American leaders did not bother about criticism. It formed an interim
setup for governing Iraq. Sixteen of the 25 members were returning exiles and
remaining nine were more exiles than the exiles. With this composition America
hoped that the representation of Iraqis would be acknowledged, but the world
was not impressed.
The Council was to be headed by a panel of nine members in rotation.
Ibrahim was the first head for one month. This was a unique approach to ensure
political stability and provision of good governance in occupied land. The
council appointed 25-member cabinet which was sworn in amid tight security
on 3rd September.
The cabinet was dominated by Shias having 13 ministers. The remaining
slots were filled by five Kurds and Sunnis each and one each went to Christians
and Turks:

Communications: Haider al-Ebadi,

Shia.

Public Works: Nesreen Mustafa Sidiq Berwari,

Kurd.

Construction and Housing: Bayan Baqir Solagh,

Shia.

Environment: Abdul Rehman Sidiq Kareem,

Trade: Ali Abdul Amir Allawi,

Shia.

Planning: Mahdi al-Hafidh,

Shia.

Education: Alaudin Abdul Shaheeb al-Alwan,

Shia.

Higher Education: Zeyad A.Razzaq M. Aswad,

Sunni.

Culture: Mofeed M. Jawad al-Jazeeri,

Kurd.

Shia.

Human Rights: Abdul Basit Turki,

Sunni.

Foreign Affairs: Hoshyar Zebari,

Kurd.

Interior: Nori al-Badran,

Shia.

Agriculture: A. Ameer Rahima al-Abboud,

Shia.

Sports and Youth: Ali Faik al-Ghaban,

Shia.

Health: Dr. Khudayer Abbas,

Shia.

Industry and Minerals: M. Tawfik Raheem,

Kurd.

Justice: Hashim Abdul Rahman al-Shibli,

Sunni.

Science and Technology: Rashad Mandan Omar,

Turk.

Work and Social Affairs: Sami Izara al-Majoun,

Shia.

Electricity: Ayham al-Samaraie,

Sunni.

Finance: Kamil Mubdir al-Gailani,

Sunni.

Immigration and Refugees: M. Jassem Khudair,

Water Resources: Abdul Latif Rasheed,

Kurd.

Oil: Ibrahim Mohamed Bahr al-Uloum,

Shia.

Transport: Behnam Zayya Polis, Assyrian

Shia.

Christian.

Egyptian official paper termed the new cabinet as a group of fugitives.

Arabs refused to recognize US-spun governing council, but could not stand for
long on their weak legs. Iraqi Council was given the seat in Arab League.
Perhaps this was the only way they could think of blocking Israel from
entering Iraq. The Governing Council was encouraged to seek Arabs
recognition.
OIC declined to invite Iraq to attend Islamic summit. Rafsanjani urged
UN to run post-war Iraq, but Iran accepted the new cabinet as a step toward
handing power to Iraqis. Some UNSC members urged US to give more power
to Iraqi people, but Annan asked UNSC to recognize the Council. Talabani,
member of the Council asked US troops to stay for one or two years.
The US continued the efforts to secure international involvement.
America sought UN help to broaden Coalition and presented a new draft
Resolution seeking multinational force. Bush asked for UN support. Rumsfeld
hinted about transfer of power to win the support. We are naturally ready to
study it in the most positive manner. But we are quite far removed from what
we believe is the priority objective, which is the transfer of political
responsibility to an Iraqi government as quickly as possible.

US drive for more troops faced major hurdles as expected. Germany and
France opposed US Resolution. Germany reiterated not to offer troops for Iraq.
Russia backed US-led forces, but only under UN mandate. America expressed
willingness to adjust new UN Resolution. France hailed the American shift, but
Germany insisted that more troops wont boost security in Iraq. While trying to
secure world backing for Iraq policy, Bush asked for another $ 87 billion from
the House for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Commenting on the shift Anwar Ahmad suggested that the UN should not
bail out America. While it is clear why the US-UK have suddenly rediscovered
a tender spot for the UN, Mr. Annan cannot have forgotten that, not too long
agoBush was threatening the UN with irrelevance if it did not rubber-stamp
his Iraqi adventure. For once, the UNSC did not succumb and Bush-Blair went
ahead nonetheless to meet the predicted consequences. Why should the UN bail
them out now? Indeed, why was/is the UN in Iraq in the first place, when the
whole blood-soaked enterprise is a violation of its Charter and defiance of its
resolutions? If anyone needed to be there it was the UNs weapons inspectors.
With no place for them in American grand plan, the UN has no business in Iraq.
It would, thus, be supremely tragic if it now provided a fig-leaf to help the
US
The analysts from the civilized world, however, kept urging US and UN
to reach a compromise. Will Hutton of the Observer suggested that:

Even if the UN has been compromised by the role forced on it by the

United States, it remains Iraqs last best hope. New UN Resolution should
entail a decisive move towards the internationalization of Iraq and the
legitimization of the political authority.

In turn, the UN must plan for a peace-keeping operation with troops on

the scale Dobbins argues for (more than 400,000). The EU must commit
to deliver at least a quarter of the total.

This is a 10-year engagement that will cost hundreds of billions of

dollars, not all of which can come from Iraqi oil revenues.

These men (referring to those attacked UN HQ) make no distinction

between liberal and conservative, hawk and dove, UN official or
American soldier; we are all crusaders. We have to get Iraq right.

These analysts were not prepared to accept that Iraqis were the best hope
for Iraq. It was the cost of the misadventure which forced them to look for ways
to internationalize the issue. The ongoing defence and security costs are
already more that $ 50 billion and running at $ 3.9 billion a month. Not
surprisingly they rightly equate NATO, UN and US as members of the same
team; the Crusaders.

At the time of invasion America acted unilaterally against the advice of

entire world. Why should US now ask the world to send troops? The world is
not morally bound to oblige the Yankees, particularly when entangled in the
quagmire they still look for availing more opportunities. America held secret
talks with IAEA experts over Iran. EU asked Iran to ensure nuclear transparency
and sign new protocol allowing snap inspections. Russia delayed signing of
nuclear accord with Iran.
Iran refused to give up its nuclear plan. Khatami vowed not to make
nuclear bomb and Tehran wanted more time to convince hard-liners on nuclear
treaty. Iran did not close the doors for talks on surprise checks and nuclear
inspections.
America agreed to give last chance to Iran and reportedly Mossad was
tasked to track Irans bid to build nuclear weapons. Iran claimed that IAEA did
not share extremist view of US, but ElBaradei urged Iran to show nuclear
transparency and ultimately decided to give deadline to Iran.
Iran denied terror links and refused to hand over al-Qaeda men to US,
including Saif al-Adel. Iran also rejected US charge over fighters in Iraq.
America took an unexpected action of closing Iranian opposition groups offices
and freezing its assets. It was probably aimed at securing moral grounds to press
Iran not to interfere in Iraq. Tehran declared the closure of NCRIs offices
insufficient.
Meanwhile the Crusaders continued exerting pressure on Iran. A former
Iranian diplomat, allegedly involved in 1994 bombing in Argentina was arrested
in Britain. Iran lodged protest with Britain and Argentina. Incidentally Britain
and Argentina had fought a war with each other, but they have become
comrades-in-arms in the ongoing Crusades.
Khatami sought apology from UK regarding arrest of former diplomat.
Ex-envoys arrest will harm ties warned Iran. The warning resulted in
detention of another ex-Iranian diplomat in Belgium. Resultantly UK Embassy
in Tehran came under fire.

CONCLUSION
America has been criticized for concocting pretexts to invade Iraq.
Criticism was justified, but henceforth America cannot be blamed for hanging
on to Iraq. The resistance put up by Iraqi Sunnis has provided a genuine
pretext to blame them for terrorism. Going by the American logic Iraqs link to
terrorism has been proved. This justified perpetration of Yankee-style terrorism
against them.

Bremer had the cheeks to call the operations carried out by Iraqis as
terrorism; whereas these operations were purely military in nature which
targeted illegal occupation forces with precision. It was America which
perpetrated state terrorism against Iraqis.
In all fairness the Iraqis should be supported by Muslim Ummah,
particularly by those who could be targeted next. Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and
Pakistan should support them at least by words of their mouths. This is the only
way to stall American plans of availing opportunities presented by the tragedy.
Things should be made difficult for the Yankees to embark on new adventures.
Alas! None of them will dare that.
Contrarily some countries of the Ummah seemed to be willing to help
America in consolidating their victory. Reportedly Iraq Council was prepared
to welcome Turkish troops under UN. Less than a century ago Arabs had
joined hands with the Crusaders to undo the Turkish Empire, now Turks are
being invited to undo few Arab countries.
Nobody talked about rebuilding of Iraq, because costs were very high.
Just repairing the electrical grid and the water system will cost $ 13 billion and
$ 16 billion respectively. Perhaps the reconstruction would be considered once
the act of destruction is fully completed.

11th September 2003

PLIGHT OF THE PARTNER

Musharraf has been boasting about Pakistans partnership with America
in war on terror. He also acknowledged frequently that the war has been
targeting Muslims only. Thereby it is obviously against Pakistan as well,
because it is an important country of Islamic World.
Pakistans commitment to war has not been matched even by most of the
crusading countries. Pakistan facilitated occupation of Afghanistan, hunted
fleeing Taliban and al-Qaeda men, cracked down on Mullas and Madrassas,
strangulated Jehadi organizations supporting freedom movement in Kashmir,
choked funding of the militants, quietly consented to invasion of Iraq and
showed willingness to recognize Israel.
In turn India accused it of sponsoring cross border terrorism and the
Crusaders asked Pakistan to curb terrorism in Kashmir. Lately the Transitional
Government in Kabul has started blaming Pakistan for perpetrating cross border
terrorism and the occupation forces asked Pakistan to do more. The parameters
of more remained undefined.
The Crusaders continue considering Pakistan a cradle of terrorism. They
have yet to repose confidence and trust in the partner; Pakistan. Most of their
acts have endangered the regional peace and threatened the security of Pakistan.
The anti-Pakistan trend is likely to persist as there are no signs of change
of heart or mind on the part of the Crusaders. Resultantly Pakistan is likely to
keep paying the price of unequal partnership for indefinite period. The proxy
crusaders will remain the beneficiary.

ACCUSATIONS FROM EAST

India kept accusing Pakistan of cross border terrorism after every attack
launched by the freedom fighters in occupied Kashmir. Of late it has started

pointing finger towards Pakistan for acts of militancy occurring anywhere in

India.
On 25th August forty-seven persons were killed in car blast in Mumbai
and over 150 were injured. Advani first blamed students wing for attack and
when Pakistan deplored the incident, he not only termed the condemnation as
mere formality but also warned that attacks could hurt peace moves. Attacks
make task of peace initiatives more difficult. India advised Pakistan to shun
terrorism and reiterated the old point asking Pakistan to hand over nineteen
men.
Pakistan rejected all allegations of terrorism. Kasuri argued that suicide
bombers do not abide by rules. They are in fact the product of non-adherence to
rules. Aziz conveyed Pakistans willingness to discuss Indian concerns on
militancy. Musharraf assured US lawmakers that Pakistan wont allow across
border terror.
Foreign Office termed Indian accusations about Bombai blast as wild.
Rashid vowed, no Pakistani will be handed over to India. Pakistan reiterated
that no terrorism was emanating from its soil and Kasuri suggested regional
monitoring of cross border terrorism. Jethmalani exonerated Musharraf from
accusation of intrusions. Ansari said, no infiltration was taking place across
Line of Control.
Pakistan then tried to turn table on the issue of cross border terrorism and
asked India to dismantle terrorist apparatus. Adoption of this strategy was too
late. India denied anti-Pakistan terrorism. The world did not take serious notice
of terror charges against India.
Pakistan initiated confidence building measures as desired by India. In
first week of September Pakistan freed 269 fishermen and sent them homeward
with gifts. Sixteen more were released a few days later. India on the other hand
planned to release Pakistani prisoners in exchange only. Using Pakistani
prisoners for bargain is illegal said Indian AG.
Pakistan proposed talks for resumption of rail links. India was not keen
to resume rail link said Sibal. Talks for air link were held but ended in impasse
as Islamabad sought guarantees against future unilateral bans on over flights.
Visiting MPs of Pakistan and India yearned for peace. Jamali gave a
message of love and peace for Indians. Indian MPs termed their visit a success
and praised Musharraf. Pakistan inked $ 200 million business deals with India.
Track-II contacts must lead to talks said Kasuri. He felt that ball was now in
Indias court.
Pakistanis and Indians in America celebrated independence jointly.
Benazir contributed to confidence building by divulging minutes of a defence

conference to an Indian. Pakistani models went to India via UAE to join

catwalks to build confidence by exhibiting the curves of their trust. This gesture
should mark the end to asking more from Pakistan.
Salahuddin urged Hindus to return to held Kashmir assuring them that
Mujahideen would provide them possible protection. Qayyum however declined
to meet visiting Jethmalani as he was working for settlement under Indian
constitution.
Pakistani leaders desired peaceful co-existence. Musharraf offered
ceasefire on Line of Control. Jamali called for peace and sought tension free ties
with India. Pakistan wanted to live in peace with India said Rashid. Delhi saw
nothing new in Musharrafs offer of ceasefire. However, Indian leaders
reciprocated as Vajpayee and Sonia also wanted peaceful co-existence. The
Bania in Vajpayee asked for more trade with Pakistan but refused to talk.
Khokhar blamed New Delhi for delaying dialogue. Rashid said that
Delhi was not serious and wanted to avoid talks. Kasuri again urged for
sustained dialogue with India. Musharraf claimed that India was in no-win
situation; hence it must start dialogue without any delay to negotiate
settlement of all issues including Kashmir. Mufti Sayeed termed talks with
Pakistan vital to peace. Mufti and Mehbooba called for meaningful Indo-Pak
dialogue.
The possibility of Musharraf-Vajpayee talks at UN was speculated. India
ruled it out. Vajpayee linked talks to peace in Kashmir. The arrogant Bania
insisted that peace must be restored before talks and also refused mediation,
though no one was keen to do so. Restoring normalcy in Kashmir is Indias
responsibility countered Pakistan.
India concentrated on measures to build different kind of confidence.
Having struck strategic partnership with the Crusaders it planned mission to
moon and strengthen Navy with Russian frigates. India and Iran discussed
regional security situation. India planned to make 30 more Pirthvi missiles.
Thackeray demanded unleashing terrorism in Pakistan. A week later
Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan invited Wali to visit India. Pushtoon
stalwart thanked him for invitation. Three days latter Thackery and Advani
urged stepping up terror in Pakistan through LTTE.
Other measures related to mutual cooperation of Indians and the
Crusaders which will be seen little later. First a glance at the state terrorism
perpetrated by Indian armed forces during last forty days:

Indian shelling claimed two lives in AJK on 4th August. Two days later six
persons including father and son were killed in IHK.

Lashkar commander was shot dead two on 8 th August. Three days later
Indian shelling claimed two lives in Hamzigun sector in Skardu district.

On 12th August Indian shelling killed a boy. Next day one person was
killed and 30 hurt in IHK.

Eight were killed in IHK on 15 th August and one more was killed three
days later.

On 19th August two LJ activists were awarded death sentence. Next day
ten persons were killed in IHK fighting.

Two-month old baby was among twelve killed in the Valley on 21 st

August and next day a woman was among six killed. Five civilians were
killed in Indian shelling across Line of Control the same day.

Ten persons were killed in the Valley gun battle on 23 rd August. Next day
sixteen civilians were hurt in Indian shelling in IHK.

On 25th August three members of a family were among nine killed in

IHK. Next day nine more died ahead of Vajpayees visit.

Five were killed in a hotel siege on 28th August and two days later
thirteen more were killed in clashes. Two Jaish men were shot dead in
Delhi the same day.

On 31st August six civilians were killed in Indian shelling in Nakyal

Sector and two more were killed in Indian firing. Seventeen were killed
in the Valley in violence the same day.

Six persons were killed in IHK on 3rd September and sixteen more died in
violence next day and a Lashkar man was arrested in New Delhi.

Indian shelling killed three civilians in Skardu area on 5 th September. The

same day a politician was among six shot dead in IHK.

On 6th September twenty were killed in IHK violence. The same day
Indian shelling claimed two lives in AJK. Two days later ten more were
killed in IHK.

Three persons were gunned down in Kashmir violence on 9th September

and Indian shelling killed two civilians in AJK.

On 10th September seven fighters were among nine shot dead in IHK and
next day six more were killed in blast and gun battles.

Twenty-three were killed in the Valley on 13th September. One civilian

was killed and three injured in Indian shelling across Line of Control the
same day.

Indian shelling killed two civilians in AJK on 14 th September and thirteen

died in IHK violence.

On 31st August Mast Gul escaped attempt on his life. Family of the hero
of Charar-i-Sharif blamed Indian secret agency RAW for the attack. Haji
Zaman, Afghan commander, had reportedly taken Rupees five million from
India to kill him. The attack was second of its kind.
India committed a blunder. It should have approached the Crusaders and
on their instructions the Government of Pakistan would have done it free. Or
FBI would have done it as many families of the deceased believe that their
dear ones were killed simply for their sympathies towards extremists. India
blinded by its arrogance was not shy of committing blunders. A Brigadier was
earlier permitted to plan communal riots in Kishtwar.
Vajpayee expressed his willingness to meet fighters before embarking
upon visit to IHK. Security was tightened as Indian PM arrived in the Valley.
Mujahideen called for general strike. Indian prime minister said, doors were
open to all who shun violence. But his Lollipops failed to win over Kashmiris.
They observed Indian Independence Day as black day. Hizb refused to declare
ceasefire.
Freedom fighters kept striking back. Two Indian troops perished in
grenade attack on 7th August, four soldiers were killed on 11th, another died on
18th and yet another on 27th August. On 6th September a Brigadier was wounded
and two soldiers were killed in a blast. In addition five soldiers died in
helicopter crash and a major committed suicide.
Indian strategy to approach APHC through parallel talks however
succeeded in sowing the seeds of disagreement within Kashmiri leadership.
APHC expressed no-trust in Ansari and Conference was at the verge of splitting.
Gilani convened parallel General Council Meet.
Islamabad accepted APHC decision, but its top body declared unseating
of Ansari illegal. Bhat threatened to issue show cause notices to dissidents.
Ansari denied split in APHC and Gilani claimed that APHC was re-organized to
boost the struggle. India intriguingly kept quiet.

ACCUSATIONS FROM WEST

As consequence of two unsuccessful operations in Eastern Afghanistan
and increase in intensity of operations carried out by the victimized Pushtoons,
the puppet regime in Kabul and the Crusaders started blaming Pakistan for
supporting Taliban and al-Qaeda. Jalali talked of cross border terrorism with
reference to attack in Paktika. Karzai stressed joint Pak-Afghan fight against

terrorism. He wanted stricter approach by Pakistan against the Taliban

incursions into Afghanistan.
Rumsfeld expressed US concerns about Afghan borders and infiltration of
terrorists, while acknowledging Musharrafs endeavour to do everything to
stop terrorists entering Afghanistan. It was reported that al-Qaeda was getting
help in tribal belt and a US report blamed Pakistan for providing training
facilities to al-Qaeda in 1990s.
Without listening to Pakistans viewpoint, the Crusaders took punitive
actions across Durand Line. On 11th August two Pakistani troops were killed by
trigger-happy US troops. Musharraf demanded action against US killers and the
same day a Pakistani civilian was injured in skirmish on Afghan border and
Afghan forces again fired at Pakistani check post in Mohmand Agency.
President and Prime Minister discussed the situation.
Powell apologized for killing of Pakistani soldiers. That was end of the
matter. Intriguingly Musharrafs calls have never been responded by Bush. He
should have asked for extradition of the culprits instead of protesting. If it was
below his status, then Kasuri should have summoned Nancy and told her in the
language understood better by the Americans. There was no grace in lowering
level of the President merely to lodge a protest.
Mir Jamilur Rehman commented; an American dies in action and his
photograph is flashed all over the world. Our soldier dies in the line of duty and
we are not even told his name. This friendly fire syndrome is also one of the
reasons that we should not send our troops to Iraq.
The News dated 13th August commented that Pakistan has lodged a
routine protest with the US government, but that should not be the end of the
affair. It is expected that Afghan-US operations along the sensitive border areas
will continue for quite some time and the possibility of more such incidents of
mistaken fire will become quite frequent with painful consequences for
Pakistan.
The Pushtoons were struggling for liberation from their two-fold
subjugation by Americans and Tajiks. Islamabad has estranged itself from
Pushtoons by siding with the Crusaders, but Pushtoons in tribal areas of
Pakistan couldnt remain neutral. In the prevalent situation it is not easy to
convince them not to fight for their rights.
Pakistan denied the allegations of supporting or sponsoring cross border
terrorism. No Pak incursion into Afghanistan said Kasuri. Involvement of ISI
in any operation in Afghanistan and regrouping of Taliban on Pak soil were
denied categorically. Pakistan called for timely exchange of intelligence with
Kabul regarding alleged incursions.

Islamabad based journalists were conducted to Pak-Afghan border to see

the ground realities. Musharraf assured that extremist forces have no future in
Pakistan. Kasuri planned to visit Kabul to remove misgivings as tripartite
meeting failed to resolve disputes.
Despite the accusations Pakistan did not falter in its commitment to the
cause of the Crusaders. Ex-Hizb man was picked up from Miran Shah on 9 th
August. Six days later an al-Qaeda man was gunned down in Peshawar. An Iraqi
was held for alleged al-Qaeda link. Nancy vowed hunt for al-Qaeda to
continue inside Pakistan.
FBI assisted in raising anti-terror force and in maintaining criminals
record by police. Faisal declared that noose around bin Laden was tightened.
Catch Osama operation was launched in North Waziristan. Pakistani
helicopters flew foreign forces to border. More than hundred Taliban were killed
in Dahchopan offensive. ISPR tried to cover up and termed it routine
movement. During the operation more than two dozen helicopters were seen on
Bannu airport, almost equal to the entire fleet of Pakistan. ISPR still dared
calling it routine movement.
Hafiz Hameedullah, brother of provincial minister Hafiz Hamadullah,
was arrested in Baluchistan for his alleged link with Taliban. Meanwhile wife of
missing businessman, Saifullah Paracha, claimed that her husband was with US
authorities in Kabul. Only god knows how many of missing persons were with
US.
Unknown people fired at UN vehicle in NWFP. Police chief dispelled the
impression that attackers were Islamic militants. Rockets were fired at Bannu
air base during operation in Waziristan. Religious parties and the people
resented unconditional cooperation with the Crusaders.
Their workers protested against operation in Hayatabad, condemned
killing of Arab national and asked US to stop anti-Muslim campaign. There was
uproar in NWFP assembly on Bannu operation. Durrani discussed troops
mobilization with Faisal and asked Centre to take NWFP into confidence before
initiating any move.
Durrani denied presence of Taliban and al-Qaeda activists. He said, the
provincial government wont allow anyone to interfere in its affairs. He did not
realize that interference had been completed the day he gave this statement.
Operation was successful according to government press release.
Vested interests took advantage of the situation. Ranger was killed in
rocket attack by Bugti tribesmen and two rockets were fired at FC HQ in
Quetta. Four persons were killed in Karachi firing. Mourners torched six
vehicles, a fast food outlet and petrol pumps were ransacked.

On 16th August an attempt to blow up Tezgam failed. Blast damaged

railway track near Nawabshah. Minister termed the incident subversive act.
Patrolling of railway track was ordered. A blast in Hyderabad injured three and
two more were injured in Karachi by parcel bomb. Despite widespread acts of
subversion Pakistan focused on security of US Consulate in Karachi.
Pakistan expressed its willingness to expand linkage with Afghanistan,
but Kabul following the precedence set by India, took measures to boost
confidence of different kind. The first confidence boosting measure was to
revive Pustoonistan Day.
Karzai invited Wali Khan to visit Kabul. On 13 th September Afghan
Council General called on Wali Khan. Pushtoonistan appeared to have become
part of future strategy of India and Afghanistan to pressurize Pakistan with the
help of nationalists. This could also help diverting the attention of Pushtoons
fighting against occupation of Afghanistan.

NEGLECTED OR TARGETED
Appreciations of Pakistans contribution to war on terror continued with
the sole aim of urging it to do more. Pakistan has been providing tremendous
support said Myers. US president praised Pakistans role in war on terror.
Annan contacted Musharraf to tell the purpose of US praise for his
commendable contribution. He brokered for troops for Iraq under UN. An
American Senator asked Pakistan to do more.
However, doing more in the context of recognition of Israel and sending
troops to Iraq was not so easy, though Musharraf was impressed by the polls
conducted in Iraq that Iraqis wont attack Pakistanis. Strangely he believed in
such polls to take major policy decisions.
Nevertheless he wont be able to ignore the opinion of his own people
and unanimous decision of Arab League. He should ask a simple question from
himself on this issue. Will sending of troops not mean defending the illegal
occupation of Iraq?
Governments loud thinking invited criticism. Pakistans support for UN
Resolution on Iraq was deplorable said Khurshid. MMA vowed to issue
Fatwa on sending troops to Iraq. Qazi opposed troops for Iraq. Kasuri retraced
his footsteps, no decision on sending troops to Iraq.
Praise was exclusively reserved for Musharraf. Pakistanis were still
treated as terrorists. In August Uzair Paracha was charged in US for alleged alQaeda support. His mother alleged that US court wrongly charged her son. He
was refused the bail.

The Crusaders never bothered to listen to Pakistans viewpoint; instead it

was accused on various counts. It was blamed for providing enriched uranium
to Iran. Foreign Office termed the report false. Both countries denied nuclear
cooperation.
The motive of accusations was to target Pakistans nuclear programme,
which had been mentioned by Sultan boastingly. Europe and US are afraid of
Pakistans nuclear programme. Musharraf condemned propaganda about
alleged assistance to Iran. He rejected freeze or rollback of programme which
was meant to fortify security.
Derogatory language was used against Pakistanis in cable-show
Hardball. Western Media continued portraying Pakistanis as bad guys. Many
were harassed and detained by America for terror link. Security environments in
Pakistan were depicted highly volatile. West expressed concern about
Musharrafs security as he was on the hit lists of all terrorists. None of them was
concerned about the security of Pakistan.
Even armed forces of Pakistan were not free of militancy. Reportedly four
army officers were being probed for extremist links. The tips about their links
must have come from foreign agencies operating in Pakistan. Army spokesman
denied that more officers were being interrogated. He termed the report absurd.
Absurdity did not lie in numbers. It made no difference whether the number was
four or sixteen.
The news was alarming in the context of foreign interference. Though the
spokesman denied involvement of foreign agencies yet they have surely been
arrested on tips from them. There are hundreds of officers who are inclined
towards the so-called extremist religious organizations. It is not easy to target
only four of them by Pakistans military intelligence agencies.
The Crusaders are definitely working on elimination of officers belonging
to the breed not acceptable to them. The allegation of Mushafs link with alQaeda in a newly published book was based on the same evil design, which was
rejected by Rashid and PAF termed it as trick to promote sale of the book.
Reportedly some activities in the army have been curtailed to curb
religious extremism and promote moderation. That was why the opposition
wanted probe against generals, instead of investigation against junior officers.
The invitations to Wali Khan by India and Afghanistan in quick
succession could not be extended without the knowledge and approval of the
Crusaders. These invitations have encouraged the nationalists to oppose
governments renewed efforts for construction of more water reservoirs, which
are considered lifeline of Pakistan. The invitees have declared that construction
of such dams would endanger countrys integrity.

In addition to the subversive moves, Pakistans security was threatened

by intimate cooperation with India. This can be ascertained from the events of
last five weeks:

Indo-US Defence Policy Group meeting was held from 7th to 8th August in
which wide ranging matters of cooperation were discussed.

Moves were initiated to allow AEWS sale to India.

Blackwill, a staunch supporter of India, was named as key US foreign

policy advisor.

America offered spares to Indian Navy and India planned to buy 66

British trainer jets.

Indian and US forces carried out exercises close to Siachen glacier during
first and second week of September.

India and US discussed sale of eight P3C Orion.

The events clearly indicated as to what kind of terrorism was intended to

be targeted by Indo-American collaboration. Pakistan showed concern on the
sales and criticized US-India exercises in disputed territory. In response to the
concerns Rocca assured India to press Pakistan for curtailing militancy. The
UN Resolutions on Kashmir demanding action from India were never
mentioned in this context.
As Pakistan contemplated recognition of Israel, Sharon visited New
Delhi. On the eve of his visit Vajpayee said, our relations will be further
strengthened. India and Israel vowed to fight Muslim militants. Israeli Deputy
PM said that both our countries faced a common threat by fanatic Muslims.
We can train and teach and supply materials we have developed in fighting
terrorism. We have developed a very advanced technology he boasted.
Vajpayee said, aspect of our common experience is the menace of
terrorism. Sharon emphasized, terror is the enemy of freedom and democracy.
Israel and Indiawill combat this menace. There is no compromise possible
with terrorism. Israel and India pledged closer ties and billion dollar Phalcon
radar deal was expected within weeks.
Rocca dashed to India during Sharons visit to deny India-US-Israel
Axis. Pakistan and the Muslim World should have no doubts about the aims of
tripartite strategic partnership. It is immaterial to call this partnership a nexus or
Asian NATO or by any other name. from entire Ummah only Indian Muslims
were courageous enough to protest during Sharons visit.

Pakistan feared Indo-Israel nexus would destabilize the region, but

refused to indulge in arms race with India to be a nice guy. Musharraf however
had second thoughts about Israel, I never advocated Israels recognition.
The partner in war on terror was given some lollipops. America agreed
to sell six C-130 aircraft to Pakistan; India objected. Pak-US Defence Group
met in Washington with no worthwhile outcome. Nevertheless America offered
$ 9 billion arms sale to Pakistan. It caused no excitement in Islamabad as most
of the items offered must have been off the shelves of junk stores. Pakistan
however considered buying AWACs.
Even the most optimists would infer from the foregoing that Pakistan was
being forgotten or neglected as partner. The realistic conclusion would be that
Pakistan was being targeted by all means short of direct use of force.

CONCLUSION
Having shown unprecedented timidity for the last two years Pakistan
naively hoped that it would be able to bring India on to the dialogue table. To
understand the implications of thaw in Pak-India ties correctly, one should
read the word in Punjabi. Instead of asking for resolution of core issue
Pakistan should be prepared for sustained wait, with or without dialogue.
In traversing the road Pakistanis, like Palestinians, will keep begging for
peace; whereas India will enjoy the freedom of killing those seek right of self
determination. Even wishing for a Kashmir solution on Ireland pattern would
be quite optimistic.
Aziz believed that Pak-India ties were bedeviled by mistrust. India
however reposed unprecedented trust in Pakistan by asking it to become antiterror ally. Some cynics will take it as a taunt. They must remember that after
all Pakistan too had been taunting by telling India not to feel jealous of its
position in war against terror.

The road of partnership with America is meant for one way traffic.
America will keep asking Pakistan to do more and favouring India more
without being asked. The puppet regime in Kabul under the influence of the
Crusaders and India will keep acting against the expectations of Islamabad.

15th September 2003

TWO YEARS AND TWO WARS

In less than two years after 9/11 America has won two wars, not against
terrorism, but by using this evil pretext to avail the opportunity presented by
the tragedy. Two victories, apart from the one without war against Pakistan,

have obviously not defeated the terrorism, but helped in realization of some
dreams of neo-conservatives.
These opportunities, apart from conquering lands, related to crushing the
spirit of Jihad in followers of Islam and depriving the Ummah of worthwhile
military capability using pretext of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Similar
threats emanating from non-Muslim countries have been ignored deliberately.
This strategy has helped in mustering the support of Russia, India and China.
Military action against North Korea or in South America would have deprived
America of support of many countries.
The arrogance of Americans, strengthened by easy victory in
Afghanistan, led them to tread the path of unilateralism. Invasion of Iraq has
contrarily forced hem to look towards UN to seek world support. Doctrine of
pre-emptive or preventive war has proved counter productive and turned into
quagmire.
The war waged for holy cause has degenerated into immoral and illegal
war in a short span of time. The world that had hurried to sympathize with
Americans has now started criticizing the criminal acts and neglects of the
Yankees.
Muslim World has not been able to recover from the shock and awe
caused by the onslaught of the Crusaders. Ummah remained divided and
despondent mainly due to their rulers, who have been scared of the superpower.
Out of the entire Muslim World only Taliban and Baathists dared defying
the might of the superpower. All the rulers have been acting wisely in saving
themselves and their respective domains by directly or indirectly supporting
Americas holy war.

AFGHANISTAN
Afghan War started when the world sincerely sympathized with America.
There was no problem in mustering the support for invasion to topple Taliban
and hunt their guests. Nevertheless America seduced Muslims and Afghans with
promises of bright future through provision of good governance and
reconstruction.
But Afghans having been freed from repressive rule of Taliban have
landed into the shackles of imperialism imposed through auspices of the UN.
Afghan sovereignty established by Taliban has been molested by the Crusaders
with the help of renegades. Remnants of Afghan sovereignty have been
distributed amongst warlords as souvenirs.

Afghan warlords have been freed to do what they couldnt dare to think
of during Taliban rule. They have been permitted to reap the fruits of freedom
under the new ruler, who seemed to be staunch believer of delegation of
authority.
Writ of the new ruler, Karzai, is restricted to a palace in Kabul; unlike the
Mulla who ruled the rugged land and its rough people while sitting in a mudwalled Hujra in a Killi near Kandahar. Warlords, who had been reined in by a
school-master, are playing havoc as reported by Sana:

Afghan warlords who helped defeat the Taliban are now running the
opium business, defying the authority of the ineffectual central
government which has neither a credible army nor the means of running
the countrys fledgling institutions or repairing its decrepit infrastructure.

Beyond Kabul are the Afghan badlands, where banditry is the norm,
warlords rule and the economy is in thrall to the opium poppy, virtually
the only source of income and trade.

Afghanistan is in danger of spiraling out of control and turning once

again into a failed state, a deceased host organism ripe for re-infection by
the parasites of Islamic terrorism.

In the eastern and southern provinces, the Taliban are making increasing
sorties against US forces and in western areas, inter-tribal violence is
growing.

According to April Witt the violence is on the rise due to ineffective

central authority:

In Kandahar all the three clerics were killed who served on a religious
council that recently decreed that, contrary to pronouncements by the
Taliban movement, there is no legitimate Jihad against the central
government or the foreign troops that support it.

Bands of 50 or more pro-Taliban fighters have begun appearing around

Kandahar, both along the border with Pakistan and in the interior of the
province.

Just over the border in the Pakistani town of Chaman, high-ranking

Taliban officials are meeting openly and handing out guns, money and
motor bikes, according to a witness and Afghan police officials.

In addition to Taliban fighters, other men with guns - warlords - dominate

much of Kandahar, allowing the trade in illegal drugs to flourish.

We are tough people said Hotek. He added, the experiences we are

having now make us lose our hope for the future.

Kandahar police feels targeted. In one week five or six government

officials were ambushed and killed.

Since killing of Red Cross engineer the number of aid agencies has
dropped from 22 to 7 or 8. Those left, stick to Kandahar.

Both reports tried to implicate Pakistan in reinvigourated resistance of

Pushtoons. It is not because of Pakistan but due to the injustices being
experienced by the Pushtoons, in words of Hotek. Afghans understand that
they are no more ruled by the man who emerged to power from their own soil,
but by the one chosen by the civilized world.
The new ruler is different from the one who was toppled. He dresses
immaculately and looks impressive, but not as effective as was one-eyed Mulla
in Afghan attire. He can converse in many languages, hold press conferences
and loves being projected by media, but Afghans listened to and obeyed the
Mulla who could speak only one language and was shy of facing a camera.
The new ruler prefers to be protected by foreign security guards unlike
the one who trusted his own men for this purpose. He has restored semblance of
peace in the capital with the help of ISAF, but the Mulla did it in 90 percent of
Afghanistan with the help of his own people. He however is shrewd enough to
survive amidst threat of terrorism unlike the Mulla who became victim of state
terrorism due to his limited vision of international politics.
The foreign occupants, who made Afghanistan a battleground for
decades, now claim to be trying to win the trust of Afghans. In fact they are
intriguing to sow seeds of mistrust amongst their subjects by sidelining majority
Pushtoons. The puppet rulers are encouraged to deal with them ruthlessly after
accusing them of terrorism.
They are also prompted to mistrust the neighbouring country. Pakistan is
blamed for sponsoring cross border terrorism and accused of not doing more.
This is done to make Pakistan pay the price of supporting Taliban. Once the
occupation forces leave then Pushtoons would ask Pakistan to pay more for
abandoning Taliban.
Afghans are taught the lessons of controlled democracy. They have to
understand that in democracy it is always a minority which rules. The majority
surrenders its right after casting the vote. In democratic spirit Pushtoon majority
should tolerate Tajiks rule. They must not crib that political base of Afghanistan
has been confined to the limits of Panjsher Valley.
As regards reconstruction Afghans should not believe in misguiding
reports that America has spent only $ 1.83 billion since October 2001 in
Afghanistan as against thrice the amount spent in post war Iraq every month.

They should desist from drawing wrong inferences, i.e. destruction, not the
reconstruction, tops the priority list of America.
The promises of reconstruction stand, but Afghans must remember that
Rome was not built in a day. Meanwhile the chosen leaders should learn the
use of begging bowl rather than having misconstrued ideas about self-reliance
like their predecessors or solely depending on America.
The ideas of self-reliance must be censored. However Afghan warlords
are free to revive poppy cultivation, process drugs and smuggle them. But
occasional destruction of their crops should not be made an excuse to be farmer
by day and Taliban by night.
Afghan refugees can return to their homes by their own choice and risk.
Transportation will be free, but rehabilitation remains Akhpal Bandobast. The
government employees should not be critical of meager remunerations. They
should give up primitive ways and instead adopt sophisticated means of
corruption as high-tech officials are now available in finance department.
They must also realize that economic revival is dependent on restoration
of peace and security. Terrorism perpetrated by Pushtoons in the name of Jihad
is major hindrance in this regard; which must be crushed as according to
Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir most of them still remain at large:

Most of Pushtoon majority areas of Afghanistan are still safe for Arabs,
because there is no writ of the state in rural areas.

Ordinary Pushtoons have still a soft corner for Taliban and Hekmatyar is
still very popular in Kunar.

There is a lot of anger among Pushtoons of Kunar, like other Pushtoon

areas from Helmand to Ghazni and Paktia to Khost, against the Tajik
rulers installed by the civilized world. They believe that Pushtoon
President Hamid Karzai is powerless.

Pushtoons still shelter men like Abu Zara who said, Bush is inviting
Musharraf to Washington again and again because more than 300 Arab fighters
were handed over to Bush by Musharraf in December 2001 and thats why we
hate Musharraf.
Many Pushtoons also think like this Arab. On the eve of second
anniversary of the liberation of Afghanistan they renewed the call for Jihad.
They all qualify to be termed as Taliban, the terrorists and must be hunted.
The outline of a terrorist as described by Aslam Effendi should be kept in
mind. Every Afghan who opposes the occupation of Afghanistan automatically
becomes a terrorist; anyone wearing a beard becomes a Taliban and any Arab

becomes al-Qaeda Therefore, American backed warlords are justified in

killing all such people.
The liberators frequently reminded Afghan fighters that their
marksmanship has rusted as almost all the rockets fired by them land off the
target. They would be better off if they now start pelting stones on US troops as
Palestinians do against Israelis. They should give up arms and satisfy their
marshal instincts and faculties by watching fights of birds and animals.
Afghans should avail the opportunity to learn about human rights without
unnecessarily bothering about their brethrens in Cuba. These terrorists are not
human beings. Afghans must forget about Jangi fort as quickly as possible and
start digging mass graves to discover atrocities committed by Taliban.
Afghan women are free to get rid of Burqa forced upon them by Taliban.
Those who decide to cling on to it are allowed to do so as part of the Afghan
tradition, but not the Islamic one. The women can get driving licenses in
anticipation that one day Afghanistan would have roads to drive on.

PAKISTAN
The burden of decision to support war on terror is still telling on the
conscience of many Pakistanis. Imtiaz Alam justified Musharrafs decision on
three counts:

First, he has rightly asked the Muslim World to choose moderation over
extremism.

Second, the international community, especially the US, should actually

play a positive role in delivering justice wherever the Muslims are being
denied their due rights.

Third, the West should help the Muslim World in overcoming poverty and
ignorance as the only way to deprive extremists from exploiting the
miseries of the Muslim masses.

Only the first argument envisages action from the Muslims. The ruling
elite of Muslim World from Indonesia to Morocco, including Qaddafi, have
been supporting the war on terror with all their means at their disposal.
The remaining two are based on assumption that the Crusaders would
help administration of justice and alleviation of poverty. It amounts to asking
for the impossible. They are rich because of the poor. They will never share
their fortunes with down trodden people condemned as evil forces.
The justice in resolution of political disputes involving Muslims has been
administrated by declaring all organizations of freedom fighters as terrorist

setups. The civilized justice has been dispensed ruthlessly. Musharraf and many
leaders of the Muslim World, who were forced to exercise their prudence
under duress, dare not challenge the verdict.
Pakistani ruler can feel proud of supporting the Crusades waged against
evil of Islamic militancy. He can boast about replacing fundamentalist Taliban
with pragmatic Tajiks led by Karzai alongwith warlords and foreign forces. He
can be proud of rendering great service to Afghan brethrens and to the
Crusaders.
He can seek solace in assisting Afghans in rebuilding and opening new
trade routes while India, Iran and Russia make inroads deep into Afghanistan. In
any case it provides an excellent opportunity to relax in isolation after getting
rid of Afghan problems. He can boast of keeping the Crusaders away from the
sacred soil of Pakistan and be satisfied with remaining afloat in the mainstream.
All this wont last for long, as reportedly America has started manoeuvres
against Islamabad. Pakistans voluntary surrender of the right to influence
events in Afghanistan by consenting to toppling of Taliban and installation of
anti-Pakistan Northern Alliance in Kabul wont be helpful. The isolation has all
the chances of turning into confrontation.
On second thought of his decision he can blame the Crusaders for biased
conduct of war on terror but his acts had been equally biased. His actions were
entirely motivated by the need to win Americas support rather than any noble
cause as brought out by Ghazi Salahuddin. It was he who earned appreciations
for consenting to:

Targeting of Muslims all over the world.

Launching of crackdown on Mullas and Madrassas in the name of

pragmatism.

Caring more for the pleasure of the Crusaders disregarding the injuries to
religious sentiments of his people.

Arresting and extraditing hundreds of terrorists and in exchange

receiving deportees twice in number.

Crushing organizations supporting freedom movement of Kashmiris and

yet keep harping about their cause.

Preaching Jihad-i-Akbar, whereas the situation warranted Qataal-fiSibilillah.

Floating ideas of sending troops to Iraq and recognizing Israel, while

massacre of Palestinians and Iraqis was going on.

All has been done to prove pragmatism and tolerance often overstepping
the bounds of moral obligations and brushing aside the advice of persons like
Shireen Mazari. Let us have the confidence to be a little less tolerant of the
abuse and violence meted out to us as Pakistanis by outsiders. And let us be
public in protesting and acting against those who abuse and violate us. Our
defeatist/apologetic psyche in the face of outsiders needs to undergo a radical
shift. We should be angry at what is being done to Pakistanis by others.
Untouchables of India are the most tolerant community in the world.
Even they have started speaking out, but the leaders of Pakistan:

Are proud of standing by the side of the Crusaders who continue treating
their people with malice.

Boast about being frontline state against terrorism while neighbours on

either side accuse Pakistan of cross border terrorism.

Frequently talk about the murder of a sneaking Jew while forgetting the
assassination of religious scholars like Dr. Murtaza Malik.

Rejoice over India losing 789 troops in Operation Partakram while

ignoring the grounds lost in the game of brinkmanship.

Relish few packets of peanuts given as compensation of the incalculable

losses suffered in war on terror.

Feel happy on prospects of revival of military relationship with the US

while the strategic partnership of fundamentalist Christians, Jews and
Hindus is already in place.

Dedication to war on terror has not been able to absolve Pakistan of

allegation of terrorism. Another terror attack is feared in US reported the
London-based World Markets Research Centre. Colombia, Israel, Pakistan, US
and Philippines were ranked in descending order as possible venues of terrorist
attacks Man is known by the company he keeps. It holds good for the
countries as well.
During the same period startling revelations by Abu Zubaydah were
published by Time magazine in the latest book review:

The writer tried to prove al-Qaeda-Saudi-Pakistan triangle. Prince Turki

and Mushaf Ali Mir were named.

Mir tried to get protection, arms and supplies for al-Qaeda through his
links with extremists in ISI setup.

Three princes were named for having direct contacts with al-Qaeda and
Taliban.

All three of them died within days of one another. On July 22, 2002,
Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince
Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a
high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin
Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially died of thirst while traveling east of
Riyadh one week later. Seven months after that Mir perished in clear
weather over NWFP.

These deaths occurred after CIA officials passed along Zubaydahs

accusations to Riyadh and Islamabad.

Both Ahmed and Mir knew that attack was scheduled for American soil
on 9/11. They couldnt warn US as they did know the targets and feared
implication of their prior knowledge.

Both capitals swiftly assured Washington that allegations were

investigated and they were false and malicious. Bush Administration
ignored involvement for the support of two countries for war in
Afghanistan and attack on Iraq.

The threat of terrorism in and around Pakistan is considered so grave that

it warranted the carving of US-India-Israel Axis with urgency. New name for
this Axis has been proposed to cover its anti-Muslim designs.
Sharons visit was timed with second anniversary of 9/11 to grant it
special significance. India reportedly handed over shopping list to Sharon of
equipment that has never been given to any other state. The list included:

Submarine launched cruise missiles.

Micro-satellite systems for surveillance which can be launched from

aircraft or in clusters from a missile.

Laser guided systems and precision guided munitions.

Anti-ballistic missile systems and radars of all types.

This was in addition military hardware already procured or upgraded with

the help of Israel:

UAVs for army and navy.

50 Russian MI 35 helicopters with Israeli avionics and night vision

devices.

Russian 130mm guns for up gradation to 155mm, 180mm plus 250mm.

250 battlefield surveillance radars for artillery and hand-held battlefield

radars for infantry.

Two fast attack naval craft Super Davora and four more to be built in
India.

Electronic warfare system for INS VIRAT.

Munitions for 160mm mortar, 130mm gun, 125mm for tanks and 5.56mm
rifles.

Indo-Israel defence cooperation has fairly long history, which got impetus
during the Kargil war. Israel obliged India by delivering many defence items
within twenty-four hours. Presently Israel is the second largest supplier after
Russia. As Indian interest in Russian manufactured defence equipment is
waning significantly Israel is likely to soon become the largest supplier to
India.
Support of the Crusaders and timidity of Pakistan have added to Indian
arrogance. Therefore, in future Pakistan will:

Keep vowing teaching lesson to Indian aggressors while begging for

peace and dialogue.

Continue displaying confidence about retaining minimum deterrence at

all costs while compromising it by agreeing not to use it first.

Be pressurized on nuclear issue, while India planned to increase the pace

of building nuclear reactors. Last year construction work on seven
reactors started, which was highest in the world in a calendar year.

Keep boasting about writing off of loans while the enemy threaten
wiping out Pakistan.

Thus the two partnerships, i.e. Pakistans with America in the context of
Afghanistan and Indias with the Crusaders over Kashmir and terrorism have
resulted in cornering of Pakistan. Imtiaz Gul questioned, have they all turned
Pakistan into a cornered helpless hare whom the hounds from the east and west
are sadistically staring in the face, with their master, despite being a friend,
relishing the helplessness of the hare! The friend retains the prerogative to
shoot in leisure.
It is general impression that Musharraf is in good books of the
Crusaders, therefore terrorists have long list of grievances against him. AlZawahri expressed some the allegations as under:

We ask our Muslim brethren in Pakistan: until when will you put up with
the traitor Musharraf, who sold the Muslim blood in Afghanistan and
handed over the Arab Mujahideen to crusader America?

Had it not been for his treason, the surrogate government would not have
been installed in Kabul, that government which brought the Indians to
Pakistans western borders.

Not only this. He opened up nuclear installations to US inspections,

choked off the Jihad in Kashmirand is (planning) to recognize Israel all for a handful of dollars the Americans stack in his pocket. (He was
slightly wrong. Musharraf had been so scared that he would have done all
these without getting a single buck in turn. He could think of no other
way to save Pakistan and himself.)

The officers and soldiers of the Pakistani army should realize that
Musharraf will hand them over as prisoners to the Indiansand flee
abroad to enjoy his secret (bank) accounts.

Act O Muslims in Pakistan before you wake up from your slumber to

find Hindu soldiers raiding your homes in complicity with the
Americans.

The government reiterated that the decision against terrorism was taken
in greater national interest. It was in complete agreement with the armed forces
and had support of the people of Pakistan. The official statement did not
elaborate as to how did Musharraf acquire that support during the fateful
telephone call?
Western Media used al-Zawahris message to prove that General
Musharrafs decision to side with US and its allies was justified. The allegations
made by al-Zawahri will further boost the image of Musharraf as far as his
commitment towards war against international terrorism is concerned. The final
verdict will however come through testimony of the time.
The animosity of the terrorists cannot augur well for Pakistan. However,
Musharrafs resolve to fight against terror has not been dented by al-Zawahris
statement. The criticism by his own people has also not discouraged him. He,
while having his hands full in anti-terror war raging on either side, talked about
sending troops to Iraq without ascertaining the nature of terror in Iraq.
One could only suggest that he should lead the first batch to be
dispatched to Iraq. He is the most suitable person to lead such contingent with
credentials of a Camp David returnee, devout believer of war against Islamic
militancy and experience of having fought two wars.
On reaching Baghdad the entire batch should be baptized in Tigris at a
spot down-stream from the place where American soldier had holy dip. After
going through the ceremony they should all pronounce like Gaspard; we are
here to do what Bush said. According to Chaplain, who baptized American

soldiers, the religion provides an important solace more so in case of pursuing

illegal and immoral instructions
Those who recommended curtailing of religious education in units of
Pakistan Army and abolishing religious teachers should consider appointing
Chaplains in vacancies so created. According to the civilized world Islam does
not provide the required solace therefore, lectures on Christianity should be
delivered.
This kind of motivation could mentally prepare Pakistani soldiers to kill
Iraqis, including women and children. American soldiers were baptized by the
Chaplain with the same thing in mind, though after the reported episode many
US soldiers remained unconvinced about the justification of killings in Iraq.
Thus Pakistani officers have to work much harder as their men have been
listening to merits of Jihad-e-Akbar and demerits of Qataal-fi-Sabilillah for the
last two years.

MUSLIMS
The policy of regime change has been pursued by the Crusaders for
liberation of nations oppressed by Muslim rulers. Iraqis have been liberated
recently. Lenda S Heard enumerated the effects of this liberation as under:

The number of Iraqi children who are dying from dysentery or diarrhea
has more than doubled since last year according to UNICEF.

Iraqis have democracy delivered at their doorsteps in the form of a

Council of largely returned migrs.

Iraq is under occupation. The countrys oil, banking and economy are
under the control of the invaders.

The Council is made up of different political parties, with different

agendas, different ethnic groups. There was no agreement among the
members as to the agenda of any one party or among the varying ethnic
groups. This Council could do no more than following instructions of the
master.

Muslims should also note that the so-called roadmap for peace has added
to the agonies of the Palestinians. The same is true for the thaw in Indo-Pak
relations in the context of Kashmiris. The position of the partner is equally
precarious.
The plight of Muslims elsewhere in the world is no different. The
Crusaders have given no time to Iran to rejoice over toppling of two of its
adversaries; Taliban in the east and Baathist in the west. The Crusaders are now
focusing on rulers in Tehran.

Because of the ruthless application of military means by the Crusaders

the rulers in Muslim World, including friends of US fear America more than
they did before 9/11. On the other hand the people hate America much more
having experienced what America did in waging the holy war.
The war on terror was started on genuine grounds but went astray. Its
prolongation and the indiscriminate mode of operation causing any nations or
communitys humiliation at random, has led the people at the receiving end to
think - some times rightly and at other times wrongly - that it is simply an
extension of the past (and even ongoing) practice of persecution of Muslims by
the non-Muslim bloc that is equipped with most devastating means of war and
subjugation commented Mian Saifur Rehman.
Dr. M S Jillani expressed this more emphatically. The ongoing operation
against terrorists (read Muslims) around the world, in particular in the Middle
East, Western South Asia and other more vocal Muslims states does indicate
(read prove) a consistency in goals, i.e. containing and subjugating Muslim
masses totaling about 1.6 billion, and paving the way for Christian
fundamentalists, rabid Zionists and conspiratorial American politicians to
vanquish Muslims through the creation of covert organizations in the Muslim
World and the use of other forces opposed to Islam.
Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal termed it re-colonization of Muslim World, which has
been made easier, because:
There are no international laws that now stand as safeguards and there
are no counter forces that can check this new wave of colonization.
This new phase of colonization differs from the previous era in that it
has been conceived as a process that is accomplished through using the natives
against their own people at a scale which differs from the nineteenth century
colonization by several orders of magnitude.

In this new phase of colonization, what is being colonized is not so much

the land but the economies, cultures, lifestyles and belief systems.

Most of the Muslim World has already passed through the first phase.
With rulers appointed, installed and supported by US money, these
countries are being rapidly transformed.

The onslaught might be different from that of the past, but it has not
ignored the importance of application military means. The forces hating
Muslims are joining hands to keep the Muslim World in check for long time to
come. India-Israel-US alliance for is the outcome this hatred.
Mian Saifur Rehman observed that those Muslims who look askance at
new nexuses especially at an Asian NATO, contemplating key role for India
suggest going back to the historical background of strong religion-based biases

that had even developed into hatred among prominent global factions especially
Muslims and non-Muslims.
Muslim and non-Muslim divide and armed conflicts do seem to be under
the influence of these historically proven prejudices although the powerful
countries of the world namely United States, Israel and India, all of which are
non-Muslims, claim time and again that their confrontation with some segments
of Muslims in some regions is not because of their religion-based differences,
but because of escalation in acts of terrorism.
In addition to military offensive the religion of Islam is also being
scrutinized according to Dr. John L Esposito of Gulf News. For decades Islam
has evoked discussion and debate. The religion is under a microscope after the
September 11, 2001, attacks. Never before has Islam been as questioned as to
the extent it is today. He advocated reduction of militancy in Muslims.
The Muslims demanding justice or fair play are termed militants and
extremists. Those who resort to armed struggle are condemned as terrorists.
United Nations has rendered great service to the cause of the Crusaders.
Recently twenty more Muslim individuals were added to the list of terrorists.
All these measures are focusing on the concept of Jihad.
The radicals in the civilized world recommend a better solution;
convert followers of Islam to Christianity. The Time magazine reported:

Western people, particularly Americans and Christian evangelist

fundamentalists, appear to be convinced that the time has come to wage
an all-out spiritual war against Islam.

Islam, as many of them see it, is a Satanic-inspired programme of

terrorism that abodes ill for all humankind, and represents the greatest
challenge to Christianity and Christendom. Islam, in itself, is the ultimate
Weapon of Mass Destruction.

Scores of Christian evangelists following close on the heels of American

soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, offering aid in material as well as in
spiritual form. Today more than 27,000 Christian missionaries are
working in Muslim countries, almost double the number two decades
ago.

Evangelical fundamentalists today enjoy the warm support of the

American President.

In turn, the evangelicals faithfully serve the American goals abroad;

propagating an extremely conservative and an ultra-reactionary theology,
based on the deeply-rooted conviction of the ultimate superiority of the

American way of life and the belief that all the religions, other than their
version of Christianity, are wholly false, if not downright Satanic.

In order to escape strict visa regulations, they often travel to and reside in
Muslim countries in the guise of businessmen or do-gooder social
workers. They go to the extent of distributing toys to unsuspecting
children and using that as a means to get their message across.

They are careful to keep their real identities concealed, and some even
attempt to pass of as Muslims to dupe their potential converts.

In Muslim lands, some evangelists disguise themselves as Sufis and hope

to be able to pass off as Muslim mystics; others set up what they call
Jesus Mosques and others go to the extent of publicly reciting the
Muslim creed: There is no god but God, and Muhammad (PBUH) is His
prophet.

On the other hand Muslim charities are labeled with tags of terrorism.
Organizations like al-Harmain Foundation have been compelled to cease
operating. This organization has closed offices in Pakistan and shutting offices
in Bosnia, Somalia, Tanzania, Kosovo, Indonesia, Kenya and Ethiopia as
governments of these countries are cooperating with America.
Ruling elite of Muslim World has failed to react against multi-pronged
offensive launched against Ummah since end of Cold War. It began in Bosnia
and gained momentum after 9/11. The ruling elite have been watching this
happen complacently.
The civilized world keep scratching the wounds of Bosnians by
excavating mass graves of the victims of initial phase of the clash of
civilizations. Exhuming of thousands of dead bodies serves no useful purpose
except conveying an intimidating warning to the Muslims.
The Muslim rulers must act to prevent digging of mass graves a few
decades later in many Islamic countries. They should not only distance
themselves from the biased war on terror but should also pick the courage to
support the legitimate struggles of Palestinians, Kashmiris, Afghans and Iraqis.
The bias of war on terror cannot be corrected by issuing apologetic
statements like those of Saudi Envoy. Terrorists have no religion he said and
advocated global unity against terrorism. The terrorists might not be having any
religion, but all terrorists are generally Muslims. At this critical juncture it is the
unity of Ummah which is more important than global unity. They should
unanimously support the struggling people morally, diplomatically, politically
and more.
The tragedy of 9/11 provided an opportunity to neo-conservatives as well
as to the Muslims. The opportunity for Muslims was provided in the shape of

renewed interest of the non-Muslims in knowing about Islam. This has not been
availed by the Muslims.
The Crusaders availed it through disinformation. There has been flux of
publications to distort the image of great religion. The psychological offensive
also aims at winning over hearts and minds of the youth of Muslim countries.
Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal analyzed this aspect of the onslaught as under:

Fostered by popular media and propagated by a powerful global

enterprise, this effort is going to receive a major boost through the new
budget approved by the US Congress allocating 1.3 billion dollars for
international broadcasting.

Directed at winning the hearts and minds of the Muslim youth, this
money will be used to establish a new Middle East Radio and TV
Network.

In this construction of worldview, the Western civilization is depicted as

the most advanced, powerful, glaringly progressive and advanced
civilization. From sciences to arts and from lifestyles to literature, this
depiction manufactures a false reality which is then made concrete
through visual images as well as through print media. In contrast, this
same mechanism produces a view of the Islamic civilization in which
everything is in a state of rot.

On economic front the Ummah should create its own bloc to counter
negative effects of globalization. If within globalization there is
Europeanization or Christianization then why not Islamization? Muslim
countries should prefer trade relations with their brethrens rather than nonMuslims. In this context proposal of joint OIC investment body and PTA to
promote trade amongst Muslim countries merit urgent considerations.
The need for adoption of common line of action to tackle issues related to
Muslim World is realized, but actions do not commensurate with the realization.
Muslim countries are caught in a constant balancing act between their ties with
Washington and their anti-US populations. (Cairo receives some two billion
dollars in civil and military aid each year - making the second largest recipient
of US aid after Israel)
Egypt is not the only country engrossed in balancing act. There are
many countries which value ties with Washington more than the aspirations of
their peoples. The balancing act entails victimization of religious elements.
Victimizations of Mullas have continued well before the Crusaders have
started. Saddam did it, Taliban did it, in Iran it has been going on and in Sudan
Mullas were kept out of power wrote Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal.

The rulers are not the only one to be blamed for seeking favours of the
Crusaders. There are many religious scholars who seek goodwill by issuing
Fatwas forbidding killing of non-Muslims. Some scholars even preach killing
of Muslims by non-Muslims after tagging them as terrorists.
Muslim politicians and scholars generally lack understanding of the
intentions of the West, because there is no institutional mechanism for the
study of Western civilization, culture and its oppressive war on Islam and
Muslims. Those, who succeed in reading their intentions correctly, hesitate in
expressing it in unambiguous terms.
The enlightened classes impressed by Western education, development
and affluence have practically lost faith in religion of Islam. In most cases they
hold Islam responsible for the retarded growth of Muslim societies. They do not
express their views openly, but give vent to their feelings while indulging in
intellectual intercourses in private gatherings.
Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal explained the surrender of the Muslim leadership to
the superiority of the civilized world and the resulting rot of the Ummah as
under:

Another product of the same uncontested claims of Western supremacy

is the political, military and intellectual leadership of the contemporary
Muslim World, a leadership who has surrendered to the shock and awe.
This includes the generals who possess no valour, intellectuals who see
nothing worthwhile outside the West and even religious leaders who
attempt to justify their slavish submission to strategy.

For almost four centuries now, the Muslim World has been at the
receiving end - from knowledge to products and from ideas to consumer
good, it has been receiver, rather than a generator. More often than not,
this deadly involvement is attributed to low level of scientific and
technological expertise, ignoring all other realms, as if one can abstract
the scientific tradition from the rest of the society. The rot, in fact, is
much deeper, much more sweeping in scale and dimensions.

What is wrong is not merely the lack of laboratories and libraries, but an
intellectual deadness, an aberration of the worst kind that has left our
scholars and thinkers in a state of enslaved laziness. This laziness, this
drowsy and accursed stagnation becomes apparent as soon as one enters
the corridors of Muslim institutions. Instead of alert, aware and active
minds, one finds sleepy lassitude. There is no research agenda; there are
no driving forces here, merely stupor reigns supreme.

AMERICA: THE CRUSADER

Americas obsession of war on terror has been persisting. Taliban

proved to be an easy prey. After replacing them with surrogate regime, Afghans
were left alone to sort out problems. Fighting with each other is the method best
known to Afghans for sorting out the problems.
It is said that Afghans are at peace when they are at war. America has set
the stage for them to continue fighting with each other and be at peace.
Instability, anarchy and lawlessness have been ensured for warlords to thrive
and leaving American soldiers free to hunt al-Qaeda men at liesure.
Victory in Afghanistan was made easy due to support of entire Ummah in
general and Pakistan in particular. Tajiks and bribe addicted warlords were used
to save own casualties. Easy victory in Afghanistan fueled US adventurism.
The special Pentagon intelligence cell, known as the Office of Special
Plans, which was created after 9/11, took measures to keep the fire of war
raging. This cell, headed by Abram Shulasky included determined neo-cons,
Paul Wolfwitz, Deputy Defence Secretary, and Douglas Feith, Under Secretary
of Defence Policy, to probe into Saddams WMD programme and his links with
al-Qaeda becausethey did not trust other intelligence agencies of the US
government to come up with the goods as reported by Patrick Seale of Gulf
News. It meant that this cell was created with special mission of providing
information the Bush Administration needed to invade Iraq.
It was the child of America mental state after 9/11 attacks. Suddenly
mighty America was afraid - afraid of mass-casualty terrorism; afraid of the
proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction; afraid that rogue states might
pass on such weapons to nebulous, elusive, fanatical, transnational terrorist
groups such as al-Qaeda, enabling them perhaps to strike again with even more
devastating effect. The point that fear usurps the ability to think rationally has
been discussed in an earlier article.
The thoughts taking birth from fear were taken as correct due to
American psyche of self-righteousness, which combined with its military
prowess, it reached the obvious decision. The United States gave itself the right
to project its overwhelming power where-ever and whenever it pleased, to
invade countries it disliked, to overthrow their regimes, and transform hostile
tyrannies into friendly - read pro-American - democracies. It was a
programme for global dominance, driven by the perceived threat to America but
also by a modern version of imperial ambition.
He added, the second overlapping trendwas more narrowly focused on
Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians and its Arab neighbours. The
dominance of Bush Administration by pro-Israeli zealots made it easier for neocons to hijack Americas Middle East policy. They argued:

America was attacked because the terrorists envied the American way of
life. America was virtuous; America was good.

The real problem lay with the sick and failed Islamic societies from
which the terrorists sprang, with their hate-driven educational system,
with their inherently violent and fanatical religion.

US was urged to reform and democratize Arab and Muslim societies by force if necessary - so as to ensure its own security and that of its
allies. Wars of choice became official American policy.

The aim of US policy in Middle East should be the thorough political

and ideological restructuring of the region. A reformed Middle East
could be made pro-American and pro-Israel.

Patrick concluded that the pro-Israeli lobby selected Iraq as first choice
after Afghanistan because:

Saddam had dared fire missiles on Israel in 1991.

He sent money to the bereaved families of Palestinian suicide bombers,

whose homes had been flattened by Israeli reprisals. His crimes had
gone unpunished.

Saddams Iraq was the only Arab country which might in the long run
pose a strategic challenge to Israel.

Occupation of Iraq would intimidate Tehran, Damascus, even Riyadh and

Cairo, and tilt the balance of power decisively in Israels favour, allowing
it to impose on the hapless Palestinians the harsh terms of its choice.

He included the control of oil resources as additional aim of invading

Iraq. All the analysts somehow miss the mention of the real aim of the
Crusaders. The holy war is solely aimed at disarming Muslims; all other gains
are fringe benefits.
The invaders of Iraq were given no respite by the liberated Iraqis. The
victorious soldiers are now feeling the ill-effects of their visible victory. Lenda
S Heard has described some of these:
The soldiers who were told that their fastest way home was through
Baghdad are being picked off by guerrilla fighters almost daily. Some soldiers
expressed their disappointment and asked Rumsfeld to resign.

US army deserters were paying smugglers $ 500 to guide them across the
Syrian, Turkish or Jordanian border.

Two US helicopters were witnessed dumping plastic bags containing

burnt or dismembered bodies of American soldiers.

US find itself in quagmire and seek help from others for rescue. Others
are not willing to send their troops.

Iraqis subjected to Israeli-type checkpoints, house checks and body

searches by grim-faced Marines in full combat gear are no longer
celebrating their liberation while the children who once smiled, waved
and asked for sweets are now throwing stones at passing armoured
personnel carriers.

The ill-effects of landing in a quagmire necessitated baptizing of the

soldiers in despair. The ceremony solemnized in the Tigris explained it all:

I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ proclaimed nineteen-year-old

Private Bill Goodwins units Protestant Chaplain.

I have been away for five and a half months and have thought a lot about
this. I could die here. I realized it was necessary to get baptized said the
Private.

Religion is an important solace as they face loneliness, hardship and

possibility of losing their lives.

The Bible says thou shall not kill but the original Greek says thou shall
not take a judicially innocent life. Saddam and his men are pretty evil, if
they were tried in any court, they would be found guilty.

I dont think its problem because God sent people to war. Just look at the
Old Testament Chaplain added.

May be we do not understand them (Muslims), but this has nothing to do

with religion, added Gaspard, a 24-year-old from Louisiana. We are
here to do what (US President) George Bush said - find Weapons of Mass
Destruction.

The ceremony was primarily aimed at convincing soldiers about the noble
cause of an illegal war and to legitimize the killing of Muslims. However back
home Al Gore criticized the war and tauntingly urged American hawks to feel
proud of their victories. Millions of Americans now share a feeling that
something pretty basic has gone wrong in our country, and that some important
American values are being placed at risk.
He termed the lies told by Bush about Iraq War false impressions.
Americans were made to believe that Saddam Hussein was involved in
September 11 attacks and was actively supporting al-Qaeda; that Saddams
Weapons of Mass Destruction were an imminent threat, and Iraq was on the
verge of building nuclear weapons; that US troops will be welcomed with open
arms, and that there was little danger of continued casualties in a prolonged
guerrilla war.

Pains of victory have been felt even by Laura Bush, who wanted to visit
Iraq and Afghanistan. She said, it was difficult to hear reports of soldiers
deaths in the ongoing war on terrorism and would like to travel to Iraq and
Afghanistan.
The price paid in financial terms is quite heavier. In financial terms the
Iraq War has cost over $ 50 billion and it is rising by $ 4 billion every month.
The sad part of this bargain is that flow of oil from Iraq is still in jeopardy.
The biased conduct of war and discriminatory measures taken to improve
internal security have antagonized American Muslims against Bush regime.
Most of them are likely to vote against Bush in 2004.
Shafqat Mahmood observed that the biased war has negative effects in
Muslim World as well. Something obviously is wrong with the US strategy to
fight terror if it wins the battles but looses the war. I say this both in the military
sense because neither Afghanistan nor Iraq are anywhere near a victory for the
US. But, I also mean it in a larger sense of winning hearts and minds. The Bush
Administrations strategy of fighting this war on terror has turned the people
of the Muslim World against it and this cannot be good.
After 9/11 America was in position to capitalize on world sympathy and
demand support against evil of terrorism. Today that advantage has evaporared
according to Ghazi Salahuddin, the United States has lost all the sympathy that
had erupted internationally two years ago and President Bush, mainly because
of his Iraq War, is not an admired person in the world.
Two years later he is finding difficult to muster support for his
misadventures. Islamic countries have become suspicious of the war. Many
European countries have also expressed their reservations on unilateralism of
America.
The war has affected the entire world in general. Dr. Tariq Rahman
writing under caption of Two years down Insanity Avenue pointed out
following consequences of war:

America, and for that matter the world as a whole, has also lost respect
for privacy, rule of law, humane behaviour and civilized social norms.

Nine Eleven has brought out the worst in everybody. Above all it has
empowered authoritarian personalities, intelligence agencies, sadists,
right-wing racists and religious fanatics of all kinds.

Even liberal intellectuals, trained in the West, denounce American

arrogance and barbarianism. Even moderates are ambivalent about
American deaths in Iraq - it is difficult to sympathize with conquerors and
occupiers although ordinary soldiers should be separated from those who
sent them there and sympathized with

Muslim opinion is becoming as radicalized against American dominance

as neo-imperialist opinion became after Nine-Eleven.

This, then, is humanitys greatest loss - moderation, liberalism, live-andlet-live attitude! We have all descended into insanity and hatred and
mistrust.

The war, despite visible victories, is nowhere close to defeating the evil
of terrorism. On the contrary it has fanned various kinds of terrorism. According
to Praful Bidwai two years, and two wars later, the world has become more
skewed, more disorderly, and more vulnerable to terrorism.
Referring to Israeli Prime Ministers visit to India he said, the symbolism
of timing Ariel Sharons visit to India to coincide with 9/11 was crude, but real.
It is not symbolically insignificant that he had to return home a day earlier.
In Afghanistan warlords have been co-opted in perpetration of terrorism
by the occupation forces. Afghanistan remains hopelessly ungovernable.
Hamid Karzai has been called the Mayor of Kabul - not inaccurately.
Afghanistans sole state-level military force remains under the control of the
Punjshiris, while warlords rule its remaining territory.
Indiscriminate use of military means is likely to increase extremism,
militancy and terrorism. Hans B Bremer, on the basis of report of Germanys
intelligence service, felt that terrorism would spread. One of todays central
problem areas of conflict such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel-Palestine provide
al-Qaeda with an enormous potential for support and recruitment.
On the second anniversary of the raids on New York and Washington we
challenge America and its Crusades, which is teetering from its wounds in
Afghanistan and Iraq said al-Zawahri. We tell them that we do not seek to kill,
but we will chop off the hand which seeks to inflict harm on us, God willing he
added. Bush acknowledged that Osama still plans against US.
Today Bush finds himself in the quagmire, the term he despised a few
months earlier. His arrogance has started showing the signs of softening. From
Youre either with us or against us he has come down to bring em on
observed Eliot Cohen of Herald Tribune. He reminded UN, in a tone lacking
politeness as well as arrogance, that it has a responsibility to help the United
States escape from the mess in Iraq.
With subdued arrogance he was searching for the way out of the
quagmire. In Iraq he is finding it difficult to transfer power back to Iraqis, which
is being demanded by the world with increased emphasis. While fighting
unexpected resistance put up by the Sunnis, he also feared Shia renaissance.

American anxiety about a Shia renaissance in Iraq no doubt has its roots
in what you might call unfinished business next door in Iran. It is, of course,
shared by conservative Sunni states in the Gulf region, who shudder at the
thought of a Shia-dominated government in Iraq. But that is exactly what Iraq
should have, given its Shia majority of 60 or 65 per cent opined Hans B
Bremer.
The gravity of situation leads to speculating a remote possibility. To get
out of the mess and to safeguard its interests in the region, America may patch
up with Iran. This could help in undermining the unity of Ummah and also
keeping the Sunni Arabs under control.
The willingness of Shias to cooperate with occupation forces; most of
Shia factions surrendering weapons voluntarily; action by France initiating
action against Iranian opposition groups; and similar action taken by US
indicate that spadework for rapprochement is on. The only obstacle is Irans
nuclear plan, which at present seems difficult to be surmounted.
The way out from quagmire surely passes through the corridors of United
Nations. America will try its best to strike a face saving compromise, but for
that it has to spell out a time table for restoration of sovereignty of Iraq as
demanded by the critics of occupation.
America has undoubtedly shown far more of the side the world loves to
hate than the one others aspire to in words of Eliot Cohen. Yet American
leaders are likely to remain adamant. This is attributable to clueless-ness of
common Americans.
In the age of information, the people of a country having extensive means
of information are ironically the most uninformed or ill-informed. They blindly
believe that every action taken by their leaders is justified. For this reason they
have remained mum over the startling revelations pertaining to the untenable
reasons their government had advanced to justify their Iraqi misadventure
observed Masud Akhtar Shaikh.
He added, common American is not at all aware that its leaders are fully
determined to neutralize the revolutionary spirit of Islam that demands a
perpetual war against oppression, injustice, inequality, and denial of human
basic rights. They do not realize that the war will prove counter productive.
American leaders will capitalize on ignorance of its people and will keep
working on availing more opportunities.
Iran is already being targeted by US-EU-IAEA Axis. America has not
given up its right to use force against rogue states. We aim ultimately not
just to prevent the spread of WMD, but also to eliminate or roll back such

weapons from rogue states and terrorist groups that already possess them or are
close to doing so vowed John Bolton.
Pressure on rogues like Pakistan will continue. It will be asked to do
more in checking cross border terrorism in Kashmir and in Pushtoon areas of
Afghanistan. Efforts will continue to implicate Riyadh by producing evidence
suggesting that a key associate of hijackers may have been Saudi Government
agent.
The suggestion like the one made by Maleeha will fall on deaf ears.
America will initiate no moves to bridge gap with Muslims. The gap, not the
bridge, is needed for creating opportunities. The biased conduct of holy war
will persist. The reports like Muslim clerics denied entry to US and Muslim
army chaplain held on suspicion of espionage will keep pouring in.
To this end America is contemplating to improve efficiency of its
intelligence network by setting up a new agency. The idea is in admiration of
Israeli spooks as reported by Linda S Heard. It would be an endeavour to learn
from both the successes and failures of Israels human intelligence.
The list of lessons to be learnt from experiences of Israelis is long and
interesting. Its aggressive tactics and inventive use of non-official covers may
serve as a useful guide for this new agency. Linda quoted following models
from the past:

Mysterious art students showed up at Drug Enforcement Administration

security office in France to sell paintings in January 2001. Their
surveillance revealed that many of the students had served as
intelligence officers during their obligatory army stint.

Notorious spy, Eli Cohen craftily wormed his way into the good offices
of high-ups in the Syrian government. He was able to pass himself off as
a Syrian as he was born in Alexandria. In 1960 he was approached by
Israel, convinced to leave for future assignment, and posing as a Syrianborn businessman from Argentina, he arrived in Damascus in 1962. He
again made his access to top echelons.

Israeli intelligence operatives seem to spend a lot of time spying on their

friends, including America and targeting them if so required. US Jury is
still out on Israels bombing of the USS Liberty, which Israel says it
believed was an Egyptian vessel.

In 1952 relations between US and Egypt improved and America was

likely to assist construction of Aswan Dam. Israel sent espionage agents
to Egypt charged with bombing US interests and shifting the blame on the
Egyptians. Bags filled with acid were placed on top of nitro-glycerin and
hidden in fake books, which were put on the shelves of American

libraries in Alexandria and Cairo in the knowledge that it would take

several hours for the acid to destroy the coverings and set off the bombs.
The agents were however caught and bombs were recovered before
exploding.

Killing of professor of Alexandria University, Yahya al Mashad was the

deadly craft of the Mossad, who was found dead in a Paris hotel room.
Some 14 Egyptian nuclear scientists lost their lives in suspicious
circumstances.

America intends following above models in its war on terror. Linda

visualized that the new agency could consider limited cooperation with Israeli
spy services given the amount of overlap in the terrorism and proliferation
threats to both our national interests.
The cooperation is considered viable despite the fact that Israeli agents
did not cooperate with their American counterparts when a truck bomb killed
241 Lebanon-based US Marines in October 1983. Israel knew in advance that
the attack was planned and failed to warn its friends. In the light of this incident
it is reasonable to believe that Mossad might have penetrated al-Qaeda and
could even have had the knowledge of 9/11 attacks.

CONCLUSION
America has carried the war to the courtyard of the terrorists and in doing
so it has positioned about two-third of its active-duty combat forces in Arabian
Peninsula and Iraq which has about two-third of known oil reserves of the
world.
It is now setting the stage to restrict terrorism to the Muslim World by
manipulating the diversity of Ummah. Armed conflicts between different ethnic
and sectarian factions will be sponsored and supported through covert means.
Learning from the experience of Israeli spooks America is likely to
resort to target killing. Brains of Islamic World, particularly belonging to the
field of science and technology, will be targeted in particular. The possibilities
of damaging the interests of the so-called friends cannot be ruled out.
This short-sighted strategy, however, will fail in protecting Americas
global interests as well as internal security, because America is not only losing
the friends fast, but also creating new enemies. The manner in which it has been
treating the people of conquered lands will undermine the plans of neoconservatives of carving a new empire.
In last two years America has resorted to winning support through arm
twisting or purchasing it; rushing to adopt policy of unilateralism; using brute

force; violating Geneva Conventions while demanding compliance from others;

endangering security of many nations to improve its own; and carrying out
covert killings. Its unjust attitude has minimized the chances of peace and
increased the prospects of conflict in future. Nourishing of anger, hatred,
mistrust, suspicion, coercion, threats, counter threats and rejection of dialogue
can never augur well for the humanity.
The world community cannot afford to watch bullying of the weaker
nations by the lone superpower. It cannot approve the use of lawless force.
Sooner or later it has to act to rein in the bully to preserve the peace, security
and prosperity of the humanity.
The Crusades of 21st Century provided an opportunity to the Muslim
World to rise to the occasion and work for the unity with the sole aim of
preserving its freedom without threatening interests of other nations.
Unfortunately it has succumbed to the might of the superpower and seemed to
have reconciled with inevitable.
Arabs have no option but to act, and act immediately. They must
safeguard their collective as well as legitimate interests of Palestinians and
Iraqis. The Arab World has to demonstrate unity to check further adventures of
America and to rescue Palestinians and Iraqis.
Iraq is heading for prolonged convalescence like Afghanistan. The
Crusaders are presently entangled in the mess they have created for themselves.
Once they overcome the ongoing resistance, they will create conditions for
armed conflicts between ethnic and sectarian groups of Iraq and the neighbours
will be blamed for cross border terrorism. The road to peace for Palestinians has
been blocked by the highwaymen of Sharon; the butcher. Palestinian cannot
resume their journey without explicit and unanimous support of the Arab World.
Healing of Afghanistan will take decades. By the time there will be signs
of recovery, half of the current century will go past as the Crusaders have set the
stage for frequent scratching of the wounds. Different factions of Afghans will
keep fighting with each other and the Crusaders will remain around to ensure
that everything goes according to plan.
Pakistans; nay Musharrafs, contribution to the Crusades has been and
will continue to be appreciated; whereas Pakistanis will be treated as Islamic
militants or terrorists. As soon as Musharraf will be off the stage, Pakistan will
be asked to surrender Weapons of Mass Destruction and reduce its armed
forces, failing which these will be portrayed as threat to peace and dealt with
accordingly. This is the threat for which Pakistanis have to prepare themselves.

18th September 2003

AWKWARD AFGHANISTAN
Peace remained elusive in Afghanistan. Brahimi formally mentioned his
concern over law and order situation at least four times in last three months.
Straw and Canadian Foreign Minister discussed Afghan security with Karzai
and Abdullah. Tribal elders, aid chiefs and Human Rights body slammed Kabul
regime over security issue.
Kabul regime at last found an escape-goat. Pakistan was blamed for all
the security related problems. Despite best of its efforts Pakistan found it
difficult to absolve itself from the unfounded allegation of cross border
terrorism.
Rehabilitation and reconstruction of Afghanistan made no significant
progress. Iraq War dissipated the enthusiasm of donors because of unending
American urge for destruction. The world couldnt afford to undo the damage
caused by the revengeful superpower.

PEACE AND SECURITY

Factional fighting kept posing threats to peace and security in
Afghanistan. Following incidents of fighting were reported during the period:

Seven civilians were wounded in fighting between Dostum and Atta on

2nd July, despite sending of mediators to halt factional fighting around
Mazar.

UN helped in brokering truce between Atta and Dostum in Balkh on 6 th

July, but twelve persons were killed as fighting erupted once again.

On 8th July gunmen ambushed rival commander in Kandahar. Three

weeks later factional fighting left one dead in Samangan and a week later
rival Afghan factions traded fire in Faryab.

On 13th August 61 Afghans were reported killed in different incidents of

violence; twenty-five in remote district of Uruzgan, fifteen died in bomb
blast in a bus in Helmand, and sixteen elsewhere.

Fighter loyal to Dostum was killed in Mazar on 21st August and ten days
later hundreds fled as factional fighting erupted in Sari Pul province.

On 8th September Jumbish commander was injured and two weeks later
battling warlords forced villagers to flee in central Afghanistan.

Efforts to control factional fighting continued. United Nations Assistance

Mission negotiated ceasefire among Jamiat and Jumbesh factions. Mujadeddi
was authorized by Zadran to mediate with Karzai after he had secured release of
Zadrans son. Meeting of Northern warlords was arranged in Kabul. Peace
commission was formed in Faryab. Despite these efforts commanders personal
rivalries and in-fighting kept disturbing the peace.
Another cause of disturbed peace was the amber of revenge burning in
hearts of Pushtoons:

On 22nd June two bomb blasts rocked Kabul, but there were no casualties.

Three persons were injured due to blast in cinema in Helmand and UN

office came under rocket attack in Jalalabad the same day.

Seventeen persons were hurt in Kandahar mosque bombing on 1 st July.

Next day pro-government cleric was gunned down in Kandahar and an
Afghan was blown up by own bomb the same day.

On 3rd July rockets were fired at Afghan road crew. Next day fifteen
suspects were held for killing of the cleric.

Afghan official escaped grenade attack in Kandahar on 7th July.

On 15th July police chief was among five gunned down in Kandahar
province.

Eight Afghans died in remote controlled mine blast in Khost on 18 th July

and a police official was among three gunned down in Kabul.

On 21st July UN vehicle was ambushed in Kunar, but there were no

casualties.

Official of Ulema Shoora was killed in Kandahar on 30 th July and on 6th

August a person was killed in blast in Kunar.

On 19th August a blast ripped through house of Karzais brother without

injuring anyone.

Three persons were injured as abandoned device exploded in Maruf on

24th August.

On 3rd September a school was burnt in Logar and six days later four
villagers were killed in ambush in Shorawak district of Kandahar.

Car bomb killed four in Ghazni on 18 th September and two days later
another blast killed nine in Laghman province.

Out of all these incidents of killings Karzai reacted only in case of killing
of pro-government cleric. He vowed death to those who attacked. He did not

realize that peace largely depended on cooperation of Pushtoons who have been
sidelined since toppling of Taliban.
Tajiks have been the main cause of Pushtoons grievances. A glimpse of
their high-handedness was seen in illegal occupation of land in Kabul after
eviction of poor. Fahim was criticized for bulldozing houses to grab land. UN
demanded action against land mafia. Karzai could not go beyond
contemplating action against grabbers.
Landmines too remained security hazard causing death and injuries to
innocent people. Survey teams assessed the impact of landmines and concluded
that Afghanistan could be free of landmines in ten years.
Poppy cultivation was patronized by the warlords. Afghanistan was
expected to have record harvest this year. The country risked becoming narcomafia, despite seizure of drugs by security forces, torching of heroin factories
and paying farmers to stop growing poppy.
Eradication of the causes of insecurity had to start with disarmament of
private armies of the warlords. The plan formulated by the Commission
dominated by Tajiks envisaged disarming Paktia, Khost, Kabul, Kunduz and
Kandahar in first Phase. All these provinces are Pushtoon majority. Shiite
majority Bamiyan was also included. UN and Japan expressed concerns over
disarmament plan.
Karzai noticed that fair conduct of disarmament drive was not possible
under present Army chief and deputy Defence Minister. He decided to carry out
reforms in Defence Ministry. America backed Karzais reforms, but reportedly
differences between Karzai and Fahim deepened. Karzai could only change
Asef with Bismillah. New army chief is also an ethnic Tajik.
The planned disarmament could not make any headway primarily due to
the refusal of warlords on various pretexts. The only achievement was
collection of 120 weapons in Mazar by UN assisted team. Dostum and Atta also
gathered 200 weapons in Balkh.
During the period NATO assumed the command of peacekeeping force.
First NATO unit arrived for ISAF command on 5 th July. On 17th July Canada
took command of ISAF brigade in Kabul. On 11th August NATO took over
command of 5,300 peacekeepers from 31 countries. The event was termed
milestone in peacekeeping though its scope was not clear to ISAF.
Debate on expansion of ISAF continued. Brahimi pressed UNSC for
expansion of peacekeepers. Afghan government also desired the expansion.
Only Germany supported ISAF expansion and showed its willingness to deploy
peacekeepers outside Kabul.

NATO stressed upon the need to extend Karzais authority and

emphasized improvement of security before elections in 2004. NATO was
prepared to discuss troops expansion, but was in no rush to move outside
Kabul. ISAF chief later announced that NATO wont tackle guerrillas.
The Afghans (mostly Pushtoons) kept resenting the presence of foreign
troops by targeting the peacekeepers. On 6th July two Dutch peacekeepers were
wounded in blast and rockets were fired at ISAF bases on 12 th September
injuring one Canadian civilian. NATO commander warned peacekeepers of the
dangers.
Afghan police was blamed for looting and torturing masses in Mazar.
Innocent people were arrested in anti-Taliban operations. Karzai removed Kabul
police chief. The only visible improvement was that women started policing in
Kabul. The need to search Burqa-clad terrorists had necessitated this.
Majority of the Afghans were not happy with the prevalent situation since
ouster of Taliban as none of the promises were fulfilled. Sarah Chayes of the
New York Times reported this as under:

Kandaharis keep asking me, why are the Americans helping President
Hamid Karzai and helping his enemies, the warlords, too?

Many warlords who have become governors are running their provinces
like personal fiefs, who withhold vast customs revenue from the central
government, who truck with meddlesome foreign governments, who
oppress their people, who turn a blind eye to extremist activities while
trumpeting their anti-Taliban bona fide.

These warlords are not going to behave. They are not reform-able,
because it is not in their interest to reform. The warlords livelihood
depends on extremism and lawlessness.

The American alliance with warlords also discourages ordinary Afghans

from helping rebuild their country. They are also wary about the elections
next year.

Karzai is quite helpless in solving the problems of security. It is futile to

ask him to crack down on rising moral crime. After all who is responsible for
this rise; Taliban or the civilized world? The civilized world is not interested in
solving these problems. The occupation forces restrict their acts to adoption of
preventive measures by suspending road travel, warning its citizens after
insurgents attacks and employing Ugandan dogs to guard Americans in Kabul.

REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Rehabilitation and reconstruction have been relegated to lower priority

due to the destruction commitments elsewhere in the Muslim World.
Repatriation of refugees particularly from Pakistan has been ignored. Insecurity
inside Afghanistan provided a ready-made excuse to slow down the repatriation
process. UNHCR suspended operations after each incident of fighting and in
Chaman refugees were moved away from border.
This was to meet the requirement the Crusaders, who wanted to check the
movement of terrorists across the border. Amnesty opposed repatriation of
refugees. Afghan government wanted refugees to settle in countryside.
Humanitarian problem has become victim of security concerns of the
occupation forces.
On the other hand refugees from the civilized world were pushed out
forcibly. Britain deported 49 asylum seekers, despite opposition of the Amnesty.
Australia had already done the same. In Belgium refugees resorted to hunger
strike and five of them were hospitalized.
Reconstruction remained restricted to promises. WB approved $ 39
million to boost job creation and inked accords for rebuilding. Bush
proposed $ 1 billion for aid projects and US treasury chief visited Kabul for
talks on aid.
British troops planned to launch reconstruction team to rebuild
infrastructure and monitoring of reconstruction work. Abdullah and Italian
Foreign Minister discussed EU role in reconstruction and EU promised to
give 79.5 million euros for various projects. Italy pledged to give $ 39 million
for construction of Kabul-Bamiyan road.
Afghan government stepped up administrative reforms. New Kandahar
governor, Muhammad Yusaf Pushtoon, vowed boosting reconstruction.
Abdullah kept welcoming the promises made by the West and urging donors
for more aid. Rebuilding was considered necessary for establishment of
democracy in Afghanistan.
Construction of roads was disrupted due to security threats. Gas pipeline
project was put on hold till October. Paucity of foreign aid, however, remained
the main impediment in reconstruction. Nevertheless Karzai observed that
Afghanistan has started rising from ashes and reconstruction was making good
progress according to Abdullah.
With a view to democratizing Afghanistan Kabul was supported by the
West in drafting new constitution. Consultations among people on constitution
were started with the claim that it represented a model of democracy.
Presidential candidate, Ishaq Gailani son of Pir Sayed Ahmed Gailani,

denounced constitutional drafting process. The supporters of ex-king, however,

demanded restoration of monarchy.
Karzai issued decree for selection of Jirga members for final approval of
the constitution. He wanted approval of constitution as planned, but then
postponed convening of constitutional Loya Jirga.
Abdullah expressed governments commitment to hold polls next year.
Karzai set up new department for voters registration and UN hailed formation
of election commission. UN and Afghanistan signed $ 7.6 million aid package
for registration of voters.
Registration of voters was delayed due to release of funds. Government
faced tough time in conducting national census. It was apprehended that
anarchy might delay polls. An optimist official hoped that elections might be put
forward. So far Gailani and Karzai have desired to run for president election.
In social sector US army helped in opening of a girls school in Gardez.
But 180 schools were likely to be closed as funds ran dry and 4,000 teachers
could lose their jobs. Fund shortage also hampered ICRC health clinics.
Cultural emancipation remained the priority. Mobile cinemas brought
movie magic to country side. Workshop on helping child soldiers was
organized to take care of the martial instincts of the Afghans. IDB planned to
establish womens hostel for Kabul University. New department was launched
to help women in setting up business.
Chief Justice decreed that women could work but must observe veil.
Emancipation was also resisted by clerics in Kandahar, who confiscated books
not suited to Afghan culture. Afghans were warned not to listen music or shave
and video shops were closed in Jalalabad.
Issue of arrested journalists lingered on to secure freedom of press. UN
called for release of detained journalists and HRW slammed Karzai for failing
in resuming freedom of press. Karzai ordered the release of jailed journalists
amidst demands of punishment for journalists involved in blasphemy case.

MANHUNT
Hunting of Pushtoons continued in the garb of war on terror. The
occupation forces with the help of puppets achieved the following in last three
months:

Ex-Taliban intelligence official was held near US base on 23rd June and
an Afghan prisoner died in custody.

On 24th June Coalition forces seized anti-aircraft guns in Zabul and antiTaliban border operation was claimed a success.

More weapons caches were seized in Paktika on 25 th June and next day
Coalition troops detained a man carrying rockets.

On 28th June US troops clashed with al-Qaeda men in Paktia. Next day
Taliban commander died in gun battle in Zabul and bomb blast damaged
Mulla Omars house.

Fifteen Taliban were killed in clash in Zabul province on 2 nd July. Next

day ten more Taliban perished as troops scoured Zabul for Taliban
fighters.

On 7th July US and Italian troops launched anti-Taliban operation in

Paktia. Next day three ex-Afghan commanders were held.

US forces concluded Operation Haven Denial in Paktia and Khost on 9th

July and three Afghans were held for possessing pamphlets urging Jihad.

US and Afghan army searched Khost for Taliban suspects on 16 th July.

Four days later US-led forces killed 24 Taliban fighters near Spin Boldak.
Those killed were all Pushtoons resisting occupation of their homeland.

On 21st July US forces detained ex-police chief of Paktia. Three days later
US forces pounded rebel positions in Kunar.

Taliban were among eight held in anti-militants sweep in Jalalabad on

28th July. A day later forces seized truckloads of ammunition in Khost.

Three insurgents were killed near US base in Kunar on 31 st July and four
persons were injured as US troops opened fire on a taxi.

Five Taliban were killed in gun battle on 1st August and four were killed
by helicopter firing.

Four Afghan militants were killed in operation north of Kandahar on 2 nd

August.

On 11th August suspected insurgent was killed and three were captured in
Paktika. Ten days later US helicopter fired on civilian vehicle injuring
three.

Fifty Pushtoons were killed in air and ground offensive in Zabul and US
aircraft also bombed Zabul Mountains.

Five Pushtoons were killed in fresh offensive on 26 th August and forces

searched villages and caves for fugitives.

On 28th August forty Pushtoons were killed in Zabul and US jets also
bombed their positions after attack.

On 30th August twenty-six suspected Taliban (Pushtoons) were arrested at

Chaman. Next day seventeen were killed in Paktika.

Coalition forces launched new operation in Zabul on 1 st September and

overran southern hideouts next day. On 3rd September aircraft bombed
bases in mountains and ousted them from Daichopan.

Afghan and US forces flushed out fleeing Taliban in Zabul on 5 th

September and the hunt continued for next two days.

US troops hunted militants in Kandahar on 16th September. Four days

later seventeen Afghans perished in bombing in Zabul.

America and its allies failed to break Taliban (Pushtoons) and al-Qaeda
resistance despite the brutality with which operations were carried out.
Ruthlessness of the civilized soldiers was so feared by the villagers in southern
Afghanistan that they hid Quraan from US soldiers lest they were killed for
being Muslims.
Resistance from Pushtoons persisted with varying intensity as Mulla
Omar named 10-men council. The Governor accepted that Taliban were active
in Uruzgan province. Posters threatened death to US collaborators. Tactics of
fighters were termed serious threat to occupation forces as could be seen from
the following:

On 23rd June US troops came under mortar attack in Kunduz. Next day
Ismail Khans troops joined in shooting at US convoy in Herat.

Afghan soldier was killed and three were injured in Taliban ambush on
26th June. Next day an American soldier was shot dead in Paktia.

American troops were attacked in Paktia on 30th June and six days later
Afghan airbase came under rocket attack in Jalalabad.

On 10th July a US soldier died of heart attack and next day US forces
were attacked in three separate incidents in Khost, Kunduz and Kandahar.

Afghan interpreter working for US was killed on 14 th July. Next day

Police chief was among five gunned down in Kandahar province and
gunmen attacked US forces in Asadabad.

On 20th July a border post in the south was attacked by Taliban, who
came from and retreated into Pakistan.

Pushtoons killed an Afghan soldier in Zabul on 22nd July and the same
day a Dutch soldier was injured in bomb blast and two US and one
Afghan soldier were injured in car accident.

US forces were ambushed on 23rd July. Next day Taliban killed fourteen
in Zabul province and two Afghan soldiers were wounded in gunfight in
Chak Dara.

Two rockets hit army facility in Kandahar on 27 th July. Next day six
Afghan soldiers perished in ambush in Helmand.

On 29th July three Afghan soldiers were killed in ambush north of

Kandahar and US base in Uruzgan came under rocket attack.

Two Afghan soldiers were killed in gun battle on 1 st August. Three days
later rockets were fired at US base in Kandahar and thirteen Afghans
were killed in ammunition explosion.

Three rockets were fired at US base in Orgun on 6 th August. Next day

seven persons were killed as US aid office was attacked in Helmand and
mortars were fired at Coalition base in Paktia.

On 8th August two rockets landed at US base in Kunar and two days later
de-miners in Balkh came under rocket and gun fire.

Five Afghan soldiers were killed in clashes in southeast Afghanistan on

13th August. Two days later a rocket landed near US base in Uruzgan.

Coalition base was attacked in Paktia and rockets were fired at Khost
bases on 18th August.

Nine police men were killed in ambush south of Kabul on 19 th August and
two Afghan aid workers were injured in Taliban attack.

US soldier was hurt by bomb in Paktika on 21 st August. Next day rockets

were fired at US base in Paktia.

On 23rd August four persons were killed as Afghan troops fought Taliban
in Uruzgan. Next day Pushtoons claimed killing twelve soldiers in Zabul.

Taliban claimed killing eleven Americans in Faryab on 25th August. Two

days later a US soldier was hurt in battle with Taliban.

US-led Coalition soldier was wounded in Zabul on 29 th August. Two days

later two US soldiers were killed in clashes in Paktika.

On 1st September eleven Afghan soldiers were killed in fighting in Zabul.

Two days later Taliban claimed killing seven Afghan soldiers.

On 4th September US troops were attacked in Gardez. Three days later

intelligence official and driver were injured in rocket attack.

On 10th September four Afghan aid workers were killed in attack; a senior
Afghan official was shot dead; and military base in Uruzgan was
attacked.

Taliban burnt a police station in Paktika on 14th September. Next day US

soldiers came under mortar fire.

Fifteen Taliban were killed in clash and air raids on 15 th September.

Taliban denied Mulla Abdul Rahims death. US troops also clashed with
guerrillas in Paktika.

Two days later Taliban claimed capture of four US soldiers and US-led
forces in Barikot were attacked.

Nine were killed in blast near US Bagram Air Base on 19 th September and
Taliban fighters escaped siege of a Madrassa in Paktika.

Afghanistan echoed with anti-US calls as Rumsfeld visited Kabul.

Taliban vowed extending anti-Government resistance and denied talks with
Afghan officials. Osama and Mulla Omar remained elusive as ever and kept
giving calls for attacking US troops though less frequently. Hekmatyar too
vowed to fight Karzai and foreign troops.
Assistance from Afghans in man hunt increased considerably in last three
months. America used Afghan soldiers effectively in operations carried out in
Zabul to save blood of its soldiers as could be seen from the following:

During third week of July Afghan army assisted US forces in search for
Taliban suspects in Khost. Twelve Taliban were arrested for killing police
officials.

On 23rd July Afghan army launched first major anti-Taliban operation.

On 3rd August three suspects were held as bid to kill governor Uruzgan
was foiled; abducted Afghan military officers were rescued; and Afghan
government claimed capturing twenty Taliban.

A Taliban deputy minister was captured on 4th August and four days later
Afghan troops were employed to hunt Taliban after attack.

On 13th September sixteen Taliban were killed in clashes in southeast

Afghanistan and pro-government clerics called for Jihad against Taliban
four days later.

Twenty Taliban were killed in Zabul and three days later three more
killed in fighting.

On 6th September Afghan troops captured five Taliban fighters in Zabul.

Three Taliban were killed in clash with Afghan troops on 17 th September.

Next day Afghan troops surrounded Taliban in a Madrassa in Waza
Khawa town in Paktika.

During this quarter thirty Afghans were released from Guantanamo Bay.
Kabul freed sixteen returnees and also released their photos on arrival, unlike
Pakistan which kept the media away lest the released prisoners talked about
their experience of values of the civilized world.
Assistance from the partner do-more continued, despite accusations by
Kabul and resentment of own tribesmen. Pakistani troops also experienced the
embarrassment of carrying out operations in conjunction with the Crusaders
On 22nd June tribesmen
exchange of fire in Mohmand
incursions by Pakistan Army.
Pakistan border and next day
Mohmand Agency.

resisted troops deployment resulting in 3-hour

Agency. Four days later Kabul probed alleged
On 30th June US commander visited AfghanAfghan tribesmen fired at Pakistani troops in

Foreign Office denied border crossing on 4th July, but Afghan

Government reacted harshly to Pakistani troops entry to Mohmand Agency.
Karzai decided to discuss tension with Musharraf.
On 7th July Pakistan confirmed skirmishes along border. Mohmand
Pushtoons accused Pakistan of incursion and called for immediate action by
Kabul. Two days later Pak-Afghan troops again exchanged fire. Protest against
border violation was held in Kabul on 15th July. Jalali blamed Karzai for his
inability to settle Durand Line row.
On 6th August Afghan rocket hit Pakistani border town in Chaman area.
Twenty-two persons were killed in attack on Afghan police HQ in Paktika
province on 17th August. Afghan officials claimed that 400 attackers came from
Pakistan. Next day three Afghan soldiers were killed in another attack in
Turwah district of Paktika province. Jalali blamed Pakistan for infiltration, but
Taliban denied crossing over from Pakistan.
Afghan tribesmen kidnapped three FC men and took them to Zabul
province. The incident was followed by reports that Pakistani soldiers were
arrested in Zabul. This amounted to stretching the blame-game too far.
In addition to the action on ground the leaders on either side indulged in
finger-wagging. Karzai said that Osama was hiding along Pak-Afghan border.
Musharraf remarked that Karzai lacked influence across country and his
government was not representative of all ethnic groups. Karzai was saddened
by these remarks.
Kabul again accused Pakistan of not doing enough to prevent Taliban.
As insecurity in Afghanistan has direct impact on Pakistan, Islamabad showed
its willingness to pacify Afghan concern, but Kasuri rightly asked US and Kabul

to do more on Afghan security. Karzai shifted the blame Pakistani Ulema and
urged them to stop backing Taliban.
Some incidents pointed towards Indian involvement. Establishment of
terrorist camps in Afghanistan by RAW was reported. Pushtoons expressed their
concerns over Indian foothold in Kabul. Despite all this Pakistan tried to win
over Afghan sympathies. Islamabad pledged to bury the hatchet and offered
three major economic concessions. Ban on land route trade was also lifted.
Pakistan discussed building of rail link to Kandahar, offered to train 800
Afghan policemen and agreed to provide electricity to Khost. Pakistani
investors were prepared to help in rebuilding of Afghanistan. These actions
were taken with the hope that stable Afghanistan is good for the region.
On the other hand Afghanistan continued detaining Pakistani prisoners as
hostages. Kasuri observed that prisoners in Afghanistan jails awaited US nod.
Like a shrewd lawyer he conveyed that American was responsible for
everything happening in and around Afghanistan.

CONCLUSION
Tajiks have been talking foul about Pakistan since their beating at the
hands of Taliban, but NANBAI from Kandahar has also started using the
language of the Crusaders and proxy crusaders. Awkward Afghanistan has
placed Pakistan in an awkward situation. It cant even tell Kabul not to treat it
like Palestine.
Pakistans Interior Minister could not tell Karzai government more than
establishing its writ all over the country. Faisal should have asked Bush to do
it, who still retains physical occupation of Afghanistan. Karzai is merely a
helpless puppet.
Resistance of Pushtoons is likely to continue with varying intensity, but
chances of its success remain bleak in the absence of any support from outside.
No Muslim country can dare supporting them, but there will be many to
criticize and condemn them.
Pakistan will continue to be accused of perpetrating, supporting or
sponsoring terrorism after every indigenous upheaval. Pakistan must pick up the
courage to tell Americans and their stooges to address the grievances of
Pushtoons rather than dubbing them as Taliban. It cannot afford to alienate
Pushtoons living on either side of Durand Line.

26th September 2003

PURGING PAKISTAN

Faisal blamed India for blocking Pakistans re-entry to Commonwealth. It

was not fair to accuse India for everything. Pakistan should either accept own
failings or point its finger towards the real culprits. Imran correctly pointed that
Mushrraf was responsible for pro-India Afghan government and the same was
true in the context of Indian arrogance over Kashmir. The Crusaders have been
behind the visible adversaries on either side of Pakistan.

This was quite evident during the visit of Armitage to Pakistan, who held
talks with President, Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and Defence Secretary to
seek strategic relations. Astonishingly America was still in search of strategic
partnership with Pakistan; whereas the same has been already struck with India.
Gaining strength from this partnership India asked Pakistan to join hands
against terrorism. The offer was in the context of cross border terrorism.
Pakistan declined saying that it couldnt be party to Indian repression.
Pakistan has already been party to repression of Kashmiris by joining war
against the so-called terror. In two years it has not even once said no to the
Crusaders demands of launching crackdown on Jehadis. India has been getting
the job done through them.
The same strategy has been adopted by the puppet regime in Afghanistan.
Karzai and his team have also resorted pressurizing Pakistan. The Crusaders
have never disappointed them in asking Pakistan to do more. Pakistan
Government justified all its actions in quest for peace.

SEEKING PEACE
Constant accusations and threats compelled Pakistan to seek peace. India
initiated the so-called peace process seeing the keenness of Pakistan. It asked
Pakistan to take appropriate actions to prove that it was really interested in
peace.
Pakistan felt that the process had not started as yet because it did not see
Vajpayees hand of friendship reaching Pakistan. In its eagerness to see the
friendly hand Pakistan offered India 150 more items under SAPTA. India
refused to finalize trade concessions.
Pakistani teams visited for release of fishermen and to inspect Bagliar
project. Pakistan wanted restoration of full strength of diplomatic staff, but India
only offered expansion. Musharraf came out with an effective CBM; he praised
Vajpayee as man of peace.
On 22nd October India unveiled 12-point peace plan. Important points
were; bus service between held Valley and AJK; another from Rajhastan to
Khakhropar; ferry service from Bomby to Karachi; increase in diplomatic
strength; free treatment to second batch of children; and revival of sporting
encounters.
Jaish and Hizb dismissed Indian peace move, but the Crusaders widely
hailed it. Analysts opined that Indian package was a bid to sidetrack Kashmir
issue. India appeared to be guiding Pakistan according to the roadmap it had
prepared in consultation with the civilized world.

All the moves were aimed at increasing access to Pakistan while ignoring
the core issue. Inayatullah commented, what India wants is little else than
Pakistan totally abdicating its obligations to work for a just settlement of the
Kashmiris in their struggle for the realization of their right of self-determination
sanctioned by the United Nations. Kasuri also felt that the Delhis proposals
were part of delaying tactics.
A week later Pakistan accepted nearly all the proposals. It sought full
strength of diplomatic staff and agreed to UN-supervised traveling between
Srinagar and Muzaffarabad. It also offered assistance to IHK students, widows
and disabled persons in its endeavour to out-smart cunning Bania.
Mufti termed Pakistans proposal for bus service illogical. Jamali was
confident that both countries were heading towards solution of Kashmir dispute.
Pakistan and India decided to free 167 fishermen. Pakistan was ready to restore
Samjhota Express announced Mehr.
These moves were followed by Rashids visit to Delhi. He delivered
Jamalis message and called for not allowing the issues to simmer. He denied
that Dawood was in Pakistan. India advocated push in trade ties and Pakistan
welcomed Indian proposals on common fishing area. Rashid hoped that
Kashmir impasse was breaking and found Vajpayee man of vision. India freed
seven Pakistani boys.
On 23rd November Jamali announced ceasefire along Line of Control
from Eid. He also proposed Muzaffarabad-Srinagar and Lahore-Amritsar bus
service; talks on Karachi-Mumbai ferry service and Khokhrapar-Munabao
route; talks for release of prisoners; suggested setting up of visa camps; and
meeting for restoration of air-link. He hoped that decision on Samjhota Express
could be taken by end of the year.
Delhi reacted positively and offered to extend truce to Siachen. Pakistan
welcomed Indian response and formally conveyed ceasefire decision. Kashmiris
hailed the ceasefire. Guns fell silent at Line of Control and Siachen on 25 th
November marking the first cease fire in 14 years.
Despite the CBMs the chances of dialogue remained in doldrums. Sinha
saw no chance of Pak-India summit. India rebuffed Kasuris India visit offer,
but soon denied snubbing Kasuris planned visit. Delhi ruled out any chance of
Musharraf-Vajpayee meeting and rejected Kashmir talks offer.
Pakistan formally invited Vajpayee for SAARC summit. Musharraf again
offered talks to India and regretted delay in dialogue. Jamali said, Islamabad
and Delhi have no option but to resolve disputes peacefully.
Sinha said that Indo-Pak peace talks options remained open, but CBMs
should not be taken as an offer of dialogue. India also delayed the confirmation

of participation in SAARC summit. It was part of the strategy of keeping the

options open.
Pakistan hoped that Vajpayee would attend SAARC summit. Islamabad
wanted composite talks with Delhi and asked India to initiate purposeful
dialogue. It was time for talks Pakistan told India. India can choose format of
talks said Kasuri.
Mufti said that talks were the only option to Kashmir solution. He wanted
unconditional talks with Mujahideen and supported shared sovereignty in the
Valley.
Advani offered talks to APHC leaders in December. Abbas Ansari agreed
to join talks, which was termed a cruel joke by Gilani. APHC reiterated
tripartite talks on Kashmir issue. Delhis offer of talks to Kashmiri moderates
ultimately hit the snag.
The prospects of dialogue between Pakistan and India dont have to hit
snag to be ruled out. The very CBMs carry lot of mistrust. The latest steps were
last effort to make peace with Pakistan; hold talks or go to battlefield said
Frenandes. He was going to war without even agreeing to dialogue. Rashid
reacted, Pakistan is ready for talks and war with India.
Musharraf tried to be realistic in expecting no quick breakthrough in talks
with India. Pakistan sought formal Indian reply on SAARC summit
participation. Vajpayee will attend SAARC Summit replied Sinha. Pakistan
formally invited India for meaningful talks after President and Prime Minister
discussed foreign policy.
While blowing hot and blowing cold, India kept accusing Pakistan.
Vajpayee termed Pakistan terrorist blackmailer. Pakistan was accused of
proliferation after test-fire of Ghaznavi missile. India attacked Pakistan at
crime-busters meet. Advani said, we have to isolate nations which practice
terrorism as an instrument of state policy. He again asked Pakistan to hand over
20 criminals.
Sinha linked talks to end of militancy in Kashmir. Pakistan was blamed
for using delaying tactics. Pakistan must show sincerity Vajpayee told senior
commanders. Advani said, Pakistans response on cross-border terrorism is
disappointing.
Vajpayee warned of Taliban threat and asked Pakistan to snap links with
terrorism. He said it after one of Indian general had acknowledged that
incursions were down in the Valley. Even at the time of terming Pakistans
peace moves encouraging, India insisted on end to infiltration.
Pakistan reiterated the need to monitor Line of Control. It criticized
perpetration of state terrorism and urged efforts to implement principle of self-

determination. Jamali accused India of assuming double posture. Kasuri

alleged, India lacked sincerity over Kashmir. Delhi was blamed for sponsoring
terrorism against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Foreign Office proposed
gag on Indian extremists till SAARC summit.
Gilani urged world to take note of state terrorism and APHC asked HR
body to help stop it. He accused Mufti government of targeting APHC leaders.
Indian state terrorism should be raised at OIC and World Court said Sultan.
Yasin was acquitted in cases of funding insurgency and ISI connection,
yet he expressed distrust in Indian laws and rule. He accused India of
conducting fake trial against him. After his acquittal Shiv Sena threatened to
send suicide squads to the Valley.
Perpetration of state terrorism has been going on for about two decades.
Since 15 September Indian armed forces committed following brutalities:

Violence left six people dead in Kashmir on 15th September. Next day two
commanders were among twelve shot dead.

On 17th September two more commanders were among eight killed. Next
day fourteen fighters were among 21 killed in the Valley.

Seventeen were killed in IHK fighting on 20th September, including

district commanders of Harkat and Jaish among twelve suspected
freedom fighters, two soldiers and three civilians.

On 21st September nineteen Kashmiris perished in blast and clashes. Next

day seventeen, including 14 fighters, were killed in held Kashmir.

Fifteen fighters were among eighteen killed in IHK on 23 rd September.

Next day an army officer was among four killed and Indian shelling
claimed three lives in AJK and eleven were hurt.

On 25th September seven fighters were among eight gunned down in

IHK. Two days later six fighters were among nine killed and four were
injured in a village of AJK due to Indian shelling.

Fifteen fighters were gunned down on 29th September. Next day five
more killed.

Indian shelling killed two civilians in AJK on 1 st October. Next day six
were wounded in shelling and three Hindus were among thirteen killed in
IHK.

On 4th October fourteen fighters were killed by Indian troops. Next day
twelve were killed in heaviest shelling in Neelum Valley and seven
perished in IHK violence.

Indian army officer was among eight killed in the Valley on 6 th October.
Next day sixteen more were killed in explosion and shootouts.

Thirteen fighters were killed in clashes on 8th October. Next day Indian
shelling claimed one life in Azad Kashmir.

Seven died in Kashmir violence on 10th October. Next day nine more died
in IHK.

Indian shelling killed one in AJK on 12th October. Next day Indian
shelling claimed two more lives and seven fighters were among ten killed
in IHK.

Heavy Indian shelling claimed eleven lives in Kamri and Mini Merg
areas and six were gunned down in IHK. Next day six more killed in
violence.

Eight fighters were among ten killed in IHK on 16 th October. Next day
two Indian soldiers died in attack near Muftis home.

On 18th October two fighters were killed in the Valley. Next day three
civilians were killed in Indian firing at Line of Control and four died in
IHK.

Ten were killed in violence on 20th October. Next day twelve died in
hostage drama.

Two days later Indian shelling killed five civilians in AJK and claimed
four lives in Siachen area on 23rd October.

On 24th October three more were killed in AJK. Two days later four
fighters were shot dead in IHK.

Hizb commander was among thirteen killed on 27th October and Indian
shelling claimed a life in AJK.

Violence left ten dead in IHK on 28th October. Next day Indian firing
killed three in AJK and two children were among eight killed IHK.

Indian shelling killed a woman in AJK on 30 th October and violence in

IHK left six dead. Next day One more was killed in Indian shelling across
Line of Control and a politician was among ten killed in IHK.

Six fighters were killed in IHK on 1 st November. Next day seven more
were shot dead.

Ruling party worker was among nine dead on 4th November. Next day NC
activist was among seven killed in IHK.

Violence claimed eleven lives in IHK on 6th November. Next day a PDP
leader was among three shot dead.

Two Nepalese were among fourteen killed in the Valley on 8 th November.

Next day two children were among ten killed.

PDP activist and seven others were killed in IHK on 10 th November. Two
days later five died in violence.

Woman was among six killed in IHK on 14 th November. Next day ten
died in blast near holiest mosque in Kashmir.

Indian firing killed teenage girl in AJK on 16 th November and sixteen

were killed in Kashmir violence.

Indian colonel and major were among five killed in the Valley on 20 th
November. Next day booby-trap bomb killed two children in AJK and
seven were shot dead in IHK.

A child was killed as toy bomb exploded near Line of Control on 24 th

November and next day seven were killed in Kashmir shootings and three
were injured as police opened fire on protesters. Indian troops availed the
opportunity before ceasefire injuring three children across Line of
Control.

In September 310 and in October 240 Kashmiris were martyred by Indian

troops. In last ten months more than two thousand Kashmiris were killed in
IHK. Pakistan lodged 132 complaints with UN of Indian violations. AJK
cabinet sanctioned Rupees 80 million for Indian shelling victims. MMA planned
to raise the issue in National Assembly after sending a fact-finding mission to
worst hit areas. UNMOGIP called for immediate cessation of hostilities.
Pakistan lauded, but India assailed the call.
Once again India timed killing of civilians across Line of Control with
the visit of American VIPs to the region. Children in IHK were tortured and
raped as reported by HR group. India wanted to wipe out Kashmiris said
Gilani and Indian army admitted killing Kashmiris civilians.
Indian army planned to recruit ex-militants to fight uprising in the Valley.
Raising Territorial Army in IHK was also planned. Reportedly RAW operated
terrorist camps in Kashmir and eight other Indian states.
India also took more confidence shattering measures. It blocked
Pakistans re-entry to Commonwealth alleged Faisal. During the period it
continued enhancing indigenous missile capability to intimidate Pakistan. Three
test-fires were carried out in last four weeks after shrugging off Ghaznavi and
Shaheen test-fires. India also set up alternative nuclear command centres. Indian
shopping-spree caused concerns in Islamabad.
Indian strategy of sidelining the core issue by refusing to come on the
table continued. After Musharrafs address in UN General Assembly Sibal,

Foreign Secretary, said that Musharraf should give up annual Kashmiri itch. It
may be useful, before making this annual UN pilgrimage, if the Pakistani
leadership were to do some fasting. Vajpayee declared UN Resolutions on
Kashmir as outdated.
Another prong of Indian strategy was to hold talks with Kashmiris under
Constitution of India to ignore the pledge of plebiscite. In view of the Kashmiri
leaders persistent refusal, India worked on winning over some leaders to start
the process of dialogue between Delhi and Kashmiris.
APHC dissidents appointed Gilani as chief, but Ansari insisted that he
was still the chairman; whereas moderates rallied behind Ansari and served
show cause notices on supporters of Gilani. Sajjad Lone accused Gilani of split
and Sikandar and Qayyum regretted that.
APHC asked India to adopt realistic attitude and sought time to respond
to Indian offer of dialogue. Nevertheless black day was observed as usual to
mark Indian invasion of Kashmir. Farida asked UN to take over Kashmir for
two years and Sikandar sought OICs effective role in Kashmir.
Pakistan insisted that Kashmir was the only dispute with India and rest
were irritants. Kashmirs centrality cant be ignored said Jamali. Foreign
Office announced that Frenandes was ill-informed about UN role in Kashmir.
Musharraf, Jamali, Kasuri and Rashid reiterated that no long-term peace sans
Kashmir solution.
Kasuri and Maleeha asked world not to accept Indian stance on Kashmir.
Kasuri discussed Kashmir with 24 foreign ministers. Musharraf asked
Canadian Prime Minister to help resolve Kashmir. Swamy endorsed
Musharrafs peace formula in which Kashmir is to be accepted as central issue.
America called for Pak-India dialogue and restraint. Nancy assured
Pakistan to help resolve issues with India. Europe urged resumption of dialogue
and sought proactive role for UNMOGIP, there was no mention of Kashmir in
EU-India declaration. Russia and China offered help in Indo-Pak reconciliation.
UN was accused of not doing enough on Kashmir.
Muslim Ummah was urged to pressure India on Kashmir. OIC renewed
support to Kashmiris to get their rights. Muslim women body asked UN to stop
state terrorism in IHK. Abdullah endorsed Musharrafs Kashmir plan. Jamali
lauded Irans stance on Kashmir.

CRUSADERS PRESSURE

Terrorism has become a magic word for coercion. For the last two years
this word has been used to get anything done by Pakistan. Pak-US relations
have been pursued on the basis of this magic.
America stressed upon tough money laundering laws. Banks were asked
to share FCA details with FBI. Armitage and Rocca rushed to Pakistan to
discuss matters of unilateral interests. General Abizaid discussed security with
Musharraf, which obviously related to cross border terrorism in the context of
Afghanistan and India.
Praise reinforced the pressure. Appreciations and compliments were
exchanged during Jamalis visit to Washington. Pakistans anti-terror efforts are
excellent said US. Snow praised Pakistans anti-terror fight on financial front.
Pakistan and US resolved to continue fight against terrorism. Pakistan
and China also pledged to combat terrorism. No going back on war on terror
and Pakistan was heading for moderation said Maleeha. Jamali vowed to
combat terrorism and directed provinces to implement ATA.
Fight against terror goes in all dimensions said Musharraf. He was even
prepared to consider the request for construction of Pearls monument as part of
the war on terror. He urged Muslims to unite against terrorism. National
Assembly extolled President for anti-terror fight.
While fighting valiantly against the evil of terror, Musharraf asked the
West not to portray Muslims as terrorists. He kept pleading for tackling root
cause of terrorism. In his address to UN he traced causes of terrorism and
defended legitimate resistance in Palestine and Kashmir, thereby declaring all
other movements as illegal:

Short-term actions against terrorism must be accompanied by a longterm strategy; otherwise the war against terrorism may fail.

We have to look beyond al-Qaeda to the breeding grounds of terrorism.

What motives a suicide bomber has to take his own life and kill innocent
civilians? In order to eliminate terrorism, we must understand its causes.

Today most of the unresolved political disputes involve Muslims. Their

demands for justice are often brushed aside. This has given rise to
hopelessness, frustration and desperation.

Foreign occupation and the suppression of the right of peoples to selfdetermination is a direct cause for suicide bombings and terrorist acts that
flow from a sense of despair.

There is a growing sense among Muslims that Islam, as a religion, is

being targeted and pilloried.

Despite convinced about the above facts and knowing well that in two
years of war on terror there has been rise in foreign occupations, his resolve to
fight against terror was not shaken. Hunt for fugitives from Afghanistan
continued in tribal areas:

FC seized large quantity of arms and ammunition on 15th September.

On 19th September US jets dropped three bombs on Pakistans side of

border.

Twelve al-Qaeda men were killed and eighteen foreigners were arrested
in South Waziristan on 2nd October and two soldiers died in day-long
operation.

On 3rd October seven foreigners were among eight killed. Foreigners

were Uzbek and Afghan expatriate farmers.

Thirty-two were detained on 8th October for sheltering al-Qaeda. Next

day ten more tribesmen were held as crackdown continued.

On 15th October Rashid confirmed killing of senior al-Qaeda man in

operation. Next day Waziris handed over a suspect to authorities.

Two foreigners (Uzbeks) were shot dead near Angoor Adda on 4 th

November. Two days later houses of two Waziristan tribesmen were
demolished for harbouring al-Qaeda men.

Before conduct of recent operations in tribal areas Armitage had accused

Pakistan for not preventing infiltration into Afghanistan, which was denied by
Pakistan. After the operation in Waziristan, Armitage lauded Pakistan.
The Agent to President, Governor NWFP, briefed visiting envoys and
diplomats about preventive measures taken to secure Afghan border. American
probe body was allowed to visit FATA to trace out 9/11 links. Musharraf vowed,
Osama will be extradited, if caught.
Hunt for al-Qaeda and Taliban men continued all over Pakistan:

On 21st October two Yemenis and a Pakistani were held for al-Qaeda link
at check point in Faisalabad.

Al-Qaeda suspect was held in Lahore on 25 th October. Five days later

another suspect was held in Rawalpindi.

On 11th November 150 Afghan suspects were detained in Quetta. Two

days later an al-Qaeda suspect was held in Peshawar.

Reportedly FBI probed ARY TV channel for al-Qaeda link. Rashid

denied that FBI was meddling in internal affairs of Pakistan. A few days later
arrival of FBI team in Lahore was reported. Foreign Office also denied

extradition treaty with US; that meant all extraditions carried out so far were
without any legal binding.
Hunt was extended beyond al-Qaeda and Taliban. On 20 th September
thirteen Malaysians and two Indonesians were held in Karachi. One of them
was Hambalis brother. Three days later four more Indonesian students were
arrested. Indonesian team questioned Hambalis brother. Eleven out of 13
students were handed over to Malaysia. Earlier three alleged accomplices of an
under-world boss were killed in Karachi.
Resentment against operations in tribal areas kept simmering. Tribesmen
rejected proposed ban on carrying of arms in SWA and threatened suicide
attacks. MNAs from FATA demanded end to operation. The authorities arranged
pro-Musharraf rally in Waziristan to counter these demands.
Opposition disapproved FATA operation and warned of backlash. MMA
condemned government for not allowing fact finding mission into the Agency
and advised Jamali to avoid serving US agenda. Soldiers fighting fellow
Muslims could not be called martyrs said Qazi. Noorani told Army to go to
Kashmir and Palestine. Durrani ruled out al-Qaeda presence. Hekmatyar asked
Pakistan to stop assisting US. Rashid ignored all appeals and reaffirmed
governments resolve to combat terror.
The existence of resentment within armed forces was negated by
Armitage. He declared that armed forces were 200% (100% Pakistani+100%
American) behind Musharraf. After his departure Opposition distributed a letter
from soldiers. Government ordered probe and at the same time Rashid and
ISPR termed the letter fabricated. Recipient of the letter was arrested.
When Pakistani soldiers were killing own tribesmen and getting killed
themselves, some tribal elders paid unauthorized visits to Afghanistan. They
received favours from the Afghan government. We are going to implement the
existing government policy by taking action against tribesmen involved in antistate activities. Those found hobnobbing with the Afghan authorities with view
to harm Pakistans interest would be made accountable warned secretary
(security) FATA.
This reflected governments shyness in asking Kabul to stop anti-Pakistan
activities. It couldnt tell America either, which controls the strings of puppet
regime, not to hobnob with tribal elders. Obviously the hobnobbing is not the
evil that falls in category of terrorism.
While Pakistan was embroiled in multi-dimensional war against terror;
the Crusaders kept arming India to its teeth. Musharrf decided to tell Bush that
Russian and Israeli arms to India would upset regional balance; as if Bush did
not know. Jamali too raised conventional arms imbalance in South Asia during

his meeting with Bush. Kasuri confirmed Bush was briefed on strategic
imbalance and ties with India.
During the period India attained the status of top arms buyer. It procured
deep-sea assault boat from Israel and signed $ 1 billion Phalcon radar accord. It
also planned to expand air force. Russia and India vowed to strengthen strategic
partnership. America was ready to give India access to dual-use technology.
Despite all these, Vajpayee denied starting arms race.
The bias was too obvious, yet Pakistan had no choice but to request the
Crusaders to do something. Armitage assured that Pakistans reservations
(substitute for concerns) about arms sale to India would not to be ignored.
Meanwhile Pakistan resolved to match Indias arms deals to maintain
deterrence. It vowed countering Phalcon purchase with Chinese SAM. President
talked about policy of minimum credible deterrence and so did Kasuri. Series of
missile tests was carried out to maintain strategic arms balance with India.
Musharraf blamed India for forcing military imbalance in the region,
Indians must have felt proud of it. Pakistan can never be threat to India
boasted Fernandes. Musharraf pledged to match Indian arms spree, but did not
explain; how? Khokhar was more realistic in accepting that arms race with India
was not economically viable; thus Jamali was ready to meet any eventuality.
Apart from shopping spree, India increased combat training cooperation
with the Crusaders. India and Britain planned to hold joint military exercises.
Indo-US naval exercises were held in October. First Indo-US air combat
exercise and marine commando exercises will be held in February.
These events indicated that the Crusaders were encouraging India to
attain the capability to extend its influence to Central Asia. Air base in Ayni
(second after Farkhor), ten kilometers northeast of Dushanbe, has been
renovated at the cost of 500 million rupees. Indian Defence Ministry spokesman
said, our own security interests, our own energy interests have to be looked
after by ourselves.
Tajik Defence Ministry spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Zarbuddin Sirajov
(a Muslim name with Russian accent) called the information groundless. He
claimed India is only providing technical assistance and helping in training of
Tajik military.
The move angered Pakistan. The anger reflected nothing but helplessness,
because the move definitely had the approval of Russia and the Crusaders. The
move marked beginning of a campaign which envisaged expansion of military
cooperation in Uzbekistan, Kyrgystan and Kazakhistan. As part of the same plan
Vajpayee had urged reforms in UNSC. India was eyeing at permanent seat in
Security Council.

Discrimination continued as Pakistans suspension was extended by

Commonwealth; Islamabad regretted the decision. Foreign Office claimed that
democracy was fully restored in country. America pledged to continue
discussing PAK-India problems with special emphasis on Indian concerns and
branded Dawood Ibrahim a global terrorist.
Accusations of cross border terrorism were showered generously from
either side. The Crusaders kept supporting the accusing parties. On 13 th
November US ambassador to Pakistan said that Washington was concerned
about the re-emergence of outlawed Islamic militant groups in Pakistan under
new names.
Two days later three religio-political outfits (Jamat-ul-Dawa, old Lashkare-Taiba, present head Maulana Masood Azhar; Islami Tehrik-e- Pakistan, old
Tehrik-e-Jafaria Pakistan led by Allama Sajid Naqvi; and Khudamul Islam
formerly known as Jaish-e-Muhammad) were banned. Offices of banned
groups were sealed, accounts frozen and Sajid Naqvi was arrested.
President wanted the pro-active anti-terror policy to continue. Next day
Jamali hinted at banning more parties to eliminate extremism, but denied that
action was taken under US pressure. Faisal promised solid steps to root out
sectarianism. India, the judge appointed to assess Pakistans performance, was
to oversee effectiveness of the ban.
Pakistan pledged to choke terror funding. London and Washington
welcomed crackdown on extremist groups. MMA vowed to defy ban on religiopolitical parties. Faisal forecast ban on more outfits before Eid. On 20 th
November three more outfits, Jamiat-ul-Ansar, Hizb-ul-Yahreer and Jamaat-ulFurqan, were banned. Jehadi magazines and print material were also to be
banned subsequently. Four days later nine persons were held for raising Jehadi
funds.
Foreign Office was constrained to deplore Blairs remarks, who spoke
about Kashmir in the context of terrorism. Maleeha found her embassy building
infested by bugs. Pakistan asked UK to explain bugging reports and Maleeha
met Blair, Straw and services chiefs in this regard. In the absence of any
response Pakistan decided to debug the building on its own. One can only pity
Pakistan trying to find some comfort in a bed with so many bugs.
Pakistans nuclear capability was targeted by Western Media. Pakistan
dismissed report on nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia; denied provision of
any equipment to Iran; refuted any help for Libya; and Musharraf personally
denied aiding nuclear programme of Pyongyang. CIA suspected Pak-China link
and IAEA feared that terrorists might steal nukes and nuclear material.

Islamabad has tight control on nuclear assets assured Musharraf once

again. China was not deterred by the accusation and was prepared to set up
another nuclear plant in Pakistan. Kasuri boasted, Pakistans nuclear deterrence
level is not static.
Pakistanis abroad were treated no differently from those back home. EU
pressed Pakistan to sign pact on illegal immigrants. UK tightened visa rules for
Pakistanis and Indians, which too will be applied discriminately. Nabbing of
Pakistanis abroad continued. US deported 48 more and Poland held ten illegal
Pakistanis.
Discrimination was so conspicuous that New York town united to help a
Pakistani fight deportation. Pizza delivery man, Ansar Mahmood had been
arrested for photographing water facility. In Brooklyn fear gripped Pakis after a
non-Pakistani reportedly spilled chemical in underground parking of a big office
building owned by a Jew.
Ummah too joined in poaching spree. Turkish police detained 113 illegal
Pakistanis and deported 64 of them. Iran handed over 54 deportees. Oman gifted
seven hundred to Pakistan.
So many punitive actions against a devout partner warranted some steps
for his consolation. America agreed to bolster Pakistans defence. Jamali was
taken to Pentagon-Yatra to meet Rumsfeld. Pakistans defence team had the
privilege to shake hands with Armitage and Bloomfeld. Nancy desired long
term ties with Pakistan and Armitage said, PAK-US ties are long lasting. Bush
again invited Musharraf. McKinnon wanted Pakistan in Commonwealth.
America was willing to write off $ 500 million debt, earmarked $ 390
million USAID package and allotted Rupees 120 million for S&T Research
Fund. Zinnis firm planned to invest in telecommunication sector. America
planned to fund sale of its agricultural products in Pakistan.
These gestures kept the hopes of government alive. Jamali expected
positive outcome of US visit and wanted to talk on free trade. Kasuri saw
long-term Pak-US partnership. But America ruled out FTA with Pakistan; EU
imposed anti-dumping duty on bed linen; WB attached strings to $ 1 billion aid
pledge; and foreign investment in Pakistan halved during the current fiscal year.
EU deferred accord with Pakistan because Hashmis arrest raised serious
questions about transfer of power. Musharrafs services to the Crusades could
not outweigh the importance given to democracy by the civilized world.
Khokhar still remained optimist and observed that Pak-US ties were
moving in right direction. The Crusaders guided the relations to right direction

and asked Pakistan to do more in the context of Iraq. Jamali discussed the issue
with Annan and earlier Powell had held unscheduled meeting with Musharraf.
Pakistan delayed the decision to send troops to Iraq for want of UN nod,
OIC consent; Iraqis desire and national consensus. Pakistan denied US pressure
and any monetary interest in sending troops to Iraq. The hesitation was however
caused by public opinion.
Kamran Shaffi summed up this opinion in these words. We had no part
in popping up the brute regime of Saddam Hussein; Iraq is not in our backyard;
in short we have nothing to do with it. Far more than anything else, why should
we do the dirty work for those who do not even treat us as human beings? Far
more than that, this is the ideal chance to help the arrogant and unspeakably
idiotic Bush lose the election.
In addition to the crackdown against al-Qaeda, Taliban and Jehadis,
Pakistan remained embroiled in indigenous militancy:

Three LJ militants were held in Karachi on 23 rd September. Next day LJ

activist was sentenced to death.

Six terror suspects were arrested on 26th September and a week later three
Harkat men were arrested in Hyderabad.

On 4th October a terrorist (sectarian) camp at Diamir was dismantled.

Jaish leader was arrested near Sargodha 18th October and four days later
an alleged terrorist jumped to death and eight LJ men were arrested.

Wanted sectarian killer was arrested in Multan on 3rd November.

The Crusaders interest in this dimension of the war on terror was

confined to religious extremism. They wanted religious liberalism the kind of
which has been disapproved even by the Christians of Pakistan. They criticized
appointment of gay priest in America.
Spokesman of White House should have addressed concerns of the
uncivilized Christians of Pakistan. They should have been at least assured that
America will never tolerate a gay President in White House. This kind of liberty
is exclusively reserved for religion.
The government is not against Madaris said Musharraf and America was
told that all Madaris were not breeding terror. The crackdown however
presented opportunity to saboteurs, communalists and other vested interests in
addition to religious extremists:

Bomb blast damaged a plaza in Karachi on 19 th September. Eight days

later twelve persons were killed in blast in Karachi.

Blast damaged rail track in Quetta on 2 nd October. Next day rocket attack
killed locomotive driver in Machh.

On 3rd October seven employees of SUPARCO were killed in Karachi as

result of sectarian terrorism. Next day mourners went on rampage.

Within three days Azam Tariq was shot dead in Islamabad along with his
driver and three guards. The same day PML-Q activist and two relatives
were killed in ambush in Gujrat.

Next day one person was killed as protesters ransacked cinema, shrine,
food street and petrol pump in Islamabad.

One person was killed in Peshawar blast on 14th October. Three days later
FC man was killed in Kohlu shoot-out.

On 20th October three explosive devices went off in Quetta. The same day
two policemen were killed in raid on wanted suspects.

Three persons were killed as gunmen attacked police post in southwestern

Baluchistan on 25th October and a week later one was injured as rockets
were fired on Quetta cantonment.

Ten persons were injured in Karachi explosion on 2 nd November. Four

days later two cops were injured in grenade attack in Quetta.

Two journalists were among eight hurt in Quetta blasts on 10th November.

On 20th November two blasts rocked Quetta. The same day local JI leader
was among three killed in ambush in Sui area.

Bomb blast rocked Quetta on 22nd November. Three days later bomb
exploded near army auto repair yard in Quetta.

Such incidents led Musharraf to warn against enemy within. He

apprehended that terrorism would affect trade and pledged that crackdown on
extremism would continue till no extremist remained in Pakistan.
The incidents of killing of SUPARCO employees and counter killing of
Azam Tariq appeared to be the acts of enemy within. But involvement of
Indians or even FBI cannot be ruled out. In any case the Opposition held
government responsible for Taiqs murder.

CONCLUSION
Cessation of hostilities along Line of Control ought to be welcomed.
Firing with ever available weapons for over fourteen years, in the absence of
any tactical manoeuvre on ground, was no war. It was a criminal act invariably
initiated by India.

For how long the ceasefire will last? The prospects are not very bright as
troops remain deployed with eyeball to eyeball contact and all the CBMs
initiated so far have in-built element of conflict rather than confidence building.
Either party suspects the other to be less trustworthy.
The ceasefire promised no respite in state terrorism. It is apprehended that
India wants to tackle freedom movement on Khalistan pattern. With cross
border terrorism fully choked and ceasefire in place, India will be free to
intensify perpetration of state terrorism. India, like Israel, will never be asked to
stop it.
So far Pakistan has got zero return and nobody can forecast as to how
long it will take to break the zero syndrome. Purging of Pakistan on counts of
terrorism, cross border terrorism and religious militancy will continue. Pakistan
will find it hard to be absolved of these charges.
As regards the possibility of resumption of dialogue, Jethmalani opined
that India was not serious in holding talks. Even if India agrees to come on the
table, the dialogue will follow the schedule that suits India and it might be
stretched to exhaust Pakistans patience.

30th November 2003

PRECARIOUSLY POISED
Reportedly Saddam was willing to accept all American demands,
including a free run of the country to look at the non-existent WMDs and even a
change of policy on Israel, in desperate bid to avoid war. Bush was then in
different frame of mind and declined to avail an opportunity which meant peace.
In less than a year his adventure seemed to be turning into misadventure.
Imperialistic designs of Christian fundamentalists in his Administration as well
as his own political career have been poised precariously.
He has started understanding the principled objections to war and the
good motives behind them, yet he insists defending the illegal war. Arrogance
persists, though somewhat dented. His soldiers, however, are finding it difficult
to rule the conquered people of Iraq.
Bush risked a secret visit to Baghdad airport to woo his demoralized
troops and salvage his political career. He came all the way to Iraq to tell them
that Coalition would prevail over insurgents and went away. This was too
ordinary a message to be delivered by the President of the superpower.
How long the soldiers would take to prevail over Iraqis? Nobody can
answer this question. It all depends upon the will of the Iraqis fighting for
eviction of the occupation forces. At this moment they seem to be quite
determined to make America pay for its misadventure.

RESISTANCE
Richard Hart Sinnreich said, its not the winner who typically decides
when victory in a war has been achieved. Its the loser. The recent increase in

intensity of the resistance showed that Iraqis were not willing to grant the
victory to their liberators.
Anti-US guerrillas kept up pressure on US forces. Reportedly American
troops suffered 33 attacks daily on the average. There could be some
exaggeration in this, but Americans have surely been on the receiving end:

Three US soldiers were wounded in attacks on 11th September. Next day

three Americans died in different incidents.

On 14th September an American soldier was killed and three were hurt in
Fallujah. Since 1st May, 75 US troops have been killed in Iraq.

US soldier and Iraqi police chief were among three killed on 15 th

September. Two days later an American soldier died of wounds and three
more were injured.

Eight Americans were killed in ambush in Khadiyah and panicked troops

fired at reporters. Fire raged at oil pipeline in north.

Four American soldiers were killed in different incidents on 19 th

September. Next day five US soldiers were wounded in attacks and Iraqi
Governing Council woman member was critically injured in assassination
attempt.

On 21st September three US troops were killed and thirteen wounded in

different incidents. Next day two persons died in suicide attack near UN
HQ in Baghdad.

Seven Iraqis were killed in mortar attack on 25 th September and two

bombs were found near mosque in Najaf. The same day eight US soldiers
were injured in blast and Akila died of wounds.

Two US soldiers were killed and three injured in different incidents on

26th September. Next day four more were killed in Fallujah and mortars
were fired at Rashid Hotel.

On 29th September US troops came under heaviest attack and a soldier

was killed in Habbaniyah. An Iraqi official escaped assassination bid.

US soldier died as vehicle plunged into canal on 30th September. Next day
three soldiers were killed in different attacks.

On 2nd October three US soldiers were killed in attacks. Next day four
civilians were killed in explosion.

US soldier was killed in attack on 4 th October. Next day twenty mortar

shells were fired at US army HQ in Baqubah.

On 7th October three US soldiers and one Iraqi was killed in road side
blasts in central Iraq.

Spanish diplomat was among thirteen killed on 9 th October. Next day two
US troops and four Iraqis were killed in attacks. The same day two
parallel pipelines were set on fire in Kirkuk.

On 11th October another explosion damaged pipeline in northern Iraq.

Next day seven persons were killed in car blasts in Baghdad.

Two persons were killed in suicide attack on Turkish mission on 14 th

October. Two days later car exploded near US Coalition base in northern
Iraq, explosion damaged oil pipeline and two Iraqis were killed in
different incidents.

Three Americans were killed in Karbala clash on 17th October. Next day
two US soldiers were killed in Kirkuk ambush.

On 20th October US soldier and two Iraqis died in Fallujah. Next day
another soldier was killed in Baghdad and pipeline fire raged for second
day in Tikrit.

Four US soldiers were wounded in ambush in Fallujah on 22 nd October.

Next day two US soldiers were killed in Baqubah and Baghdad.

Three US troops were among seven killed on 24 th October. Next day

Black Hawk was shot down near Tikrit, eight US soldiers were injured in
different incidents and Amara police chief was shot dead.

On 26th October Wolfowitz escaped rocket attack on hotel al-Rashid

where US soldier was killed and 15 others were wounded. Four more
soldiers were injured in two separate incidents and a Spanish soldier was
killed in accidental firing.

On 27th October 43 persons including four US troops were killed in

suicide attacks on ICRC HQ and police station.

Another car blast killed six in Fallujah on 28 th October and two US

soldiers and Baghdad deputy mayor died in separate incidents.

Two US soldiers were killed as a tank was blown up on 29 th October.

Next day explosions in Baghdad killed one and another blast damaged
goods train.

On 31st October an American soldier and eight Iraqis were killed in

different incidents. Next day bomb killed two US soldiers in Mosul.

On 2nd November sixteen US troops were killed in deadliest attack and

twenty more were injured as CH-47 Chinook ferrying soldiers was shot

down near Fallujah. Another soldier and two American contractors died
in roadside bombings.

Iraqi judge and politician were among nine killed on 3 rd November. Next
day British commando and two US soldiers were killed in different
incidents.

US soldier was among six killed on 5th November. Next day one Polish
and two US troops were killed in different attacks.

Six US soldiers were killed as helicopter was shot down on 7 th November

and another was killed in Mosul. Next day two US troops were killed in
Fallujah.

Bomb attack killed a US soldier in Baghdad on 9 th November. Next day

another soldier and a Kurd were killed in violence.

Two Iraqi policemen were among four killed in blast in Basra on 11th
November. Next day eighteen Italians and eight Iraqis were killed in
Nasiriyah. Two US soldiers were among seven dead in other attacks.

On 12th November death tally reached 397; whereas in Vietnam 392 were
killed in first four years. On 14th November seven Iraqis and three
Americans were killed.

Seventeen were killed and four wounded when two US helicopters

crashed in Mosul on 15th November. Another American soldier was killed
in Baghdad bombing.

On 16th November explosions rattled Baghdad. Next day two US troops

were killed and rocket landed near Baghdad central bank.

Shots were fired outside Japanese embassy on 18 th November. Two days

later an American soldier was killed.

On 21st November rockets hit Baghdad hotel and oil ministry, one person
was seriously injured. An American soldier died in roadside attack and
four persons died in grenade attack on alcohol stall in Baghdad.

Thirteen policemen were among 18 killed in suicide bombings on two

police stations on 22nd November and a missile hit DHL plane. The same
day an American soldier died in Baghdad and Aziz al-Hakim survived
rocket attack.

Five US soldiers and Iraqi police chief were killed on 23 rd November.

Throats of two soldiers were slit and bodies stoned.

Two US soldiers were killed in separate incidents on 28 th November. Next

day six Spaniards were killed in an attack on convoy south of Baghdad.

Two Japanese diplomats, two South Koreans, two US soldiers and a

Colombian contractor were killed in separate attacks on 30th November.

On 1st December an American soldier was killed in ambush west of

Baghdad. Next day another was killed in Samarra. On 3 rd December an
American soldier was killed in attack in Baghdad.

In the month of November alone 77 US soldiers were killed at the rate of

more than 2.5 per day. Since start of war 441 have been killed till 3 rd December
and nearly 10,000 have been wounded. Seventeen have committed suicide and
army ordered investigation of high rate of suicide.
Iraqis were legally and morally correct to fight the occupation forces. In
addition to armed struggle Iraqis frequently carried out protest rallies as the
Governing Council tried to win over their support. Thousands of Shias observed
Baqirs formal mourning, held anti-US demonstrations and demanded release of
clerics.
Two Iraqis died in capital and Basra as ex-soldiers protested against delay
in payment of their remunerations. In Mosul lawyers demonstrated against
arrest of two colleagues. All rallies opposed long term stay of foreign troops.
SAIRI demanded deadline from Coalition forces. Enraged Iraqis denounced US
over killing of mayor of Sadr City district of Baghdad and asked US troops to
stay out of Sadr City.
Calls for Jihad mostly came from Sunnis. Saddam gave good news to
Iraqis. The losses have begun to eat away at the enemy like wildfireyou must
increase your grip and armed struggle. During the period he called for Jihad at
least twice. The reports of arrest of four Saudis near border indicated that Arabs
outside Iraq were also responding to the calls. Saddam loyalists claimed that
insurgency was aimed at driving out Americans.
The Coalition reacted as was expected. It recoiled after each major
incident. Saddam loyalists and al-Qaeda were blamed for shooting Akila.
America and Britain saw al-Qaeda and foreign terrorists hands behind Baghdad
bombing. An ex-Iraqi general was suspected behind spur of attacks. Bremer
said, al-Qaeda men were entering through Syria. Al-Arabia and al-Jazeera were
accused of cooperating with Iraqi insurgents.
Bremer and Blair deplored the brutal attacks by insurgents. The former
also accused insurgents of attacking innocent Iraqis. Straw blasted attack on
ICRC office. Rumsfeld called November 2 a tragic day. Bush called bombing a
sign of desperation. He also accused Saddam of trying to stir trouble.
Annan pulled more UN staff out of Iraq. France said UN pullout showed
need for change in approach. Red Cross withdrew its staff from Baghdad and

Basra. World Bank felt that Iraq was still too risky for its staff. ECHO (EU aid
agency) also contemplated quitting.
Arab Media blamed US for Baghdad massacre. Damascus communiqu
denounced deadly attacks and urged America to restore peace. Syria asked US
to leave Iraq to end violence. Koizumi was infuriated over envoys shootings.
Britain blamed Japanese and Spaniards for failing to take precautions.
Lawlessness persisted and business of guns, drugs and passports
flourished, even grocers sold RPGs in Baghdad. Keeping the prevalent situation
and upsurge in of insurgency in view AFP inferred that America was turning to
Vietnam exit strategy in Iraq. It was a premature conclusion.

COUNTER INSURGENCY
American troops struggled to keep the liberated Iraqis under control.
Their visible successes since second week of September were as under:

US troops detained al-Jazeera journalist on 11th September. Next day their

friendly fire killed eleven persons. Three days later they arrested
suspected loyalist of Saddam.

Former Iraqi Defence Minister Sultan Hashem Ahmad, one of the 55

most wanted officials of Saddams ousted regime, surrendered, bringing
the overall number of most-wanted Iraqi officials captured or killed to
forty.

On 24th September nine Iraqis were killed in blasts and US fire. Five days
later ninety-two persons were held in Iraqi-US military police joint
operation in Tikrit.

Police fired at job seekers in Baghdad and Mosul on 1st October. Next day
two Iraqis were shot dead.

On 4th October two Iraqis died as ex-soldiers rioted in capital and Basra.
Next day US deployed airborne snipers to defend oil pipelines and troops
uncovered bomb-making material in Tikrit.

On 6th October American troops killed two Iraqi army veterans and
unspecified number of persons was detained after finding ammunition.

US troops sealed off Baghdad to search for Saddam and arrested an exIraqi army officer. Two days later 112 persons were captured along Syrian
border.

On 11th October four Iraqis were detained for financing anti-US attacks.
Next day 34 Iraqis, suspected of anti-US attacks, were detained.

Ten Iraqis were killed in clash in Karbala on 17 th October. Two days later
three Iraqis died in Baqubah and Fallujah incidents.

On 20th October US soldiers detained five Baath Party officials. Next day
32 were held in Karbala.

On 24th October US troops arrested all men of a village in anti-terror

sweep. Next day three civilians were killed in Habbaniya.

Former Baath Party member was shot dead in Basra on 29 th October. Two
days later American troops sealed off Saddams native village.

On 8th November US forces arrested Saddams bodyguard. Tikrit was

bombed and curfew re-imposed.

US troops battled with Kurd rebels on 10th November. Next day twenty
al-Qaeda suspects were detained.

On 16th November US forces stepped up offensive. Next day guerrilla

hideouts in Saddams hometown were raided.

Six Iraqis were killed in Tikrit on 17th November. Next day suspected
hideout of attackers was subjected to cannon fire in Baghdad in
retaliation to killing of a soldier.

On 19th November US hit targets with largest weapons and Bremer

claimed that 90 percent of Iraq was normalized.

Twenty-seven Iraqis were killed in attacks on 20 th November. Next day

two rocket launchers were found near Italian Embassy.

British troops detained an Australian on 23rd November and three Turk

suspects were held in connection with blast in Kirkuk.

On 24th November an Iraqi handed over dozens of RPGs to US troops for

reward.

US troops killed three Iraqis on 25th November and security was tightened
in Najaf as Shias celebrated Eid.

On 3rd December American troops missed Izzat Ibrahim, but nabbed his
Aide in Hawijah. Iraqi villagers complained about US excesses. They
came to make trouble, not to restore security.

Counter insurgency operations were combined with measures to win

hearts and minds. Participation of Iraqis in controlling the disorder was
increased. Seven hundred Iraqi soldiers graduated in Kirkuk. In September $ 1
million were paid to Iraqis in compensation. A pro-US demonstration was
organized in Baghdad under heavy security. Iraqi Council, however, slammed
the plan to train police in Jordan.

Trigger happiness of the Yankee soldiers hampered the winning of hearts

and minds. In September mourners vowed vengeance for those killed in
friendly fire. In October desecration of Quraan triggered protests. On 16 th
November residents of a village were left bewildered after US raid. Abdel
Karim, who had deserted army to lead quiet life as farmer, was arrested after
recovery of uniform from his house.
The civilians remained main victim of post war violence. A minister
criticized Human Rights violations by US-led forces. Not only the civilians but
animals too did not escape from the cruelty of US soldiers. On 20 th September a
soldier killed a tiger in Baghdad zoo after the caged beast attacked his buddy
trying to feed him. The Yankee soldier proved to more deadly than the beast.
Considering the atrocities committed by American soldiers charging of
only eight Marines was a mere eye-wash. On the other hand Bush had the
cheeks to criticize those on other side of the divide. Events during the past two
years have set before the world the clearest divide: between those who seek
order, and those who spread chaos; between those who seek peaceful change,
and those who adopt the methods of gangsters; between those who honour the
rights of man, and those who deliberately take the lives of men and women and
children without mercy or shame. Only a man with as much of shame as Bush
has could say these words.
Major attacks on occupation forces resulted in summoning of Bremer to
Washington. He was told to take tougher measures. After excessive use of force
the Coalition claimed that attacks by insurgents were reduced by 50 percent.
The latest incident of use of indiscriminate force took place 100
kilometers north of Baghdad in Samarra town where Americans were
ambushed. The ambushed soldiers retaliated and killed more than fifty persons,
most of them were civilians. Iraqi civilians were paying heavy price said Arab
League. Khamenei slammed the Samarra incident.
Salim Lone writing in the Guardian opined, get-rough strategy using
missiles and heavy bombardment of suspected hideouts in the vicinity of civil
population will not succeed. The Coalition definitely felt the shortage of troops
in Iraq, which was being balanced with get-rough strategy.
America has not yet started contemplating vacation of Iraq. Leaving Iraq
prematurely would encourage terrorists said Bush. Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld
vowed to defeat guerrillas. US to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan till arrest of
Osama and Saddam.

SEEKING SUPPORT
America, along with its willing, not-so-willing and reluctant partners, has
been trying to muster support for its misadventure. Despite its efforts it has not
been able to overcome the divide in Big-5 and reconcile the difference of
opinion within the Crusaders.
The differences revolve primarily around four issues; legitimacy of
invasion, transfer of power to Iraqis, sending troops for consolidating
occupation, and profiting from reconstruction. As regards invading Iraq, the
opponents of war have no doubt that all the pretexts were bundle of lies and
they no more wanted to talk about that. America and its partners, however, keep
harping about righteousness of their cause.
Most of the talking about WMDs was done by those who lied about these.
White House insisted that it had the required intelligence. Bush repeatedly
defended his decision to attack Iraq and Blair had no regrets on Iraq War.
Australian PM rejected charges of lying over Iraq. US and UK decided to delay
publishing the report on WMDs.
Iraqi scientists said that Saddam had no nuclear plan after 1991. Mahathir
said, US knew Iraq had no WMD. Chirac criticized US for launching war
without UN authorization. Straw warned Europe against admonishing US.
American expert Kay said that no al-Qaeda link was found to Iraqs
WMD plan. US Senate blasted CIA intelligence on Iraq. Americans began
doubting Bush about Iraq War. Anti-Iraq War protest was held in Washington.
Transfer of power to Iraqis has become a political quagmire for Don
Quick of modern times. The opponents as well as Iraqis wanted timetable for
transfer of power to be spelled out. Mr. Don however was keen to hang onto the
windmill.
France, Russia and Germany, supported by China, demanded early
transfer of political power to Iraqis. EU also desired Iraqis to regain power.
India demanded restoration of Iraqs sovereignty and offered political aid to
Iraqi Council. Italy wanted quick power transfer.
Iraqi Council asked for transfer of power. SAIRI chief demanded US
troops to leave Iraq soon and Sadr wanted elected constitution writers. Iraqis
blamed US for delaying transfer power. Chalabi said, no Iraqi is ready to
postpone regaining sovereignty and putting an end to occupation.
Iraq Council called for provincial government. Bremer met Iraqi Council
over self-government plan. The Council sought swift handover of power. Iraqis
submitted timetable to end US occupation by June, which was accepted in
principle.

Iraq and Palestine dominated OIC summit held in Malaysia. Mahathir

said, US is not welcomed in Iraq. OIC sought US timetable for Iraq and gave
guarded response to modified draft Resolution. Egypt wanted quick withdrawal
of US troops and demanded steps for power transfer.
America never said NO to empowering Iraqis politically. Iraqis are on
road to democratic self-government said Powell. Power to Iraqis can be
handed soon said Straw. Bush tasked Bremer with Iraq strategy shift to
accelerate the transfer to self-rule.
Bush continued working on securing UN cover for American domination
in Iraq. He issued call to action to UN promising greater role. Chirac was
disappointed with draft Resolution. America was able to resolve differences
with France and Germany. The Resolution was subsequently passed
unanimously.
America seemed to be determined to follow the schedule of its own.
Bremer opposed quick handover of sovereignty to Iraqis. Bush formed Rice-led
Iraq Stabilization Group, which was followed by the announcement that Iraq
needed more time for transfer of power.
Drafting of new constitution in six months was considered impossible,
though Bush agreed to accept UN help in writing the constitution. However,
America was afraid of associating Shia majority with the drafting of new Iraqi
constitution for fear that this would strengthen the hands of Shia Islamists in
Iran, according to Praful Bidwai.
Meanwhile Rumsfeld declared that US troops would stay in Iraq despite
power transfer. Power transition wont affect US military presence he asserted.
But the requirement of peacekeeping in the new empire posed unforeseen
problems for America.
To hang on to Iraq required additional troops. America and Britain did not
want to increase the strength of their troops as the expenditure of war was
already running at the same rate as during the bloodiest phase of Vietnam War.
Pentagon planned to relocate troops from South Korea to Iraq and
Afghanistan. Armitage sought more foreign troops and Clinton encouraged
others to send troops. He asked NATO to lead Iraq operations under UN.
Rumsfeld said, more NATO help would be welcome. NATO remained hesitant
and Opposition in Italy demanded withdrawal of Italian troops.
Some Democrats assailed Bushs policy and sought Rumsfeld ouster.
Clinton opposed US domination in Iraq. Al Gore and others denounced Bush
over Iraq. A former US General rapped Bushs policies. Anti-occupation
demonstrations were held in American cities. Majority of Brits believed Bush
was wrong on Iraq.

OIC urged eviction of foreign troops from Iraq and Malaysia wanted
Muslims to take job for Iraq peace. Iraqi Council spurned troops from Islamic
states. Its opposition was more vehement against troops from Turkey.
Turkish Parliament approved sending troops to Iraq. Governing Council
flayed Turkeys plan and Kurdish member of the Council discussed Turkish
troops with Arab League chief. Turkish troops should stay out of Iraq said
Jordan. Turkey and US too were at odds over locating Turkish troops.
Ultimately America suspended talks on Turkish troops deployment. Turkey
slammed US ineptitude and decided not to send troops to Iraq.
Nevertheless America was in dire need of troops from Muslim countries.
Pakistan was persistently urged to send some troops. Pakistan declined to send
troops following the stand of Russia, France and Germany. Egypt and Saudi
Arabia also refused.
Japan after lot of deliberations agreed to send troops by February next
year. America asked for 5,000 troops from South Korea. It agreed to send 3,000
amidst protests against the plan. Thailand and Philippines reluctantly agreed not
to pullout their troops. China ruled out troops for Iraq and Russia wanted
political settlement.
Reconstruction of Iraq has almost been forgotten. EU promised 200
million euro for reconstruction and donors pledged $ 37.5 billion. Germany
hinted at forgiving Iraqs debt, but Kuwait refused to write off the debt. The
donors have been generally hesitant to release funds without UN cover. The heat
of insurgency has forced the removal of reconstruction plan even from the backburner.
Friends of Bush set up consulting firm for Iraqi contracts. Three GSM
mobile phone licences were awarded. Iraq planned to give licence to six foreign
banks. Electricity was yet to be restored and half of Iraqi population remained
without drinking water. Meanwhile $ 1 billion were transferred from UN
account to the Iraqi fund controlled by the US-led Coalition without approval of
the UN Security Council.

CONCLUSION
Never in history might an emperor have visited his empire or a victor his
newly conquered land as secretly as Bush did. He came to the land of Ali Baba
like a thief and stayed for short while at airport, from where he could be frisked
away quietly in case of any danger. He came to serve the Thanksgiving turkey
and pumpkin-pie to the demoralized American soldiers. He had no time to meet
and have few thanksgiving hugs from the people who had been liberated by his
brave soldiers.

His trip demonstrated only fear and, perhaps, defeat in words of Abdul
Hamid Ahmad of Gulf News. Yet America boasted that the Coalition wont be
intimidated out of Iraq. Bush seemed to be prone to committing more mistakes
in Iraq.
His capacity to commit mistakes has endangered the peace of the entire
world. London Mayor Ken Livingstone has rightly described Bush as the most
dangerous man on the planet. He said that, even if asked, he would refuse to
shake hands with him. It is, however, matter of shame for the Muslims that no
leader from Ummah has picked up the courage to say so. They have yet to
recover from the fear of the superpower and by the time they recover it could be
too late.
Iraqis fighting against the occupation forces, in the absence of any
support from the Muslim World, deserve pat on their back. If they succeed in
their aim the victory would exclusively belong to them, but in case of their
defeat the Ummah should take the entire blame.
Iraqis have definitely served some of shock and awe to Americans.
Their tactics, to ambush vulnerable US forces when on the move, have paid the
dividends. The use of RPG has proved surprisingly quite effective.
The get-rough strategy adopted by America since late November would
succeed in controlling insurgency only temporarily. Indiscriminate use of force
would further antagonize the neutral forces adding to the number of the
insurgents.

4th December 2003

FORAYING FROWNING AND FEIGNING

From Chechnya, Xinjiang and Indonesia to Colombia, Saudi Arabia,
Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Palestine and the Philippines, the anti-terror war has

expanded exponentially with Bushs blanket blessing wrote Simon Tisdall.

One never would have guessed there were so many terrorists he added.
The war, which has been going on for the last two years, is not against
terror. It is reinvigourated Crusades against followers of Islam. Active fighting
has been raging on six fronts. In Afghanistan and Iraq the charge has been led
by the Crusaders, the details of which have been covered separately
Sharon and Vajpayee have taken care of freedom struggles in Palestine
and Kashmir. The later has also been covered in articles pertaining Pakistan. In
Chechnya and Philippines the co-opted members of Crusaders have been
allowed free hand to crush the militant Muslims.
On other fronts the war has been pursued with means other than the
actual use of force. Pakistan remained under constant pressure to do more and
more for the Crusaders. Iran was subjected to pressure through accusations of
nuclear proliferation and terrorism. Syria has been threatened to stop supporting
Palestinian terrorists and interfering in Iraq. Muslim states in Fareast have been
coaxed and coerced to fight against Islamic militancy.
As regards North Korea the Crusaders have been satisfied with feigning
only. Military confrontation has never been the desire of the Crusaders. The aim
is to deter North Korea from having any kind of military relations with Muslim
countries.

FORAYING
The day before signing US sponsored roadmap Bush said, terror must be
opposed and it must be defeated. He then assured the critics of envisaged
creation of Palestinian state, I destroyed a terrorist state in Afghanistan, I
destroyed a terrorist state in Iraq and I am not about to help create a terrorist
state on Israels borders.
Sharon had asked for waiver on return of Palestinian refugees to Israel.
Bush asked him to drop this demand for the time being to facilitate negotiating a
solution with Palestinians. The situation warranted that diplomacy should be
preferred over military means to defuse prevailing criticism. The waiver could
be granted any time.
On 5th June Bush said, America is strongly committed, and I am strongly
committed, to Israels security. He asked the world to deal harshly with Hamas.
Powell declared Hamas as enemy of peace. Sharon visited London as Israel
hailed new era in relations with EU, which had agreed to discuss British
demand to ban Hamas. Pressure on Arabs was increased to reign in Palestinian
militant groups. Europe promised to reverse stand if Hamas agreed to cut ties
with terror.

On 15th October America vetoed UN Resolution against Israel. Arabs

were angered by the use of veto. Its black day for the United Nations and for
international law said Erekat. Muslim states also regretted the veto.
Enjoying the full support of America, and despite the plan to slow down
military crackdown, Israeli kept foraying at Palestinians:

Five Israeli troops were among ten killed in shootings on 8 th June. Two
days later three Palestinians were killed and Hamas leader was hurt in
Israeli air raid. More than 20 others were injured.

Sixteen persons were killed in suicide attack and eight in Israeli missile
fire. Hamas claimed responsibility of bus bombing.

Hamas leader was among seven killed in raids on 12th June. Next day
Hamas man and an Israeli were killed in attacks.

Hamas man and Israeli were killed in attacks on 14 th June. Four days later
an Israeli girl was killed. Next day a suicide bomber killed an Israeli in
Jenin.

Israeli settler was killed on 20th June. Three days later four Palestinians
were killed in violence.

On 24th June 130 activists of Hamas were among 150 arrested in West
Bank. Next day four Palestinians were killed in Israeli missile attack and
firing.

An Israeli and two Palestinians were killed in shootouts on 26 th June.

Next day five Palestinians were killed in raid.

On 30th June a Bulgarian worker and an Israeli were killed in shootings.

A leader of al-Aqsa was killed on 3 rd July. Two days later a Palestinian

died in explosion in Gaza Strip.

On 15th July an Israeli was stabbed to death in Tel Aviv. Ten days later
four-year-old Palestinian boy was killed.

On 2nd August Hizbollah man was killed in car bomb blast and twenty
fighters were arrested at Arafats HQ. Fatah faction ended the truce.

On 4th August a Palestinian was killed and two wounded due to firing by
Israeli troops.

Three Palestinians were killed in Israeli raid on 8 th August. Hamas

threatened revenge. The same day Israeli jets attacked Hizbollah positions
in Lebanon.

Two days later an Israeli was killed in Hezbollah shelling. Two Israelis
died in twin suicide bombings on 12th August. Israel cancelled release of
prisoners.

Israel demolished suicide bombers house on 13th August. Palestinians

and Israelis blamed each other for violence.

On 18th August a woman was killed in blast in Tel Aviv restaurant. Next
day twenty Jews perished in Jerusalem in blast in a bus and more than
100 were injured. Jihad accepted responsibility.

Hamas leader Abu Shanab was killed in raid on 21st August. Abbas
termed attack an ugly crime.

Four Palestinians were killed in missile attack on 24 th August. Two days

later one more was killed and 20 wounded in Israeli air strike.

Hamas militant was killed by Israeli rocket on 28th August. Two Hamas
fighters were killed in air strike two days later.

On 1st September Hamas man was killed in Gaza air strike. One more was
killed next day.

Hamas man and an Israeli were killed in Nablus raid on 5 th September.

Next day Yassin was hurt in Israeli attack.

Eight were killed in Israel in suicide bombing on 9th September. Rantissi

said bombing was in response to Israeli crime. The same day Hamas
leader was among three killed in Israeli raid.

Hamas leader was hurt in F-16 strike and his son was killed on 10 th
September. Palestinian Authority condemned the attack.

Palestinian youth was shot dead in Ramallah on 14th September. Four

days later Israel mounted an incursion in Jenin and killed a Hamas leader.

Israeli army killed Hamas leader in Hebron on 22 nd September. Five

Palestinians and an Israeli soldier were killed in raids three days later.

Jewish settler and a child were killed in attack on 26 th September. Two

Palestinians wounded earlier died that day.

Two Palestinians were killed and Islamic Jihad leader was held in West
Bank raid on 1st October.

Woman bomber killed nineteen in Haifa on 4th October. Islamic Jihad

claimed responsibility. A Young Palestinian fighter was killed the same
day.

On 5th October Israeli jets bombed Syrian civilian area. Damascus called
air strike serious escalation.

Seven Palestinians were killed in Gaza raid on 10 th October. Palestinian

leader was shot dead two days later.

Fifteen Palestinian detainees were expelled from West Bank on 14 th

October. Next day a Palestinian was shot dead. The same day three
American diplomats were killed in Gaza blast. Arafat and Bush
condemned attack.

Two Palestinians were killed in Israeli raid on Rafah refugee camp on 16 th

October. Four more were killed in Israeli raids two days later.

Three Israelis were killed in West Bank ambush on 19 th October. Al-Aqsa

claimed responsibility. The same day Palestinian youth was killed in
Gaza.

On 20th October ten Palestinians were killed in Israeli air strikes. Ninetyfive were injured in four raids. Hamas vowed revenge.

Three Palestinians died on 22nd October. Two days later three Palestinians
and three Israelis were killed in Gaza.

On 26th October Israel dynamited apartment blocks in Gaza. Two days

later a Palestinian was shot dead in West Bank and Hamas man was
awarded nine life terms.

Palestinian was shot dead in Gaza on 29 th October. Five days later suicide
bomber blew himself up in Qalqilya.

On 5th November Israelis destroyed hundreds of olive trees. Next day

Israeli troops killed two Palestinians.

Israeli troops killed four Palestinians in Gaza on 7th November. Three

days later Israel expelled West Bank Palestinian to Gaza.

On 17th November a Palestinian was shot dead in West Bank. Next day
two Israelis were killed in ambush.

Ten-year-old boy was among five Palestinians killed on 22nd November.

Eight days later Palestinian officer was killed in car blast.

Israel killed two Palestinian in raids on 2nd December. Four days later
Israeli forces killed three more in Gaza.

Nine Palestinians were killed in major Israeli raid on 11th December as

three perished in Tel Aviv blast.

In addition to use of force in self-defence Israel continued building

security fence. Sharon aides went to Washington to get approval for disputed
barrier and soon after that Israeli cabinet decided to extend the barrier.
Palestinians said that the barrier was a fatal blow to peace efforts and protested

against it. UN asked Israel to tear down barrier which could create humanitarian
crisis. Israel refused to comply.
Israel asked Palestinian leaders to press Hamas and other armed groups to
stop attacking. On 6th June Hamas broke off talks with Abbas as Rantissi
considered Aqaba summit a declared war on the Palestinian people. Hamas
spurned truce as Sharon vowed more attacks.
In mid June Egyptian mediators tried to persuade Palestinian militants.
By the end of the month Hamas and others agreed to three-month truce. Bush
lauded the deal, but Sharon vowed to ignore the accord. Nevertheless Abbas and
Sharon saw better future ahead.
About five weeks later Israel refused to accept the idea of permanent
ceasefire. Subsequently Israel and Hamas rejected the truce and Israel declared
war on Hamas. Abbas condemned use of force against Hamas and blamed Israel
for the crisis. Yassin and Sharon traded threats of destruction.
New Prime Minister of Palestine hoped for truce as Hamas once again
hinted at ceasefire. Arafat offered total truce; Israel rejected. Ceasefire with
Israel remained top priority of Palestinian Prime Minister and he was prepared
to meet Sharon under certain conditions. Sharon took time to consider steps to
kick start (kick or start) the peace process.
As an incentive to give up militancy, Israel withdrew troops from Gaza
and Bethlehem. Tel Aviv offered transfer of more cities to Palestinian control.
On 18th August Jericho and Qalqiliya were handed over to Palestinians. During
first week of November Israel eased blockade of several Palestinian towns.
Israel had also released 21 Palestinian prisoners on 2nd June with the same
intention. Four days later it spelled out the condition of crackdown against
militant groups for release of any more Palestinians. Abbas called off meeting
with Sharon in protest over issue of prisoners release.
There was no breakthrough in Abbas-Sharon talks held in July. Israel
refused to release 350 prisoners, but in first week of July 334 Palestinian
prisoners were released. Israel also agreed to swap prisoners with Hezbollah.
The deal could not be finalized as Israel refused to free Samar Kantar.
Israel did not budge on the issue of settlements. Arafat said, what does it
mean if Sharon removes one caravan and after that tells us he has removed a
settlement. Four days later Israel did the same; it dismantled an uninhabited
settlement outpost. Settlements remained major obstacle to peace. Palestinians
protested against expansion of settlements, but in October Israel announced the
plans to establish more settlements.

Arafat has been blamed since long for his stand of Hamas. Powell
accused him of serving as a spoiler or attempting to be a spoiler and urged Arab
leaders to resist him. Arafat was threatened to be expelled.
Abbas had been helped manoeuvring his way up to the post of Prime
Minister to liquidate the organizations under Arafat. As his plan to have
complete control over militant organizations was foiled; he resigned on 6 th
September. Qorei replaced him.
Twin incidents of bombings forced Sharon to rush home from India.
Israel decided to expel Arafat. The events of these last few days have proved
again that Yasser Arafat is an absolute obstacle to all attempts at reconciliation
between the Israelis and the Palestinians said Israels official statement. It
added, Israel will act to remove this obstacle in a manner and at a time which
will be decided afterwards.
Palestinian Authority chief preferred death over quitting office. No one
can kick me out. They (Israelis) can kill me with bombs but I will not leave
said Arafat. Palestinian Authority called on Security Council to impose
sanctions on Israel. Its Foreign Minister said, its the Israeli occupation that is
the obstacle. We need the United States to come in and play an important role
on the ground so that obstacle removing happens on both sides.
Islamic Jihad vowed to intensify Palestinian resistance. It would lead the
region into a cycle of violence and the (Palestinian) people are ready to defend
our leaders and our rights.
Arabs urged UNSC to defend Arafat. Mubarak warned that any such
attempt would be a monumental error. Russia said that it would be a serious
political mistake with the most negative consequences. French Foreign
Minister asked for international force in Middle East. EU placed Hamas
political wing on terrorist list. We do not think it would be useful said US
official statement. The reactions were contrasting.
Israel insisted that killing Arafat remained an option. He must go to
salvage peace said Israel. Bush admitted that Middle East peace was stalled and
blamed Arafat for that. UNSC asked Israel to stop threatening Arafat. Israel
dismissed UN Resolution, but Sharon deferred the plans to expel or kill Arafat.
Sharon weighed response in the wake of another suicide attack. On 5th
October Israeli jets bombed Syrian civilian area. Islamic Jihad denied existence
of camps in bombed area. Syria blamed Israel for beating drums of war. World
condemned the unacceptable aggression. UN Security Council was called into
session, but Sharon kept beating the drums.
Arabs had backed the roadmap and agreed to fight terror. We will use all
the power of the law to prevent support reaching illegal organizations including

terrorist groups said Mubarak. Arabs, however, expressed their apprehensions

about Israeli violence.
Syria Radio said that the terrorism which US wanted to fight was
martyrdom operations against the Israeli occupation. In the meantime, Israeli
occupation, crimes of mass punishment, killing women, children and youngsters
and destroying houses, farms and crops came in the framework of self-defence.
Amr Mussa said, we cant take this mention of Jewish state lightly, since
20 percent of Israeli citizens are Arabs. Does it mean they will become second
class citizens because they are not Jewish, or will it be a pretext to expel them
or not welcome refugees, or to refuse any negotiations on the question of the
return of Palestinian refugees?
Hamas leader Abdul Aziz Ratissi termed Bushs speech very dangerous.
He is asking Abu Mazen (Abbas) to stop Palestinian resistance. If (Abbas) does
not condemn his words, we can no longer consider him an envoy of the
Palestinian people. Hamas and Jihad vowed to continue their struggle. Rantissi
urged all Palestinian militant groups to kill Israeli political leaders, because all
of them are killers.
As apprehended, Israel continued foraying in self-defence. Abbas was
constrained to call Israeli attacks as criminal acts. Fighter groups termed US
secretary big liar. Hamas vowed revenge for killing of its leader. Sharon
threatened to carry out more operations. Palestinians and Arabs could do
nothing more than urging US to stop Israeli aggression.
Ummah watched the events helplessly. Only Mahathir had the courage to
grill Israel and US for anti Muslim agenda. OIC condemned Israeli attack on
Syria. Khamenei opined that Bush and Sharon were the most hated men.
Rafsanjani felt that America was mistaken for backing Israel.
Pakistans reaction was the outcome of fearing America. Israel policy
should be reviewed in changing circumstances said Musharraf. In view of the
opposition to recognition of Israel, he called for debate on the issue. Yassin
founder leader of Hamas warned Pakistan against recognition of Israel.
Musharraf committed yet another mistake by equating Palestinian groups with
al-Qaeda and Taliban during his visit to Beijing University. Hezbollah slated his
comments.
Seeing the American plan making no headway, some Israelis and
Palestinians worked on an alternative, generally known as Geneva Initiative.
Salient features of this plan were:

The agreement to renounce any new claims and would replace all
previous UN Resolutions.

Mutual recognition of each other. Palestinian boundaries would conform

to those before the start of Israeli occupation in 1967. Israel would
withdraw in 30 months.

No mention of right of return. Only small number will be allowed to

settle in Israel. Refugees would be entitled to compensation for their
losses for which a fund will be established to which Israel would
contribute.

Jerusalem. Both parties would have their mutually recognized capitals in

the areas of Jerusalem. Palestinian would control Old City with the
exception of Jewish quarter and Western Wall.

Al-Aqsa. Mosque would be with Palestine, controlled by international

force to ensure unhindered access. Similar arrangements for Tomb of the
Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachels Tomb in Bethlehem would be made.
Jews would not be allowed to pray at Temple Mount and archaeological
excavations would be forbidden.

Settlements. Israel would have the right to guard Gush Etzion bloc in
southern West Bank and settlements in outskirts of Jerusalem. West Bank
settlements of Ariel, Efrat and Har Homa would form part of Palestine.
Israel would transfer control of the Negev desert bordering Gaza Strip to
Palestine in exchange for areas of West Bank.

Corridor. Two states would establish a land corridor linking the West
Bank and Gaza Strip which would be under Israeli sovereignty, but
administered by Palestine.

Terrorism and security. Both sides would recognize and respect each
others right to live in peace. To this end Palestine would be
demilitarized and its border points would be manned by international
force. Israel would be allowed to keep a small force in Jordan Valley for
36 months after withdrawal from rest of Palestinian territories.

Prisoners. All those who were imprisoned before May 1994 would be
released immediately with all women and minors. Those jailed after May
1994 would be freed no later than 18 months after the agreement, except
in exceptional cases.

Palestinian cabinet minister Qadura Fares, attending meetings, said that

the blueprint would allow the Palestinians to create a state on 97.5 percent of
the land which was occupied in 1967. Total mass of Palestinian state would be
6,200 square kilometers. He did not mention the obvious anomalies of the
agreement:

By having the sovereignty over the proposed corridor Israel will retain
the option of closing it any time.

Demilitarization of Palestine will mean one-sided peace.

The use of word exception in the context of release of prisoners gives

Israel the right to retain anyone.

Hamas termed Geneva peace negotiators as traitors. Sharon slammed

Geneva Initiative between Israeli left-wingers and Palestinian figures. America
cast a wary glance at the Geneva Initiative, but Powell met authors of the plan.
Despite the roadmap for peace and alternative initiative, major escalation
in Israeli-Palestinian conflict loomed large. Even authors of the roadmap
painted grim picture. Because Israel never exercised any restraint and it has no
intention to stop killing Palestinians.
Israel and America would never agree with views of men like Anwar
Ahmad. For one thing, Israel is not facing terrorism but a war of resistance
exactly of the kind that was waged by the French against the Nazi occupation.
Nor will they agree with Avi Shlaim who said, the real obstacle to peace is
Sharon, not Arafat.
In the bizarre upside-down political discourse of the US the brutal
provocateur Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is a man of peace and Arafat,
the head of a dismembered and dispossessed people and a dismantled authority
is an obstacle to peace wrote Dr. James J Zogby in Gulf News.
Regarding Palestinian statehood, he said that it was time to haggle over
price. I am reminded of crude but telling joke. That has so often been used in
lessons about situational ethics. The story line of the joke runs something like
this: A rich man approaches a young woman and asks if she would go with him
for $ 1,000. She hesitates, considering the offer, whereupon he immediately
counters with; what about $ 10? She slaps him saying; what kind of woman do
you think I am? He responds; weve already determined that, now were
haggling over the price. That is what the Crusaders think about most leaders on
Islamic World.
The co-opted member of the Crusades has been foraying in Chechnya.
According to the News dated 7th December the Crusaders were silent about
Russian atrocities since Mr. Putin supported the American assault on
Afghanistan. A relentless Russian bombing had reduced Groznyy to a hulk.
The military was given a free hand to decimate the Chechen fighters, and
charges of terrible brutalities inflicted on innocent civilians, women and
children were brushed aside. Even mercenaries were allegedly let loose against
the Chechens.

Details of counter insurgency operations in Chechnya have never been

reported by the international media due to strict control exercised by Russia.
Scant coverage of attacks by insurgents has been allowed. Since May 30 the
Chechens carried out following attacks:

On 30th May three persons were killed and nine hurt in blast in Groznyy.
Next day a shoot-out left eight Chechens dead.

A woman suicide bomber killed sixteen by blasting herself in a bus

packed with Russian air force personnel. Next day eleven died in an
explosion.

Three soldiers were gunned down in Groznyy on 17 th June. Three days

later six policemen were killed in suicide attack. On 26th June thirteen
Russian soldiers died in Chechen fighting.

Twenty persons were killed in suicide attack on Moscow festival on 5 th

July. Next day four Russians were killed in chopper crash in Chechnya.

Moscow McDonalds was evacuated after bomb hoax on 7th July. Next day
eight Russians were killed in fresh fighting in Chechnya.

On 10th July a Chechen tried to blow up a restaurant in Moscow. Two

days later blasts claimed three lives.

Nine Russians were killed in mine blast in Chechnya on 13 th July. A week

later six soldiers were killed in Chechnya in gunfight.

On 26th July a suspected rebel blew himself up near Chechnya. Five days
later a suicide bomber detonated explosives in Chechnya.

Thirty-five persons were killed on 1st August in Russian hospital

explosion by a truck driven by a suicide attacker.

Six Russian soldiers were killed in Ingushetia on 8 th August and one

helicopter was shot down.

Chechens killed five Russian soldiers on 15th August. Next day two more
Russian soldiers were killed.

Nine Russian soldiers were killed in Groznyy blast on 22 nd August. Three

days later three more were killed in Russia near border with Chechnya.

On 29th August three soldiers and one policeman were killed in

Chechnya. Next day fifteen more Russians were killed.

Five persons died in violence. Four days later four Russian policemen
were killed in gunfight.

Two were killed in suicide attack on 15 th September. Six days later four
Russian troops were killed in Chechnya.

Gunmen killed four villagers in Chechnya on 27 th September. Three days

later five policemen were killed in Dagestan. A political leader and his
son were killed on 2nd October.

Two soldiers died in mine blast on 5th November. Nine days later four
Russian soldiers were killed in blast in Ingushetia.

On 15th December 41 perished and 150 were injured in suicide attack on a

train in Russia. Two women jumped out of the train shortly before the
explosion and the one directing the operation was seriously injured.
Fragments of a man with grenades around his legs were also found.

Suicide attack in Moscow killed six persons and the authorities faced
criticism.

Since October 1999 more than 300 Russian military intelligence officers
were killed in Chechen war. A study revealed that Russian casualties were rising
faster. Putin asked his armed forces to destroy the Chechen rebels and
threatened pre-emptive strikes against those who supported the Chechens.
Despite the war Russia was able to hold presidential elections in
Chechnya. Russia claimed high turnout of voters which was refuted by
Chechens. Nevertheless Kremlins man won, who immediately vowed tough
action against Chechen rebels.
Russia along with Armenia, Belarus, Kazakistan, Kyrgystan and
Tajikistan discussed the ways to enhance ties with NATO, particularly in the
context of war on terror. At the same time Russia sought OIC membership.
Saudi Arabia and Russia agreed for joint anti-terror efforts. Maskhadov denied
any al-Qaeda link with Chechen fighters.
America has been playing important role in peace process by
encouraging and supporting Philippines in crushing Islamic militancy. It froze
assets of ten JI terror suspects and threatened to withhold aid for Muslim areas
of Philippines. On 15th October Philippines and US signed pact to boost
Manilas anti terror law.
During his visit to the country Bush vowed to help reform Philippine
army and pledged bringing Abu Sayyaf and Jemaah Islamiyah to justice. He
urged Pacific leaders to do more in war on terror amid protests. Thousands of
demonstrators marched in Manila and called Bush terrorist.
With US backing Arroyo vowed not to waiver in her tough stance against
Muslim rebels. Fight against JI is on she said. She called for cooperation
against Southeast Asian terror groups. Muslims fighting for autonomy have
been dubbed as terrorists and Arroyo vowed hunting them. Taking advantage of
the situation she also ordered crackdown on communist leaders.

MILF was urged to cut links with al-Qaeda. On 18 th June an Indonesian

with explosives was held in Philippines and MILF was blamed for terror links.
MILF chief denied links with JI and terror groups. Arroyo insisted that MILF
must get rid of terrorists. During second half of October traces of bio-weapons
were found and two al-Qaeda men were captured. Arroyo said, JI is top
security threat.
At the end of May MILF offered ceasefire. Troops ignored truce offer and
stepped up anti-terrorist drive. On 31st May twenty-three persons were killed in
violence. The offensive launched by government troops marred MILF ceasefire:

Two persons were slain as soldiers clashed with MILF on 4th June. Four
days later rebels killed three soldiers.

On 15th June top MILF leaders escaped arrest and a fortnight later a
mayor was shot dead.

Six persons died in explosion in southern Philippines on 10 th July. Four

days later JI agent, Fathur Rehman al-Ghazi, escaped from jail.

Philippines rebel chief, Hashim Salamat, was reported dead on 5th August.

Four Muslim rebels died in a clash on 17th August. Muslims condemned

army plot to bomb mosques.

Communist rebels burnt a police station on 7th September. Six days later
two suspected Abu Sayyaf men were killed.

A constable was killed in ambush laid by Sayyaf men. Two weeks later
seven Abu Sayyaf rebels were killed in clash.

Three Muslims were dead and 30 injured in blast in a mosque. A fugitive

of Jamia Islamiya was killed nine days later.

On 20th November five persons were slain and five detained in fighting
with rebels.

On 28th November funeral workers buried 49 unidentified corpses. Most

of the dead were Muslim-victims of summary killings.

A top Abu Sayyaf leader was captured on 8 th December. Three rebels of

MILF died in clash three days later.

The crackdown, despite truce offer, dimmed chances of peace talks.

MILF threatened to end truce and hit back, yet the truce was signed. It was to be
monitored by Malaysian, located adjacent to the southern Philippines where
most of the countrys five million Muslims live.
The conflict has killed at least 120,000 people in overwhelmingly Roman
Catholic nation. Manila has been battling MILF, communist rebels and other

homegrown and regional guerrilla groups. Moro Islamic Liberation Front, the
largest Muslim rebel group, has 12,000 fighters.

FROWNING
In addition to military action on six fronts, the Crusades were waged on
other fronts with coercive diplomatic pressure or brinkmanship out of which
Pakistan remained the main target. After conquest of Iraq the diplomatic
offensive focused on Irans nuclear programme.
As Iran showed signs of succumbing, the pressure was increased. Iran
gradually surrendered, but in doing so it pretended to defiant like North Korea
as could be made out from the following:

On 12th September IAEA set 31st October as deadline for Iran to accept
the terms dictated by the Crusaders. Iran threatened to quit NPT and cut
ties with IAEA.

Powell warned Iran against nuclear programme forcing Tehran to

reconsider cooperation with IAEA. Three days later Aghazadeh
announced Irans commitment to NPT and Khatami denied that Iran was
seeking nuclear weapons. Washington insisted that Irans nuclear plan
was threat to Middle East and US.

On 17th September Rafsanjani refused to submit to UN deadline. Five

days later Iran launched six Shahb-3 ballistic missiles. Soon after that
IAEA found more signs of enriched uranium in Iran. An Iranian General
countered by claiming that every Basiji was an atomic bomb.

EU warned Iran of economic repercussions, but Iran rejected curbs on its

nuclear programme. ElBaradei pledged that forthcoming inspections
would be decisive. Meanwhile Tehran tried to prevent its nuclear plan
from being referred to UNSC.

On 2nd October Iran and IAEA inspectors started crucial talks and next
day IAEA expressed optimism about Irans cooperation. As IAEA began
probe, Iran again vowed continuing uranium enrichment. ElBaradei
declined to extend the deadline.

On 18th October Iran-IAEA discussed nuclear checks and two days later
Iran and IAEA reached understanding. Iran agreed to snap nuclear
inspections a day after Khatami met UK, French and German Foreign
Ministers.

Tehran also agreed to return nuclear fuel to Russia and the decision was
hailed by US and Annan. Rowhani, however, announced that Iran
reserved the right to resume uranium enrichment.

Iran agreed to sign nuclear protocol before November 20 and delivered

nuclear report to IAEA, which was acknowledged as comprehensive. Iran
admitted failures in respecting nuclear commitments.

ElBaradei briefed European team of the Crusaders on deal. After the

briefing ElBaradei urged Iran to reveal all nuclear activities only a day
before the deadline.

This was followed by attempts by Iranian leaders to pre-empt criticism

from within Iran. Iran wont stop uranium enrichment plan.
Cooperation with UN is not beyond state interests. IAEA reacted by
blaming Iran for failing to honour nuclear safeguards.

Iranian security chief met ElBaradei on 7th November and on the

following day Iran reiterated suspension of uranium enrichment. Rowhani
met ElBaradei and agreed to snap inspections.

IAEA announced that it had found no evidence of Irans nuclear weapons.

America was not satisfied and CIA warned of Irans secret nuclear ability.
Straw admitted differences with US over Iran.

Iran warned of crisis if nuclear issue was referred to UN. France,

Germany and UK were planning tough Resolution against Iran; despite
Solana acknowledged that Iran had been honest in nuclear dealings.
Russia opposed sanctions, but Powell said Tehrans conduct would
determine the nature of UN action.

On 19th November Iran rejected obligatory enrichment freeze. Next day

IAEA identified Irans nuclear supplies. America accused Iran of brazen
tricks. UN and Iran closed nuke inspections deal.

America then resorted to softer tone on Irans nuclear plan. US and

Europe came close to resolving differences on the issue, but US rejected
new UN draft. Both parties agreed on revised draft resolution.

Pressure on Iran was primarily focused on nuclear programme, but for

that Iran was also subjected to pressure on other counts. America accused Iran
of undermining security in restive Iraq. US considered deployment of missiles
against Iran in Europe. Iranian woman was awarded Nobel Peace Prize to
highlight violations of human rights by Iranian government.
The pressure was exerted in the context of al-Qaeda as well. Iran,
however, refused to reveal names of arrested al-Qaeda men or to hand them
over to America. Nevertheless the doors to talks were not closed. On 11th
December Khatami hinted at possibility of expelling 130 al-Qaeda captives.
After studying the report submitted by Iran, IAEA censored Iran for past
nuclear cover-ups. Next day Iran again announced that Uranium enrichment was

not suspended forever. Whether the stoppage was temporary or permanent was
immaterial as Iran had agreed to freeze its nuclear programme.
In American war against proliferation even Russia, which had been
helping Iran in development of its nuclear establishments, exerted pressure on
Iran. Putin asked Iran to sign additional protocol with IAEA. Russia delayed
launch of nuclear plant in Iran. Putin and Bush urged Iran and North Korea to
end nuclear plan. China and US also agreed on nuclear technology exchange.
On 7th December, Iran pledged to sign tougher nuclear inspections; frowning did
the job.
The war on terror in Fareast has been going on under Australian
supervision. Australia signed separate anti-terror pacts with Japan and India. A
major military exercise was held to stem WMD trade in which US, Australia,
Japan and France participated. Australia continued improving internal security
environment.
Police raided homes of Iranian terror suspects. Court refused to release
children held under immigration laws. A Chechen was found dead after fight in
Australia camp. An Islamic leader complained of victimization. Detained boatmen sew their lips in protest and vowed to continue strike till death.
Muslim Countries of the region and those with restive Muslim minorities
were urged to act against terrorism. ASEAN Summit ended with pledge to battle
terrorism, but failed to agree on anti-terror treaty. South Pacific moot vowed to
fight instability. Asia was advised to control exports to keep terrorists at bay.
Indonesia tried to prove in the court that al-Qaeda had helped funding JI
and Bali attackers. Police saw Bali similarities in the blast of 5 th August in
which fourteen people were killed and 100 injured in blast in Jakarta hotel and
blamed JI for recruiting attacker. The courts awarded death penalty to Bali blast
suspect; Bashir was found guilty of treason and jailed for four years; and a
teacher got death for authorizing Bali blast.
Megawati vowed taking down terrorists. Sydney and Jakarta planned
anti-terror summit. Jakarta worked on tightening anti-terrorism law and stepped
up anti-terror campaign. Bashir reacted, fighting infidel oppressors is an
obligation for Muslims. Thousands of Indonesians rallied in his support. The
public reaction forced some Indonesians to tell Bush that his policies were
aiding terrorism. Indonesia feared more terror attacks.
Malaysian leaders were in complete disagreement with American stance
on terrorism, therefore they vowed to fight terror without US. American antiterror cops were not welcome in Malaysia said Badawi. US froze assets of ten
Malaysians. US control on portable missiles and its safety warnings were
criticized by Malaysians.

Thailand has Muslim majority areas like Philippines. In June Thai

Muslims warned of unrest over JI arrests. On 4th July five police officers were
gunned down in Muslim majority area. On 15 th August top ally of Osama,
Riduan bin Isomuddin, also known as Hambali, was captured and handed over
to America. His wife was to be handed over to Malaysian custody for
questioning. Hambali allegedly had given $ 45,000 for blasts.
Coercion in Middle East was directly handled by America. In October US
House Okayed sanctions on Syria. Bush refused to talk with Syria. The pressure
was exerted to stop it from helping Palestinian fighters and to desist from
interfering in Iraq.
America, Britain and Australia repeatedly warned of credible terrorist
threats in Saudi Arabia and issued travel warnings. On 7 th November US closed
missions in Saudi Arabia after terror threat. Saudis were accused of considering
acquiring of nukes. Riyadh brushed aside Western terror warnings but acted
against terror as desired by the Crusaders. It declared war to crush terror by
eliminating al-Qaeda:

On 22nd June a minister disclosed arrest of forty-four suspects over

suicide blasts in Riyadh. Four days later six more terror suspects were
detained.

Saudi authorities threatened to strip Osamas sons of Saudi nationality.

On 21st July Riyadh claimed foiling attacks and arrested sixteen persons.

Six militants were killed in firefight on 28th July on tip-off from arrested
persons. Riyadh claimed that killed militants were al-Qaeda trained.

On 12th August five persons were killed in gun battles in Riyadh. Four
days later police arrested 21 suspects.

Four persons were killed in shootout on 23 rd September. Four more

suspects were arrested a fortnight later.

On 12th October Saudi forces besieged militants near Riyadh. Three days
later 154 persons were held. The captured terror suspects were preparing
suicide blasts alleged Riyadh.

Al-Qaeda plot to kill pilgrims was foiled, claimed Saudi authorities on 4 th

November.

Two militants were killed in explosion in Makkah on 6 th November.

Another terrorist was gunned down in Riyadh the same day. Ten more
were arrested on 24th November.

On 6th December Riyadh arrested an American and a Britain for al-Qaeda

link. Next day UAE Islamist was arrested and Riyadh offered reward for
26 suspects.

Riyadh sentenced 36 protesters on 8th December and Saudi forces claimed

killing most of the terrorists.

The terrorists kept retaliating. A wanted suspect shot a police officer on

29 June. Suicide bombing killed seventeen and wounded 122 in Riyadh on 9th
November. Militants targeted residential enclave of foreigners. Al-Qaeda denied
link to the blast. A Saudi prince was killed in ambush in Algeria on 29 th
November.
th

A Saudi intellectual accused al-Qaeda of sowing the seeds of terrorism

from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia. He made it convenient to ignore as to who
sowed the seed from which al-Qaeda germinated and now threatened to cleanse
Saudi Arabia of pro-US elements.

FEIGNING
North Korea, a non-Muslim component of the Axis of Evil, was also
pressed to give up its nuclear programme, but the Crusaders never stepped
beyond diplomatic moves. AFP reported following chronology of this part of
nuclear proliferation:

2002 Oct: North Korea reportedly admitted to US special envoy James

Kelly that it had a programme to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons in
violation of the 1994 Geneva Accord known as the Agreed Framework.

Nov 14: The United States and its allies agreed to suspend fuel oil
shipments promised to North Korea under the Agreed Framework.

Dec 12: North Korea said it would reactivate nuclear facilities frozen
under the now-defunct 1994 Accord because of power shortages.

Dec 19: Liberal Roh Moo-Hyun, who campaigned against the US hardline policy on North Korea, was elected as South Koreas next president.

Dec 21-25: North Korea removed seals and monitoring cameras from its
nuclear complex at Yongbyon north of Pyongyang, shut down under the
1994 pact. Seals were also removed from some 8,000 spent nuclear fuel
rods.

2003 March 4: US and South Korean troops began month-long war

games described by North Korea as a prelude to invasion.

March 10: North Korea test fired second anti-ship missile into Sea of
Japan.

March 20: US-led war in Iraq began. South Koreas president expressed
support for the campaign, North Korea denounced the war.

April 2: South Koreas National Assembly approved the dispatch of 700

non-combat troops to Iraq. North Korea responded with anger.

April 9: UNSC expressed concern about the nuclear crisis but issued no
condemnation of North Korea.

April 10: North Koreas withdrawal from the nuclear Non-proliferation

Treaty became effective.

April 12: North Korea dropped demand for one-on-one talks with
Washington and said it would accept any format for dialogue if the US
was ready to make a bold switch-over in its Korea policy.

April 18: North Korea claimed it had begun reprocessing more than 8,000
spent fuel rods to make weapons-grade plutonium.

April 23: The US, North Korea and China met for three days of talks in
Beijing. North Korea admitted to possessing nuclear weapons, according
to the US. North Korea submitted a bold proposal for resolving the
crisis.

May 14: President Roh and President Bush agreed at a Washington

summit that further steps might be needed against North Korea.

May 22: President Bush and Japanese leader Koizumi denounced North
Koreas nuclear weapons drive at a Texas summit, referring to the
possible need for stronger measures.

June 2: North Korea said it had almost completed reprocessing 8,000

spent nuclear fuel rods for more nuclear bombs, according to a US
Congressional delegation that visited Pyongyang.

July 9: South Koreas intelligence chief said evidence pointed to

reprocessing of a small portion of North Koreas stockpile of spent fuel
rods.

July 16: The White House said North Korea informed the US that it had
completed reprocessing of 8,000 spent fuel rods on June 30. Washington
and Seoul were unable to confirm the claim.

July 31: North Korea agreed to six-way talks with China, Japan, Russia,
South Korea and the US. No date was fixed.

Aug 28: North Korea threatened to conduct nuclear test and declared
itself a nuclear power.

Aug 29: Six-way nuclear talks ended in acrimony with North Korea
threatening to strengthen its nuclear arsenal if Washington refused its
demands to end the nuclear crisis. While envoys agreed that the Norths

security concerns needed to be addressed and more talks were necessary,

but failed to set a timetable for future negotiations.
Some events of interest were not included in the chronology. A top
defector was reported to have disclosed that North Korea had dozens of nukes.
It was reported on 7th May that DPRK had threatened to export nukes. It meant
that Pyongyang understood the purpose of the pressure exerted by the
Crusaders.
North Korea lashed out at Seoul for urging more vigilance against attack
from North. Nuke pact with South Korea was declared dead North threatened
South of disaster. Japan was also warned of fatal fiasco. IAEA accused DPRK
of blackmailing world on nuke issue. Meanwhile America also looked into
DPRK laser-gun report.
During second week of May South Korea had alerted its troops. Roh
hardened tone on DPRK during US tour and later on hinted at toughening
stance towards North Korea. He defended pro-US stance as realistic. South
Korea also warned the North for risking aid in nuclear crisis. North Korean
terrorism was at top of the agenda of Asia-Pacific defence ministers meeting.
American lawmakers arrived in Pyongyang on 30th May amid tension.
Next day Wolfowitz suggested that economic pressure could end crisis. North
Korea spelled out following conditions and format for multilateral discussions:

The format of talks does not present itself as an essential issue if the US
is truly willing to settle the problem. DPRK-US talks should be held first
and they may be followed by the US-proposed multilateral talks as there
are issues to be settled between the DPRK and the US.

The conception of absolute denuclearization on this planet is quite

meaningless unless the US, the nuclear weapon state, proves its antinuclear policy by dismantling its nuclear weapons and abandoning its
nuclear threat. This is the stark reality today created by the US nuclear
blackmail policy.

If the US officially drops its political, military and economically hostile

policy toward the DPRK, intended to destroy its state and system, and
approaches negotiations with it from a fair and equal stand, it will take
the US-touted security concern into full account.

If the US is truly interested in the settlement of the issue, it should not

raise the format of talks as a precondition.

On 2nd June Wolfowitz asked DPRK to abandon nukes. Japan, US and

South Korea officials met in Hawaii ten days later and warned North Korea over
smuggling and counterfeiting. ASEAN and Asia-Pacific security forum were

also urged by US to exert pressure. America hinted at aid for North Korea if it
abandoned nukes.
South Korea fired warning shots on North Korean boat on 3 rd June.
Koizumi and Roh met and said DPRK nukes wont be tolerated. South Korea,
however, refused to discuss US-led blockade and two Koreas held symbolic
ceremony to re-link railways.
During American lawmakers visit to North Korean, parliamentary
speaker, Kim Yong-Nam looked at American visitors sitting across the table and
said; do I really look like that Im a part of an Axis of Evil. Obviously
American replied in negative, though he might not have meant it.
DPRK threatened to counter American arms build-up and publicly
admitted possession of nuclear weapons. Pyongyang asked UN Security
Council to reject discussion on its nuclear programme.
No more soft landing with DPRK, declared Japan on 2 nd July. CIA
reported that North Korea was producing plutonium. America warned Tokyo of
200 North Korean missiles. IAEA announced that Koreas nuclear plan was
most serious threat. Australia, however ruled out that war with Pyongyang was
inevitable.
Roh wooed North Korea with promise of economic help if it dumped
nuclear programme. Seoul also pressed Pyongyang on multilateral talks. On 9 th
July North Korea conducted high-explosive tests and again threatened to pull
out of armistice pact. On 17th July troops of two Koreas clashed along border.
Pyongyang asked America to defuse crisis.
On 4th August Powell ruled out any trading at North Korea talks.
Howard prodded China to keep pressure on DPRK. At the end of month
America played down hopes of quick breakthrough in talks and warned that
North Korea might continue with its nuclear plan. Seoul, however, felt that
nuclear build-up threat was not real.
On 3rd August DPRK refused to hold talks with US Envoy, but remained
hopeful about prospects of six-way talks in Beijing. Before the talks it asked
America not to treat it like Iraq and renewed its demands for settlement of the
issue. American demand for early inspection of nuclear facilities was rejected
vowing not to give up nuclear deterrent unless US hostile policy was changed.
After the talks DPRK opposed more talks and wanted to retain nuclear
deterrence.
Since then the blame game has continued with no significant change in
stance of either side:

In September IAEA warned of North Korean nuclear buildup. America

reported new ballistic missile with DPRK and decided to deploy
unmanned spy planes.

North Korea kept US guessing in nuclear game by defending its right to

make nuclear arms. It slammed American missile plan and called IAEA a
US stooge.

On 20th October Bush claimed making good progress on North Korea.

The same day North Korea test-fired missile and linked new talks to nonaggression pact.

Next day Bush tried to pile more pressure on Kim. North Korea claimed
using plutonium to make bombs to enhance deterrence and offered to
show processing sites. It accused Seoul of armed provocation and
rejected the call for new six-way talks.

In November America discussed the crisis with Japan and South Korea
and again told North to scrap nukes.

North Korea wanted talks with Japan on compensation. It slammed

Rumsfelds criminal junket and asked Seoul to drive out US troops from its
shores. Rumsfeld is worse than Hitler said Pyongyang. Nevertheless it
favoured new talks in December.
China and Russia wanted a negotiated solution. In June China opposed
curbs against North Korea. Putin advised that North Korea must not be pushed
into corner. Even Seoul said that patience was needed over nuclear issue.
In July Chinese Envoy visited US to discuss the crisis and Roh hailed
Chinese steps. After the visit China urged North Korea to restart nuclear talks.
China confirmed that talks would begin on August 27 and advised calm and
patience.
In September China asked US to clarify stand on DPRK. It remained
hopeful on peaceful end to crisis as North Korea wanted amicable solution. In
October Russia told North Korea to cool down. China and DPRK agreed to
continue six-nation talks. In November Russia said that talks could start in
December. Chinese Envoy visited Seoul and Tokyo for discussions about
forthcoming six-way talks.
The label of Axis of Evil did not force North Korea to budge from its
endeavour to protect its national interests. Not for once it showed any signs of
compromising its security. The ambiguity about its nuclear capability was
maintained successfully. The Crusaders kept demanding rollback of nuclear
programme and DPRK kept vowing its enhancement.

Pyongyang refused dialogue on terms dictated by the Crusaders, but

never said NO to talks. Each round of talks ended in disappointment for the
superpower, even the six-nation talks ended in acrimony leaving US and allies
incapable of offering any clues. America was not optimistic as it did not see any
end to nuclear threat as reining in Kim was no easy task.
Kim fully exposed the hollowness of Crusaders threats. Koreans
steadfastness and backlash of Iraq War forced Bush to soften his stance. He
accepted, military action is not the only way to resolve disputes. Rumsfelds
visited Seoul to discuss thinning US force in Korean Peninsula for rotation of
troops in Iraq.
Seoul again urged America to ease its stance on North Korea. Keeping
these facts in view one could infer that in the context of North Korea the game
of brinkmanship was a mere hoax. The Crusaders had been feigning all along.

FOCUS ON MUSLIMS
In war on terror military options have been reserved for cleansing
Muslim countries from Islamic militancy and depriving them of Weapons of
Mass Destruction to secure peace for the civilized world. Therefore, all
roadmaps for peace lead to butchering of Muslims and destruction of their
abodes.
For achievement of the intended goals it was essential to keep raising the
terror alarm. Threats from already identified monsters, particularly al-Qaeda,
were blown out of all proportions. All evil acts were attributed to these monsters
without going into the formalities of proofs.
Taliban, Baathists, Palestinians and Jehadis were continuously accused.
On 7 May America warned of terror strikes in Kyrgyzstan. Islamic teachers
and students were forced to leave Cambodia after similar alarm. In September
US showed concern about Islamist in Norway.
th

Al-Qaeda intends using cargo planes cautioned US. America closed its
embassy in Kenya over terror threat. Britain claimed foiling chemical terror
plot. A report blamed al-Qaeda for franchising its brand of terror around the
world through internet.
In retaliation to Mahathirs remarks, Simon Wiesenthal Centre called on
investors and tourists to avoid Malaysia. He had accused the Jews of controlling
the world by proxy. This call proved that Mahathir was absolutely right in his
remarks.
There was no respite in discriminatory actions against Muslims. An
Italian minister allowed navy to shoot at immigrants. Six persons were arrested

on 24th June for helping al-Qaeda. In November seven Muslims linked to

terrorism were expelled. Four persons were held for alleged links to terrorists.
In France two sisters were barred from school over scarves. Another 12year-old Turkish girl was expelled from school for committing the same act of
terror. Anti-mosque riots in Sweden were reported. In Spain Osama and 34
others were charged with terrorism.
A Muslim in UK was charged with conspiring with shoe bomber.
Canada banned three Sikhs and two Muslim groups, presumably on coaxing by
India. In America a prominent US Muslim was arrested for links with Libya.
Bolivia detained 16 Muslims on terror tip off.
The issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction was kept alive. Risk of alQaeda using WMD is on the rise said UN and urged governments to act against
nuke terror. Old scores were also settled. Lockerbie case was resolved through
agreement to pay compensation dictated by France.
The efforts to muster support for pursuing ongoing operations and their
further expansion did not dissipate. Powell and Ivanov held several rounds of
talks in Moscow. America pressed Europe over defence plans. EU Okayed
enlargement, but warned of shortcomings. America was unhappy with new
security plan for Europe.
America desired to expand military presence in Africa. NATO agreed on
US prodding to eye at Middle East and Africa as new centre of activity. Bush
urged democracy in Middle East and China. India was encouraged to increase
engagement in Central Asia. Fernandes offered military help to Kyrgyzstan. The
work on fence-mending continued. France and Australia ignored Iraq row and
agreed to boost ties. Our two countries stand for the same values.
Wolfowitz suggested that US troop realignment should not wait until
crisis was solved. He indirectly urged for more military action. US-led Coalition
planned worldwide training to check arms trade interception.
US cowboy policy was blamed for negative outcomes of ongoing war.
Red Cross warned against rights erosion in war on terror. Amnesty blasted
planned EU and US extradition deal. It was feared that US-backed regimes in
Central Asia could push Islamic group to violence. Thirty-five states were
angry at US aid cut over ICC issue. The power-drunk Crusaders remained
completely oblivious to criticism of the biased war.
Backlash of the war on terror was felt at unexpected places. In June US
Consulate in Turkey was subjected to grenade attack. On 4th November Turkish
Embassy in Netherlands was attacked. The worst followed on 15th November.
Twenty-three persons died and more than 250 were injured in blasts at
two synagogues in Istanbul. A militant Turkish Islamic group, Great Eastern

Raiders Front claimed the responsibility. A paper and a minister pointed their
fingers toward the monster. Turkey probed al-Qaeda link in attacks.
The militants struck again on 20th November. Suicide bombers killed
twenty-seven and British Consul General was among the dead. More than four
hundred were wounded and the same group claimed the responsibility.
Pope Paul to Kurd leader and from leaders of the civilized world to
those in Islamabad and Kabul condemned the attacks. Grim-faced Bush in the
company of Blair vowed to crush those who hate freedom. The same day the
same numbers of Iraqis were killed by US army. That news could not make the
headline even in newspapers of the Muslim World.
Michael Jansen writing in Jordan Times attributed these incidents to
Turkeys alliance with the West and aspiration to become a member of the
European Union. He argued that Islamist fundamentalists rejected these
aspirations.
Communiqu released by the group which claimed bombing called upon
Ankara, to leave the Crusader army of NATO and return to the Islamic nation,
and cut relations with the US and Israel. We consider the government of Turkey
as a first-class agent for America and therefore it must choose (domestic) peace
or America.
Repercussions were also felt in Africa. Kenyans observed that anti-terror
probe hurts Muslims. Two more Muslims were killed on 18 th August in Sri
Lanka and Indian backed Tamils were accused of killings. Sri Lankan President
feared Muslims taking up arms.
The bias was too glaring. While urging enforcement of missile-regime
America prepared to deliver advanced missiles to Taiwan. US Senate rejected
ban on nuclear tests. Bush signed $ 401 billion defence bill. While signing the
bill he said that US armed forces were facing a great and historic task in
confronting and defeating the forces of terrorism.
We face enemies that measure their progress by the chaos they inflict,
the fear they spread and the innocent lives they destroy. Americas military is
standing between our country and grave danger he proclaimed. On 2 nd
December Bush signed another bill allowing study of new generation of nuclear
weapons.
Religious prejudices of the civilized people were exposed. Powell called
US Judeo-Christian and then amended to a country of many faiths. General
William G. Boykin (Jerry) was appointed as under-secretary of Defence for
Intelligence, who is known for his anti-Muslim mind-set and as staunch
supporter of the Crusades.

Arrogant Jews were backed. Those who did not condemn Mahathirs
comments, like Chirac, were pressed to do so. Opponents of war within the
civilized world were targeted for corrective punishment. According to New
York Times, FBI was collecting data on anti-war groups. On 11 th December
opponents of Iraq War were barred from reconstruction contracts.
Laws, which could be used by the uncivilized people to their advantage,
were amended. Belgium repealed controversial war crimes law. This law was
fine as long as it served the interest of the civilized world. but after filing of a
case by Iraqis it became repugnant to the interests of civilized people.
Taking note of the mind-set of the civilized world Attorney Norman
Sepenuk pleaded for Krstics Srebrenica conviction quashed. He argued that the
slaughter of 7,000 Muslims by Bosnian Serbs troops, who overran the enclave,
did not amount to genocide but constituted merely ethnic cleansing. The
number of killed was too insignificant to speak of genocide. His punishment
could be remitted on the basis of ethnic cleansing. On the other hand senior
Bosnian Muslim leaders were reportedly facing trial.
The bias warranted initiation of some pacification measures. In June Pope
visited Bosnia on reconciliatory mission. He must have advised the Bosnian
Muslims to reconcile with the tragedies of their massacres. Bush praised Islam
as religion of tolerance. He greeted Muslims on start of Ramazan. He said that
war on terror was not against Islam. Rumsfeld showed the magnanimity on his
part. Pentagon allowed lawyer for US-born Taliban suspect. British prison
officer was fired for insulting bin Laden.
These measures were too clumsy to impress anyone. Bush, like Boykin,
still believed that his God is bigger as was evident from his acts. The
Whiteman was still far from getting the crux of message of the Savage. He had
told the great grand father of Bush that your God and my God is the same. He
could argue that the ongoing war was not against Islam, but on ground only
followers of Islam were being persecuted.
The hate factories in America worked overtime. According to Dr.
Muzaffar Iqbal, Bernard Lewis who is acclaimed as authority on Islam has
turned into hate factory since 9/11. He skillfully associates Islam with most
discredited, racist and violent philosophies, ideas and organizations.
In America there is vast system of scholarship, which is sometimes
directly funded by the CIA, the neo-conservative think tanks, or the Department
of Defence. This scholarship aims to produce studies on Islam which influence
the young minds entering American university system as well as those who do
advanced work added Muzaffar.

Why Americans were focusing against Muslims? Andaleeb Abbas

answered this question by borrowing the words Horowitz. These are fascist
countries. Theyre Islamo-fascist countries, and they support terror. The hawks
exposed the hollowness of Bushs claims.
Apart from the actions initiated at government level, the Crusaders have
encouraged the people to augment the on slaught. ARY Gold and others were
added to the list of defendants in 9/11 victims suit. New defendants in trilliondollar case included Mid-eastern business elite.
The crux of the lawsuit wss that the 186 defendants; including numerous
foreign banks, dozens of Islamic foundations, Osama bin Laden, the Republic of
Sudan, an Islamic Cultural Centre in Milan, and a diamond company in Africa;
knowingly provided money and other aid to terrorists.
Saudi American bank, partner of Citibank, but surprisingly Citibank was
not named as a defendant, which revealed the nefarious designs of the justice
seekers. Motley the lawyer for plaintiffs said, the day of reckoning was
coming for the defendants. His team was receiving assistance from government
investigators in thirteen countries.
The ruling elite of Muslim World has totally submitted to the Crusaders
on the issue of terrorism as was evident from their acts. Individually they have
been following the dictates of the Crusaders. Morocco promptly sentenced ten
suspects of suicide attacks on 12th July. Two more were sentenced to death in
terror cases in September and forty-one were sentenced for plotting attacks. The
punishments were awarded for the satisfaction of the Crusaders rather than to
meet the ends of justice.
Even Libya, known for his defiance, admitted to Pan Am bombing and
also agreed to compensate Berlin bomb victims. Having done that it asked
America to unfreeze its assets, most of which would be spent for payment of
compensation.
Saudi Ambassador declared that terrorists have no religion. He stressed
upon the need to promote true face of Islam. Prince Abdullah declared
terrorists as enemy of Islam. But promotion of true Islam could only be done by
true Muslims. Such Muslims can only be identified once Muslim World agrees
on definition of true Muslim like that of terrorism.
Musharraf while ridding the torrents of the mainstream urged the West to
shun discrimination. His repeated cries for addressing the root cause of
terrorism fell on deaf ears. Indo-Israeli nexus threat added to his worries.
Mahathir was the lone voice in Ummah who urged Muslims to outsmart
Jews. He blasted Wests bias towards Muslims and slammed state terrorism and

WTO. He suggested Gold Dinar to replace dollar as he accused arrogant Jews

for ruling the world by proxy.
He shrugged off Western and US criticism and renewed attack on Jews.
You say that you are not under the influence of the Jews and yet when I
criticize the Jews, the whole of the European Union wants to condemn me. But
when somebody condemns the Muslims, did the European Union say anything?
That showed that they are under the thumb of the Jews.
Jews were avenging past ill-treatment, he reiterated. The Muslims have
never ill treated the Jews, but now they are behaving against Muslims exactly in
the way the Europeans behaved toward them. His lone voice was not enough to
end Muslim bashing.
OIC was the only platform from where Muslims could collectively
express their concerns toward biased conduct of war on terror. Muslim rulers
converged onto Putrajaya in October. Musharraf suggested enlightened
moderation to bridge gap between Islam and West, and proposed setting up
OIC body to meet challenges.
Islamic nations pledged to fight terrorism in communiqu. OIC softened
stand on Iraq and Middle East, but vowed to revitalize economic boycott of
Israel and denounced sanction vote against Syria. OIC reaffirmed support to
people of Kashmir.
Outcome of the summit fell short of the expectations. Follow up action
would be well short of the requirement as seen by Shafqat Mahmood. OIC,
which for better or worse is the repository of Muslim dreams and aspirations is
largely a toothless organization that has accomplished little of significance since
coming into being. It passes meaningless resolutions on Palestine and
sometimes on Kashmir but its member states refuse to act in a concerted way to
put the adversaries of Palestinians or Kashmiris on the mat. While commenting
he forgot that one lying flat cannot put the adversary on mat.
What does Enlightened Moderation mean; questioned Dr. Muzaffar
Iqbal. And what does it mean to bridge the gap between Islam and the West? He
then answered these questions; Islam is a religion, with a definite set of beliefs,
one of the most important among which is the belief in the Hereafter, and the
West is a geographical entity in which such a belief is no more the defining
factor of political, economic and social life, though it remains a personal
concept in many lives. So, how does one bridge the gap between geographical
entity and a faith?
No one was interested in such details. This enlightened idea suggested a
new brand of Islam, which should reject militancy and refute Jihad, one of the
key concepts of the Quraan. Those who preached enlightened moderation

ignored that the Quraan only mentions three categories of people: the believers,
unbelievers and the hypocrites added Muzaffar.
The people of Islamic World, particularly the freedom fighters, remained
at the receiving, both against military aggression of the Crusaders and their
allies as well as crackdowns launched by the frightened rulers of Muslim States.

CONCLUSION
The peace march in Middle East as per American roadmap has bogged
down before it could take off. The disappointment was so wide spread that even
Israelis and Palestinians were forced to think about alternatives. Geneva
Initiative was the outcome this disappointment. This initiative wont succeed in
the absence of support of the respective governments.
Despite the rhetoric of peace, democracy and justice, Muslims in Fareast,
South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, Africa and elsewhere will continue to be
persecuted as long as the Ummah does not demonstrate unity or at least
semblance of it. But Muslim rulers remained shocked and awed by the military
might possessed by the Crusaders. They cannot think of any thing other than
moderation to counter prejudices of neo-conservatives of the civilized world.
The sufferings of people Muslim world will persist indefinitely. Those
factions who have the will to resist militarily will be hunted by the Crusaders
with the support of Muslim rulers. Those who have the courage to speak the
truth, like al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, will be barred from entering the prohibited
areas. On other fronts they could only think of Mecca Cola so far. May be it
marks the first step?
In addition to getting the jobs done through use of force, the Crusaders
will keep frowning at frightened leaders of the Muslim World. This method has
worked effectively for the last two years. Recently Iran has been subdued to
freeze its nuclear programme. Now Pakistan is the only one left to be coerced to
give up its nuclear plan.
Crackdowns to check cross border terrorism, sending troops round the
globe to do jobs of the civilized world and recognition of Israel wont resolve
security concerns of Pakistan. The argument of Burhanuddin Hasan that if
Pakistan can have diplomatic relations with India; which is an idolater nation
and with which it has its major territorial dispute on Kashmir; then what is
wrong in having diplomatic relations with Israel; is too sweet in comparison to
other bitter realities.

The Crusaders have been feigning in the context of North Korea. They
never wanted to tackle this component of the Axis of Evil militarily. Even if
they had so desired the countries of that region would have come in their way.
With the emerging realities in Iraq and to some extent in Afghanistan, the
Crusaders are now considering to shift some troops from Korean Peninsula to
Iraq. That was why it dawned upon Bush that military means were not the only
way to resolution of disputes.

12th December 2003

CHANGES DEMAND CHANGE

Threats to Pakistan are diverse and enormous. This should not intimidate
the people of Pakistan. They must remember that a nation having no enemy is
no good and also that a weaker nation is destined to perish; threats or no threats.
They should also know that everything in this world is changing either by
growing or by decaying. They only have to continuously observe the changes
with discerning eye. Correct perception of the changes will help identification
of right course of action.
The Creator has blessed the man with wisdom to recognize the need for
change and with ability to bring suitable changes. In that they have to
understand that only change for better is termed as growth; the rest is decaying.
Pakistanis are a young nation; they ought to grow, but not without
striving hard. One that stops growing, no matter at what age, soon starts
decaying. No one can escape the change by evading it.
The change is essential for adapting to ever-changing environments. The
adaptability is the key to survival. The survival in turn is pre-requisite of
growth. The growth controlled with definite purpose is called development,
which in turn enhances the ability to adjust to new environments.

KNOW THY ENEMY

The challenges to security emerge from national interests, particularly
those which are in conflict with interests of other nations. National interests of
different nations are the instruments in the symphony of international relations.
The nations aspiring to dominate pose greater threat to those obstructing
fulfillment of their ambitions. Pakistan by virtue of its geo-strategic location
crosses the path of some aspiring nations. Therefore, Pakistan feels the grind of
pressure zones merely because of its strategic location.
Nevertheless the knowledge of interests of other nations, in conflict with
own interests, helps in identifying the adversaries. After identification, the
information should not be held back for the sake of secrecy. The leaders must let
the people know the true extent of threats. It is criminal to keep the people
ignorant about sinister designs of their enemies.

He who is aware will prepare to face the threat. Well-aware person,

despite being ill-equipped, will perform better as compared to the one who is
well-equipped, but unaware. When threat materializes, a well-aware person
finds his bamboo stick handy and well oiled; whereas an unaware person finds
his powder damp and the gun rusty. The ignorant people are also prone to
reacting irrationally.
The people of Pakistan have been denied the right to know. They are
neither aware of national interests nor of interests of other nations in clash with
theirs. These facts, after having been reduced to few lines, are kept in safe
custody of the bureaucrats along with other classified documents. The custody
of these should be transferred to the masses so that they understand the
implications and their responsibilities thereof.
The clash of civilizations looms between Islam and the West warned
Mahathir. He asked his people to be prepared for this when it comes to
Malaysia. You must learn how to handle it and to handle it well you must
understand these people.
He characterized them as warlike and greedy and emphasized that it was
not criticism, but a statement of facts. He cited genocide of the original
inhabitants of Northern America and Australia as proof. Now we see the actual
invasion of a country (Iraq) because that country is seen to be not democratic.
Then he questioned imposition of democracy through conquests.
Muslim World is facing new phase of active Crusades. The Crusaders
have launched multi-pronged assault on Islamic Civilization. In that they are
forming new military alliances to isolate evil forces of Islamic militancy.
Indo-Israel nexus is one of the strategic partnerships sought by them.
Farooq Zaman, after identifying the driving force behind this partnership,
advised Musharraf, which holds good not only for the addressee, but for the
entire nation.
The US is so insidiously committed for its long term designs to the
newly emerging Indo-Israel axis of evil, it will despicably betray Pakistan and
insultingly abandon you as well in keeping with its policy of opportunism the
moment it decides that its so-called reliable ally is no longer needed in the war
on terror.
The merging interests of neo conservationists (the Crusaders) and Hindu
fundamentalists (the proxy crusaders) pose grave threat to the security of
Pakistan. Indo-American strategic partnership is no more a secret. It has been in
play for the last two years in the game of brinkmanship and in the form of
joint exercises held on heavenly heights of Laddakh and high seas. They are
bent upon availing opportunities offered by the tragedies.

Accusations of cross border terrorism by neighbours on either side; vows

of Hindu fundamentalists to take terrorism to the soil of Pakistan; ominous signs
of revival of Pushtoonistan issue; the Crusaders resolve to defeat terrorism and
elimination of WMDs; combined with doctrine of pre-emptive strikes are too
grave threats to be averted by extending the hand of friendship. Seeking peace
through passive approach has already caused considerable damage.
With regard to our relations with India under international pressure and
because of Indias consistent and more successful diplomacy we are yielding
ground by conceding to its demands one after the other, in the name of peace
and amity. While Pakistan gives way, the world cheers the well-devised and
timely initiatives announced by the Indian Prime Minister as these gel with the
current international ideas and trends explained Inayatullah.
Presently Pakistan can boast of being on the right side of the Crusaders,
who apparently helped in defusing tensions with India. But the reality of Indian
and American arrogance cannot be ignored. The tensions can be raised any time
as both adversaries are capable of blowing things out of all proportions with the
strength of their media.
They are also capable of producing evidence off their cuffs to prove that
Pakistan remains a bastion of Islamic extremism and terrorism. India and
Afghanistan have not stopped accusing Pakistan of sponsoring or supporting
cross border terrorism. The Crusaders plan to eliminate Weapons of Mass
Destruction in Islamic World is still being pursued vigorously.
The present peace overtures mark a temporary change in their strategy to
achieve the aims of the war on terror. Peace-ploy is being applied exactly the
way military means are resorted to as extension of the policy. Ploys sometimes
prove more dangerous than naked aggression.
Of late it has been reported that America has sought permanent bases in
India and Pakistan. This was how it happened in Middle East; first acquired the
foot-hold and then came invasions for global domination. M B Naqvi raised
some pertinent questions in this context leading to obvious answers:

To what uses will the US put these bases? Pax Americana.

Do Pakistani people endorse the longer-term US aims and objectives in

Asia and elsewhere? No.

How will giving bases to US harmonize with our worldview and national
aims? Two can never go side-by-side.

America is certainly interested in increasing its military presence in and

around Muslim World, but for that bases in Pakistan are not indispensable.
America also understands that under the prevalent situation Pakistan will be
reluctant to accept this kind of friendship.

The demand of bases fits more in its strategic partnership with India,
which is looked at by Pakistan with concern. India is likely to say yes to the
proposal. Once it happens Pakistan, after declining the offer, wont be justified
in raising objections.
India is also encouraged to increase its military prowess to encircle
Islamic World. To this end India is being assisted to develop strategically potent
navy and air force with arsenal of long range ballistic missiles. India has also
been allowed foot-hold in Central Asian States, which have been refusing
ordinary visits of military delegations from Pakistan.
At some stage Pakistan will be cornered to say no to unjust and
humiliating demands of the Crusaders and the proxy crusaders. The proud
people wont like to cross the line drawn by Mahathir. On that day they should
be ready to face the challenge and for that they must understand as to how these
threats could materialize.

KNOW THY SELF

Identification of foes alone is not sufficient to save a nation from harms.
For thwarting the threats it is equally important to know thy friends; and there is
no friend more trustworthy than thy self.
A cursory peep inward reveals disheartening facts. The sight of multifaced monster living inside is horrifying, which frequently pops up bearing
masks of sectarian intolerance, ethnic prejudices, regionalism, political
instability and economic fragility. Most of these masks are produced by
psychological moulds.
Despite the enormity of external threats, those emerging from within
remain the most dangerous. No doubt the unfavourable tilt in balance of power
has reduced options for Pakistan for protection of its interests, but it is because
of internal pressures that many hawks have started cooing like doves.
Today most Pakistani leaders and intellectuals see only one way to
safeguard national interests, i.e. avoid confrontation at any cost. They talk of
nothing but peace, knowingly that it is up to the adversaries to decide about
nature and terms of peace to be granted and for how long.
In view of the bitter realities within and in the face of enormity of the
military strength of adversaries, M B Naqvi has suggested paradigm shift. He,
perhaps sarcastically, advised not to start another long phase of expensive
military build up that cannot, repeat cannot, either meaningfully facilitate the
resolution of Kashmir tangle or significantly strengthen national security to
enable Pakistan to fight a successful war.

The arms race with India is a foolish enterprise because the 56-yearslong arms build up has left Pakistan far behind India in conventional arms and
as regards nuclear capability it failed to deter India in 2002 he strengthened his
argument.
The issue now is not Kashmir he opined. The more relevant question is
what happens to the people of Pakistan. He went on, it is time to stop
confronting India altogether and pursue a policy of reconciliation and friendly
cooperation with the Indian people.
He then advised his fellow countrymen, Pakistanis should gradually
disarm and give up all those juvenile macho notions of militarism and foolish
extolling of physical bravery. The most intriguing part of the advice was that if
Pakistanis do not interfere with its dreams, India will pose no greater threat to
Pakistan than it does to Nepal and Sri Lanka. He hoped that his advice will
ensure Pakistans survival in safety and honour allowing it to engage in
economic and social construction.
His argument is based on some assumptions. First, when enemy is too
strong the security can be ensured by getting rid of the notions of confronting
him and by extending the hand of friendship. Two, Pakistan needs military
strength only for the solution of Kashmir dispute and apart from that there is no
threat to its security. Lastly, after having been down graded to the status of
Nepal and Sri Lanka, Pakistan would survive in safety and honour without
facing threats like those of Maoists and Tamils?
The method to tackle challenges as suggested by M B Naqvi and applied
by the regime for the last two years can help avoiding confrontation, but only
temporarily. No sovereign state can afford to keep submitting to the will of its
adversaries forever. Pakistan cannot save itself from the threats by keep rubbing
the nose on concrete blocks of Capital Hill, till well after the nose is completely
scratched off the face.
There ought to be a finish-line for preservation of national pride as
brought out by Mahathir. He termed Bushs statement that either you are with
us or against us as misguided. We are with them half way, but not all the way.
As far as fighting against terrorism is concerned, yes, we are with America, but
the way in which it is being fought we think is wrong; so we cannot be with
them.
Pakistan has been standing on that line for the last two years. The
Crusaders have not taken a single step even to pretend reciprocation. It is
because of this arrogance that one occasionally hears the shrilling cries of the
hawks. Pakistanis cannot accept all the nonsense just to earn a certificate of
tolerance from the civilized world.

Shireen Mazari has suggested, let us have the confidence to be a little

less tolerant of the abuse and violence meted out to us as Pakistanis by
outsiders. And let us be public in protesting and acting against those who abuse
and violate us. Our defeatist/apologetic psyche in the face of outsiders needs to
undergo a radical shift. We should be angry at what is being done to Pakistanis
by others.
The most tolerant community in the world is of Untouchables in India.
Even they have started speaking about their self respect. The Muslims in general
and Pakistan in particular must learn from them and pick up the courage at some
stage to say enough is enough.
Naqvis thesis ignores the questions raised by Masud Akhtar Shaikh. Can
India really become a friend of Pakistan? What about their slogans of
AKHAND BHARAT, (indivisible India) MAHABHARAT (Greater India) and
Kashmir - Indias ATOOT ANG (inseparable part of India)? How about
SHUDHI Movement that wants all Indian Muslims to convert to Hinduism or
quit India?
While attempting to answer these questions one tends to agree with
balanced views of Shafqat Mahmood. He said, let us not be deluded into
thinking that we can do without a well organized, disciplined and professional
military. We live in a troubled region with many difficulties and problems. The
armed forces provide us with the strength and the ability to tackle these
challenges.
Many Pakistani intellectuals and decision makers have been unduly
depressed by the conclusions drawn from the tangibles. The depression seems
to have eroded their courage to protect national honour and dignity. But
determined people are not disheartened by the odds pitched against them. No
doubt geo-political, economic and military environments have marked
disadvantage for Pakistan. The odds are many, but most of them are not
insurmountable.
The real odd is the absence of efforts to overcome the odds already
identified. Application of wisdom should not end with foreseeing the dangers; it
must extend to taking measures to forestall them and be prepared to meet them
when those materialize.
Once a threat materializes, wisdom alone does not suffice. In such
eventuality one has to be reckless at times; instead of showing cautiousness of
a wise man. To defend ones honour one must risk crossing the limits of sanity.
The same is true for a nation.

CHANGE IS MUST

Complacence hastens the inevitable rather than averting it. Keeping this
in mind Mahathir called on Muslim nations to build up their military might so
that they could defend themselves against attack by the West, and not for
offensive purpose.
The idea of striking fear into the hearts of enemies is part of the
teachings of the Koran. If they are strong then people will not attack them. But
at the moment they are not strong, and because of that, because of their
frustration, their anger, they resort to acts of terrorism. His advice is applicable
more to the inhabitants of citadel of Islam.
The act of striking fear of God in the hearts of the enemies must begin
with placing the fear of Allah in own hearts. This will reassure the entire nation
about its ability to face the challenges without any worldly apprehensions.
Pakistan by virtue of its ideology is morally bound to work for the unity
of Muslim Ummah and safeguard interests of Muslims in India. In the case of
latter Pakistanis owe a lot to them for their role in creation of Pakistan, despite
knowing that their abodes were not to fall within territorial limits of the
proposed state. They were not to be the citizens of Pakistan.
They supported the demand of separate homeland, because they had
experienced the extent to which a minority could be subjected to socioeconomic exploitation in Hindu Society. The division of the Subcontinent added
to their miseries, as Hindus started treating them as Pakistanis in India. They
continue paying the price of creation of Pakistan in installments. The formula of
working out installments, applied by the Bania, is such that they will never be
able to clear the bill.
The onus of clearing their debt lies on Pakistanis. If Hindus treat them as
Pakistanis in India, Pakistan should help them accordingly. This however,
cannot be done by weak Pakistan struggling for survival. Similarly it cannot
contribute towards the unity of Ummah without being politically stable,
economically sound and militarily strong.
These extra-territorial aims could be termed as ambitious or sinister
and laughed at. If India can have designs to undo Pakistan, it can have such
aims which do not mean undoing anything. The prevalent global and regional
environments however dictate that Pakistan should desist from trumpeting these
without first setting the house right.
Pakistan can defer these for the time being and concentrate on building its
strength. A strong Pakistan will automatically serve the cause of Muslims in
India and unity of Ummah and then equating Pakistan with India wont appear
that ridiculous.

As regards the tangible elements of national power the strengths and

potentials should be harnessed and vulnerabilities guarded. Potentials of each
element can be capitalized and inadequacies should be taken care of. The people
have the right to know political, economic, psychological and military
inadequacies so that their efforts are focused accordingly.
Politics is not the business of the men in uniform. Measures should be
initiated to keep them away from politics. Onus lies on politicians. They should
not create crisis like conditions tempting soldiers to grab the power. The selfcentred politicians should desist from prompting them to meddle in politics.
In 1971 Pakistan was defeated not by the bullets of the enemy, but by the
ballot papers used in only free and fair elections of its history. Politically
Pakistan lost the war before its soldiers fired the first bullet in defence.
This leads to obvious conclusions. One; soldiers in political role are no
good as soldiers or politicians. Two; incompetent politicians are unable to
protect their rule, what to talk of provision of good governance. Ignorance and
indifference of the people too cause irreparable damage to political stability of
the country.
Therefore, people must be educated not to be carried away by the
parochial rhetoric of the politicians. These undermine the national harmony. The
hatred spread by the parochial rhetoric is exploited by the adversaries. That was
how Pakistan disintegrated.
The planners on national economy, while aiming at ambitious annual
growth, should not accentuate economic disparities. While endeavouring to
eradicate poverty, steps must be taken for fair distribution of the wealth.
Economic disparities breed discontentment, which is exploited by the vested
interests from within and without.
Psychological offensive of the enemy has harmed Pakistan beyond the
visible damage in form of fall of Dacca. It is the result of enemys propaganda
that many Pakistani do not feel bad about disintegration of their country. Very
often one hears statements that it was good that East and West Pakistan parted
their ways.
Over a period of time wrong impression about enormity of India military
might has been created. Pakistan, being unequal and weak, cannot fight against
India. With the advent of the Crusades of 21st Century Pakistan has been
confronted with even mightier adversary; America. Stepping on to the side of
America in war on terror is the result of this mind-set. This unique one-way
partnership is based on exigencies of the situation. It can never be justified on
moral grounds.

The leaders of Pakistan must nourish the desire to protect national honour
and dignity. Their resolve will greatly strengthen the tenacity of the people to
fight against the threats to their country. The character failings of ruling elite
must also be eradicated to achieve similar effects. Enormous threat from the
Crusaders can only be countered with the strength national character.
Initiation of the process of change has been long outstanding with regard
to armed forces. The stalemate of 1965 and debacle of 1971 amply exposed
weaknesses and vulnerabilities of Pakistans military system. The defeat of 1971
should have lead to soul-searching. Discreet analysis of the debacle should have
been carried out to identify the weaknesses with a view to initiating measures
for their eradication. The events since 9/11 indicate that any further
complacence could prove fatal.
Pakistan perforce has to maintain larger forces than it can afford, because
of the nature of threats and length of its borders in relation to its size. The
elongated rectangular shape, with hostile neighbours along the longer sides,
denies the depth, therefore, it has to lean forward without losing the balance.
Armed forces should be so reorganized and equipped that they should be
able to guard against pre-emptive strikes, withstand massive onslaught of hightech weaponry and be able to resist occupation by resorting to unconventional
warfare. Civil population should have the sense of participation all along in
defending the Motherland.
A proud nation must hold its men in uniform in high esteem. Neither of
the two can afford to estrange themselves from each other. The chances of
holding them in high esteem largely depend upon attitude of the soldiers. The
have to conduct themselves with devotion and dedication with dignity.

CONCLUSION
Pakistan is undoubtedly in precarious position, but it does not mean that it
should compromise on national interests. These are aspirations of 140 million
people and difficulties cannot force any compromise. However, the strategy
may be altered temporarily.
Adversaries of Pakistan are waiting for opportune moment. After all
patience is a great virtue. Pakistan should avoid presenting any opportunity and
at the same time must remain vigilant. Vigilance is an equally great virtue.
It is important that the people should have comprehensive knowledge of
national interests. The awareness should be self-motivating so that everyone
willingly strives hard for achievement of the intended goals.

The entire nation has to collectively work for achievement of the goals
set-forth. Everyone has to be aware of his duties towards defence of the country
during peace and war. Feeding them with slogans like crush India at eleventh
hour serves no purpose.
The freedom can neither be secured nor preserved without paying the
price. Those who intend defending their freedom must draw strength from
examples of the past and the ongoing struggles. The Vietnamese made the
superpower to bleed and leave their country in disgrace. Afghans had forced the
elephant to limp back to the safety of its abode. Palestinians, Kashmiris,
Chechens, Morros, Afghans and Iraqis have not given up their struggles against
great odds.
These living examples should be source of inspiration for Pakistanis.
They should not chicken out on seeing the enormity of the dangers and shut
their eyes. No pigeon has ever saved itself by closing its eyes. This is true for
doves of peace as well.
The circumstances are demanding from Pakistan to review basic issues
with impunity. Perception of external threats must be clear; own political,
economic and psychological weaknesses must be identified and eradicated; and
inadequacies in armed forces must be addressed. This can only be done by
bringing major changes.
India has not given up its designs to undo Pakistan altogether. Therefore,
Pakistan must retain the option of potent nuclear deterrence with capability of
second strike. Any pledge to forego the right of first use amounts to
compromising its deterrence value. Such pledges render the nuclear weapons
into a heap of garbage lying in the backyard.
Presently Pakistan is under tremendous pressure with regard to its nuclear
capability under the pretext of proliferation. It will find difficult to withstand the
pressure, though it has become very difficult in the wake of double standards
pursued by the peace-loving civilized world.

18th December 2003

EXTERNAL CHALLENGES

Pakistan has unique distinction of having an enemy before it came into

being. By virtue of its ideology it deserved special attention of anti-Muslim
forces and got that. Britain, the then leader of the Crusaders, tried to harm it
during the process of partition of India.
Despite its fondness for the West, Pakistan has always been treated as
suspect because of its Islamic identity. However, occasionally some favours
were showered to requisition its services for the Crusaders. For the last two
years it has been rendering meritorious services as frontline state in war
against terrorism.

Indian enmity has geo-historical background. India has not been able to
reconcile with division of the Subcontinent. It has been number one enemy of
Pakistan always carrying a dagger under the armpit. India successfully exploited
the post 9/11 situation to damage Pakistans interests. After winning a victory
without war it has now started talking of peace, but that too is extension of
brinkmanship pursued hither-to-fore.
Afghanistan was the only country that opposed Pakistans entry into
United Nations. Despite this solo effort of opposition, Pakistan has been trying
hard to befriend Afghan brothers, but due to perpetual internal turmoil
Afghanistan always remained a source of trouble.
With the installation of a government dominated by Northern Alliance, its
hostility toward Pakistan has increased. The regime in Kabul enjoys the support
of two adversaries mentioned above. This has led Pakistan to unenviable
situation of active two-front scenario.
Pakistan has more adversaries in addition to those mentioned above. Most
of them act in concert with these adversaries. The discussion herein would be
restricted to three threats to be able to look at them in some detail.

DISTANT THREAT
During the Battle of Trench, the Jews of Madina treacherously violated
the treaty between them and the Muslims. After the Battle, the Holy Prophet
(peace be upon him) took punitive action against them.
They were punished severely in accordance with Jewish Law. The
fairness of action was not appreciated by those at the receiving end. Instead they
bred malice against Islam and became enemies of Muslims for ever.
Twelve years later, in 637 AD, Caliph Umar set out from Madina to sign a
treaty with residents of holy city of Jerusalem. The purpose of undertaking
arduous journey by the head of state was to save the dwellers of the city from
bloodshed; the city which could no longer withstand the pressure of his strong
army.
The magnanimity shown by the Caliph has no parallel in the history. This
too was not to be reciprocated by the other side, which in the contrary might
have thought of outsmarting the Caliph. Subsequently it ended up in long-drawn
Crusades against Islam.
The Pope, today projected as symbol of peace, instigated the Christians of
Europe to wage the holy war. Jerusalem kept falling to Christians and Muslims
in turns. When the city was lost by Ottoman Empire, it was announced that the

Crusades had at last come to an end. The man who said that was not declaring
Truce of God. He was simply rejoicing over a visible victory against Muslims.
Creation of Israel added a new dimension to the Crusades. It marked the
beginning of strategic partnership of the Christians and the Jews. This
partnership resulted in enlargement of the aim and scope of the Crusades much
beyond the limits of the holy city.
The idea of clash of civilizations provided a cover name to the Crusades.
The incident of 9/11 added urgency to deal with the evil forces of Islam. Neoconservatives and Zionist forces launched all-out offensive against Muslim
World. The strategic partnership against Islam has been now expanded with
inclusion of India.
On political front their aim is to destabilize countries of Muslim World,
including Pakistan. In the past it was done by criticizing the regimes and
supporting the victimized opposition. The disgruntled politicians were
provided sanctuaries as if they were threatened species of fauna. The brute
dictators were accused of threatening their extinction and termed as illegal and
undemocratic.
The disgruntled elements were given free access to media in the name of
freedom of speech. Their statements, particularly those which threatened
political stability and territorial and ideological integrity of Pakistan were given
wide publicity, and this continues to date.
It wont be fair to shift entire blame on the adversaries. The governments
and the oppositions contributed a lot toward subversive game against Pakistan.
The ruling class did it by controlling press and exercising exclusive proprietor
rights over electronic media. The opposition, in fulfillment of their urge for
projection, fell easily into the trap.
Before 9/11 the governments were accused of suppressing democratic
process. Emphasis has been now shifted to creating unrest and lawlessness. The
government, in its eagerness to do more for winning favours of the Crusaders,
has been tempted to cross acceptable limits of using force. In doing so the
religious parties are being pressed to react irresponsibly to crackdown launched
by the government.
By triggering internal unrest the world can be made to believe that
nuclear weapons can fall in the hands of extremists. These insecure weapons
constitute the most dangerous threat to peace. Western Media has been focusing
on this aspect.
Once it happens, the UN will be asked to approve military action for
reconstruction of Pakistan after its destruction. In case of any hesitation on part
of the world body, the Crusaders can proceed unilaterally and seek

legitimization later on. With this scheme at the back of his mind a leading
neoconservatives has recently said that while the US can be friendly with some
of the Muslims, we can never trust them.
The cultural onslaught is two pronged. Before 9/11 it projected
ascendancy of western civilization over others, particularly Islam. In addition
the Islamic culture was subverted with the influx of degenerated literature. Both
prongs generally remained indirect in nature.
Since 9/11 the offensive has turned into frontal assault on Islam. The
followers of Islam are being subjected to military aggression and the teachings
of Islam are misinterpreted and ridiculed using longer reach and strength of
their media.
The main theme propagated is that the oppressed Muslims fighting for
redress of their grievances, solely equipped with Islamic concept of Jihad, are
terrorists threatening world peace. Other themes revolve around human rights
and discrimination of women. Harshness of Islamic laws is blamed for it.
On the other hand the Crusaders commit no wrong in violating norms of
law, logic and morality in their war against evil of terrorism. They simply
follow the golden principle that in clash of civilizations nothing is illegal,
illogical or immoral.
The Crusaders, equipped with high-tech military hardware, have rendered
the barrier of geographic borders meaningless. The doctrine of preventive war
has added a new dimension to the threats. Pakistans dirty bomb can invite
trouble anytime.
The threat of unilateral preemptive strike exists, as technological
advances have made the star wars possible. A strike lasting for few minutes, as
was carried out by Israel against Iraq, cannot be ruled out. Propaganda against
nuclear capability of Pakistan fits in this design.
The option of sustained open aggression, in collaboration with the willing
partners, can also be adopted. To this end the idea of Asian NATO has been
floated in addition to strengthening of Indo-US strategic partnership. Indo-US
military cooperation, including joint exercises, is a harsh reality. India has been
allowed to accumulate military hardware through increased indigenous
production and generous supplies from outside sources.
The frontline state has been denied any significant military assistance.
The Crusaders however dont mind trickling of some spare parts to keep
Pakistan looking towards them for assistance. The supply of spare parts can be
choked at the right moment. It has happened in the past and can happen again.
The unfortunate aspect of this perception is the illusion of Pakistans
partnership with the Crusaders, who in reality endanger its security and

integrity. Incorrect perception amounts to indulging in self-deception, thus

making the threat most dangerous.

DIRECT THREAT
Geographically Pakistan is located in unpleasant company of a country
much is much bigger in size. Its own elongated shape renders it vulnerable
because of extended borders in relation to its size. The lengthy borders, except a
small portion of lofty mountain ranges of Kara Krum, are shared with hostile
neighbours.
The adversary in the east enjoys quantitative as well as qualitative
ascendancy over Pakistan. The company of discourteous fatso, who is in the
habit of spreading his limbs right and left, ought to be uncomfortable.
Historically Muslims have been source of anxiety to fundamentalist
Hindus. The Subcontinent was frequently invaded by the outsiders. Some
invaders came and went back, but most decided to settle permanently in the
conquered land. Those who decided to stay were absorbed in Hindu Society and
lost their identity.
Muslims were an exception. They not only preserved their identity but
also attracted large number of Hindus to embrace the new religion. Islam
survived and spread. Ultimately it resulted in partition of the Subcontinent.
Hindus despised the division.
Creation of Pakistan is the root cause of all the problems with India
including the core issue of Kashmir. Those who vow creation of AKHAND
BHARAT have not and will never reconcile with the existence of Pakistan,
despite the fact that AKHAND BHARAT had never existed throughout the
known history. Yet these Hindus continue striving for obliteration of Pakistan
from the worlds political map for which they have coined a new rhetoric;
Pakistan is the problem.
India has never concealed her ambition to attain status of regional power.
The actions initiated by Nehru immediately after independence have nearly
made India self-sufficient in defence needs. Slowly and surely it is trying to
posses military might compatible with its designs to dominate the region of
Indian Ocean. The strategic partnership with the Crusaders has brightened the
prospects of achieving this goal.
Pakistan is an obstacle in fulfillment of Indias hegemonic designs.
Disintegration of Pakistan did not reduce its obstacle value. Similarly the
victory without war too has not been able to eliminate the obstacle. Therefore,

problem of Pakistan has to be resolved or at least the obstacle has to be made

negotiable as early as possible.
To this end partnership with the Crusaders is of great help. The mind-set
of the Crusaders to deny Muslims the possession of military prowess and their
willingness to provide military hardware to India offer a golden opportunity.
Pakistan holds a prominent position in this context and attracts the attention of
the Crusaders and proxy crusaders.
India is likely to adopt the strategy that worked effectively in 1971.
Insurgent conditions were created in erstwhile East Pakistan prior to the open
aggression. Insurgency lasted for about a year to weaken Pakistan militarily.
Insurgency was combined with hostile propaganda. Pakistan was pushed
into isolation. The success of Indian propaganda could be assessed from the fact
that most of Pakistans friends believed in Indian contention.
When in December 1971 Pakistan declared war, India welcomed as if it
had been waiting for this to happen. Indian commander in charge of invading
East Pakistan arranged a toast in Calcutta. He took only two weeks to cut
Pakistan to size.
India has seen this method working successfully and will be tempted to
apply it again. Insurgency will precede the all-out war. The strategy may
however be refined by bringing changes dictated by the conditions obtainable in
present Pakistan and the emerging geo-strategic realities.
Friendly relations with Afghanistan can be utilized to revive the issue of
Pushtoonistan. The services of comrade Crusaders have been used to force
Pakistan to disown Kashmir cause by accusing it of cross border terrorism.
The possibility of escalation of conventional war into nuclear disaster can be
checked with services of the strategic partners by eliminating Pakistans nuclear
capability.
India has also been cognizant of the past experience in which wars with
Pakistan were always short and intense. Therefore, it has focused on developing
powerful hard-hitting force capable of achieving decisive results in shortest
possible time. Nevertheless it has been building adequate logistic stamina to
sustain a war of longer duration, if required.
The fact that India has not imposed another war on Pakistan since 1971
must not mislead any Pakistani about her evil intentions. It does not mean that it
has given up animosity and become a decent neighbour. Both countries have
been at the brink of war at least three times since last war.
There are other reasons for India to refrain from all-out war. First, India
has not been able to consume East Pakistan the way it would have liked. With

predominant Muslim population Bangladesh retained the characteristics of

Pakistan.
Two, internal situation of India has not been conducive for waging war
against Pakistan. Three, India needed time to prepare so as to make the next
round conclusive. Lastly, Pakistan successfully avoided confrontation and in
that nuclear deterrence proved quite useful.
Where will India launch its offensive in terms of space? The border with
India can be divided into three distinct categories in view of the nature of
terrain. Area north of River Chenab is mountainous, south of Sutlej is all desert
or semi-desert and in between is the plain of Punjab. The terrain provides wide
choice to India for future adventure against Pakistan.
Indicators are that India is inclined toward southern sector for various
reasons. Terrain in the north is unsuitable for large scale military operations.
The experience of two wars revealed that Pakistan always defended the centre
in strength and stalled Indian offensive making use of water obstacles running
close to the border.
The terrain in the south presents better choice for carrying out deep
penetration. This can be further facilitated by seducing political dissidents to
create insurgent conditions before the war. The development of communication
and logistic infrastructure in and around southern Rajhistan along with
development of amphibious force conform to this hypothesis.
The timing of next war will be dictated by internal situation of Pakistan.
The duration of conventional war will be short as was in the past. India could
use all its military might to make it decisive round.
The time in between the wars is utilized by India to undermine Pakistans
strengths, which have been correctly identified. The people of Pakistan
displayed exceptional determination and fortitude during initial days of their
nationhood. The same spirit was demonstrated in 1965 War. The strength of
Pakistan lied in the unity and determination of its people.
India launched psychological campaign to break the national harmony.
Within six years subversion of the unity was accomplished with enviable
success. Since then efforts have focused on undermining the will of the people.
It is the result of this campaign that one often hears pessimistic statements; our
enemy is too big and too strong. Nothing can be more harmful than suffering
from inferiority complex. Why must one forget that an enemy is never too
small?
In addition to the people, Pakistan draws strength from its armed forces.
The soldiers thrive on three things; support of the people, their weapons and

their morale. In September War soldiers of Pakistan had edge over their enemy
on all the three counts. India took cognizance of these realities and targeted
armed forces in its cold war against Pakistan.
In accordance with well-worked out plan, enemy has tried to create
mistrust between people and soldiers or at least in politicians and soldiers.
Simultaneously, diplomatic efforts were launched to choke sources supplying
military hardware to Pakistan. With the advent of renewed Crusades it has
become difficult for Pakistan to retain even that capability which it acquired
indigenously.
Pakistans nuclear weapons were dubbed as Islamic bomb, which became
dirty bomb in the wake of on going Crusades. Only those bombs which have
not been baptized cause destruction and Pakistani bomb is the only one which
has not been baptized.
Economic strength is an important element of national power. Pakistans
economic potential, particularly in agriculture, was not ignored by India and
everything possible has been done to turn Pakistan into desert.
While taking measures to undermine Pakistans strengths and potentials,
India also exploited its weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Ethnic and sectarian
divide drew special attention as it shakes the very foundation of Pakistan; its
ideology.
In short Pakistan has been in state of perpetual confrontation with India.
The war on diplomatic, economic and psychological fronts has been raging
without break. All opportunities were availed and if opportunities did not come
forth; India did not wait for long to create one.
The war on terror provided an opportunity to blame Pakistan for cross
border terrorism and at the same time perpetrate terror inside Pakistan. The acts
of terror, irrespective as to who commits those, give substance to the argument
that Pakistan is the breeding ground for this evil.

INDIRECT THREAT
In its short history Pakistan remained obsessed with the threat from India
ignoring other realities related to its security. It never lost the hope to befriend
Afghan brothers who had opposed its entry to United Nations and orchestrated
the issue of Pushtoonistan.
It went out of the way to befriend Afghan brothers. When Soviets
occupied Afghanistan the estranged brothers looked towards Pakistan. They
were helped with the hope of winning their friendship.

The opportunity in tragedy of Soviet occupation was also availed by

America to defeat the threat of communism. The warm waters theory was hyped
to muster support, particularly from Pakistan, to evict Soviets from Afghanistan.
The Soviets were ultimately pushed out of Afghanistan exposing their
weaknesses to the extent that Soviet Union disintegrated giving birth to half a
dozen of semi-independent Muslim States in Central Asia. America was able to
end the Cold War on winning note, but Pakistan earned enmity of the Russians,
but failed in winning affection of the Afghans.
The subsequent neglect of Afghans by the civilized world dragged
Afghanistan into a civil war. Pakistan in search of stable and friendly neighbour
supported the emerging power of Taliban. This resulted in Pakistans differences
with Iran and non-Pushtoon ethnic groups, particularly Tajiks.
The stability achieved by Taliban did not last long. They invited wrath of
the superpower by hosting the angry Arabs who were blamed for 9/11. Pakistan
was asked to disown Taliban. It succumbed to American coercion and
abandoned them. With that Pakistan lost the good will of Pushtoons; the ethnic
group that gave birth to Taliban.
America invaded and occupied Afghanistan resulting in new kind of
security related problems for Pakistan. Today the puppet regime in Kabul
blames Pakistan for cross border terrorism and Pushtoons resent its operations
against al-Qaeda and Taliban.
In words of Masood Akhtar Shaikh, Pakistan has already antagonized the
Pushtoon population of Afghanistan, because of the role it has been playing as
an American stooge over the last two years. The manner in which we let down
the Taliban to please America, and the way we have been trying to placate the
Karzai government are factors good enough to keep the Afghan Pushtoons
antipathetic towards Pakistan for many long years he added.
Russia, Iran, India and Tajiks are back in Afghanistan to avail
opportunities for giving vent to their anti-Pakistan feelings. Merging of the
interests of the Crusaders and India has rendered Pakistan more vulnerable than
it has ever been before.
Russian grievances are as old as Pakistan itself. Immediately after
independence Pakistan joined defence pacts with America to contain
communism. The Soviets did not like that. Since then Pakistan has done much
more to further annoy them.
In mid fifties Pakistan was rewarded with defence equipment which
resulted in misplaced confidence and it ventured to resolve Kashmir dispute
through military means. Pakistan was punished for misusing the military

equipment given to fight against communism. The West refused to supply any
more military hardware.
Pakistans active participation in aerial spying against Soviet Union
added to the tension in Islamabad-Moscow relations. In seventies Pakistan
played key role in removing the barriers in Sino-US relations. The Soviets did
not admire such peaceful adventures. American influence of any kind in its
vicinity was seen as dangerous development.
By virtue of its ideology and by being too vocal about Islamization of its
socio-economic systems, Pakistan caused concern to the Soviets. Islamic
revolution in Iran added to their concerns. Moscow feared resurrection of
religious feelings among Soviet Muslims.
Invasion of Afghanistan was primarily a pre-emptive to check resurgence
of Islam in Central Asia rather than reaching the warm waters. Armed
intervention displaced millions of Afghans and forced them to take refuge in
Pakistan. The refugees were looked after on humanitarian grounds and Afghans
Jihad against the infidels was supported in the name of Muslim brotherhood.
It is true that Pakistan has been responsible for creating mistrust and
aggravating it. It committed the mistake of getting on to the wrong side of a
superpower located in the vicinity to win favours of a distant superpower.
It is said that poor countries are like prostitutes. The rich entices them
with his wealth. A rogue drags them using force. The poor have to bear in mind
that a hooligan can never tolerate a whore of his locality flirting with gangster
of another town.
The example quoted is somewhat vulgar, but it explains the need to be on
the right side of the rogue who lives in the neighbourhood. Pakistan erred in
that. It should try to mend fences with Russia despite the enormity of the
damage done in the past.
However, it is unfair to blame Pakistan entirely. The ambitions of Soviet
Union also caused strain in Pak-Soviet relations. In its endeavour to protect the
sensitive territory of its Empire in Central Asia, it went too far and tress-passed
Afghan territory.
The Soviet Union entered Afghanistan under the pretext of helping
Afghans against foreign intervention and aggression. The Soviets never
indulged in aggression against other countries. Its armed forces usually marched
into other countries under cover of treaties of friendship. All armed
interventions were termed as cooperation for peace and progress. Just like the
Crusaders do it on the pretext of their cherished values.

Pakistan remained the only obstacle between warm waters and Soviet
Union. It got worried because of the ruthless method of the Soviets to negotiate
obstacles as described by King Abdul Rehman of Afghanistan.
Their habit of movement resembles the habit of the elephant, who
examines a spot thoroughly before he places his foot on it, and when once he
puts his weight, there is no going back, and no taking another step in a hurry
until he has put his full weight on the first foot, and has smashed everything that
lies under it.
Pakistan apprehended that while the first foot of the elephant was
smashing everything that lied under it, the beast must be examining the spot
for his next step to continue the forward movement. The Soviets could adopt
any of the three options.
One, create conditions which could necessitate their help for saving
Pakistan from threats of capitalist and imperialist world. But Soviets failed to do
so because they had not made sufficient in-roads in to Pakistan for adoption of
this option.
Pushtoonistan provided second option. The Soviets could intervene to
save Pushtoons from exploitation by the Punjabis. This also did not
materialize as there was no MAL MASTA in Pushtoon-Soviet relationship as
the former understood the implications of friendship of the latter.
Third choice lied in territorial expanses of Balochistan. This could result
in molesting territorial integrity of both Pakistan and Iran, and creating a new
nation state of Balochistan. The Soviet leaders had earlier held discussions on
matters of mutual interests with Baluchi leaders.
Both Iran and Pakistan were convinced about elephant taking the next
step. It was only matter of time as to when the beast took it. Gleaning through
the history of forward movement of the Soviets since Second World War, it
revealed the following interesting but frightening facts.
In 1956 they invaded Hungary; twelve years later it was Czechoslovakia
and after approximately the same period Soviet troops entered Afghanistan in
December 1979. Therefore, the next step could be taken in early nineties. This
analysis forced Iran and Pakistan to join hands and support Afghans to evict
Soviets from their homeland.
The Soviets not only failed in reaching warm waters or in saving the bulk
of its Empire. Disintegration of Soviet Union is generally attributed to defeat in
Afghanistan. Russia has not forgiven Pakistan for that.

CONCLUSION
To be with the mainstream is no guarantee for the safety of Pakistan
against adventures of the Crusaders. Presently Iraqi quagmire appears to be
having sobering effects on unilateral belligerence of Americans, but they still
remain determined to check proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Pakistan is the only Islamic State possessing these weapons.
The strategy is to tackle strong holds one by one rather than challenging
the entire Ummah as the Crusaders did in earlier days. Disunity of Ummah is of
great help in isolating the intended targets for successful application of this
strategy.
After 1971 War, Indra Gandhi had boasted of throwing two- nation theory
into the Bay of Bengal, but that did not mark the fulfillment of Indian
ambitions. Pakistan is yet to be thrown into Arabian Sea.
It was for this reason that when in eighties the sickle and hammer
frightening clanked closer to Pakistans ears, it did not turn its back towards
India. It rightly remained focused on the real enemy while supporting the
struggle of Afghans. Even today while engrossed in fighting the war on terror
it cannot afford to be distracted.
The Crusaders will exploit Indian obsession of Pakistan and India will
exploit theirs. Russia could also count on India in settling the old scores. That is
why India gets most of its military hardware from Russia, despite its strategic
partnership with the Crusaders. All three of them can coax Afghanistan to revive
old issue of Pushtoonistan.
Pakistan may have joined the war on terror with the hope of reducing
threats to its security, but threats have been multiplied rather than diminishing.
This demands rethinking about defending territorial frontiers of Pakistan.

20th December 2003

POLITICAL INSTABILITY
Political stability is an important indicator of a nations strength and
political culture casts great influence on political stability of a country. A nation
freed after prolonged colonization encounters numerous problems in ensuring
stability due to scarcity of men versed with the art of politics.
At the time of independence Pakistan inherited some civil servants who
could deliver the goods by following the directives issued by the superiors. But
after the departure of Whiteman there were very few political leaders who could
conceive such directives and ensure their implementation in letter and spirit.
Pakistan was blessed with limited number of able politicians, but lost
them too soon. Those who succeeded them were no more than political
workers or apprentices at best. They were not competent enough to handle the
affairs of a new born state.
Pakistan suffered because of their incompetence. The politicians failed in
developing political institutions for their own grooming, which could be
instrumental in ensuring survival of politicians, the system and the nation.
Resultantly all three of them suffered.

Pakistan has been unable to circumvent this problem till today. Over the
period the political instability has turned into chronic ailment. Main causes of
the ailment have been undemocratic character of politics; the unending game of
hide and seek played between politicians and soldiers; and indifferent attitude of
the people.

POLITICAL CHARACTER
From day one the political order in Pakistan has been oligarchy of feudal
lords. Politics in Pakistan always had the touch of their class. Feudalism thrives
on placing personal interests above national interests. Projection and well-being
of individuals are held dearer to those of the institutions and the country, which
result in many undesirable practices.
Dictionary meanings of the word politics are: the art or science of
government, the management of political party, etcetera. It also means
manoeuvring and intriguing. It is the last meanings of the word politics
which have fascinated Pakistani politicians the most. The reason is obvious. The
life of a feudal lord is full of intrigues in his public as well as private capacity.
He is a born intriguer.
Almost all political activities in the country are intrigue oriented. During
initial years, barring Liaqat Ali Khan, none of the remaining six prime
ministers (till 58) were elected as a result of any election or even as a result of
the vote of confidence in the legislature. They were the products of palace
intrigues. The things did not change much thereafter.
They had learnt the art of divide and rule from their ex-masters. They
always encouraged splits and disintegrations of the parties whenever any of
them constituted a threat to their hold and dominance. Resultantly today one
finds an array of political parties to the likings of feudal lords. It provides them
opportunities to intrigue, bargain and exploit.
A baron is an authoritarian by nature. He hates opposition and even the
difference of opinion when it comes to imposition of his authority. Victimization
of the opposition, regime after regime, is the result of this character trait of the
politicians.
Bhutto had protested against this practice saying that in applying one law
for its favourites and another for those against whom it harbours hatred, regime
has shaken the confidence and morale of the people. How truly it is applicable
to all the regimes in Pakistan and more so to regime of the complainant?
Intolerance for the opposition has impeded the evolution of political
system. In a democratic system the opposition leaders should be on the pay

roll rather than being on the hit list of the ruling party. In Pakistan the
opposition has never been accorded due importance.
More often than not, an opposition leader is dubbed as traitor for merely
criticizing a particular policy of the regime. He is accused of working against
the unity and solidarity of the nation. When the same politician manoeuvres his
way to government benches, he becomes a patriot overnight.
If he remains steadfast, the accusations continue and one fine morning he
actually finds himself working against the interests of the state. Call a man an
idiot, day in and day out, he will become one or at least start behaving like an
idiot.
The contempt for opposition is also linked to the days of Pakistan
Movement. During that period it was essential to over-run all sorts of opposition
for achievement of the goal. This attitude persisted after creation of Pakistan;
whereas it should have been changed. Opposition to creation of Pakistan could
not be equated with opposition to policies of a particular government.
Apart from the use of stick against opposition the politicians have also
learnt the use of carrot in politics. This brought the use of money in politics.
Political bribes have become a norm, even the members of ruling parties are
bribed by allocation of funds for the development works in their respective
constituencies. Politics have become a profitable business. Consequently the
aristocracy, which should have been developed into democracy in Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, has degenerated into Lotacracy.
In Pakistan politics have become exclusive domain of the rich. It is no
more a system ensuring a government of the people, but of the privileged people
only. The business of politics has been monopolized by the feudal lords. They
have managed the business part of the politics well in which the investments
bear handsome returns.
Of late the industrialists and business tycoons have encroached upon
monopoly of the feudal lords. With the accumulation of money in their hands
the balance was bound to tilt in their favour. The change does not promise any
respite for the general public. In future the politics will have their touch; the
profits are likely to increase manifold.
A feudal lord is non-democratic by nature. Therefore, most of political
parties do not practice democracy within, though they cry hoarse for
establishment of democratic system in the country.
Another problem is lack of national outlook in character of political
parties and their leaders. There is hardly any party which has its roots in all
parts of the country and in all segments of the society. No party has ever been

able to carry the entire nation along except the one which created Pakistan. The
politicians were smart enough to cause its disintegration.
Two major parties which won the bulk of seats in free and fair elections
of 1971 had failed to impress voters at national level. The both virtually
emerged as regional parties. The party that won overwhelming majority in the
east could not secure a single seat in the west and vice versa. The result proved
detrimental to national unity. Pakistan disintegrated. Self-centred and shortsighted politicians did that for their lust to be in the power.
In Pakistan every politician wants to be a leader; nobody wants to be led.
They think that this is the only way to serve the nation. A politician, who fails
to draw public attention from national platform, moves on to provincial stage.
In his endeavour to become a leader of some sort it dawns upon him that
his people are politically oppressed and economically exploited by big
brother. He starts shouting louder in counting the miseries of his people to
describe their pathetic state. He claims having solution to their problems.
He then lays the trap of provincial autonomy. Eyes and ears of the people
are bound to turn towards him. He feels elevated not realizing that the process
of his degeneration has started. His plunge from politician of national stature to
political leader of parochial level begins.
The point of no return is reached once constant harping about provincial
autonomy leads him to the path of confrontation. He falls prey to his own trap.
The process of his degeneration is completed; irrespective of the end result he
causes lot of damage to the country.
The rich and strong nations have been and continue interfering in internal
affairs of weaker nations. Pakistan is no exception to this principle of the
civilized world. The problem is further aggravated when outside interference
is not only tolerated but at times sought earnestly. Even the ruling parties are
guilty of seeking interference concealed in the packets of aid, assistance and
guidance.
Establishment of sanctuaries for politicians in the civilized world is
corollary of the aforementioned problem. As soon as a politician of this
category encounters a political setback or foresees it, he develops anatomical
ailments which cannot be cured by indigenous expertise.
He leaves for treatment abroad. The party in power too feels relieved in
getting rid of him and his ailments, at least temporarily. On reaching the
sanctuary he forgets about his sickness and problems of his people start
worrying him again.
Due to the access to foreign information media he starts suffering from
false impression about his political stature. He considers himself a politician of

international level. It never occurs to him that no Tory or Republican, when not
in power, has ever come to Lahore or Quetta to serve the cause of his people.
He may argue that politicians on the civilized world enjoy freedom of
speech in their respective countries, but he wont be able to explain as to why
Nikita Khrushchev did not leave his country when he was ousted from power.
One must agree that it is not fair to abandon ones country, even momentarily,
for any reason.
A baron does not like the spread of awareness in his subjects. This
attitude of the ruling elite comprising feudal lords compels them to exercise
strict control over media. They find it easier to mislead and exploit the ignorant
people due to lack of their capacity to distinguish political rhetoric from
reality.
It can be summed up by saying that Pakistanis have made no progress
from the democracy practiced by the Greeks. In those days rival factions
competed in whole-sale purchase of candidates and votes; in 53 BC one group
of voters received ten million sesterces for its support. When money failed
murder was available, citizens who had voted the wrong way were in some
instances beaten close to death and their houses were set on fire.
Politics of the nature described above can never grant, to those who
emerge in power, the authority and legitimacy so essential for political stability
and provision of good governance. For about half of its existence, Pakistan had
constitutionally illegal governments in the form of Martial Law regimes. In rest
of the period the legitimacy of politicians remained controversial due to rigging
in elections, floor crossing and use of other corrupt practices.
The social values which are in uniformity or at least in harmony provide
the basis to political culture. The political culture in turn regulates the political
behaviour of the community. Pakistans political culture has not provided
standards for apprising and evaluating political conduct. The result has been a
tendency to dissipate time and energy, preserving and expanding political power
rather than using it to achieve ends.
It is not possible, even in democracy, to ensure participation of every
citizen in forming the government. The political process must however facilitate
participation of maximum of those segments of the society which rightly feel
entitled to participation. The exclusion of such segments leads to frustration.
Political system in Pakistan, despite bearing the label of democracy, has been
restrictive, rather than being permissive to maximum participation.
The narrow outlook of traditional political base promotes parochialism
legitimized under the pretext of provincial autonomy. The politicians from

smaller provinces deliberately resort to this strategy to keep the biggest

province under pressure and thus draw maximum share in power.

POLITICAL PROCESS
Unfortunately political process has been disrupted frequently providing
an excuse to the politicians to justify their failings in evolving suitable political
system for Pakistan. The causes of disruption can be identified by gleaning
through the history.
In British India the Muslims were not trusted by the rulers and they were
reluctant to share the responsibility of managing the affairs of their domain with
Muslims. The mistrust was outcome of the age-old prejudices harboured by
them against followers of Islam and because they had snatched India from the
Muslims. The suspicion was further compounded during War of Independence
in 1957, in which Muslims played the key role.
Therefore, they were deliberately kept away from the government posts.
Muslims indifference to politics was partly self-imposed as well. Consequently
most of the Muslim population virtually remained politically inactive. Inactivity
breeds incompetence.
During World Wars the British were forced to expand their armed forces.
In doing so they could not ignore the fighting abilities of the people of Northern
India, majority of whom was Muslims. They were inducted in British Armed
Forces in large numbers. Participation of Muslims in armed forces helped them
in acquiring knowledge and experience in this field of the statecraft.
The effects of activity in one field and inactivity in the other remained
unnoticed during the British rule, but with the creation of Pakistan, these began
surfacing. After the death of Quad-e-Azam politicians failed in managing the
affairs of a new born state. On the other hand the Armed Forces, despite the
meager resources, managed their affairs quite well.
The competence of soldiers was acknowledged by the general public.
They looked towards them for managing the matters of governance as well.
Even the politicians, when finding themselves helplessly entangled in intricate
problems of a young state, looked towards them for rescue. They invited the
soldiers to take on the additional responsibility of running the civil affairs.
When first Martial Law was imposed the people expected that the
soldiers would produce better results. To start with they delivered the goods
satisfactorily. In the long run they were bound to fail and they did. The expertise
of a blacksmith could be of no use in doing the job of a goldsmith.

Politics was not the field in which professional competence of soldiers

could come handy. It only helped them in tackling the day to day administrative
problems. The art of statecraft encompasses much more than mere
administration.
The task of governing a state confronting numerous problems weighed
heavy on the broad shoulders of the soldiers. Their physical strength was not
enough to carry the burden; but to prove their mettle they decided to stick on.
The soldiers tried to become politicians. At this point the politicians
realized that the rescue squad might oust them forever. They could not afford to
sit idle any more. That marked the beginning of tussle between soldiers and the
politicians.
The soldiers could not be pushed back to their barracks easily. The
politicians found themselves helpless against the might of their adversary.
Perforce they adopted the strategy the weaker would opt for in such a situation;
exploit failings of the soldiers.
Disintegration of the country provided them a golden opportunity. The
disgrace of defeat was thrown on to soldiers. Ultimately the soldiers found
themselves in situation similar to the one from which they had tried to rescue
the politicians.
It is said that battles are won by the generals (soldiers) and wars by the
politicians. It can also be added that outcome of wars is decided well before
these are begun. In fact Pakistan had been defeated before soldiers fired the first
bullet.
Nevertheless politicians found the scapegoat. Fingers were pointed
towards the big man in uniform. The fact that the foundation of Pakistan was
shaken by the politicians was conveniently ignored. The people were also
disappointed by the performance of soldiers turned politicians. They were
compelled to hand over the power back to politicians voluntarily.
After regaining the power the politicians should have stopped maligning
the soldiers, but they did not. Ridicule of soldiers was aimed at checking the
imposition of another Martial Law. The intentions were noble but the approach
adopted was unjust. It did not promise happy ending.
The shortsighted approach led them back to square one. They found the
genie of Armed Forces staring at them with contempt; the sight they had feared
the most. Once again the incompetent failed and history repeated itself
mercilessly. Another Martial Law was imposed by a soldier who was considered
quite innocuous by the most intelligent politician in Pakistans history.

The game of hide and seek between politicians and soldiers continued.
This childish game has done irreparable damage to the country as well as to the
interests of both the parties endeavouring to rule it. The end is not in sight.
Political process was severed time and again. In fact it never gained the
desirable momentum hampering the evolution and development of political
institutions. Politicians were denied the opportunity to acquire requisite
experience and maturity. Today they are being tutored on democracy by the men
in uniform.
Sufferings of soldiers, though less visible, are even worse. They have
been frequently distracted from their primary job. The argument that only a few
soldiers were actually employed in non-professional assignments is too flimsy
to be accepted.
Even if one soldier has been wasted or spoiled, because of his
transformation into politician or civil administrator or due to his addiction to
power or monetary gains, legal or illegal, it is a great loss. Above all intentional
or inadvertent criticism has tarnished the image of Armed Forces. Yet there are
many who say that not much has been lost.
Politicians and soldiers are two important pillars of countrys strength and
stability. They are also the reflection of national image. In their tussle for power
they ignored these facts and resultantly both have lost their credibility.
Nobody, except the enemy, can feel happy in such a situation. Soldiers
and politicians must vow strengthening each other. If one of the two is weak the
other cannot boast of strength. The strong and stable political and military
institutions are must for security of the country. They must bring positive
change in their attitude; otherwise the disappointed people would be justified in
looking down upon both of them.

ATTITUDE OF THE PEOPLE

Indifferent attitude of the people towards national affairs, particularly
towards politics, has been yet another drag on evolution and maturing of the
political system. The causes of lack of interest are many.
Democracy means casting of votes in favour of deserving candidates,
provided the environments are conducive for free and fair polls. The social
environments deny the majority of people to exercise their right freely.
The voters go to the polling stations under socio-economic pressures
rather than in pursuance of their political obligations and commitments. They
are herd to the polling booths, the privileged people act as shepherds.

Illiteracy is usually blamed for this undemocratic phenomenon. But the

literates too fail in making positive contribution. The educated people are often
heard discussing politics and candidly differentiating the right from the wrong.
They seem to be having solution to all the political problems of Pakistan.
Ironically, they abstain from calling spade a spade when time comes. They
seldom cast their votes to help bringing the right kind of politicians to the
forefront.
Somehow the profession of politics is not held in high esteem by the
majority of the people. It is because of the below standard morality practiced by
the politicians, contrary to the expectations of the people who hold the Quaid
their ideal.
Politics in Pakistan are like the game of musical chairs always won by the
familiar faces. The handful of clever men knows the art of grabbing chairs for
themselves every time; to ensure that persons of one family become members of
different political parties. No matter which party wins, one of them surely
makes it to the corridors of power.
People are disillusioned by this monopoly. More than a century after
independence a common citizen is still deprived of active participation in
matters of governance. The masses and the ruling elite have remained strangers
to each other.
No political party has ever made any effort to bridge this gap. In fact they
contribute towards accentuating the divide. Politicians deliberately involve and
misuse youth, students, womenfolk, labour and farmers in politics of the street
of agitation and even violence.
This alienation can be noticed when a particular class of people comes
out to the streets. The protesters treat the government owned assets as enemys
property. The tension and hostile conditions created by the opposing political
parties during electioneering also prompt the peace loving citizens to stay away
from humbug of elections.
The indifference of the majority towards politics makes it difficult to
achieve stability and provide good governance. Therefore, illiterates as well as
literates need to be motivated about their political obligations. An inactive
majority can never out-fight an active minority.

CONCLUSION
The situation has been quite depressing. Political stability is need of the
hour for which people, politicians and soldiers of Pakistan must:

Ensure continuity of political process. Politicians must avoid creating

chaos and soldiers should stop interfering in politics.

Curtail monopoly over politics. No individual should be allowed more

than three tenures as member of House of Representatives.

Make it mandatory for political parties to hold elections down to tehsil

level.

Bar independent candidates from contesting elections to check

subsequent bargaining.

Check floor-crossing by imposing severe penalty of forfeiture of the seat.

Enforce universal accountability. Selective accountability proves counterproductive.

Promote political dialogue and shun political coercion and victimization.

Acknowledge importance of opposition and accord the status it deserves

in democratic system.

Allow the public opinion to mature free of bias and prejudices.

Desist from intimidating the Press. Encourage private channels in

electronic media.

Allow the system of District Government to flourish to achieve the

intended goal.

Religious parties, which had been laughed at for their nuisance value,
have emerged as new political force in last elections. These parties have great
responsibility in ensuring political stability. They must remember that the
Crusaders are on the lookout to harm them and their country.

22nd December 2003

ECONOMIC FRAGILITY
Governments in succession made no positive contribution towards
economic development of Pakistan. They generally failed at implementation
stage, despite formulating sound plans. The knowledge transformed into
meticulous paper work proved to be of no use in the absence of efficient
execution.
Nevertheless there were periods in which Pakistans economy made
steady progress mainly because of the individual efforts of the people. But in
the absence of direction from the governments, their efforts resulted in
mushroom growth in some cases and none at all in others.
In seventies some achievements of the individuals were bulldozed by
politically motivated nationalization. Subsequently enterprises in public sector
suffered from incurable sickness and the government was forced to get rid of
those through privatization.
For decades the government efforts toward economic well-being of the
common man were restricted to taking decisions on frivolous issue like weekly
closed holiday. Common man could not expect any wonders from leaders
having such priorities about economic development of the country.
Without indulging in discussion of intricate economic terminology it is
difficult to draw impressive conclusions and recommendations. However, an
endeavour will be to identify the impediments in economic development of
Pakistan. Identification should lead to recommendations for exploitation of the
potentials.
However, it would be fair to caution about expecting miracles to happen
in the field of economy. Therefore, emphasis should be on just distribution of
economic wealth Pakistan has or will have in future.

IMPEDIMENTS

Enumeration of impediments must begin with mention of rampant

corruption. Pakistan had the distinction of topping the list of corrupt nations.
This evil has far reaching effects on retardation of economic growth.
Corruption in government agencies continues unchecked, despite the
establishment of institutions like NAB in addition to host of other agencies.
Illegal gratifications have become a way of life in government departments.
Bureaucracy is involved, directly or indirectly, in most cases of corruption. Thus
it is termed white collar crime to save the privileged corrupts from any
embarrassment.
The lust for accumulation of easy money is like viral disease; it spreads
fast. Politicians showed the least resistance to common virus of corruption and
some soldiers also succumbed when they were exposed during periods of
Martial Law.
Other segments of society were affected by the local varieties of the
virus. In Karachi MQM resorted to collection of BATHHA, JWP leaders
frequently used force to press government for gas royalty and WADERAS of
Sindh patronized dacoits.
Political instability resulted in inconsistent economic policy, which
caused irreparable damage to economic development. Economic policies were
changed frequently impeding the pace of development.
Weak governments devoted their energies to preserve their rule rather
than using those for the economic well-being of the masses. The rulers
concentrated more on getting monetary assistance from outside rather than
mustering the internal resources. The dependence on loans and grants from
developed state had negative effects on economic growth.
Pakistan has become like a drug addict. All its efforts have been aimed at
finding some drug to doze of for yet another day. Each dose made the patient
weaker and more dependent. Resultantly the patient was put on resuscitator of
International Monetary Fund and World Bank.
The knobs of the resuscitator are controlled by the established adversaries
of entire Muslim World. Their enmity has further intensified since 9/11. The
enemy controlling the knobs retains the option to switch them off whenever he
so desires.
Development of human resources has been the most neglected aspect of
the economy and in that the need to educate people stands out. The existing
education system is not orientated towards acquisition of the skills required for
modern day development.
Pakistan did not keep pace with technological advancement in all sectors
of economy. It is true that the developed countries are reluctant to transfer latest

technology, but Pakistan too has been guilty of not pressing for transfers where
it could.
Security environments have hampered the investment in Pakistan. The
problem of law and order took serious turn when Pakistan was targeted by
sponsored terrorism to punish it for supporting Afghan Jihad. Since then there
has been no respite.
At the time of independence Pakistan was lucky to inherit the largest
irrigation system in the world. India tried to dry it up by stopping flow of water.
Ayub Khan was able to salvage some of it by signing Indus Water Treaty with
India.
After that no further action was initiated to develop the system further to
ever increasing requirement of irrigation water. The measures to control wastage
of water during the process of utilization were not adopted.
The need to increase the storage capacity of rain water was politicized.
Unnecessary debate on suitability of sites for construction of dams was initiated
by the vested interests. They kept the issue of securing royalty dearer than the
basic requirement of overcoming the problem of water shortage.
As result of the latest initiative of the government NWFP has now
preferred Basha to Kalabagh. Frontier Province also wanted compensation for
unutilized water of its share. In simple words it would mean selling its share of
water to the needy; whereas the needy have been asked to be generous to give
water to the more needy free of cost.
Price control over agriculture produce to provide relief to consumers has
hit the farmers the hard way. Provision of meager subsidies has been no
compensation for the tenants and land owners with small holdings. The farmers
never got the due reward for their tireless toiling.
Fragmentation of land has reduced the land holdings to a degree where
farming has become uneconomical. Small holdings prohibit profitable use of
agriculture machinery. Collective farming could be a solution to the problem but
that becomes impractical keeping in view innumerable disputes in rural society.
Major cash crops are not adequately saved from various diseases. The
disease control suffers due to use of substandard, expired or fake pesticides.
Every year the government comes out with excuses to exonerate itself from the
responsibility by shifting blame on to others.
Annual budget for scientific research and development has always been
too meager to carry out sustained research. Only recently the government has
increased allocations. The breakthroughs in research are not popularized
promptly to improve quality and the yield of various crops. Resultantly per
hectare yield has always been low as compared to other countries.

Industry survives on sources of energy. Oil, gas and electricity are the
main sources of energy consumed in industrial sector. For oil Pakistan is
dependent on foreign sources. Electricity has become uneconomical due to its
shortage and high rates. Gas is the cheapest source, but efforts to convert to this
source are lacking in many ways.
Production of hydro-electricity as by-product of the irrigation system has
been neglected; perhaps sabotaged. Resolution of differences in opinion has
become complicated due to delay in addressing these for political convenience.
Final blow was delivered by daughter of the East by striking a deal with the
IPPs.
Electricity rates fixed for industry do not help in controlling the
production cost. The enormity of cost of electricity can be judged from the fact
that many government departments are defaulters in payment of their bills. With
such a costly input Pakistani producers will never be able to compete with other
counties where electricity is much cheaper and even free in some cases.
Industry has also been unable to compete in terms of quality. Quality
control is due to sheer neglect of the producers unlike the price in which cost of
production is affected by energy bills. Another contributory factor has been the
non-use of the latest technology in most cases.
Industry has also suffered because of inconsistent policies of the
government. Vicious circle of nationalization and privatization has discouraged
foreign as well as domestic investments. Other factors that impeded industrial
growth pertain to lack of infrastructure, security environments and smuggling,
particularly through Afghanistan.
Mention of external factors has been deliberately avoided as it wont be
fair to blame others when own house has not been set right. However, in case of
trade such avoidance is inescapable.
The environments will remain unfavourable for the developing countries.
The situation is likely to aggravate further with the advent of free-trade. The
effects of free trade are feared even by the smaller nations of the civilized
world. These will be more pronounced for the savages of the Muslim World.
The developed countries will not stop finding excuses to promote their
economic interests by protecting their producers with subsidies. The developing
nations will find it difficult to provide similar protection to their producers in
the sectors of agriculture and industry.
In the age of inter-dependence diplomacy has gained unprecedented
importance in pursuance of economic interests. In the context of exports
Pakistani missions abroad have not contributed towards promotion of
favourable trade relations.

Pakistan produces large variety of fruits and vegetables of unmatched

quality. Most of it can be spared for exports after meeting the domestic needs.
The export potential has not been exploited for want of innovations in their
preservation and fast means of transportation.
The development of mineral resources has been suffered from criminal
neglect mainly for want of technology and foreign investment. Pakistan kept
waiting for outside help rather than utilizing indigenous expertise for
exploitation of the potentials of this sector.

POTENTIALS AND PROSPECTS

Pakistans failings in development of economy outnumber its
achievements. The causes of failings listed above should be addressed with
urgency to exploit the potentials. To this end:

Eradicate corruption with the same resolve with which Pakistan has been
fighting against the evil of terrorism.

Politicians should demonstrate prudence for the sake of political stability

of the country.

Provide constitutional guarantees to economic policy to ensure

consistency.

Curtail dependence on foreign monetary assistance, particularly that with

strings.

Evolve comprehensive policy for development of human resources and

implement it vigorously.

Endeavour to keep pace with technological advancements.

Improvement of security environments cannot be ignored any more.

Commence construction of large water reservoirs immediately to

overcome the problem of water shortage.

Farmers must get due price of agriculture produce without fearing any
repercussions in this regard.

Tackle the problem of fragmentation of land through collective farming

where possible.

Annual budget for research should be increased and utilized judiciously.

Prefer economical modes of electricity generation to reduce rates for

industry.

The producers must enforce strict measures for quality control.

The government should develop infrastructure, improve security and

control smuggling.

Prepare producers and traders for facing challenges of free trade, but the
government must protect those who need it.

Diplomatic missions must play their role in promotion of exports.

The government should help exporters in safe and speedy transportation

of perishables.

Mineral industry should be expanded through public and private

patronage.

Some points relating to technology, dependence and role of bureaucracy

have been explained by Aftab Ahmed Khan as under:

The developing countries have to make every possible effort to fill the
scientific and technological gap between them and the developed world
as soon as possible. Till achievement of this goal, the right mix of high,
medium and low technology will have to be found.

The pattern of development must take into account the means available
within the developing societies themselves and should not depend
excessively on external aid and loans. Mindless copying of developed
industrialized countries in the present context is neither possible nor
desirable.

Efforts at population control must continue. Attention should not be

focused only on the quantitative aspects of population; the qualitative
dimension should also be handled imaginatively and sensitively.

Population is the potential wealth of poor countries. Human resources

have to be mobilized and trained competence in different functional areas
has to be developed. This can be done through certain basic investments
in human capital formation, including allowing the masses greater access
to decision-making, especially in respect of planning, plan
implementation, education and communication.

The bureaucratic framework needs to be streamlined and tuned to the new

development objectives. What is needed is clean, efficient and
trustworthy administration. The civil servants should have developed
planning capability, an efficient delivery system, a critical faculty of self
evaluation and a forward looking orientation.

Bureaucracy in the final analysis, however, is only a satellite system; in

many ways it reflects the quality of leadership under which it is working.

The Indus Valley has been known for abundance of agriculture produces,
but this sector has reached the point of saturation. One cannot hope to achieve
wonders in this sector, without major breakthrough in the field of science and
technology, for which hectic research effort is mandatory.
Nevertheless this sector remains the mainstay of Pakistans economy.
Therefore, pace of development in this sector has to be maintained to the extent
that the needs of ever growing population are met with least dependence on
others.

THE PURPOSE
Basic aim of economic development is to improve the quality of life of
masses. The approach to achieve this should be progressive as brought out by
Aftab Ahmed Khan. With relative self-reliance as the ideal of development, the
developing countries should first attend to the basic needs of the people and
then move onto improving their quality of life.
He identified poverty as the pivot on which most cotemporary problems
rest. Many problems such as those of population, food insecurity, illiteracy and
public health will solve themselves if poverty is eradicated.
The daily News in its editorial dated December 24 has referred to this
with concern. The increase in unemployment and poverty, especially in the
decade of nineties, has been and continues to be source of concern.
The culprits were identified by the Quaid more than a century ago. I
should like to give a warning to the landlords and capitalists who have
flourished at your (people) expense by a system which is so vicious, which is so
wicked and which makes them so selfish that it is difficult to reason with them.
The exploitation has gone into their blood.
Alleviation of poverty is important which should begin with elimination
of exploitation by correcting the socio-economic system of the country. More
than half of the problem can be overcome by Islamization of agriculture based
economy. It is easier said than done, as present land owners will not be prepared
to embrace Islam overnight. Pakistan would need another Omar the Great to
implement this concept.
Poverty cannot be alleviated without initiation of measures to ensure
equitable distribution of wealth. In the absence of such measures, getting loans
from donors and distributing those to few will serve no useful purpose.
Aftab Ahmed Khan advocates a tilt towards equity and social justice,
even if this slows the rate of growth slightly. The pursuit of justice goals will,
however, be a failure if it is not sustained by economic growth.

In his view economic development at larger scale will increase activity

and automatically take care of the problem by creating more job opportunities.
The editor of daily News recommends acceleration of private investment a
proven route to job creation and urges the government to substantially increase
budget allocation for education sector.
The economic disparities amongst provinces must also be solved
rationally. However, the division of resources to meet financial requirements of
the federating units should not over-ride national priorities of development. The
priority of development projects must be determined by the number of people to
benefit from each project.
Priorities should not be fixed for political reasons. It wont be irrelevant
to quote a personal observation in this context. In 1980, while reconnoitering
area north of Qila Saifullah in Baluchistan, we traveled on dust track from
Morgha Faqirzai to Sharan Jogizai we came across a black-top road. It
disappeared as suddenly as unexpectedly it had appeared.
This road in desolate area, where we saw only one tent of a shepherd
family in distant foothill, had brought no qualitative change in anybodys life.
This was a sheer waste of resources and effort, which could be judged from the
fact that retrieval of machinery used for construction was considered
uneconomical and was left there to rust.
While concluding the discussion it would be appropriate to describe
effects of socio-economic environments on psycho-social makeup of Pakistanis.
In the absence of right direction and efforts to regulate economic development
many individuals have prospered, but the masses remained poor. This has led to
widespread discontentment. Such feelings are common in all developing
countries following capitalist system.
Technological advancements shower numerous comforts, but add to the
problems as well. The life becomes easier, but busier too. In terms of time
distances are reduced, yet one spends more time in traveling. Most of the
desires are fulfilled, yet one becomes more ambitious than contended. One has
more recreational facilities, yet remains perpetually tense.
At global level the world is transforming into one unit, yet different
societies are disintegrating. People living in distant continents feel closer but
persons living within four walls of a house are drifting away from each other.
The disintegration of basic unit of the society; the family, is not because of the
generation gap, but because economic pressure.
The family is an all purpose institution ever invented by the man. It helps
meeting the basic needs of a person, particularly the psychological solace. It

provides him an asylum against outside threats; an intensive care-centre for

emotionally hurt; and a base to sally out to secure his place in the society.
It guarantees the growth, education and guidance of his body, mind and
spirit in accordance with the practiced traditions. Above all it gives the sense of
belonging and acknowledges the importance of his being.
The disintegration of family caused by economic compulsions is more
pronounced in middle and lower-middle classes of the society, where the
earning hands consider other members of family as liabilities. Misguided by the
desire to preserve the maximum benefits for themselves, they try to get rid of
the liabilities; in doing that they break the institution of family.
Every member of the disintegrated family loses love and affection needed
direly by him in hectically busy life. The loss of mutual strength provided by the
members of a family renders everyone weak against the tyranny of increasingly
competitive life. The subsistence, sustenance and protection, guaranteed by the
joint family system, are lost. The sense of belonging diminishes leaving
everyone lonely in so crowded a world.
For a person love, constant love, is as essential as food and shelter. In
todays busy life majority does not get it adequately. An under-loved person
starts considering himself as unwanted. An unwanted person is unlikely to
become a useful member of the society. His attitude towards others is bound to
be indifferent and at times hostile. This is the problem faced by those people
who fail to regulate their development wisely.

CONCLUSION
The impediments in economic development are mostly indigenous and so
should be their solutions. The government has to harness the potentials by
concentrating on development of human resources; the most precious asset of
Pakistan.
Despite best of efforts it would be wrong to expect spectacles. Pakistan is
not likely to achieve economic affluence in foreseeable future. Therefore, while
exploiting the resources the focus should be on conservation through judicious
use.
The development should not cause further imbalance in distribution of the
wealth. The privileged classes should learn to share their fortunes with poor
people. At the same time the development should not disturb the environmental
balance.
The globalization of economy promotes inter-dependence rather than
self-reliance. Aftab Ahmed Khan advises that the primary need is to end the

pattern of dependency that persists to the disadvantage Inter-dependence or

economic cooperation largely depends upon skillful pursuance of foreign policy,
but the aim should be to seek cooperation; not the alms.
The developing countries, particularly those of Muslim World, by
remaining divided render themselves vulnerable to exploitation by the
developed world. With one slip they can shut the doors of cooperation upon
themselves and invite the curse of economic sanctions. Pakistan must remain
mindful of this threat.

24th December 2003

CHARACTER FAILINGS
Aspirations of the people greatly help in spelling out the national goals.
The prospects of achieving the goals set-forth largely depend on actions of the
people, individual as well as collective. The input from the people in turn
depends upon national character.
People of Pakistan are proud and patriot. They simply seek security and
prosperity of their country as any proud people would do. They harbour no
malice against any other people except those who threaten territorial and

ideological integrity of their homeland. They are undoubtedly willing to put in

their best for the country.
Survival of a nation, apart from the military, economic and political
strength, largely depends upon on national character. Character of a nation is
moulded by geography, history, traditions and above all by their Faith.
Pakistanis are the blessed people to be the followers a religion, which has
been declared as perfect by the Divine Authority. But geography, history and
traditions have polluting effects in the mould of their character and because of
that they have developed many inadequacies in their character.
The Father of the nation provided them with a formula to decontaminate
their polluted character. The people in general and the vested interests in
particular did not care using the cleanser labeled as Unity, Faith and
Discipline. Resultantly the demonstrated character remains contaminated with
failings. These failings will be discussed in the light of the motto given by father
of the nation with addition of two more: Justice and Pride.

UNITY
Ethnic diversity of people is major hurdle in national unity. The word
Pakistan was composed by taking letters from the provinces to form part of the
ideological state. He must have hoped that the people of each province would be
meshed, like the letters of Pakistan, to make a cohesive nation.
The leaders who made Pakistan did not get enough time to create a
Pakistani out of a Punjabi, a Bengali, a Sindhi, a Baluchi or a Pathan. Their
successors did not care about this requirement so essential to prove the very
feasibility of the ideology of Pakistan.
The founder of Pakistan had warned that unless the people stopped
thinking as Punjabis, Bengalis and Sindhis first and Pakistani later, Pakistan was
bound to disintegrate. His prediction came true. Pakistan disintegrated in less
than three decades after its creation. It is up to the Pakistanis to stop it from
happening again.
Contrarily, its neighbour successfully achieved unity in diversity. India
achieved unity having diversity of much bigger magnitude as compared to
Pakistan, despite the fact that it lacked the binding factor of religion. Without
denying the credit to leaders of India, it may be said that extremity of diversity
proved blessing in disguise in maintaining the unity of India.

It may be observed that separatist movements of Nagas, Mezoes and

Sikhs did not succeed despite being genuine and originating fairly away from
the centre. Pakistan had only one such movement and the country disintegrated.
Usually an unresolved dispute between two groups results in stalemate.
The prolonged stalemate leads to phenomenon of polarization. The
confrontation begins only after completion of polarization. In India the political
disputes caused by ethnic diversity require considerable time to culminate into
armed confrontation.
The lengthy process provides ample time to the central authority to take
measures to nip the evil of separatist movements. In case of complacence of the
central authority the confrontation can kick off, but there would be many others
to show the dissident ethnic groups the path of wisdom. That is what happens in
India.
In Pakistan the phenomenon of political dissent has different
connotations. The failure in resolution of disputes abruptly precipitates into
confrontation as the phenomenon takes much less time for completion. The
central authority gets very little time to initiate preventive measures. In Pakistan
the polarization stands completed; Punjabis vs non-Punjabis.
It is important to defuse the prevalent state of polarization. One way is to
add to the diversity. Punjabis, Pathans, Sindhis and Baluchis are not the only
ethnic groups inhabiting Pakistan. There are others like Saraekis, Pothwaris,
Kashmiris, Tharis, Mekranis, Chitralis, Gilgitis and so on.
Most of these, if not all, can be accorded due recognition by dividing
Pakistan into dozen or more smaller provinces. The province of NWFP
including districts of Dera Ghazi Khan can be split into three provinces. Punjab
and Sindh can also be divided into three provinces each with Karachi as
separate entity. Two provinces can be carved out of Baluchistan; whereas status
quo can be maintained in case of Kashmir and Northern Areas.
Those who seek provincial autonomy can enumerate dozens of
problems or discriminations or injustices related to their respective provinces.
Though these are generally hyped to win political support rather than securing
fair deals yet one cannot deny the existence of anomalies therein.
Out of these two need to be addressed amicably. First is mentioned as
division of resources or divisible pool of resources. The very name bearing
words of division or divisible is against the spirit of unity.
The brothers aspiring for unity never talk of division. They endeavour
sharing every thing; sharing assets and the liabilities and sharing comforts and
hardships. The issue needs to be addressed and resolved keeping the unity as
prime objective. It must begin with changing its name.

The second issue relates to sharing of water resources, which has been
mentioned earlier in one of the articles. Scarcity of water has been aggravated
due to persistent neglect of the need to more water reservoirs to cope with ever
increasing demand.
The problem cannot be resolved without having adequate capacity of
water storage. The construction of dams must start immediately. It cannot be
resolved by blaming Punjab for stopping outward movement of wheat and at the
same time asking it frequently to scarify its legitimate share of water.
The smaller brothers must stop exploiting the big brother. They have
the right to demand the due share, but in doing so they must not get into shoes
of the royals. The demand of royalties by the aggrieved and the exploited
sounds quite illogical.
The causes of economic disparity have to be addressed not only in the
context of provinces, but also to eliminate this curse within each province. The
division of the society on the basis of socio-economic disparities is wrought
with very harmful consequences.
Sectarian divide, in the wake of increasing militancy, undermines the
unity of nation which came into being on the basis of Islamic ideology.
Politicians and Mullas should stop exploiting sectarian differences. This point
will be discussed further little later.

FAITH
The Faith provides right direction to human activities. Without religion
the humanity would be rendered discontent, disarrayed and savage. Correct
perception of religion and its practice lead to well-being of entire humanity.
A person without believing in God feels satisfied only after achieving the
intended goal, short of that it results in disappointment. In case of trust in God
the mere struggle gives immense satisfaction; even utter failure does not cause
any disappointment.
The people who truly believe in God, privileged or deprived, lead
contended life. It is perhaps for this reason that a non-believer had remarked
that God is the invention of the privileged for the consolation of the deprived.
He ignored the all important fact that a privileged but discontented man cannot
be happier than deprived but contented person.
The concept of God varies from religion to religion, but the object of
having belief in Him remains the same. Without debating the point, one can say
that to have belief in God is good, may it be in accordance with the concept of
Unity, Trinity or multiple gods. However to believe in Singular, Omnipotent and

Omnipresent God is better. Such a God responds to every call without

discrimination, may it be from anyone, for anything and at any time.
Seeking Gods help with complete trust in Him is called a prayer. A
verbal call remains an incomplete prayer unless reinforced with physical action
to achieve that for which His help is sought. Action confirms the sincerity of the
prayer. The prayer that does not incite intense activity is nothing but hypocrisy.
The point can be further explained with two stories. A man prayed day-in
and day-out for winning a lottery. As he was praying one day he heard someone
asking him, give me a break too. He looked around, saw nobody and resumed
his prayer. He heard the voice again, looked around and asked; who are you? I
am God asking you to give Me a chance was the reply. How can man give a
chance to God? he enquired. Go and buy a ticket.
A chaplain while motivating the soldiers in battlefield said that to decide
the time and place of death of a person is the prerogative of God. Battlefield
hazards cannot hasten anyones death. As he said that a shell landed nearby and
the chaplain was the first to run for the shelter. An amused soldier questioned
him for not practicing what he preached. The chaplain replied, I do, but I want
to convey to God that I am cooperating.
These jokes carry serene messages. The trust in God means more than
seeking His favours by words of mouth. It must be combined with incessant
struggle to achieve the desired goal. Only then one can claim to be trusting in
God. Its Tawwakil.
While reposing trust in God, one must have confidence in abilities
bestowed upon him by his Creator. Man has been blessed with so many abilities
that he is placed second to none in all the creations of God. Even some of the
Divine powers have been delegated to him with only condition of remaining
answerable to Him.
Pakistanis pray for the big break without buying a ticket. For decades
they have been praying for national solidarity, for the security of motherland,
for liberation of Kashmir and Palestine, but their prayers have not been
answered; why? The reason is too obvious; the verbal prayers have not been
supported with positive action. The prayers lacking sincerity merit no response.
It is wrong to infer from the forgoing that religions teach its followers to
work for selfish ends. No religion teaches selfishness. Man must toil for his own
good, but he should also work for the well-being of others. At times he should
give preference to others in the spirit of sacrifice.
In that context the religion of Islam demands submission to even those
commands of God which apparently promise no benefit. Like Ibrahim (peace be

upon him), whos tradition the Muslims claim to be following, they should
sacrifice willingly as proof of their submission.
Ibrahim (peace be upon him), the most exalted, faithfully obeyed the
command of Allah to slay his son in His name. He did not grumble or pause for
a while to ponder as to why Allah should demand slaughtering of his son. He
obeyed His command displaying unquestionable submission to the will of God.
Pakistanis are lucky to be the followers of the tradition of Ibrahim (peace
be upon him), but the practice of the tradition has been restricted to slaughtering
of lambs once a year. Even in that practice other motives are at play more than
the submission to God. They must learn to submit to the will of God rather than
succumbing to their ambitions.
Pakistanis must extend their prayers beyond verbal utterances to untiring
striving for which they seek His help. That is the essence of believing his
benevolence and having confidence in own abilities. Only then their prayers
wont go unanswered. They have to remember the simple teaching of the
childhood, God helps those who help themselves.
Allah does not forbid having ambitions. To be ambitious is in the nature
of the man. However, those ambitions must be censored which mean harm to
others and are not in conflict with commands of Allah.
The followers must carefully practice the religion in its true spirit. They
should not falter in practicing Islams teaching, which urge its followers to toil
incessantly for the promotion of the noble and suppression of the evil.
The followers of one particular school of thought or sect should not take
all that is contrary to their belief is evil. More often than not Pakistanis not only
resist such differences but start fighting against them, which results in sectarian
violence. Intolerance to beliefs of others is contemptuous to the teachings of
Islam.
In an Islamic state the government is responsible to regulate the
behaviour of its people in accordance with teachings of the religion without
encroaching upon personal liberties. Unfortunately all the rulers of Pakistan
stuck to the system inherited from the outgoing masters. Many of them even
negated the very necessity of change arguing that it would amount to going
backward.
The religion cannot be taken as drag in any sphere of human activity.
Despite Western Medias onslaught of ridicule, Islam remains a dynamic
religion and the most precious asset of entire humanity.
The government while launching crackdown on Mullas, Mosques and
Madaris should not forget that it cannot separate religion from politics in
Pakistan. Both have never been practiced in complete isolation from each other

by any nation. Even in countries where religion is discarded as something

fictitious, their socio-economic ideologies substitute the religion.
As regards secularism; it is nothing more than a hoax, an attempt to boast
about fair play of the majority with minorities. Pakistan is an Islamic
Republic, where the religion should influence social, economic and political
thinking, action and inter-action.

DISCIPLINE
Discipline is the mode of conduct in accordance with rules. The life of all
living beings is disciplined in one way or the other. The plant, the animals and
everything else in the Universe display unreserved obedience to the rules
dictated by the Nature. Discipline is the governing principle of life in all forms.
Without discipline the very survival of life is impossible. If the green
plants cease the act of photosynthesis, they will die. If the geese do not migrate,
they will perish due to extremities of the climate. If the female Kangaroo does
not deliver within days of conception, her hopping might kill the fetus and the
mother. The survival lies in abidance to the rules of the Nature, therefore, it has
to be instinctive.
To human beings the discipline is not instinctive. They have to abide by
the rules voluntarily and it means much more than the mere survival. It helps in
grooming of physical, mental and spiritual faculties to the optimum.
It is essential for economic, social and cultural development of a society.
That is why Allah has blessed them with ability to augment the rules set by
Him; a quality lacking in all other living beings.
The founding father of Pakistan gave a motto to the new born nation;
Unity Faith, Discipline. If he was asked to spell the motto in one word, he
would have surely preferred Discipline. Only the disciplined remain united
under adverse conditions and they do not falter in their faith by falling prey to
temptations and intimidations, whether from within or without.
Unfortunate are the people who lack this quality. It does not require an
extraordinary discerning eye to observe that Pakistanis, as individuals and as a
nation, lack in discipline badly. They do not seem to be caring much for the
motto given by the Quaid.
The causes of slack discipline can be traced out gleaning through recent
history. Till middle of nineteenth century, as part of the then Indian nation, they
were law abiding people. Some of them went beyond the demands of discipline.
This obedience was not the outcome of some moral obligation, but for seeking

favours of the masters. They wanted to be obedient servants to in good books of

the master.
When Indians realized that they were not the free citizens but mere slaves
of an alien master, it marked the beginning of their struggle for freedom. This
realization was comparatively more in Muslims as they were subjected to the
curse of slavery for the first time. The struggle for freedom began with
disobedience; in other words defying the will of their masters.
The war of independence, labeled as mutiny by the masters, was the first
major incident of collective defiance. Though the masters emerged victorious in
that war yet the desire for freedom kept burning. The defiance continued with
varying intensity till 1947.
It should have ended with the independence, but the habit developed over
a prolonged period could not change overnight. It continued after the
independence in the form of agitations, strikes, riots and Gheraos.
Violence is not the only way of defying the rule of law. Pakistanis violate
norms of discipline in almost every sphere of public and private activities, may
it be social, economic, political or even religious. In some cases it has become a
way of life.
Indiscipline is more pronounced in state controlled institutions.
Indifference to punctuality, corruption, favourtism, victimization and
inefficiency are some of the offending outcomes of this ugly habit.
Individually the people are not as disciplined as citizens of a free nation
should be. A glaring example of indiscipline is the manner in which they evade
paying tax; whereas in some cases these evaders pay generous donations in
charity. Black marketing, hoarding, adulteration, smuggling, bribery, etcetera
are other reflections of indiscipline at individual levels.
The most intriguing defiance is shown in case of traffic rules. The
offenders know that these rules are promulgated for their own safety, yet they
violate them at the peril of their lives. Some unscrupulous individuals seek
pleasure in such violations.
The defiance of rules can also be attributed to the non-conformity of the
laws of land with demands of the society. Pakistanis have thrown away their
masters across sea, but have failed to throw into sea the laws, rules and
traditions left behind them.
The failure in bringing laws in conformity with the needs denies the
common citizen the real freedom. He does not have the feel of the government
of the people, by the people and for the people. In the absence of this feeling,
he cannot be expected to regulate his actions in accordance with the laws
enforced by the government.

There is need to educate them that abidance to laws is in their interest as

well as in the larger interest of the society. The law enforcing authorities should
also realize that the laws are meant for the convenience of general public and
not evoking arrogance in law enforcing authorities.
They must know the difference between the obedience demanded from a
slave and the discipline expected from citizens of a free nation. A free man has
the right to know the logic behind the laws and the fairness with which these are
enforced.
It is not correct to demand blind obedience and submission to all
commands; instead willing obedience should be sought. They should be
encouraged to be self-disciplined, not through fear but by strengthening their
belief in merits of being disciplined.
Education institutions are the best place for inculcating discipline in
younger generation, but these institutions have become centres of breeding
indiscipline. The innocent students are exploited and drawn to streets for
agitations by the clever politicians to promote their party interests.
Yet another unfortunate aspect of indiscipline relates to contrasts in belief
and practice of the Faith. Religious teachings are defied despite the claim that
their religion offers complete code of life. This has been discussed in detail in
article Miserable Muslim Ummah.

JUSTICE
Establishment of rule of law, or administration of justice, is the hallmark
of civilized society. In an Islamic society the rule of law is the very bedrock on
which the foundation of the entire Islamic religious, social, cultural, economic
and political structure is based.
Justice is generally understood as something linked to administration of
law. In jurisprudence it means that end which ought to be reached in a case by
the regular administration of the principles of law involved as applied to the
fact. In judicial sense the justice is nothing more, or nothing less, than exact
conformity to some obligatory law.
In Islamic system of government, the people responsible for
administration of judicial justice were held in such high esteem and given
such high status that no judicial system of the world today can compare fairly
with it. They administered justice without fear and favour and established the
supremacy of law.
Justice administered by the judiciary is fraction of what members of a
society should be entitled to as their right on the basis of equality. Judicial

justice is nothing more than redress of grievances, because judicial system

comes into action only after a criminal or civil wrong has been committed.
Administration of this justice, as sought by the aggrieved parties, has to be
cheap and prompt.
In interest of the society it should be administered free and quick. For
example, A intentionally hurts B. A is produced before a jury which sends him
to jail for few years. The decision of the court does no good to A or B. in fact
both of them suffer; one due to his disrespect to the law and the other due to
enforcement of the relevant law. Administration of this kind of justice serves
only the interests of other members of the society.
In Pakistan even this element of justice is invariably denied through
delay. The reasons are; outdated court rules and procedures, inadequate number
of courts and means to ensure implementation of the court decisions.
The scope of justice is much wider than the one encompassed in judicial
terminology. It is not mere redress of grievances, but the mean to forestall the
very need of redress. It must ensure that such damages do not occur which have
to be compensated.
The society must endeavour to check occurrence of a wrong instead of
waiting complacently for the commission of wrong acts. Islam demands
administration of wholesome justice in the form of social, economic and
political equality and fairness.
In Islam the justice encompasses the entire spectrum of human activities.
It demands the life to be governed strictly in accordance with a set of rules. Its
followers are promised reward for the duties discharged well and warned of
punishment for the failings.
Islam offers a comprehensive code of accountability the correct
awareness of which compels everyone to be fair with others and thyself.
Administration of this justice has to be absolutely free. If some price is to be
paid, the onus lies not on the one who has been wronged, but the one who
committed that wrong by act or neglect.
This sense of accountability forces the head of a state to roam in streets at
mid-night to see if someone needs his help. It compels one to spell out the
defects of his merchandise before bargaining. With this sense alive nobody can
go to sleep before ensuring that his neighbour is not without food.
In Muslim societies the opposite word for justice is Zulm; the darkness. It
means that justice is the light. An unjust person is Zalim, who is farthest away
from God. One who fights for justice stands closest to Him.

Light enables one to have clear perception of the surroundings, which

result in feelings of closeness and intimacy. The darkness blurs the vision to the
extent that even the nearest appears to be the farthest. It is not the physical
distance which renders a Zalim lonely, but his obscured perception of his
relationship with; and his obligations towards God and fellow human beings.
The society which ignores the importance of justice becomes prone to all
sorts of evil practices. History tells that civilizations had survived despite
having many vices. Even those civilizations flourished which had denied the
very existence of Divine Authority; but the society corroded by injustice has
never lasted for long. Injustice has never gone unpunished by the Nature.
Administration of justice means an obligation of every member of the
society to be honest and fair in his dealings. It is about awareness of duties
towards others; the sense of responsibility. Above all it means to be fair with his
person with finest sense of self-accountability.
Administration of justice, despite being an obligation of everyone,
remains the responsibility of rulers. Good governance should seek elimination
of the legacies of the past like colonial laws, rules, court procedures and police
powers rather striving to have like-minded people in judiciary.
In the recent past there has been a tendency to prefer political
convenience over administration of justice. Politicization of the prestigious
institution of judiciary is very dangerous. It amounts to destroying the very
foundation of the society.
The rulers should also ensure social justice, particularly in providing
opportunities on the basis of equality. Presently these are denied not only
through corruption, nepotism, and prejudices, but also by not providing
opportunities to acquire requisite skills and competence for healthy competition.
Administration of justice is the hall-mark of a great leader, because it
proves the existence of many leadership qualities. To be just one has to be
impartial without favouring or victimizing anyone; be scrupulously honest
resisting all temptations; be firm withstanding pressure and fear; be morally
correct and mentally alert possessing the ability of sound judgment; and above
all be competent and efficient by being knowledgeable.
Unfortunate is the nation whose leaders are indifferent to the
administration of justice. The ruler, who fails in administration of justice,
renders the entire nation discontent, disheartened and unhappy and in the
process he too loses the credibility. Both are bound to be doomed sooner or
later.
Pakistanis are generally discontent and unhappy, because they have been
deprived of justice. They have lost faith in their leaders. The dealings at

individual level are no better, which have led them to mistrust each other. This
has led them on to divergent courses.
They are quick to observe all that has gone wrong, but fail to realize their
obligations towards facilitation of administration of justice. They are quite vocal
in demanding the justice, but completely indifferent to the demands of justice.

PRIDE
The genuine pride instills the desire to defend the honour and self-respect
by saving oneself from disgrace. The word pride means; a feeling of pleasure
on account of something worthily done or the state of high spirit or great selfesteem or exuberance. More appropriately with reference to the context it
means a proper sense of what is becoming to oneself and scorn of what is
unworthy.
The pride is displayed in many different ways. A proud person can
demonstrate his self pride by being honest and upright. The professional pride is
shown through devotion, dedication and hard work. A group, like a regiment of
an Army, exhibits its pride in the form of spirit-de-corps. National pride is
reflected in the form of patriotism.
These reflections, combined with other similar character traits, are the
true indicators of the pride of a person or a group of persons or a nation. The
pride is always directly proportional to its reflections. When verbal claims do
not commensurate with visible reflections, it may be called false pride.
Genuine pride is tolerant and humble. It is always devoid of arrogance,
except when confronting the evil forces. It invites self-accountability and incites
self-improvement. The pride invokes the urge to promote the good and defeat
the evil. It manifests the human desire to excel in all domains of activity;
physical, mental and moral.
The pride is an innate human character trait. Every new-born child,
irrespective of his colour, creed and nationality, is a proud person, extremely
conscious of his self-respect. This inborn trait however keeps fluctuating as he
grows old.
The factors which diminish or strengthen his pride are; mental and moral
education, guidance received from elders, and above all his personal efforts in
seeking self-improvement. These factors influence individual as well as
collective pride.
The collective pride is not inherited, but acquired. It is instilled and
groomed through slow and a complex process. It is not easy to encompass all
the aspects of this process, only some of these are mentioned.

Sense of belonging is the pre-requisite for initiation of the process of

fostering the collective pride. Sense of belonging breeds the sense of
responsibility, which in turn demands wholesome involvement and
participation. That in turn ensures generation of all the positive and constructive
activities.
The activity, even the seemingly insignificant, must be appreciated.
Appreciation strengthens the sense of belonging, thus completing the cycle of
fostering the pride. A break anywhere can defuse the circuit.
Positively active person is proud as an individual and a patriot as member
of a nation. He prefers to live in the present and toil for the better future, rather
than wasting time in rejoicing achievements of the past. He puts in his best for
the good of the whole; instead of the part only.
Inactivity is the sure sign of inadequacy of the pride. Similarly the
negative activity reflects non-existence of genuine pride. An inactive person is
oblivious to the present and the future; whereas negative activity is the outcome
of dissatisfaction with the past and present. The unconcerned and unhappy
persons can never be the proud members of a nation.
In the crystal ball of the preceding description one can see the image of
Pakistanis pride. The image is not as impressing as one would like it to be. A
longer gaze will reveal that Pakistanis generally suffer from false pride.
Pakistanis can be rightly proud of the richness of their land, history and
cultural heritage. But their own contribution toward enhancement of pride
depends upon their achievements in all spheres of healthy human activities.
They can be proud of being citizens of an ideological state. However,
they indulge more in boasting about the Islamic ideology than practicing it.
They ignore the all important aspect of proving the righteousness of their
ideology through their deeds.
The poets, the music composers and electronic media have endeavoured
to instill national pride, but the effects of melodious patriotic songs are shortlived. The picture portrayed by these songs is quite contrasting to the ground
realities. Thus these melodies result in disappointment in the long run.
A young man, who grows up listening to these melodies, is often
disappointed the day he enters the practical life. Quite contrary to his
expectations, he finds nothing in harmony in the music of the real life. The
proud man in him dies the day he faces the bitter realities of the practical life.
A young man studying in Lahore was tasked to supervise construction of
a house. It required a special water connection at the site. He applied and
vigorously pursued the case. All the observations were answered promptly; yet
the connection was not sanctioned. He understood the real cause of delay but

remained determined not to bribe the concerned staff. He could not think of his
honest effort not succeeding.
Ultimately a clerk asked him; Baau (mister) do you know as to why your
case is not getting through? Yes, but I shall not bribe anyone, he replied.
Youngman, you appear to be a student. Give us ten rupees, not as bribe but for
celebrating the sanction of the water connection, the clerk suggested. He
reluctantly accepted the special student concession.
The student was my younger brother. That evening he met me and
narrated his experience with tears almost dripping from his eyes. I consoled him
over the sad demise of his pride. Today he is in thick of practical life and he
knows well how to purchase the consent of a public servant.
Before concluding, a few words about public servant. They are the
privileged people in whom authority is vested by virtue of a document or a
decree. They ought to exercise their authority for betterment of all and must
never use it for personal gains or to cause nuisance to others.
A personal gain, no matter how enormous it might be, looks like a dwarf
when compared with the smallest good done to others. The pettiest act of
comforting outweighs the voluminous nuisance caused to many.
Like the proud young man referred above, hundreds of them are being
pushed daily on to the gallows of practical life. The massacre is going on
unchecked. Nobody has the time to stop or condemn the carnage.
Condemnation of the evil is important. Pakistanis are generally hesitant in
condemning the evil but quite generous in applauding the good deeds and
heroics.

CONCLUSION
National character is the impression created by acts and neglects of the
individuals or groups of individuals. A nation through behaviour of its members
indicates whether it is going on the up or descending; as the attitude of an
airplane indicates that it is gaining height or scooping low. Pakistanis must
prove by their attitude that they are on the rise.
Regarding implications of disunity, Pakistani should learn from the recent
happenings. Afghans and Iraqis suffered due to their disunity. In fact entire
Ummah has been targeted by the Crusaders for the same reason. The unity can
be preserved through willing sacrifice.
Islam is the binding factor of Pakistani nation. The people have to cut the
contrasts in their beliefs and practice. Religious leaders must remember that

Islam means middle path and they have to shun extremism and intolerance. The
rulers should desist from misinterpreting Islam for worldly gains.
Discipline is the secret of survival and progress. The citizens of Islamic
Republic of Pakistan must inculcate the habit of self-discipline with pride. The
must also demand enforcement of rule of law. The rulers are responsible for
inculcation of discipline through enforcement of law fairly and fearlessly.
In a society of just people everyone will have the feelings of being close
to each other. Such societies ought to be more cohesive. In society devoid of
justice its members are bound to drift away, making it susceptible to
disintegration and for that they need no outside threats.
The reason behind most failings is the wrong perception that these are
very small. It must be remembered that greatness does not lie in being great in
big things, but in being great in small things. That is the hallmark of a proud
person or a nation.

26th December 2003

CHANGES IN ARMED FORCES

The existing military system in Pakistan is a British legacy. It has colonial
touch. The colonial armies are meant for protecting the empires. Motherlands
are defended by the entire nation by keeping only a part of it in state of
preparedness to absorb the initial impact of foreign aggression. This part of the
national power is called armed forces.
Pakistans armed forces have gone through lot of changes since
independence, but most of these were carried out after experiencing the
problems rather than anticipating those in advance. After each war new units
and formations were raised and reorganized.
Some changes were necessitated by the induction of new weapons and
equipment acquired from here and there. Most of the changes were aimed at
quantitative increase, rather than qualitative improvement.
The changes brought in the absence of clear-cut plan increased the
numerical strength of the armed forces, but could not eradicate other
inadequacies. This was not possible without tempering with basic structure,
which had been framed to meet the needs of colonial bosses.
The change in institutions is generally resisted by its members. The
resistance is stiffer in case of large institutions like armed forces. They tend to
ignore the governing principle of the Universe that everything in it is constantly
changing.
Herein the discussion will be confined to ground forces only. As regards
Navy it would suffice to say that its task at best would be to keep the enemy at
bay and try keep the sea routes open. Emphasis should be on its swiftness and
ability to take on the enemy vessels at long range with fast moving surface and
submerged strike force. Air Force with its existing inventory will not be able to
contribute much. At best it can plan to deliver the punch called deterrence.

THE RATIONALE
For seventeen years after independence, both India and Pakistan could
resort to use of force without the fear of any serious repercussions, because of
the limitations of the adversary. In 1965 Pakistan initiated armed conflict in
Kashmir, but failed in achieving the intended goal. India too was denied an
outright victory across international border. It was primarily for the reason that
India had merely reacted to Pakistans initiative.
In 1971 India imposed war on Pakistan. The offensive launched by
Pakistan on 3rd December couldnt qualify as initiative. Militarily it was an
obvious reaction to Indian aggression in East Pakistan. This reaction fitted well
in Indias overall plan. Since then Pakistan has been hesitant, thereby adding to
the belligerence of India.
With the start of open hostilities between civilizations, India has become
strategic partner of the Crusaders. Today India is in position to embark upon
adventures or misadventures at will. The only restraint it has to exercise is to
avoid clash with interests of the superpower.
India, in foreseeable future, will retain the ability to wage war against
Pakistan at time and place of its own choosing and in that it will have the
support of the Crusaders. In these environments Pakistan cannot think of
wresting the initiative back. At best it can endeavour to cause hesitation in India
in fulfillment of her sinister designs. For that it has to maintain certain forcelevel, preparedness and nuclear deterrence.
The aim should be to prevent aggression by sheer maintenance of potent
military power; forestall it with preemption when feasible; defeat through
sustained attrition when it materializes; and in case of major reverses force the
aggressor to give up its gains by waging unconventional war. To this end:

Pakistan should maintain armed forces strong enough to hesitation in the

hearts of potential aggressors.

Pakistan must possess nuclear deterrence along with demonstrated

resolve of the entire nation to fight back the aggressor.

Once subjected to aggression the armed forces should be able to hit back
to make the aggressor bleed. They must have the stamina to sustain hightech conventional war for reasonable period.

The war must not end even after the loss of large chunks of its territory.
The armed forces should be able to melt into the general public and start
unconventional war making the occupation difficult.

The military system has to be based on universally accepted

considerations. Geographic location, territorial configuration and enemy
capability will have greater influence as compared to other factors.
The most important decision relates to the force-level to be maintained.
Considering the nature and extent of threats Pakistan will always feel
inadequacy of men in uniform, irrespective of the size of its armed forces, but
there is nothing drastically wrong with present level. It is the organization and
state of preparedness which need to be addressed.
There is host of first, second and third line forces. Apart from Army, there
are Frontier Corps, Rangers, Northern Light Infantry, Mujahid Force and Coast
Guard. Then there is hotchpotch of Frontier Constabulary, the force under direct
control of Ministry of Defence and Janbaz.
All these are organized, equipped and trained differently on the
justification of varying nature of their roles. In war most of these forces have to
operate side by side; therefore some degree of uniformity has to be achieved.
Within Army the infantry formations have standard organizations with
few exceptions. Herein principle of uniformity has been applied irrespective of
their holding or strike roles. The organization and equipment of strike
formations has to be different from that of the holding formations.
Nature of the threat remains the important factor dictating organizational
changes. Pakistan will be subjected to incessant aerial bombing with high-tech
precision weapons delivered by long range missiles and aircraft flying at high
altitude as was done in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pakistan lacks the capability to
counter this threat.
This will be followed by invasion of Pakistan in conventional manner.
The attacker will achieve air supremacy before the start of this phase and
endeavour to out-range and out-manoeuvre the defender with better armoured
force supported by vast fleet of armed helicopters and close support of air force.
In case of occupation, Pakistans Army has to resort to unconventional
war to be waged with the assistance of civilians. This has to be sustained for
indefinite period till the invaders are forced to give up their military gains.
Another consideration relates to acquisition of military hardware from
outside sources. No western country will provide any weapon or military
equipment, which could boost Pakistans defence capability. At best it can
expect some assistance from China, but that wont match the military prowess
of the Crusaders. Moreover, the flow of weapons during the conflict will be
completely choked. Perforce Pakistan has to depend on whatever it has or can
produce indigenously.

These factors rule out the possibility of conducting operations with large
formations. Concentration of forces has to be avoided in view of the satellite
guided air threat. Fighting by night has also gained greater importance for the
weaker.
The existing forces should be restructured to achieve standardization in
organization, equipment and training as far as possible. All these should be
merged to form two types of forces; one to combat the external threat and other
to fight against threats from within or those posed by enemy indirectly.
The first line forces should be further divided into two types. The bulk of
it should consist of armies organized on territorial basis to perform defensive
tasks. Bulk of Frontier Corps, Rangers, Coast Guards, NLI and Mujahid Force
should be consumed by holding armies. There should be an army to undertake
offensive tasks at strategic level.
Similarly second line forces should also be grouped into two categories;
Internal Security Force (ISF) and Police. The police should be so organized,
equipped and trained that it should be able to maintain law and order at its own
during peace as well as in emergency with minimum of assistance of ISF. Out of
all the ground forces only police should be under direct control of respective
provinces.
ISF should be responsible for protection of lines of communication and
important installations within the assigned communication zone. It should also
reinforce Police when so required.
Units of ISF should be organized and trained like regular infantry
battalions with some reduction in authorization of heavy weapons. Most of ISF
should remain in suspended animation during peace time. The activation during
peace should be restricted to meet requirements of law enforcement and
training.
The financing channels of Frontier Corps and Rangers are different from
the Army. These forces are financed by the Ministry of Interior, perhaps for the
reason that if the Defence Ministry takes the responsibility, it would result in
further ballooning of the annual defence budget.
Resultantly these forces are organized and trained differently making
their integration with Army difficult during war. In peace time it is difficult to
implement defence related projects through them, when so required. Financial
intricacies should not over-ride the basic requirements. Common man is neither
relieved nor over burdened if these forces are financed through any of these
ministries or even by the Ministry of Religious Affairs.

THE GUARD
The territorial integrity should be guarded by territorial armies. This force
should be organized on area basis. Entire border can be divided into strategic
zones in commensuration with geographic configuration. The responsibility of
defending each zone should be assigned to a Territorial Army.
In view of the terrain and perceived threat, Pakistan can have three
territorial armies. Northern Army should defend NWFP, Northern Areas and
Kashmir; Central Army should be responsible for Punjab; and Southern Army
for Sind and Baluchistan including the coast line.
Another option could be to have Western Army to be responsible for
entire western border including Northern areas and that shared with Iran;
Eastern Army to defend Kashmir and bulk of Punjab; and Southern Army to
guard coast line and border with India from Thar to Cholistan. In either case the
aim should be to accomplish the task of restructuring with minimum changes in
existing arrangements.
The areas of responsibility of a Territorial Army should be divided into
various sectors. Each sector should have Sector Command instead of existing
divisional headquarters. The quantum of force in various sectors may vary
depending on their size and importance. The force deployed in a particular
sector should dictate the rank of a Sector Commander; whether to be
commanded by Lieutenant General or Major General.
Terrain and enemy threat will dictate further division of a sector into sub
sectors. Each sub sector should be defended by a brigade. The size of brigade
may vary from three to five battalions depending upon its significance in overall
plan of the Sector Commander. The brigades should operate directly under
control of the Sector Commander; thereby eliminating the intermediary
divisional command.
The reduction of command pyramid from four tiers, i.e. brigade, division,
corps and army to three, i.e. brigade, sector and army will reduce the length of
command channel. It will facilitate passage of information upward and of
decisions downward ensuring speedy implementation. Too many superior
headquarters in any case fail in making significant contribution to influence the
battle.
Infantry battalion should be reorganized. It should have three companies
instead of four for better command. Fourth company should be converted into
Support Company. In Central and Southern Armies the support companies must
possess adequate anti-tank and anti-aircraft fire power. It should also have
sufficient weapons to provide indirect fire support. In case of Northern Army,
these companies should have the weapons to provide indirect fire support.

In a Territorial Army the existing reconnaissance and support battalions,

now reorganized to enhance anti-tank capability, may be done away with. These
battalions have never fought as a unit, particularly in defensive battle. Instead of
the battalions there can be support companies integral to each brigade
depending on the dictation of the terrain in given sub sector.
The basic consideration for organization of a Territorial Army, as is
evident from the preceding, is its primary task to be performed through
positional defence. It must have adequate firepower to beat back ground threat
of armour and infantry. It should also have sufficient means of fire to deter
armed helicopters and low flying aircraft.
Most of the units of a Territorial Army will be deployed on ground, but
uncommitted reserves have to be maintained by sectors and sub sectors for
tactical-level counter attacks. The sector reserves should be fully mobile having
adequate armour and anti-tank weapons. There could be more than one reserve
in a sector depending upon its vastness and availability of communication
infrastructure.
Despite having been suitably organized, equipped, trained and motivated
to contest the attacker, a Territorial Army may still lose sizeable chunk of its
area of responsibility. In such eventuality Territorial Army should contain
enemy by employing its reserve and not to allow the enemy to operate freely in
the lost area. It should then assist Strike Army in launching the counter
offensive.
Infantry should constitute bulk of Territorial Army with a view to
achieving improved teeth to tail ratio. All infantry units must be from regular
first line force. The present second line troops of Frontier Corps, Rangers, Coast
Guards and Mujahid Force should be converted into regular infantry battalions
and placed under respective Territorial Armies.
Peace time manning level of Territorial Armies should be eighty percent
of the authorized strength to save on the budget. At least one-fourth of its
manpower should be recruited from within the area of its responsibility. Twenty
percent of the reservists, to be called in emergency, should be from the same
area.
This wont be aimed at ensuring local representation alone, but to
guarantee speedy mobilization. Once called, they should report direct to
respective brigades/units. The units should hold hundred percent of authorized
weapons and equipment so that reservists are equipped immediately on arrival.
To further relieve the exchequer some units should be kept in suspended
animation during peace. This measure should be adopted only in less threatened

areas and quite discriminately. Activation of too many units during emergency
can have telling effects on overall performance of the army.
The experience of two wars has revealed that the present system of
mobilization of reservists is unsatisfactory. Many reservists did not respond to
call-up notices. Majority of those, who turned up, remained in respective centres
or reinforcement camps till end of the war. Very few were able to join the units
and actively participate in war.
A reservist from Quetta should not be asked to report in a Regimental
Centre in Abbottabad and then go to a unit or reinforcement camp in Badin.
Most of reservists should be affiliated with formations or close to their place of
domicile where they should report on mobilization, without waiting for formal
intimation. Post-reporting documentation and other formalities should be
completed there and intimated to respective Regimental Centres.
Mobilization of reservists should be under direct control of Army/Centres
with clear cut policy coordinated at national level with comprehensive plans for
speedy mobilization. Each Sector Command and army should have separate
branch and directorate to maintain up-to-date record of reservists and personnel
of units under suspended animation.
The formations of Territorial Armies should be stationed in small
garrisons rather than large cantonments mingled with civil population. Brigades
should be located in garrisons located close to their respective areas of
operational responsibility. This can help overcoming the present state of
congestion, help speedy deployment and ensure intimate familiarization of
terrain in which they have to fight the war. Most of the training exercises should
be carried out in or around areas of responsibility.
Peace time rotation of units for the purpose of relief should be restricted
to the limits of Territorial armies. Inter-army rotation of units could be
eliminated or kept to the bare minimum. The rotation under the misconstrued
concept of relief should be avoided.
A mountain man feels no hardship while serving in mountains. He feels
confident while fighting in hilly terrain. Therefore, he should not be taken to
plains to provide him relief. The same is true for people of plains and desert.

THE PUNCH
To be on guard is the prerequisite of successful defence. However the
guard, even the one considered impregnable, cannot guarantee sure protection
against aggression. For successful defence one must possess the capability to hit
back without lowering the guard.

Offence is considered as the best form of defence. This method cannot be

adopted without possessing a potent punch and the will to deliver it effectively.
The existence of such a punch should deter the adversary from mischief; failing
which it must be delivered hard enough to force the aggressor to regret.
The punch implies acquisition of strength, a physical quality, and of
courage, a mental attitude. Having acquired the physical and mental strength
one must not become arrogant. One must never resort to aggression merely
because one has the ability to do so. The aggression must not be for the sake of
aggression, but to quell it.
The prospects and consequences of delivering a punch and restraint must
be weighed carefully. Restraint is equally important, because in war the delivery
of a single punch consumes lot of strength and stamina.
War is an exceptionally high intensity human activity. Nobody can
indulge in it too frequently. Within war, the attack is the most taxing form of
activity both for men and material. Therefore, the decision about delivery of
punch has to be absolutely correct, both in terms of time and space.
The fact that one becomes more vulnerable while attacking has also to be
borne in mind. While availing an opportunity to hit, extra attention has to be
paid to own vulnerabilities. Thus, proper guard is essential for delivering
effective punch.
While Territorial Force acts as guard, the punch should be delivered by
the Strike Army. This army has to be organized, equipped and trained in
accordance with its role. It should be able to operate in all types of terrain
obtainable immediately across our borders with capability to penetrate enemy
territory to the point of hurting him badly.
This demands compatible fire-power and mobility; therefore bulk of it
has to be mechanized. Strike Army should have three standing corps with plans
to raise another during emergency by re-grouping the standing forces and
mobilization.
Three corps may be organized slightly differently from each other. One
Corps should be organized for operations in mountainous terrain. It can have 3
to 4 mountain divisions and two armoured brigades with ability to launch two
pronged offensive.
Second Corps can have two armoured divisions and 2 to 3 mechanized
divisions with ability to launch a deeper offensive in plains or desert. Third
Corps should consist of one armoured division, one armoured brigade and two
mechanized divisions with ability to operate deep into in enemy territory.
Strike Corps may be organized on more or less on existing lines. Each
armoured division should have two armoured brigades and one mechanized

brigade. Armoured brigade can have two armoured regiments and one
mechanized battalion; whereas a mechanized brigade can have one armoured
regiment and two mechanized battalions. Mechanized divisions can have two to
three mechanized brigades.
Second and Third Corps ought to have an additional lorry division and
the compliments of supporting arms and logistic support units with matching
mobility. Both corps should have integral air defence resources and squadrons
of armed helicopters.
Most of integral artillery of armoured and mechanized divisions should
be self-propelled. Command and control of all artillery formations and units
should be vested in Commander Corps Artillery. His headquarters should be
organized on the lines of divisional headquarters to take care of all aspects of
planning, coordination and execution.
Engineers play key role in optimum utilization of inherent mobility of
armoured and mechanized formations by reducing the ground friction. The
possible areas for launching of offensive in plains offer considerable ground
friction in the form of rivers, canals and distributaries; with enemys ability to
further enhance their obstacle value.
Therefore, Second Corps must have adequate bridging equipment and
resources to tackle problems of inundations. Third Corps should have the
equipment and resources to overcome friction offered by the desert.
Second and third corps should have integral engineers brigades. Brigade
of Second Corps should have adequate resources to provide bridges over 2 to 3
major water obstacles without resorting to recycling of the speedily-launched
equipment. At the same time it should be able to undertake other tasks to
provide intimate engineer support needed in offensive operations.
The role of engineers should include the control of the use of bridges to
ensure optimum utilization of the facility, for which the brigade should have an
integral crossing control organization. Presently it is done under ad-hoc
arrangements, which is not a reliable method to perform this once-in-life-time
task.
The command echelons of all the engineers units in Second Corps should
be so organized that it must facilitate central control during bridge-head phase
of the battle and decentralization after break-out. Like artillery, the corps
engineers should also have an adequately staffed headquarters of commander of
the rank of a Major General.
Without reliable communications no offensive operation, of any
magnitude, can be executed successfully. It gets added importance in operations

of mechanized formations wherein troops are spread over extended area with
longer distances in between.
The ever-changing locations of units and headquarters necessitate
frequent redeployment of communication resources. The enemy capability to
interfere in communication systems based on electro-magnetic waves pose yet
another problem.
Considering these problems, the wire communication remains the best for
bridge-head phase. After break-out, one has to perforce depend on radio
communication, which would neither be safe nor guaranteed. While taking
suitable anti-jamming technical and tactical measures, alternative means of
communication has to be made available.
The supporting arm of signals deserves considerate attention in
authorization of manpower as signalmen come into action well before the start
of an operation and remain busy long after its completion.
The corps operations should be planned in totality with maximum
participation of junior commanders. It can help the lower echelons of command
to understand their role in the whole and reduce the need of modifications to be
ordered from the top. During execution the control should be decentralized,
leaving much to the initiative of the commanders on the spot. The higher
commanders should move well forward to give timely decisions.
Strike Corps should have dedicated close air support of at least 1 to 2
permanently affiliated squadrons. These squadrons should be represented in
corps headquarters by staff more than a lonely liaison officer. To ensure
continuous close air support the projected areas of offensive operations should
have requisite forward air bases.
Armed helicopters have added shorter version of vertical envelopment.
Each Strike Corps must have an integral aviation group. The suggested
composition of aviation group in Second and Third Corps is to have two
squadrons of armed helicopters and one squadron of cargo helicopters. First
Corps can have one combat and two cargo/liaison squadrons.
The use of nuclear weapons at tactical level, in future war against
traditional adversary, cannot be ruled out. Therefore, Second and Third Corps
have to be suitably equipped, organized and trained to operate in nuclear
environments. Using its inherent mobility it should be able to assemble with
speed at predetermined point from distant concentration areas.
Second and Third Corps should have alternative headquarters down to
divisional level to assume command in case of knocking out of a headquarters.
The alternative headquarters should be under the deputy commander.

The soldiers of the Strike Army will be privileged to handle sophisticated

weapons and equipment. They would be often required to act independently due
to fast changing tactical situations in mechanized warfare. Therefore, the Strike
Army must have the best men and the leaders.
The Army should not feel satisfied with that. It must provide facilities to
further improve their educational and professional qualifications. As an
incentive for every higher certificate acquired by an individual he should be
given higher pay scale. Similarly the cadets displaying outstanding leadership
qualities should be sent to Strike Army on completion of training from the
Academy. Lateral transfer of officers from Territorial Armies to Strike Army
and vice versa should be carried out for the same purpose.
The Strike Army must not have any peace time commitment. It should
devote its time and energies on professional training and in keeping the
weapons and equipment battle-worthy. It should concentrate only on preparation
for war and be ready to take it to the soil of enemy.

THE STAMINA
Large armed forces alone are not enough to win a war. Sophisticated
weapons and equipment and mastery in handling those also do not guarantee
favourable results. These are important factors, but for desirable outcome one
must have requisite logistic stamina.
Fighting demands acquisition of the skills and techniques, but to make a
match of it one must have sufficient stamina with ability to use it efficiently.
There is no wisdom in accumulating all the war material, acquiring the multiple
skills and initiating the contest and then getting knocked out for want of
stamina.
No doubt a good fighter should aim at knocking out the opponent quickly
with intelligent application of his skills. But in case one fails to do so, one must
endure the fighting with a view to denying an out-right victory to the opponent.
Logistic stamina is the total sum of production capability, stocking
capacity, conservation and efficient distribution of war supplies. During war it
has two distinct ingredients: one, the ability to replace and repair weapons,
ammunition, equipment, transport and POL to keep them battle worthy; two, the
ability to meet food, clothing, medicine and other daily needs of the soldiers.
Out of the two Pakistan has no problems regarding the latter, but it is
dependent on outside sources in case of the former due to its limited indigenous
production capability. The dependence upon others for weapons and equipment
is a serious shortcoming.

Pakistan is totally dependent on foreign sources for POL. There is no

immediate solution to this problem except creating a sizeable reserve by
stocking and resorting to rationing during war. The stocks must be widely
dispersed and the nation should be prepared to bear the hardship of rationing.
The foregoing creates an impression that logistic stamina is nothing but
overall production capability. Undoubtedly it is an important aspect, but stamina
means more than productivity. It means the ability to utilize available resources
economically with a view to conserving them for critical periods.
Management of resources required by ground forces is the responsibility
of logistic support command. It is responsible for storage, transportation and
delivery of these to users at right time and right place. The existing logistic
support setup, based on logistic areas, cannot match the suggested organization
of ground forces. It needs to be reorganized on the basis of logistic commands.
The existing administrative and logistic support units at divisional level
should be integrated with units of Logistic Areas to form Logistic Commands.
Commander of a Logistic Command should be responsible for collection,
transportation and delivery of the requisite support as far forward as tactically
possible. Fighting units should collect this directly from the Logistic Support
Units. Every Sector Command of a Territorial Army must have an integral
logistic command.
Reorganization should include dispersion of logistic reserves. The present
arrangements of storing these reserves in large depots have two inherent
anomalies. One, the large quantities of logistics stored at one place remain quite
vulnerable to initial missile and air attacks against which Pakistan has almost no
defensive capability. Two, centralization necessitates hectic movement of
logistic support prior to and during war over long distances, which further
increase the vulnerability.
To have clear perception of the suggested logistic support system, one
should keep the likely tasks of this setup during war and peace:

Stocking the logistic support for Territorial and Strike Armies in

designated depots.

Transportation of the logistics to forward areas as far forward as possible.

Evacuation and treatment of casualties as well as recovery and repairs of

damaged equipment.

Protection of depots and other installations against air and ground threats.

Evacuation of civil population from threatened areas and handling of

refugees and displaced persons.

Transportation of prisoners of war, including establishment and

administration of their camps.

Assist civil government in transportation of essential commodities.

Meet peace-time requirements of ground forces as hither-to-fore.

In addition to above tasks already assigned to present Logistic Areas, the

proposed Logistic Commands should take on following additional
responsibilities:

Ensure security of communication zones to keep the life-lines of fighting

forces open.

Repair and maintenance of lines of communication in coordination with

civil authorities.

Ensure maintenance of law and order in respective areas with the help of
civil authorities.

Assist civil authorities during peace in development activities and in case

of natural calamities.

These tasks can be grouped into two broad categories. In first category
those tasks can be listed which are directly related to logistic support. Other
tasks relate to security having indirect bearing on logistics. Therefore, each
logistic command should have two wings, logistic wing and operations wing.
This will facilitate planning, coordination and execution.
The suggested organization shifts part of the second line logistic and
administrative support responsibility to logistic commands to allow fighting
formations to concentrate on operational assignments. The fighting troops and
their command headquarters should not look backward; instead the logistic
commands should be leaning forward.
The logistic wing must have sufficient services units to accomplish the
assigned tasks of stocking and transportation. Number and size of logistic
support units may vary in each command depending on the number of troops to
be supported and size and configuration of their areas of operations.
Generally a logistic command should have supply and transport battalion
for establishment of various replenishment points. The transportation resources
should be augmented by mechanical transport battalions in plains and desert and
by animal-cum-mechanical transport units for mountainous areas.
The medical battalion should have resources to establish advance
dressing stations and ambulance platoons for evacuation of sick and wounded
for administration of medical treatment in nearest hospitals. The organization of
battalion will be dictated by the number of brigades in a sector command.

Similarly the electrical and mechanical engineering battalion should have

adequate resources organized appropriately for prompt recovery and repair of
the damaged equipment. The ordnance unit should have number of platoons
corresponding to the number of brigades. Sector should also have a unit each of
provost and postal service.
All types of depots, hospitals, workshops and other installations have to
be under command of respective logistic wing. Each of the above services must
be represented in headquarters of logistic command to facilitate planning and
execution.
The operations wing will be responsible for keeping the life-line of
fighting troops open. Its tasks will relate to protection of depots, lines of
communication and other installations against ground and air threats.
Defence against ground threat will be assigned to Internal Security Force
to be organized by amalgamating various types of second and third line forces
as already discussed. A battalion of ISF should be organized like normal
infantry battalions less Support Company. During peace bulk of this force
should be placed under suspended animation.
Operational wing must have adequate air defence resources for protection
of vulnerable points located in area of its responsibility. Preferably the air
defence units should be integral to logistic command. Some of these could also
be placed under suspended animation.
Each logistic command should have some engineer troops for
maintenance of rail and road communication and repair of damages caused by
enemy action. Existing resources of FWO, NLC and civil departments should
be employed for this purpose. To exercise effective control over units deployed
for security, maintenance and repair, each logistic command must have integral
signal resources.
The number of logistic commands will correspond to number of Sector
Commands of Territorial Armies. In addition each Corps of Strike Army should
have its integral logistic command. Logistic and administrative units of a Strike
Corps have to be organized differently from that of a Sector Command of a
Territorial Army, because these have to provide logistic support over longer
distances. This logistic command will have no responsibility to protect a
particular communication zone.
A days requirement of logistic support has to be on wheels all the time.
Therefore, all the integral administrative and logistic support units of Strike
Corps should be fully mobile and operate under Commander Logistics and
Administration for better coordination.

Its medical battalion should have the capability to establish MDS (main
dressing stations) unlike the battalion of logistic command supporting a Sector
Command. Rest of the compliments should remain unchanged.
Each logistic command must have complete record of civil transport
registered within its area of responsibility. It should be obligatory for the owners
to make their vehicles available during emergency. This should be done through
proper legislation. It will ensure speedy requisitioning of transport. This
however should not be applicable to logistic commands of Strike Army.
The elimination of second line administrative units will make no material
budgetary relief. The burden on budget, however, can be curtailed by reducing
manning level of these units during peace. Some of the ISF, air defence and
transport units can be placed under suspended animation as already mentioned.
Indigenous production capability is the most important part of logistic
stamina. Pakistan must endeavour to enhance its indigenous production so as to
achieve self-reliance, if not self-sufficiency. A nation can never defend itself
with borrowed muscles.
Pakistan may not be able to achieve parity with its adversaries but must
have adequate indigenous resources to rely upon for its security needs. But in
terms nuclear weapons and means of their delivery a degree of parity has to be
achieved.
Defence production industry has been concentrated in triangle of AttockHavelian-Taxila. It is difficult to undo the damage caused by this concentration.
In future however the dispersion of production units must be not be ignored,
while taking adequate measures to keep the existing units working during war.
Despite the best of efforts this hub of defence production wont be easy to
protect. Part of it could be damaged during war, therefore, the need to have six
months ready reserves of that war munitions which can be produced
indigenously.
The selected industrial units in civil sector should be tasked to convert
their peace time productions to meet the needs of war. The units so selected
should get clear directives about items to be produced by them during war.
Defence production capability, apart from its physical utilization, has
direct bearing on the confidence of soldiers. Guaranteed possession of means to
face aggression of the adversary enhances the belief of soldiers regarding the
ability of self-preservation.
It would be unfortunate to go to war with a psychological disadvantage
caused by the need to have own weapons and equipment. Pakistan may not be
able to achieve psychological ascendancy over adversaries in this context, but it
must be able to produce all that is essential for defending the Motherland.

CONCLUSION
The changes suggested above do not mean that these will make Pakistan
impregnable. It will be a miracle to successfully thwart the combined might of
the Crusaders and proxy crusaders. One must never hope for miracles.
This is the age of airpower. Ground forces merely act as eyes for
guidance of the munitions fired or released from long distances and high
altitudes. That is why a force of 12,000 (less than a standard infantry division of
Pakistan) is controlling a country as large as Afghanistan. Against such
adversary major setbacks should neither surprise nor dishearten the defenders.
These changes are proposed to retain the capability to resist occupation in
case of major reverses. Afghans and Iraqis are doing that despite the fact in both
cases such an eventuality was not catered for in initial plan.
Pakistan can perform better provided it has a contingency plan for
resisting the occupation. For that increase in manpower or fighting with large
forces is not recommended as it would mean nothing more than arranging the
gun fodder.
At certain stage military leaders have to take crucial decision of
defending the country through unconventional means instead of conventional
warfare. This must come at precise moment because the damage, both in case of
pre-mature or delayed decision, would be irreparable.

28th December 2003

HOLD THEM IN HIGH ESTEEM

Fighting for honour and glory of Motherland is a noble occupation. The
men who fight for the defence of their country have been held in high esteem
throughout the history of mankind. This has to be so as it has direct bearing on
national pride.
However, the soldiers lose respect when they are defeated for want of will
to face the enemy. The reaction of nations to defeat is harsher in case of
professional soldiers. This is natural as they are looked after by the people for
long before the war.
War is undoubtedly a litmus test for determining the worth of a soldier,
but it does not mean that during peace the prestige of soldiers remains
unaffected by the events. It keeps fluctuating under socio-political dynamics,
behaviour of soldiers, attitude of people towards soldiers, and because of
psychological war of the enemy.
Irrespective of the circumstances, it is in the best interest of a nation to
hold its soldiers in high esteem. In case the ground realities make it hard to do

so, the nation must do soul searching and take measures to rectify the situation
rather than being swept away by the events.
That does not mean that the armed forces can be absolved from the
responsibility of preserving their self-respect. Good reputation and honour are
never gifted. These have to be earned the hard way.
They must scrutinize their conduct individually and collectively and
exhibit professional competence when so required. This will help winning trust
and support of the people, which in turn will improve their dedication and
devotion.

SELF SCRUTINY
Army inherited good name at the time of independence, which had been
earned as part of British Army of India. The soldiers of Indian Army had
performed well during Second World War and earned appreciations. The British
looked after the soldiers extremely well due to which Army was considered a
prestigious profession at the time of independence.
Ignorance of civilians about army life also contributed towards their
impressions about soldiers. British kept the soldiers busy in marches to and
from military campaigns. The time in between was spent in seclusion of
barracks away from civil population. Intimate and frequent contact with
civilians was restricted and resultantly they had little knowledge of army life.
They only saw the glitter and took it as gold.
The soldiers of Pakistan inherited this reputation, which was further
enhanced in September War with India. The defeat of 1971 however brought
disgrace to whole nation. Despite the non-military reasons; the soldiers had to
take the blame. No soldier could argue that he was merely a witness to
surrender. Such arguments merely reflected the desire to become approvers to
escape conviction.
There is an element of grace in acknowledging the reality of defeat; but it
is matter of shame to digest it. One cannot escape the harms of defeat by turning
the face away from the reality. The failings have to be identified and eradicated
with a view to performing well in next encounter.
The honour lost in battlefield can only be regained in another battlefield.
If a hockey match lost on the turf cannot be re-won in conference room of the
selection committee, how the honour lost in war can be regained through any
other way? This was not done for any reasons other than avoiding the
embarrassment of confronting the bitter facts.

In 1976 my brigade commander wanted to display a painting in officers

mess, which was painted by ex-signal officer of the brigade. The painting
showed the brigade commander leading charge on enemy with rifle of his
batman, who followed his boss carrying spare magazines of ammunition. The
soldier was killed in action and commander got the gallantry award.
This incident was mentioned by the award-winning commander in his
book. He regretted that the soldier, who joined the assault on enemy without a
weapon, was not awarded. The painting showed the scene from the rear wherein
the soldier was shown bleeding from upper part of his spine after having been
shot in his chest.
The visiting divisional commander was briefly told the history of
painting. He was not impressed and passed derogatory remarks, he is bleeding
through his and ordered removal of the picture. This was his way of turning
face away from the reality.
This brigade was re-raised in Peshawar. New brigade commander desired
that photos of all the officers who had commanded this brigade should be
displayed in his office. They were approached to send their photographs in
uniform.
The commander, who had led the charge, sent his picture taken while
sitting behind the barbed wire fence. He wanted the picture to be displayed as
such till the defeat was avenged. His photograph was never displayed. This was
another way of turning the face other way.
These attempts to save one from injuries inflicted by the defeat were of
no use. The damage done to collective self-respect could not be undone this
way. The wounds of defeat are so deep that they hurt the genes. The woundscars are carried through generations, as is evident from an anecdote.
A six year old child, listening to his parents discussing post-retirement
life, intervened. He asked an apparently out of the context question from his
father. What are the chances of war before you retire? He was disappointed by
the reply of his father.
He pondered for a while and suggested that you must fight two wars and
win both so that you leave the arena on winning note; or at least fight one and
win that to be square with the enemy. He compared the wars with cricket series.
The child was my son born eleven years after his father had surrendered in East
Pakistan. The scars of humiliation undoubtedly last through generations.
Enquires to establish the causes of debacle were confined to searching for
scapegoats. Finding scapegoats strengthens the tendency to continue
committing wrongs and keep justifying those with the help of more scapegoats.

In addition to eradicating the causes of failings identified through

analysis of the wars, it is important to get rid of wrong practices, which are
either inherited or creep in with passage of time damaging the reputation and
professional pride. Some of these are:

The system of allocation and expenditure of funds; a legacy of the

colonial era.

Equating remunerations of soldiers with civil servants.

Compromising self-respect of soldiers by employing them on petty

welfare projects.

Conditions prohibiting soldiers to meet their family obligations.

Extravagance in the name of hospitality and the bullshit.

Misconstrued conception and practice of spirit-de-corps.

Temptations of Generals to rule the country.

Neglect to look after those who were once part of armed forces.

The system of allocation and expenditure of funds has caused colossal

damage to the reputation of the soldiers. This system was evolved by the British
to safeguard the imperial interests. Entire system was based on his mistrust in
native subordinates.
An Englishman as a lover could forego his claim to Throne, but in
business he was more like a Jew. To India he came as businessman and not as a
lover. Therefore, entire system revolved around checks and counter checks.
The system ignores that today no businessman is willing to provide
quotations for a packet of thumb-tacks, unless he is assured of purchasing the
item from him. Once the deal is struck, he will provide any number of fake
quotations and other documents.
The problem is further aggravated when bogus purchases are made. This
is necessitated when items purchased are not legitimately covered under a
particular head, but are needed to meet the genuine requirements of a unit. This
kind of forgery is resorted to avoid audit objections.
No matter how best a soldier might explain his problem to civilian
dealers, he is bound to doubt the integrity of the customer and may demand
some commission. When these efforts fail to work, the units manage to get
their bills cleared through MILAP (personal liaison), at times paying illegal
gratifications. The soldiers who perform this duty well may be termed
resourceful but to civilians they are no more than cheats.
The pre-requisites of acceptance of contingent bills appear to be
absolutely innocuous. However in the process of meeting the requirements of

quotations, cash memos and certificates, the reputation of the institution is put at
stake. It also damages the self-respect of those who have to resort to forgery in
performing a legitimate expenditure.
Despite the stringent and comprehensive rules of the system, millions of
rupees are misappropriated every year by flouting them. Though the individual
flouting the system might not pocket even a fraction of the misappropriated
money, yet he falls in the category of corrupts.
The system needs to be simplified for the sake of Amys reputation. All
funds allotted to a unit under various heads can be amalgamated and divided
into two annual grants, i.e. training grant and administration grant. A
commanding officer, who can be trusted with security of hundreds of men and
equipment worth millions, can also be trusted for funds worth few thousands.
The expenditure should be controlled by the commanding officers in
accordance with the laid down policy. Legitimacy of the expenditure can be
checked on quarterly basis. It will eliminate all dubious dealings with civilians
ensuring preservation of the reputation of the institution.
Pay and allowances of soldiers have been gradually equated with civil
servants with complete disregard to the difference in natures of two professions.
This happened during the periods when the country was ruled by the Generals.
The demands of civil service and those of profession of arms are quite
different from each other. A civil servant would be seldom required to lay his
life in the course of performing his duty, but the life is the very first thing which
duty demands from a soldier.
The man enduring rigours of service in unknown heights of Kara Karum
has been placed at par with the one enjoying comforts of a cozy office in
Islamabad. The reason for equating two men could be that both are prone to
fatal disease or injury; one because of abundance of comforts and the other for
want of these.
The change in social values necessitates that soldiers should be paid
handsomely. In not too distant past the criteria for determining the social status
of a person were different. Today the Order of Precedence for social standings
stands rearranged. It is now determined by the wealth and the nuisance value he
possesses, no matter in what capacity he has. The soldiers have none of the two.
Therefore, pay and allowances of the soldiers should be enhanced so that they
regain their position up the ladder.
To be paid handsomely is the privilege of soldiers. They should never be
given anything as charity in the name of welfare. The welfare schemes meant
for ex-soldiers are justified, but not those meant for serving soldiers,
particularly those run at formation and unit levels.

Such projects can provide some monetary relief to soldiers, but do no

good to their self-respect. Professional pride demands that a soldier must not be
asked to do unworthy tasks. This principle ought to be applied discreetly and a
soldier, irrespective of his rank and service, should never be employed in
manner which could hurt his self-respect.
Army provides accommodation only to a small fraction of married
soldiers. The remaining have only two months in a calendar year to fulfill their
family obligations. With the disintegration of joint family system, married
soldiers are left mentally disturbed. The guilt of their failing to shoulder
responsibilities towards their family affects their professional efficiency.
Extravagance in the name of hospitality and projection is a tradition
with far reaching ill-effects as compared to the appreciations that do not last
long. The wastage of meager resources and extensive efforts on bullshit do not
add to professional competence and excellence.
In armies all over the world, soldiers serving in a particular unit or
regiment develop a binding relationship known as spirit-de-corps. Development
of this spirit is natural to men who share hardships of professional life. This
spirit has many virtues.
It provides the soldiers a sense of belonging; an affectionate relationship
with colleagues or comradeship; incites individuals to work for betterment and
glory of the unit instilling the sense of pride. It is synonymous to team spirit
which facilitates collective motivation. In acknowledgement of its importance,
deliberate efforts are made for fostering it.
Spirit-de-corps should not lead to introversion. Misinterpretations of the
term should not be made an excuse to commit or condone misdeeds. It should
not promote favoutism. Interests of the Army should take precedence over
interests of a unit or corps.
Senior soldiers have developed the habit of indulging in politics. The
soldiers-turned politicians have done no service to the country or the reputation
of the armed forces. Although the number of soldiers actually employed on
imposing Martial Laws is never so large, yet the image of entire community of
armed forces is tarnished.
Martial Laws have harmed Armys reputation in many ways. Lust for
authority and luster of gold have little attraction for truly professional soldiers.
This exposure somehow has attracted many to one or both temptations.
In military circles the discussion of politics was once unheard of, but
today very few soldiers refrain from such indulgence. This is one of the adverse
effects of frequently imposed Martial Laws. This must end, sooner the better.

Retired soldiers are ambassadors of Armed Forces let loose in different

walks of the society. By their acts or neglect they damage the image of military
profession unwittingly; why? Having spent the best years of their lives in
service, they expect to be looked after, exactly the way older persons feel in the
family.
Once neglected, they indulge in activities contemptuous to the good name
of their ex-profession. Those who feel hurt, start talking ill about it. Some are
forced to seek petty jobs to beef up their financial resources or be pushed to
lower social status. In either case reputation of armed forces suffers. This can be
prevented by giving generous monetary benefits on retirement and by
preserving their sense of belonging thereafter.
The soldiers can no more survive on reputation earned because of
ignorance of the people. Today all barriers stand removed. The soldiers and
civilians frequently interact socially. The intimacy does not mean compromise
of respect, yet many myths about military profession have been broken.
The impressions about Army are now based on facts. The fact is that all
that glitters is not gold. A civilian does not find a soldier superior in integrity or
attitudes or social standings. The situation demands positive behaviour from
men in uniform for preservation of their professional pride.
The military bureaucracy must provide conditions conducive for fostering
the professional pride. Job satisfaction is the pre-requisite for inculcation of
pride. Non-conducive conditions create grumblers. Notwithstanding the
justifications of cribbing the grumbler loses the respect, despite his intentions
to the contrary.

SELF PRESERVATION
Instilling, preserving and enhancing professional pride through the rank
and file of armed forces is an important command responsibility. This is a
continuous process which begins with acquisition of professional competence.
Competence is directly proportional to acquired professional knowledge
and its effective application, which is mastered through rigorous practice. This
can only be achieved through an unending process of training. Therefore, the
training must focus on acquisition of professional competence at all levels. This
should be combined with motivation of all ranks based on the concept of Jihad
with emphasis on character building.
The nature of skills required at different echelons of armed forces varies
from each other; therefore, training methods should also vary. Training at higher
levels of command must aim at sharpening the abilities of decision making,

because outcome of war will largely depend on decisions taken by senior

commanders. Training in their case should eliminate the chances of committing
blunders in decision making, if not the mistakes.
Middle echelons of command in the hierarchy of armed forces are no
different from the middle class of the society. They are the back-bone around
which the entire system is built and functions. They are subjected to tremendous
pressures from all directions and they must be trained to withstand these
pressures.
They help the higher command in decision making by providing accurate
and timely information. To accomplish this task they must have the means to
collect, skills to collate and the moral courage to place even the bitter facts
before their superiors.
They are also responsible for ensuring initiation of prompt action on
decisions made by the higher commanders. The accomplishment of assigned
tasks depends on skillful handling of units and formations in the battlefield.
Therefore, their training should be based on outdoor activities whereby
involving practical handling of troops rather than indoor theoretical work.
The lowest echelon represents the production unit of the war machine.
The output of entire system depends on functional efficiency of this component.
Servicing and maintenance of this, through training and administration, has to
be carried out carefully and continuously.
Training at this level must aim at achieving perfection in use and
handling of weapons and equipment at individual as well as crew level. Small
combat teams should master the required battlefield techniques.
In modern wars the battlefield conditions change fast. In fluid conditions
the junior leaders have to act at their own very often. The ability to act
independently will largely depend on their wits and professional competence
acquired in peace time.
Hesitation in taking action and unduly waiting for instructions from the
superiors can prove embarrassing in peace time and disastrous during war.
Unfortunately initiative is suppressed ruthlessly at all levels of armed forces. At
times even difference of opinion is not tolerated.
In Army it is said that seniors are always right. The fact remains that the
seniors, in their capacity of decision making, have more chances of going
wrong, particularly when juniors are discouraged to speak out. Those not
prepared to listen to bitter facts are likely to go wrong more often.
Speaking out the bitter facts and to listen to them patiently need moral
courage; an important element of character. The training institutions should lay
adequate emphasis on character building. Theses institutions should break the

raw civilians and remould them into soldiers. The units should keep baking
them so that they retain the shape for long.
Undue emphasis on obedience to orders can curb the spirited display of
character qualities. Mistakes should be tolerated during peace time training and
views of juniors should not be brushed aside with sheer weight of seniority.
In character building the personnel of armed forces must be educated
about significance of conduct worthy of their profession. Unfortunately soldiers
fail to come up to the expectations of their civilian brothers while dealing with
them in official and private capacity.
A soldier must display extraordinary dignity in public dealings as the
civilians expect exemplary conduct from him. This is not an extraordinary
expectation from a person who performs his duties even at the peril of his life.
Pakistan came into being in the name of Islam. To fight for the security of
Pakistan is to fight for Allah. It is Jihad in true sense of the word and those who
toil in the way of Allah are the most exalted; soldiers of Pakistan fall in this
category.
The Crusaders have launched an all out media offensive to portray Jihad
as terrorism, because they have been unable to formulate equivalent of this
concept. Some unscrupulous rulers and scholars of Islamic World have already
succumbed to this propaganda. There is need to check adverse effects of this
psychological offensive launched by the civilized world.
Islam lays down a moral code, which has to be strictly followed in
waging war. Everything is not fair in war as practiced by those who wage it for
visible victories. Winning of victories and capturing of territories are
immaterial in the concept of Jihad.
The Ministry of Defence, in consultation with the Ministry of Religious
Affairs, should formulate and implement national motivation plan. Headquarters
CJCSC should coordinate implementation within armed forces. In Army the
directors of psychological warfare, public relations and religious affairs should
function under one Director General.
The authorities responsible for motivation have important responsibility
to prevent distortion of the concept of Jihad. The correctness of this ultimate
form of human struggle, i.e. to fight against the enemies of Allah and in selfdefence, can never be negated. However, misperceptions about this concept,
particularly as to who can pronounce waging of Jihad, must be eradicated.
Army, the largest organization consisting of able-bodied persons, forces
causes tremendous burden on a developing country, but it contributes very little
towards socio-economic uplift of the masses. Pakistan cannot afford that
hundreds of thousands of able-bodied citizens should remain non-productive.

Armed forces must contribute towards socio-economic well being of the nation
during peace by participating in various development projects.
Army is already making positive contribution towards development of
communication network and transportation sector. Other avenues should be
explored to enlarge the scope of the participation without disturbing the basic
orientation of the soldiers.
The troops deployed for surveillance and early warning should perform
anti-smuggling duties without being unduly apprehensive about ill-effects. The
regular troops will undoubtedly perform better than the existing arrangements.
Those who remain deployed on border for years at a stretch establish
undesirable contacts with smugglers; whereas troops rotated on half yearly basis
wont be able to have such contacts.
FWO and NLC have done commendably well in development of
communication infrastructure. Their involvement should be increased. This will
also ensure correct orientation of development-cum-defence projects of
communication network.
Apart from technical arms and services, Infantry and Artillery units
should also be employed in such projects. Soldiers from these arms can be sent
to engineers units on ERE (extra regimental employment) to perform
administrative jobs or even as unskilled labour. However, the employment of
troops from Territorial Armies should be restricted to the districts of or adjacent
to the area of operational responsibility.
Similarly the health department can be assisted in construction and
functioning of primary health units and rural health centres. Some of these
should be sited and designed so as to utilize these as advance/main dressing
stations during war.
Entire state land in districts along border should be afforested with the
assistance of soldiers. The plantations should be carried out during outdoor
collective training. To this end collective training periods should coincide with
spring and monsoon. Plantations will be beneficial, not only for environments,
but also provide cover during war.
Troops should help in maintenance of irrigation network as was
occasionally done in the past. Channels offering suitable lines of defence should
be handed over to troops for their maintenance and defence oriented
development. The maintenance should include de-silting and tree plantation
along canals and distributaries.

OBLIGATIONS OF CIVILIANS

Nations spare best of their men for their defence against foreign
aggression. Bulk of the annual budget is spent in meeting the needs of the
armed forces, which is forced drain of resources in a developing country like
Pakistan. After doing so much it would be most unfortunate for the nation, if it
does not hold its men in uniform in high esteem.
Over the years some segments of the society have started talking ill about
the armed forces. The root cause of this has been the tussle for power between
politicians and the generals. This row has led to converting some non-issues into
issues.
Criticism and condemnation of entire armed forces, due to fault of a few
individuals, is in no way justified. Politicians should desist from subverting the
symbol of national power driven by the political motives.
Politicians have reasons to feel irritated over military rule imposed
frequently since 1958. On each occasion martial law was prolonged for too
long. The restive politicians could think of no way to oust the military regime,
except through defaming the armed forces.
The leader that was installed by the Army was the one who initiated the
campaign of ridicule, with a view to securing and prolonging his rule. He
missed no chance to mention the surrender with the aim of degrading the
Army. He never realized that he was serving the cause of the enemy.
Pakistans adversaries were shrewd enough to recognize armed forces as
its strength. The propaganda against armed forces of Pakistan launched during
insurgency in East Pakistan continued. The statements of new leader in
Islamabad fitted well in the campaign of malign.
The most intelligent politician somehow failed in preventing military
threat to his rule. Another Martial Law was imposed in 1977. During this
martial law the ambitious politician ended up on the gallows, which led to
harsher criticism of the military rulers. Zia too met his destiny in a mysterious
accident.
This marked the beginning of tutored democracy in Pakistan. Four
elections were held within a decade as each elected government was removed
before completion of the tenure. Army was accused of dissolution of assemblies
every time.
Civilian rule ultimately ended when Musharraf ordered dissolution of
assemblies while flying over Arabian Sea. After coming to power he discarded
tutored democracy and decided to introduce controlled version of it.
These acts of the generals further annoyed the politicians, who keep
talking ill about the soldiers. Some of them tauntingly applaud the gallant
soldiers for conquering Pakistan thrice in five decades.

Such taunts neither improve the image of politicians nor prevent reconquering of Pakistan. They only sow the seeds of discord in minds of people
against the defenders of their Motherland, rendering both of them weak and
vulnerable.
They unwittingly make the task of adversaries easier, who taking
advantage of the situation coined phrases like sacred cow and propagated
those. Neither the politicians nor the generals seemed to have learnt any lesson.
Prompted by the adversaries the so-called nationalist politicians complain
about overwhelming majority of Punjabis in armed forces. Nationalists of other
provinces criticize this form of exploitation. They demand due share due share
in armed forces. Raising Sindh Regiment was the result of this pressure.
This speaks of unscrupulousness of the nationalist politicians and those
who succumb to their demands. After failing to secure representation in
assemblies they have started democratizing the armed forces.
They have been misled by the legacy of the British which showed
representation of the subjects from all parts of the empire. The array of
regiments, i.e. the Punjab, the Frontier Force, the Baluch and so on has been
taken as representation ensuring formula.
Class composition in various units of a regiment is another anomaly of
the inherited system. This was invented by the British to safeguard their
interests by having a check on uprising of any particular ethnic group. Retention
of this amounts to doubting patriotism of Pakistanis.
The legacy bears colonial outlook. It was required for fostering
competitive spirit. The Emperor of the empire needed to arouse this kind of
competition from the subjects, but the proud citizens of a free nation do not
require this.
It should have been shunned soon after the independence. Army is not the
institution where proportional representation of all groups can be ensured on
democratic basis. The representation can also not be mocked by giving
parochial names to various regiments. If that be the case then why not have
some units bearing names as 1st Sunni Battalion or 2nd Shia Battalion or 3rd
Wahabi Battalion.
Every Pakistani knows that Baluch and Sindh Regiments have
insignificant representation from the provinces they represent. This is self
deception. Thus the whole exercise becomes counter productive.
Citizens of the Motherland are not asked to lay their lives as Punjabis,
Sindhis, Pathans, Baluchis or Kashmiris, but as Pakistanis. Therefore, induction
of manpower in armed forces should be purely on merit. Proportional
representation should never be made a political issue.

Open merit policy will surely result in disparities in representation of

different areas. One should not be unduly apprehensive about negative effects of
unequal representation. The laid down standards must never be compromised
under any kind of pressure.
At least the armed forces should be kept above parochial thinking. No
army in the world can claim that it has equal representation from all nooks and
corners of the country. It is impossible to do so because of the difference in
socio-economic makeup of various areas of the country.
Other obligations of the nation include not employing regular troops on
police duties too frequently. Their employment on maintenance of law and order
is neither in the interests of civil administration nor armed forces nor general
public. The use of ultimate force, irrespective of the goodness of ends to be
achieved, is not desirable on many counts.
It reflects poorly on the competence of law enforcing agencies. Stringent
use of force creates ill-will for the soldiers. Therefore, employment of regular
troops should be resorted to very sparingly. When required it should be
augmented with units of suggested ISF.
The people must also understand their obligations towards defence of the
Motherland. It is collective responsibility of entire nation; armed forces are only
the means to do it. The nation should not suffer from complacence after raising
the armed forces. It must be mentally prepared for devastating sufferings of the
war.
The people should be so motivated that they have firm belief in
righteousness of their cause and in their abilities to defeat any aggression. The
overall state of nations motivation is reflected in its soldiers. A motivated
nation produces motivated soldiers.
The decision to confront an adversary is made by the civil government,
i.e. the politicians. In that they spell out the goals to be achieved by the armed
forces. It is an extra-ordinary responsibility, which demands in-depth knowledge
of armed forces and of modern warfare.
Contemporary political system does not guarantee the politicians, with
desirable military knowledge, coming to power. Hence the need to educate at
least those politicians who will be dealing with matters related to armed forces.

CONCLUSION
During pre-independence era the soldiers were treated differently from
the masses. They were favoured and kept away from common citizens. This was

in the interest of the Emperor. It should not be applied on free citizens of a free
country.
A nation reserved the right to scrutinize the performance of soldiers and
admonish them for their failings. It is also justified in condemning and showing
temporary disrespect for their misdeeds. But a perpetual state of disrespect to
armed forces can prove disastrous.
Such a state speaks poorly about soldiers as well as the nation. In the
absence of mutual trust national efforts to strengthen the armed forces start
diminishing, which ultimately ends up in absence of will to protect national
honour and pride.
Instead of unwittingly joining the campaign of ridicule, the people must
learn to applaud the acts of their brothers and sons in uniform. After all armed
forces reflect their own image. If there is something wrong with them, it should
be corrected rather than laughed at after passing cynical remarks.
In the face of physical and verbal bashing of the Ummah, the nation
requires rehabilitation of its will and confidence. The leaders have to not only
motivate the nation but also set the national effort on right direction to facilitate
achievement of intended goals.
To be, what one wants to be, concerted effort has to be put in. But efforts
of the people are like gales, the power which moves the ship; the leaders have to
act as the sails to determine the direction in which the ship must move. The
nation and its leaders have to remember that they are running out of time.

30th December 2003