Is Pakistan falling to Taliban?

[Neo]

Imran Khan a Mullah? Come on he can be at best a Peacenik, not a Mullah. He has too colorful a past to be accepted as a mullah!

Let me ask you Neo, Why the Peace deal? Why couldnt the Pakistani Army finish off the Taliban with atleast 1500 fighters killed etc which they were claiming. Why agree to a ceasefire when they were winning?

Read Gilani's official statement for brokering the peace deal. Valid arguments there.

 

[Neo]

NWFP govt unveils Nizam-e-Adl​

* NWFP chief minister says President Zardari approved Nizam-e-Adl
* Troops to adopt reactive mode, stay in area
* TNSM chief to leave for jirga in Swat in two days​

PESHAWAR: The NWFP government formally announced on Monday the implementation of the Nizam-e-Adl Regulations 2009 in Malakand division to placate the Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat Muhammadi (TNSM) and Swat-based Taliban, while the federal government is yet to finalise the agreement.

“The regulations will be implemented in Malakand following the return of peace and restoration of writ of the government,” NWFP Chief Minister Ameer Haidar Hoti told a press conference after chairing a jirga at the Chief Minister’s House. The jirga was attended by a 29-member TNSM delegation from Dir; leaders and representatives of political and religious parties; members of the NWFP cabinet and senior bureaucrats. He said the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation 2009 had been approved by President Asif Zardari following consultation with TNSM representatives, APP added.

Troop status: Hoti said troops would remain in “reactive mode” instead of “proactive mode” and would not target anyone unless threatened. He said army should be removed only after peace has been restored. Troops would play their role in reconstruction and rehabilitation, he added. He said the Nizam-e-Adl Regulations 2009 were in line with the constitution of Pakistan as it was the amended form of the regulations proposed for Malakand in 1994 and 1999. He said the new system had been devised to provide easy and speedy justice for the people. He said both the qazi and the police department would be held accountable for any delay. He announced that all civil cases would be resolved within six months and all criminal cases would be decided within a maximum of four months.

The chief minister rejected the impression that the sharia implementation decision had been taken under pressure from the Taliban, saying it was the demand of the people of Malakand. He also announced that Rs 400,000 would be given to heirs of each individual killed during the security operation in Swat and Rs 100,000 would be allocated to those injured. He said the federal and provincial governments and international donors would be asked to come forward and help in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Swat after peace had been restored in the valley.

Jirga: Sources told Daily Times TNSM chief Sufi Muhammad would head a jirga to Swat in the next two days to discuss the restoration of peace with the residents and the Taliban.

Earlier, NWFP Information Minister Iftikhar Hussain read an ‘announcement’ signed by three TNSM leaders and six NWFP government officials that declared “null and void” all laws “contrary to Quran and Hadith” in Malakand Division and Kohistan district of Hazara Division. Malakand division comprises seven districts of Swat, Bunir, Shangla, Dir Upper, Dir Lower, Chitral and Malakand. The announcement also requested the TNSM chief to cooperate with the government for the restoration of peace in Malakand and promised the Nizam-e-Adl Regulations would be implemented there after peace was fully restored.

 

[Neo]

Swat deal within ambit of Pak constitution: Gilani​

21 Feb 2009

ISLAMABAD: Under attack from the international community, including US, on the Swat peace deal with Taliban-linked group, Pakistan Prime Minister
Yousuf Raza Gilani has said that the pact was within the ambit of the country's constitution and there was "nothing to worry about".

He said that the peace deal enforcing Islamic laws in the restive Swat region would only become operational after restoration of complete normalcy in the area.

Gilani said the Nizam-e-Adl Ordinance would be signed by President Asif Ali Zardari only after the restoration of complete peace in the area.

"What we are doing is within the ambit of the constitution and there is nothing to worry about," he said.

Gilani's comments came as the US, NATO, India and Britain voiced concern over the pact with the Taliban-linked group, saying that it could be a ploy to enable the militant organisations to re-group.

Hardline cleric Sufi Mohammad of Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariah Mohammadi has been closeted with his son-in-law and Pakistani Taliban commander Maulana Fazlullah for the past two days to get the peace pact endorsed by the militant group, who have been waging a bloody campaign in Swat valley for enforcing Sharia laws.

 

[Neo]

Taliban announce truce in Bajaur ​

KHAR: The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on Monday announced a unilateral ceasefire and an end to resistance against security forces in Bajaur Agency. Speaking on their illegal FM radio, Bajaur TTP chief Faqir Muhammad said Pakistan was their country and its defence was their obligation. He said the Taliban did not want war against the government and the army, but some elements were fuelling differences between them, adding that the Taliban did not attack government installations and schools. hasbanullah khan

 

[Rage]

X-Posting this from another thread, original post courtesy of ahmedsid:

Taliban refuse to disarm after peace deal in Pakistan's Swat valley

Feb 20, 2009, 15:12 GMT

Islamabad - Taliban forces in Pakistan's restive valley of Swat, in talks Friday with a cleric who signed a peace deal with the government earlier this week, refused to disarm until Islamic sharia is completely enforced in the region, a Taliban spokesman said.

Maulana Sufi Mohammad, the top signatory of the Monday's peace deal with regional government in North West Frontier Province, tried to convince his son-in-law and Taliban leader in Swat, Maulana Fazlullah, to abandon violence in the talks held at an undisclosed location.

'The two leaders expressed satisfaction over the peace accord,' said Taliban spokesman Muslim Khan, speaking by telephone. 'But it has been made clear that Taliban will not lay down their weapons till the sharia is completely enforced.'

However, Khan hoped that the sides will reach on consensus in a couple of days.

Fazlullah has lead the Islamist insurgency in Swat, formerly a popular tourist destination, and surrounding areas since late 2007 in seeking to impose Taliban rule.

The insurgency prompted a security operation that has left more than 1,200 civilians dead and caused a mass exodus from the war-torn region located about 160 kilometres north-west of Islamabad.

Seeking to achieve peace, the NWFP government on Monday signed an accord with Mohammad and agreed to set-up Islamic courts in the Malakand region, where Swat and six other districts are located.

Mohammad has shunned the violence since he was released in early 2008 from a seven-year detention for sending thousands of fighters to Afghanistan to resist US-led international forces in that country.

But the Western governments and the liberals in Pakistan say the country has yielded to Taliban militants and the development may result in more sanctuaries for Islamist insurgents to launch cross- border attacks on NATO forces in Afghanistan, and in the spread of Taliban's power in more areas.

Richard Holbrooke, the special US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, told the television news network CNN on Thursday that he had called Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari to express US concern over a deal with the Swat Islamists and warned not to let the agreement to 'turn into surrender.'

The American diplomat said Zardari assured him that it was merely an 'interim arrangement' to stabilize the Swat region.

NATO has expressed the same worries over the deal, which has yet to be approved by Zardari.

Indian Defence Minister AK Antony on Friday described the new development as something that adds to his government's worries.

'From 26/11 (the Mumbai terrorist attacks) onwards, we are very much concerned about the security scenario,' he was quoted as saying by PTI news agency.


http://www.monstersandcritics.com/n...rm_after_peace_deal_in_Pakistans_Swat_valley_

 

[Rage]

ANALYSIS: Implications of the Swat deal —Najmuddin A Shaikh

February 20, 2009

It is a sad but almost foregone conclusion that this agreement will be no more effective than the ones concluded in the past, and that while there will be a welcome albeit temporary respite from the daily bloodletting in Swat, the strife will soon resume

Last week, I recommended that all power centres should adopt a clear direction and give a mandate to the foreign minister for his visit to the United States to review US policy towards Afghanistan. The general belief, which I shared, was that the army was evolving a new strategy in its war against the insurgents in Swat and that this would reverse the ongoing Talibanisation of the area.

What we have instead is an agreement crafted in Peshawar by the provincial government to enforce the ‘Nizam-e Adl’ in Swat.

This is an agreement with Mullah Sufi Muhammad. He may be the founder of the Tehreek-e Nifaz-e Shariat-e Muhammadi, and may have been a potent force in the 1990s. His spectacularly unsuccessful effort to assist the Taliban by taking 10,000 Swat youths to Afghanistan in 2001 and the decimation of this force, however, made him into a spent force. He courted arrest because he would otherwise have been lynched by the grieving parents whose children he led into Afghanistan.

It taxes credibility to suggest that this man will be perceived after his long years of incarceration and his isolation from the current insurgency — led by his estranged son-in-law Fazlullah — as being genuinely representative of the insurgents, or even of the people of Swat, who voted overwhelmingly for secular parties in the last election.

One cannot see Fazlullah — a.k.a. Maulana Radio — and his new patron (or partner) Baitullah Mehsud accepting Sufi Muhammad’s leadership even if the latter’s 300-vehicle convoy is welcomed in Mingora by crowds of war-weary Swatis. Fazlullah, and more importantly Mehsud, have a vision that goes well beyond the narrow confines of Malakand Division or even the tribal areas, and will not accept any restrictions on their ability to use Swati territory for operations elsewhere.

So why did the ANP leaders in Peshawar enter into this agreement?

That there was nostalgia for the swift justice that was available in the days of the Wali of Swat was clear, but it was also clear that the Swatis did not want extremism, and the induction of the Nizam-e Adl under the auspices of the likes of Fazlullah could mean nothing else. Sufi Muhammad has already declared that there is no place for elections in Islam and that he is opposed to democracy.

The ANP did this perhaps because it saw that the army and law enforcement agencies were not going to be able to quell the insurgency. The army would plead that no insurgency could be vanquished without the cooperation of the locals; yet the locals prepared to fight the insurgents felt that they could not get government support.

Local leaders, including ANP and PPP stalwarts, had developed the perception that for some reason or the other, elements of the insurgency were regarded as “untouchables”, protected by powerful patrons, while locals resisting the insurgents received short shrift from the authorities. They were perhaps hoping against hope that the agreement would buy them time to set things right elsewhere.

There is now a second argument that the purpose of the agreement was to drive a wedge between the Swat insurgency and the Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan of Baitullah Mehsud. This is based on the pious but implausible belief that the TNSM wants nothing more than the imposition of Sharia in Swat while it is the TTP that has other ambitions.

Both arguments are fallacious. The time bought is time bought for the insurgents. Sufi Muhammad, as shown by his unsuccessful foray into Afghanistan, shares the TTP’s ambition to re-establish Taliban rule in Afghanistan. He may not, but Fazlullah certainly wants, like Mehsud, the rest of Pakistan Islamised.

Furthermore, Sufi Mohammad and Fazlullah do not control all elements involved in the insurgency. If rumours are to be believed, there have been insurgents from Uzbekistan and Punjab that have moved into Swat.

It is a sad but almost foregone conclusion that this agreement will be no more effective than the ones concluded in the past, and that while there will be a welcome albeit temporary respite from the daily bloodletting in Swat, the strife will soon resume with the government in an even worse position than it is now. In the meanwhile, analysts in Pakistan and abroad will be examining with foreboding the fallout elsewhere in Pakistan and the region.

So far the Americans have been cautious in commenting on the agreement, suggesting that this was Pakistan’s internal affair, that it fell within the ambit of Pakistan’s constitution and that they were expecting further information from Pakistan on its implementation. There is no doubt, however, that this has caused concern in the establishment and is not seen as boding well for the region.

The foreign minister’s visit to Washington may take some time to materialise but our chief of army staff will be leaving for the United States on his first official visit as Admiral Mike Mullen’s guest today. He will be the first authoritative interlocutor to whom the American establishment will put questions about the import of this agreement:

Why does it mean for Pakistan’s internal polity; for the situation in the tribal areas; for the policy of denying sanctuary to Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban in Pakistan; and for the efforts toe ensure that Afghanistan is not used by extremists to launch attacks on the West?

His answers hopefully will be along the following lines:

* The agreement is admittedly unique in so far as it seems to have different laws in different parts of the country. But this has a long history; it is not an act of desperation. It has been entered into in good faith and in the belief that Sufi Muhammad will carry weight with the insurgents. The army will, however, continue to maintain a heavy presence in Swat and the training of forces for counterinsurgency will continue in Swat itself. While the army will be in reactive rather than proactive mode, it will make its presence felt whenever necessary.

* One element of the agreement, once peace has been restored, will be that insurgents not from the area will be asked/forced to leave. There will be an expectation on the part of the administration that connections with such clearly anti-Pakistan elements as the TTP will be attenuated if not severed.

* The agreement will ensure that normal administration is restored even while the courts are made more sharia-compliant. Normal administration will mean that in all other respects, there will be no restrictions on citizens that do not apply in other parts of Pakistan. As normalcy returns, there will be growing demands from local business interests to adapt the application of sharia to the requirements of the tourist trade, a major source of employment in Swat.

* If the agreement does not yield these results, proactive military action will be resumed and from then on there will be no “untouchables”. All locals prepared to resist the insurgents will get protection and there will be no more incidents of paramilitary forces not receiving army assistance when they call for it. Specially trained police forces will be inducted and their concerns about the measure of institutional support will be fully addressed.

* The Pakistan Army realises that if the peace deal fails, the army, as much as the politicians, will be engaged in a battle for the survival of Pakistan and this will take priority over the protection of the eastern border. India will realise, or should be persuaded to realise, that Pakistan’s internal problem is part of the larger problem of the region and it is in India’s interest that Pakistan’s armed forces should have no distractions. With the government’s blessings, the size of the force deployed in Swat will be multiplied and will work closely with local politicians and administrators.

* The situation in the tribal areas and the other border areas will continue to see a combination of military, political and economic development measures. We need to highlight the economic development aspect by identifying and undertaking on a priority basis high impact projects that generate employment and provide alternatives for the youth of the area.

The writer is a former foreign secretary


http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\02\20\story_20-2-2009_pg3_2

 

[Rage]

Violence still a threat in Swat Valley despite Sharia deal

February 19, 2009
Zahid Hussain in Islamabad

Waving black and white flags and chanting “God is great!” thousands of men marched through the streets of the main town in Swat Valley yesterday, led by a hardline cleric who called for peace in return for the enforcement of Islamic law.

“I have come here to establish peace and I will not leave until this has been achieved,” Sufi Mohammad, the aging, white-bearded leader of an outlawed Islamic movement, told his supporters in Mingora, the main town in the area.

On Monday the regional government in northwest Pakistan struck a peace deal with Mr Muhammad, who was released recently after spending six years in jail for leading thousands of his supporters to Afghanistan to fight American forces in 2001.

In return for the imposition of Sharia, the pro-Taleban cleric is expected to persuade Mullah Fazlullah, his son-in-law, who is spearheading the insurgency, to lay down arms.
Related Links

“It will be a good step if it ends the bloodletting,” Mohammed Jaffer, whose grocery business has suffered hugely as a result of the fighting, said as he watched from his shop doorway. It is a common sentiment in Swat, desperate for peace after years of violence. But reining in Mullah Fazlullah will be no easy task.

The firebrand cleric, 33, has turned what was once a favoured tourist destination into a byword for terror. The Taleban in Swat has conducted a campaign of beheadings, lynchings and bombings, and although Mullah Fazlullah announced a ten-day ceasefire on Sunday, analysts said that there was no indication that he would agree to put his weapons aside.

A similar deal last year collapsed in a few months and was blamed for giving the insurgents time to regroup. Many people — including Western politicians — accuse the Government of surrendering to terrorism and abdicating its responsibility to protect the lives and property of the people.

“This deal shows that the Pakistani Army has been defeated by the militants and the State is incapable of retaining control over its territory,” Athar Minallah, a leading lawyer and a former provincial minister, said.

At the end of 2007 Islamabad sent thousands of troops to quell the insurgency as the Taleban expanded its influence from the semiautonomous tribal areas into parts of the North West Frontier Province of which Swat, with a population if 1.3 million, forms a part.

Even though Swat does not border Afghanistan, Mullah Fazlullah pledges allegiance to Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Afghan Taleban movement.

Security officials say that large numbers of fighters from Waziristan, along with Uzbeks and Chechens, have joined the insurgents in Swat. That means that as many as 8,000 well-armed militants, allegedly funded by Arab charities, have been fighting government forces in Swat.

Mullah Fazlullah is also known as Mullah Radio for his sermons broadcast on a pirate radio station. He has declared a holy war against the Pakistani Government and in effect established a parallel Islamic regime.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5762527.ece

x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=xx==x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x


Into a Taliban wasteland of blood and fear

Daud Khattakis the first reporter for a British paper to enter Swat Valley, Pakistan, since the rebels who hold it agreed a ceasefire. He finds a hell-hole of bodies and ruin

February 22, 2009

IN the former mountain resort of Malam Jabba, where skiing thrived when the surrounding Swat Valley was an international attraction, one can still see the remnants of the Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation’s flagship hotel. The building was blown up by the Taliban because it was being used for “un-Islamic activities”.

Hundreds of other hotels in the valley have been destroyed or forced to close after threats from the militants.

“We used to charge 1,200 to 3,000 Pakistani rupees [£10.50 to £26] for a room per night. Now we are renting rooms for 200 rupees but nobody is visiting,” said Zahid Hussain, the manager of a luxury hotel which has officially shut down.

In Mingora, Swat’s largest city which once buzzed with foreign tourists, the shops are empty. The women’s clothes markets are either closed or show banners proclaiming: “Women are banned from entering this market.”
Related Links

Barbers have pasted hand-written posters to their shop fronts saying: “Shaving a beard is unIslamic. We have stopped shaving beards. Please don’t visit the shop for a shave.”

After two years of fighting between 5,000 Taliban militants and 12,000 troops from the Pakistan army, a ceasefire has been hammered out between the government and the rebels. It has left the Swat Valley, just three hours drive from Islamabad, the capital, under the control of a hardline cleric known as Radio Mullah for his fiery sermons on an illegal radio station.

American officials are concerned that the cleric, Maulana Fazlullah, who is intent on imposing a harsh version of sharia (religious law), will allow the valley to become a base for Al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

Last week I became the first journalist from a British paper since the ceasefire to venture past the heavily armed Taliban checkpoints and travel into the valley.

The journey was not made without trepidation. On Wednesday a journalist for Pakistan’s Geo television network, Musa Khan Khel, 28, was killed when he tried to secure an interview with Fazlullah. In a characteristic Taliban flourish, there were signs that his killers had attempted to behead him.

What I found in Swat was a hell-hole. Suicide bombings, car bombs and artillery have scarred the valley’s roads and buildings. The charred remains of hospitals and even a madrasah (seminary) litter the landscape.

Nearly 200 schools have been destroyed, all girls over the age of eight are banned from lessons and, in a symbol of the Taliban’s hatred of learning, the public library in Mingora has been wrecked.

The Taliban have banned music and dancing, television and internet cafes. Women cannot leave home without wearing a burqa, the all-encompassing robe. Justice has been enforced with floggings and public executions.

Everyone who can afford to leave has fled the valley. Police stations are deserted and fewer than 100 local policemen remain. In deserted parks the swings are rusting, creaking and empty.

Green Square, in the heart of Mingora’s bazaar, is now known as Khooni Chowk – or bloody square – because of the public executions carried out there by Taliban who leave the bullet-riddled bodies of police and soldiers for all to see.

Local residents said mothers used to warn their children not to pass through the square on their way to school. “Sadly, our children have got used to such sights,” said Fayaz Zafar, a local journalist. “They’ve become inured to scenes of decapitated bodies, suicide bombs and military operations. They now play ‘Taliban and soldiers’ in the playground.”

Naveed Khan, owner of a cable television network in Mingora, said that at first the Taliban had ordered him to block channels showing English language films. Then came a warning from its spokesman to remove all channels showing music and songs and all films in local languages. Later a Taliban commander ordered the closure of all the cable broadcasters. Snooker clubs and video game arcades have also been banned.

A bank security guard said: “The only thing we want is peace. I ask the Taliban, the government, the security forces not to kill us in the name of religion or restoring government. Let our children go to school and let us live how we like.”

Accounts of Taliban atrocities are many. Bukhtawar Khan’s wife, mother and sister-in-law were all brutally killed by armed men inside their home on February 4 while he was at work. Laiba, his two-month-old daughter, lost her mother.

Khan said the attackers were punishing his family for giving drinking water to soldiers manning a post near their home in the village of Matta Tehsil.

Khan’s younger sister Anwar Begum, who saw the murder, had a narrow escape. “I took shelter in a cattle pen and it saved my life,” she said.

She described how she saw 15 to 20 men storming towards the house. All had their faces covered and were carrying weapons, including rifles and grenade launchers.

Khan, who fled the village with his family, wants to see the killers brought to justice. While the Taliban militants reign supreme it seems a distant hope.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5780438.ece

 

[Rage]

I don't want to be anul about this, but I think Pakistanis should stop being naive and realize that the peace deal and the implementation of Shariat in Sawat is merely an opportunity for the Taliban to regroup, particularly at a time when the P'stani Army was making recent advances after repeatedly gaining and losing territory in the ongoing offensive. Moreover, the Taliban have shown their commitment (or lack thereof) to keeping its side of the deal on ceasing hostilities, evident through the targetting of 35 Shia at a funeral procession in a suicide attack not hours after the 'temporary ceasefire'- the prelude to the deal- was announced; a car bomb that killed 4 in Dera Ismael Khan just hours after; and yet more explosions in Darra Adam Khel yesterday and in Kohat today; a suicide attempt in Lakki on the 22nd ; the continued targeting of NATO logistics as in the one that destroyed a fuel tanker at Sultan Khel on the 22nd and a timed bomb that destroyed a bridge at Landi Kotal on the 21st ; the abduction of 12 civilians in Hangu on the 24th ; a potentially disastrous attempted (although thankfully failed) mass-assassination by a suicide bomber of senior police officials and judges in Peshawar yesterday and another attempted suicide attack in Karachi on the 22nd. The Taliban are and will remain a potent enemy for Pakistan for a good while to come, and by acquiescing to such a peace deal- moreover compensating the Taliban with $6 million in damages caused!- even while their professed purpose is to wage civil war on the state; and relinquishing any semblance of advantage that may have accrued to their Army in the preceding days is a catastrophe of mammoth proportions.

 

[Singh]

for the second point the war on terror and USA involvement in Afghanistan has already started the radicalization of society or accelerated it.

It was during the reign of the Jullundar born Zia that Pakistani society started becoming radicalised, Soviet-Afghan war was the most effective catalyst.

I dont understand the difference between both your questions, They are the same in the context of our exercise, a good chunk means the whole, as the minority will not be able to exercise power.

As a whole would mean the govt, the institutions, the power centers in Pakistan alongwith the general populace is radicalised.

A good chunk here needs to be defined on 3 levels territorial, numbers and influence.
For eg.

let us consider Balochis, they occupy the largest Pakistani province yet they are a lesser cause of concern as they are numerically weak and their influence is marginal on Pakistan etc.

If Karachi's 3million strong+ Pathans were to get radicalised (which they are day by day) would mean an all out civil war in the richest Pakistan city between the liberal Muhajirs and them. Sindhis, Shias can make this a multiple battle. Pashtuns from all over will try to help their brethren too. refer to November 2008, February 2009 riots in Karachi.

If Sindhs rural populace becomes radicalised, it would be a lesser cause of concern as the powerful wadheras with their private jails and armies will hunt them down lest they think of speaking out against their overlords.

Anyways, what makes you think Pakistan isnt radicalized as a whole in comparison to global standards TODAY?

Global comparisons are irrelevant, most of the Pakistani ruling elite are liberals. Though post-Zia Pakistani society has become more radicalised no doubt.

 

[Vinod2070]

Read Gilani's official statement for brokering the peace deal. Valid arguments there.

I agree with NEO. Imran khan may have a colorful past and may speak English like a Westerner but he is a hardline Muslim. A born again Muslim of sorts who has never criticized the terrorists and the Taliban and is openly sympathetic to them.

 

[ahmedsid]

I thought Imran Khan was a moderate, well I guess I am wrong.

Just read that 6 million Dollars were paid to Taliban for the Truce through a back door channel! Man if this is true, then I am saying, it is the dumbest truce agreement ever. They are telling its compensation for the killed and property damage, but I dont think so. If that was the case then the GOP should have stepped in and offered to rebuild the infrastructure and other stuff. This is just bribe if proved right!

http://news.in.msn.com/international/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1829145

 

[ZOOM]

A lot different. Balochi movement us backed by RAW and doesn't post serious threat to national security where as Taliban are a global threat.

Synderome of state of denial indeed. Once again blaim for Pakistan's own misfortune being blaimed to RAW. There is nothing anything new in it.

 

[ZOOM]

And how exactly do you think that will happen? Taliban's are in the cities but have almost no political support outside NWFP. Pakistan is home to 167 million people, 35 million live in Karachi and Lahore only. Taliban would have to take atleast these two cities to take over Pakistan. Not going to happen.

Well Taliban must be limited to few Geographic Boundry limit, but as far as Mentality of Pakistan is concerned Taliban is everywhere, hense forth Pakistani Prez was more optimistic about possible prospects of Pakistan's take over by Taliban.

 

[ahmedsid]

To be quite frank, RAW has helped the BLA just like they helped the MB in Bangladesh and same like ISI helps Kashmir insurgent and lends help to the Khalsa movement! Its a a game of cat and mouse, who is the cat and who is the mouse, depends on the ground they are in!

But let me tell you, dont overblow it, I mean RAW might be active in Pakistan, but Dont blame everything on it, like some Bangladeshi neocons do. As for ISI, well they do have very active cells in India but they are sort of feeling the Heat, so lying low I feel.

 

[ZOOM]

To be quite frank, RAW has helped the BLA just like they helped the MB in Bangladesh and same like ISI helps Kashmir insurgent and lends help to the Khalsa movement! Its a a game of cat and mouse, who is the cat and who is the mouse, depends on the ground they are in!

But let me tell you, dont overblow it, I mean RAW might be active in Pakistan, but Dont blame everything on it, like some Bangladeshi neocons do. As for ISI, well they do have very active cells in India but they are sort of feeling the Heat, so lying low I feel.

One thing I don't understand with you, what exactly makes you think that RAW is still active in Pakistan. Since India itself has clarified that there is no involvement of RAW in any of the Internal affairs of Pakistan.

Difference between Believing in myth created on various Pakistani defence forum about raw has one aspect and India's position has miles difference. If you have any valid link then come out with it.

If anybody interested in RAW's involvement in Baluch affairs, then come out with exact details rather then age old myth.

 

[Vinod2070]

Taliban could take over Karachi any time: Report

TNN & AGENCIES



Karachi/ New Delhi: The Taliban’s terror network is spreading across Pakistan quite rapidly. Not only has it reached Islamabad and Rawalpindi, but the Taliban might now be in a position to strike the financial and shipping hub of Karachi where the terror group has established hideouts, according to a report prepared by the CID of Pakistan police.
The Taliban “could take the city hostage at any point’’, according to the CID Special Branch of police, which has highlighted the presence of Taliban in Karachi in a report submitted to the Sindh government and the provincial police chief. Taliban fighters have “huge caches’’ of weapons and ammunition and could strike, possibly in a manner similar to the Mumbai attacks, the report says.
A systematic infiltration of Karachi by the Taliban has resulted in hills on the outskirts, slums and small motels becoming home to Taliban nests. Karachi has often witnessed sectarian violence and its residents are no strangers to violence and death, but the Taliban threat poses a grave danger to the city given the group’s agenda to slowly take over Pakistan. Now hardly any part of the country can be said to be free of the Taliban presence.
The Taliban’s growing reach will be a challenge not only to the authority of Pakistan president Asif Zardari, but also to the army itself, further aggravating a situation where the military agreed to a truce with Islamists in Swat. While the Pakistan army had shown a wavering resolve in fighting Taliban in the frontier and tribal areas, where its troops have failed to check the Taliban, the task of security forces in an urban setting is even more difficult. The police report provides details about secret Taliban hideouts and their presence in areas like Sohrab Goth and Quaidabad.
Besides living in small motels in these areas, the Taliban are hiding in the hills of Manghopir and Orangi town and in other low-income areas and slums, the Daily Times newspaper quoted the police report as saying. The daily also quoted sources as saying that the deputy chief of the banned Tehrik-e-Taliban, Hasan Mahmood, was hiding in Karachi.

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Defa...geLabel=1&EntityId=Ar00104&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T

 

[Vinod2070]

Losing integrity: Is Pakistan dividing again?

With the Taliban moving into Swat and trying to take control of the Pashtun area, Pakistan risks being torn apart by its own contradictions, says Shaun Gregory



There is a school of thought which has long argued that the creation of Pakistan in 1947 was a geographical, ethnic, cultural, economic, and political artifice, sewn and held together only by the weak thread of a questionable religious homogeneity, and that consequently the project of Pakistan would eventually be torn apart by its own contradictions. The break up of East and West Pakistan in 1971, the failure of successive leaders in Islamabad to build a nation through a just federal dispensation, and the unwillingness to settle the contours of its borders with its neighbours, has meant that the continuation of Pakistan has remained an open question.
On the face of it, the success of the murderous Mullah Fazlullah and his militant army of 3,000 men in taking control of Swat and Malakand areas of Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP), would not appear to be of great significance in the unfolding of the destiny of Pakistan. However, history may well record that the abject surrender of Swat in a phoney ‘peace deal’ marked an important stepping stone on the path to Pakistan’s destruction.
While the weak and hapless Zardari/Gilani government continues to waste precious political capital on PPP infighting and avoidable confrontation with Nawaz Sharif, to the west of the Indus river dynamics are unfolding which have placed Pakistan’s integrity once more in question. Since 2001, the Pakistan Army and ISI have been playing a dangerous game in providing sanctuary to the Afghan Taliban in the Pashtun areas of Northern Balochistan and in the FATA, in the expectation that Mullah Omar would orchestrate a comeback in Afghanistan, displace the Karzai regime or any of its western-backed successors, force NATO from the region, and reverse India’s growing influence in Afghanistan. In early 2009, this strategy appears to be working. The Afghan Taliban are influential across all but the most northerly areas of Afghanistan and a peace deal of some sort with Mullah Omar is predicted this year or next.
Pakistan has, however, entered a Faustian pact with Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura, and the darker implications of that bargain have only now begun to dawn on Pakistan’s ruling elite. As the Afghan Taliban have regained power and momentum from sanctuaries in Pakistan, they have also created and driven the context for the emergence and evolution of virulent forms of Pakistani militancy and terrorism, both in Pakistan’s Pashtun areas and across Pakistan. These dynamics have been reinforced by the Pakistan army/ISI’s continued embrace of Punjabi terrorists, and by the military focus of the US-led war on terror which has fuelled radicalisation on both sides of the Durand Line.
In this context tribal armies in the FATA have mutated into new forms of radical extremist groups such as Baitullah Mehsud’s TTP and Fazlullah’s TNSM. Al-Qaida has re-emerged and re-established something of its global reach, foreign fighters from as far as Algeria, European diasporas, western China and the Philippines have once again poured into the region, and the huge expansion of largely Saudi and locallyfunded madrassas has ensured a continual supply of young Afghans and Pakistanis ready to die for the militant cause.
The Pakistan army and ISI have presided over this rising tide of terrorism and religious extremism in the expectation that they could achieve their aims in Afghanistan through the Afghan Taliban while keeping control of Pakistani militancy and terrorism on their own side of the border. In the wake of the bombing of the Marriott hotel in Islamabad in September 2008, and of the escalation of terrorist violence in Pakistan’s cities which preceded it, that calculation has proven disastrously wrong.
Given the perilous situation in which the Pakistani state now finds itself, the question of why the Pakistan army/ISI has still not thrown its lot in with the US and NATO and unleashed the full force of the Army and the ISI against the Afghan Taliban, the tribal militants, and al-Qaida, requires an answer. Only two arguments make any sense: either the Pakistan Army-ISI is unwilling to do so or it is unable to do so. If the former, then that can only be because the Army-ISI still believes it can contain the militancy and terrorism within Pakistan. If this is the case, then one wonders why the Army-ISI continues to think that and how many more Marriotts on the push side, and what western incentives on the pull side will it take before the Army and ISI make a decisive break with past policy?
More gravely for Pakistan, for its neighbours, and for the West, the other possibility is that the Pakistan Army and ISI may genuinely have reached the practical limits of their ability to control militancy and terrorism. Pakistan has committed up to 120,000 troops to the FATA region and since September 2008 has not been able to make a substantive impact in Bajaur and Mohmand Agencies.
Perhaps the real key to understanding the situation lies in a synthesis of both arguments. Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura is understood, through a decentralised command structure and with the support of al-Qaida, to broadly control the tribal militants in Pakistan, such as the TTP and TNSM, which pose the most direct threat to the state of Pakistan. Mullah Omar and the Pakistan Army-ISI are, thus, locked in a fearful stalemate: Mullah Omar checks the power of Pakistan’s militants and holds them back from escalating violence against the Pakistani state, and in return the Pakistan Army-ISI continues the support and protection of Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura and pays lip-service to western demands for tough action against the Afghan Taliban. Either way, the Pashtun areas of Pakistan are beyond the reach of the Pakistani state and it is difficult to see that they can be recovered. The situation in Swat, thus, stands as an expression of a larger crisis of state legitimacy which for all practical purposes will likely see another piece of Pakistan break away.
The writer is a professor at the Pakistan Security Research Unit, University of Bradford

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIH&login=default&Enter=true&Skin=TOI&GZ=T

 

[Vinod2070]

PAKISTAN: SWAT DEAL
Perfect Cemetery?
Pak society and media stand sharply divided on the Swat deal

Amir Mir

Usually, a peace deal anywhere aims to unite society, heal festering wounds and really speaking insulate the future from a bloody present. In Pakistan, though, the deal between the Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Mohammedi (TNSM) and the government has driven a wedge between the liberals and conservatives, the Urdu and English media, the rulers and their people. Worse, the deal threatens to provide an opportunity for the militants to regroup and become a bigger menace to the Pakistan of the future.

Ironically, what unites these contending sections in Pakistan is the belief that the deal, signed between the TNSM and the NWFP government, marks the defeat of the State in the picturesque valley of Swat in Malakand division.

Some see the deal as a defeat of the state. Unable to vanquish the Taliban, they bought peace through it.

Unable to vanquish the Taliban—to which the TNSM is closely linked—the State has bought peace through the Swat deal that allows the implementation of Shariat in return for the militants terminating their attacks on security forces. This guarantee from militants has been underwritten

by TNSM chief Sufi Mohammed, who espouses pro-Taliban views.

Imtiaz Alam, secretary-general of the South Asian Free Media Association, says the deal is part of the Taliban's strategic gameplan to push its advance countrywide. "As in the past," he explains, "the Taliban will use this ceasefire to regroup, rearm and consolidate its position in territories under its control, even as it works to extend its influence in contiguous territories. Earlier too, such peace deals had only helped the Taliban-Al Qaeda forces to secure safe havens and expand the sphere of their jehad."

There are already worrying signs for the future.

Days after the Swat deal was signed, three major Taliban groups formed a new alliance—the Shura Ittihadul Mujahideen (Council for Unity of Holy Warriors)—in the twin tribal agencies of North and South Waziristan. They declared the fugitive ameer of the Afghan Taliban,

India ought to worry: the Taliban says it has united to defeat Christians, Jews and Hindu infidels.

Mullah Mohammed Omar, as their supreme leader and Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden as their role model. The leaders of the three groups—Baitullah Mehsud, Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur—reportedly met in secret and decided to resolve their differences to foil the crafty designs of the external forces to divide the multiple Taliban groups operating in Pakistan.

The Taliban announcement heralding unity ought to interest Indians. It said, "As Jews, Christians and Hindu infidels stand united against Muslims under the leadership of the United States, the mujahideen have set aside internal differences and joined hands." The following day, on February 23, Mullah Omar reportedly wrote to the three leaders admonishing them for targeting Pakistani security forces and killing their Muslim brethren. "If anybody really wants to wage jehad, he must fight the occupation forces inside Afghanistan," the letter stated. "Our aim is to liberate Afghanistan from the occupation forces, and death and destruction inside neighbouring Pakistan have never been our goal."

The Swat deal suits not only Pakistan, says senior defence analyst Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, but also the US and NATO. As she told Outlook, "It's argued that the reason why US secretary of state Hillary Clinton was not eager to denounce the deal was that this was considered a way of dividing Al Qaeda-controlled Taliban and the Swat Taliban. However, the bottomline is that while the conflict might be arrested for the short term in one part of the country, it might escalate in other parts where groups of people acting like the Taliban could impose their will on the rest of the population—in the name of changing the judicial, economic or political system.


Ultimately, this could even redefine Pakistan's identity completely."

The Swat deal is a threat to Pakistan's very identity, the progressives insist, because it institutionalises a framework of Islamic laws and empowers religious authorities (qazis) to hear cases in Malakand division. The government, however, justifies the deal arguing that the new judicial system had been a popular demand for years and seeks to provide speedy justice to the people of Malakand.

Against the motion: Pakistani women rally against the Taliban in Karachi Not true, contend the critics, pointing out that the masses in the 2008 election had voted for secular, liberal parties. Indeed, both the Awami National Party and the Pakistan People's Party, promising to fight extremism, had together won more seats than the six-party religious alliance—the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal—and subsequently formed an alliance to rule the NWFP. The deal, critics also say, legitimises the politics of Sufi Mohammed, who had taken 10,000 people from Swat to help the Taliban fight the United States in Afghanistan post-9/11. Many of his fighters perished there and Sufi was imprisoned on his return. Again, Sufi's son-in-law Maulana Fazlullah (Radio Mullah) runs a private militia which wreaked havoc on Swat in recent years, compelling thousands to flee the area. By providing amnesty to Fazlullah and his men, as the deal does, militant groups are likely to use terror to blackmail the state into submission elsewhere also.

This struggle for identity also finds an echo in the sharp division between the Urdu and English media. The Urdu press has largely applauded the Swat deal and has declared it as the government's wisest decision. The editorial of a leading Urdu daily, the Nawa-i-Waqt, said, "It's quite a timely decision and a sensible one at that too. The war that had erupted in Swat was a proxy war that Pakistan was fighting on America's behalf." Another Urdu paper, the Daily Pakistan, endorsed the view. "Finally," its editorial read, "the Pakistani government has taken a decision that directly and positively affects the population of Pakistan while ignoring the enormous pressure from US. This government has shown the guts to go with the national interest and ignore it if it upsets America. Bravo."

In contrast, the English media, both print and electronic, has castigated the Swat deal, describing it as a consequence of Islamabad's duplicity and desperation. The News, for instance, pitilessly detailed what President Asif Ali Zardari had said days before the Swat deal was signed. Zardari had reiterated, the newspaper noted, his government's resolve to uproot terrorists. "We are fighting for the survival of Pakistan," the daily quoted Zardari as saying. But then he did a somersault in Beijing where he told journalists that the fight against terrorism couldn't be won with guns and bombs alone. The News concluded, "The peace deal will produce not more than a brief lull before a rising storm, even as Islamabad's manifest weakness is exploited in new theatres across the country, creating expanding spaces for extreme violence."

English daily Dawn voiced similar concerns when it noted that the Swat deal would see militants raise fresh demands and impose new conditions for peace that the state would then find difficult to accept. Topping the list of new demands would be withdrawal of all troops from Swat and the release of all militants in state custody, the paper predicted. The editorial asked the state to remain firm, saying that "legitimate demands for a better justice system should be met but control of the area should be taken back and the terror infrastructure dismantled".Of course, that's easier said than done.

http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20090309&fname=Swat+(F)&sid=1

 

[Vinod2070]

Can Pakistan Divide Taliban?

There are indications that there is potential rift between Pashtuns fighting for self-rule and Al Qaeda led terrorists aspiring for global jihad. Why not encourage it?

Rajinder Puri


There is continued alarm and opposition by India to the agreement between the Pakistan government and the Taliban in Swat. External affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee reiterated that no deal with the murderous Taliban could be tolerated. Cannot such criticism wait till events unfold, at least until the ten-day ceasefire expires? Evidence suggests that Pakistan is attempting to divide the local Taliban from the Al Qaeda-led terrorists.

The Americans widened the scope of bombing raids to target some training camps run by Baitullah Mehsud who dominates Waziristan. This was at the same time as the ceasefire with Maulana Fazlullah was being attempted through his mentor and father-in-law, Maulana Sufi Mohammed. The third force in the Pakistani Taliban is led by Mullah Nazir.

The Mehsuds are the largest tribe accounting for 60 per cent of the Pashtun population in FATA. Mullah Nazir leads the Wazirs tribe which is about 35 per cent. The Wazirs are richer and have been the traditional rulers in the past. Nazir also controls the Punjabi Taliban, consisting of Punjabi speaking Pashtuns settled in the Punjab for generations. The Pakistan government is reputed to have backed Nazir as a counterweight to Baitullah. But right now Baitullah Mehsud has the most powerful and well armed force. Wazirs and Mehsuds have always been rivals but they openly clashed in March 2007 when Wazirs led by Mullah Nazir rose against foreign militants, mostly from central Asian origin, and ousted them from Waziristan’s capital, Wana. All three, Fazlullah, Baitullah and Nazir view each other with suspicion. All acknowledge loyalty to Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban. But Fazlullah is reckoned to be closer to Mullah Omar who heads the Afghan Taliban while Mehsud is reportedly loyal to Al Qaeda’s number two and effective commander, Ayman al Zawahiri.

In the tortuous intrigues of terrorist factions it becomes difficult to fathom who is allied with whom. Do Zawahiri and Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden’s father-in-law, see eye to eye? Credible reports suggest that Mullah Omar is trying to make peace with the Americans through Saudi Royals, and has even presented a 7-point peace plan. If so, this would hardly be approved by Zawahiri. On the other hand Zawahiri had launched attacks on Chinese engineers in Pakistan through Baitullah’s brother, Hakimullah Mehsud. That suggests that the Mehsuds are loyal to Zardari who has visions of creating legendary Khorasan, comprising Afghanistan, Kashmir, Pakistan and Iran, as the launching pad for global jihad.

There are indications therefore that there is potential rift between Pashtuns fighting for self-rule and Al Qaeda led terrorists aspiring for global jihad. If Pakistan is trying to separate the two, should it not be encouraged?

http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20090224&fname=puri&sid=1

 

[Vinod2070]

There are indications therefore that there is potential rift between Pashtuns fighting for self-rule and Al Qaeda led terrorists aspiring for global jihad. If Pakistan is trying to separate the two, should it not be encouraged?

That's an interesting observation. I am not really sure that is the case though.