Translate

Search This Blog

Saturday, March 20, 2010

General Kayani - A Musharraf in the making?


General Ashfaq Kayani, the chief of staff of the Pakistan Army, is much in the news these days. Senior foreign diplomatic officials make it a point to consult with him when in Islamabad. He has just renewed the term of the ISI chief, Shuja Pasha, and he has recently commented at length on Pakistan’s role and interests in Afghanistan. His presence in the political limelight is nothing short of intriguing. After all, Pakistan has a legitimately elected government and is ostensibly a functioning democracy. More to the point, barely a year ago, a host of commentators had blithely argued that he would prove to be the model for an apolitical general.  Alas, those hopes and expectations have been sadly belied. Even as early as December 2008, his clout was evident. In the wake of the horrific Lashkar-e-Taiba spearheaded attack on Mumbai, President Asif Ali Zardari had offered to send the ISI chief to New Delhi for discussions about the attack. Within hours, however, Army Headquarters countermanded Zardari and the trip was called off. Since then the putatively apolitical general has become steadily more visible in the political arena. To any informed observer of Pakistan his increasingly public role in the country’s politics should come as no surprise. Since the first coup under self-styled Field Marshal Mohammed Ayub Khan, the country has established a rather lopsided pattern of civil-military relations. Even when civilian governments assumed power they lived under the long shadow of the military. Only in the aftermath of the disastrous 1971 war when the military establishment was justly discredited, thanks to their ineptitude and brutality in East Pakistan, did they recede to the barracks to briefly lick their wounds. Such an interregnum, of course, was shortlived . Thanks to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s feckless ways the military again reasserted itself under General Zia-ul-Haq , and Bhutto was sent to the gallows.  During Zia’s regime the accretion of military power was nothing short of breathtaking. Thanks to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan assumed the status of a "front-line" state and played a pivotal role in supplying the mujahideen with American military and logistical assistance. Sadly, the Ronald Reagan administration in its relentless and justifiable quest to dislodge the Soviets from Afghanistan ignored the many unsavoury aspects of Zia’s regime. Lavished with American economic and military largesse and free of any external pressures for domestic restraint, Zia expanded the reach and scope of the military across Pakistan’s state and society. The military’s tentacles spread from running municipal functions to heading up educational institutions.  Even when Zia died in a mysterious plane crash and democracy was restored, the military did not relinquish its political role altogether. Along with a very powerful presidency it remained one of the key pillars of power in Pakistan. The end of the Nawaz Sharif regime and General Pervez Musharraf’s ascent to power saw a further diminution of civilian authority in the country and the commensurate expansion of military power. Once again, as during the Afghan war years, the Bush administration proved to be quite indulgent of the Pakistani military’s expansion of its domestic role. The exigencies of relying on Pakistan to overthrow the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and to pursue al-Qaida in the region proved to be of far greater significance than nudging Musharraf to cede political authority.  Is the Pakistani state then doomed to this tragic and desultory cycle of periodic transitions to democracy and then a return to military rule? The forces of path dependence, as institutional economists have explained, will probably rule the day. The early choice of institutional pathways set states on particular courses which are extremely difficult to radically alter. Consequently, in the absence of concerted and sustained external pressures for fundamental and structural reforms, there is little reason to believe that the bloated military establishment will, of its own accord, shrink its role in Pakistan’s politics and society.  Given this infelicitous past, General Kayani’s increasing assertiveness is entirely unsurprising. In the wake of the London conference which gave Pakistan a disproportionate role in shaping Afghanistan’s future, the Pakistani military apparatus believes that it enjoys the imprimatur of the international community to play a more overt role in shaping Pakistan’s critical foreign and security policy choices. Quite frankly, all that has really changed is that it no longer feels it must quietly manipulate its civilian marionettes from the shadows. Now General Kayani and his associates can stand tall and determine the moves of their pliant charges with the skill of master ventriloquists and puppeteers.

Pakistan Taliban arrests may hurt peace efforts


The arrests of top Taliban figures in Pakistan abruptly halted secret U.N. contacts with the insurgency at a time when the efforts were gathering momentum, the U.N.'s former envoy to Afghanistan said Friday. Kai Eide, a Norwegian diplomat who just stepped down from the U.N. post here in the Afghan capital, said the discussions that he and others from the United Nations had with senior Taliban members began in the spring of 2009 and included face-to-face conversations in Dubai and elsewhere. He criticized Pakistan for arresting the Taliban's No. 2 and other members of the insurgency, saying the Pakistanis surely knew the roles these figures had in efforts to find a political resolution to the 8-year-old war. Pakistan denies the arrests were linked to reconciliation talks.

Israel must back down on construction to boost Middle East talks

The 'Quartet' of leading diplomats in Middle East peace negotiations demanded an Israeli rethink as it set a two year deadline for a Middle East peace deal. "(The quartet) condemns the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem," the statement read. "The annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognised by the international community." It added that the city's contested status could only be resolved through negotiation rather than unilateral action. Israel's construction plans in East Jerusalem triggered a rare crisis in its carefully choreographed relationship with Washington, prompting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to privately berate Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Middle East quartet, which was established in 2002, comprises United States, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union. The Moscow meeting was also attended by Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon and EU foreign policy chief Cathy Ashton. Tony Blair, the quartet's special representative, and Senator George Mitchell, the US Middle East envoy, were also present. The quartet added it was "deeply concerned" by what it described as the worsening humanitarian and human rights situation in Gaza. Although it did not spell out exactly how it intended to get Israel to comply with its various demands, Mr Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said he felt Israel would get the message. "We are convinced that Israel will hear this and understand it in the right way. We will use all means at our disposal to get Israel and the Palestinians talking." Mrs Clinton appeared keen to put the recent diplomatic spat with Israel behind her while sticking to her demand that the Israeli East Jerusalem plan be dropped.

2011 – The year Palestine is born?


By the summer of 2011, Salam Fayyad may finally succeed in totally reforming the Palestinian Authority – and that could spell big trouble for Israel. The summer of 2011. That is when Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has scheduled the unveiling of the new and completely reformed, rebuilt and expected-to-be responsible PA. While the implementation of this program – widely known as the “Fayyad Plan” – is still more than a year away, it already has Israel extremely worried. This is because it may lead to a third intifada, during which Israel would be fighting a 20,000-strong militia, half of which was trained by the US and EU, and not terrorist organizations like Hamas or Islamic Jihad. The scenario is quite simple. Fayyad succeeds in implementing his ambitious plan – ending the PA economy’s dependence on Israel, reforming the security forces, unifying the legal system and downsizing the government – and decides that now is the time for statehood. Work on such a declaration is already being spearheaded by PA President Mahmoud Abbas and chief negotiator Saeb Erekat. The problem though is that Israeli settlements are still located in the West Bank. The solution – an official PA decision to launch a violent terror campaign branded around the world as a war for freedom. The second scenario heard these days in the corridors of the IDF’s Central Command base in Jerusalem is that Fayyad will succeed in implementing his plan and will decide to take his case to the UN Security Council, where he will ask for his newly-formed state of Palestine to be recognized. The Europeans will likely raise their hands, as will the Russians and the Chinese. The US is the wild card. On the one hand, Washington has traditionally used its veto power to thwart anti-Israel resolutions. On the other hand, if the current crisis with the White House continues and even gets worse, President Barack Obama could decide to let the resolution pass. This will automatically lead to calls on Israel to immediately withdraw from the West Bank. When it fails or even just falters, it will come under an unprecedented hail of international criticism and become a pariah state. There is also a third alternative, which is the one the IDF hopes will materialize.

Pakistan's Future: An Indian's Viewpoint


Pakistan�s establishment, both military and the spasmodic civilian ones, in the last sixty years, have enslaved the mindset of the Pakistani masses in an intense hatred of India. India in all these years has been painted in lurid colors as a country bent on the disintegration of Pakistan and its re-absorption in India proper. The Pakistani masses of successive generations have been led to believe that the devious Hindus cheated Pakistan and deprived it of Kashmir. The failure of successive Pakistani military rulers to provide stable governance, political stability and economic development is also blamed on India for keeping Pakistan under siege and therefore the requirement of diverting exorbitant financial resources from social development to maintaining an outsized Pakistan Army and its nuclear weapons and missiles arsenal. The result of these sixty years of Pakistan�s existence as a �garrison state� where the Pakistan Army has gone in for military coups, every time democracy was about to strike roots, is that Pakistan�s future seems dismal. Pakistan�s future, if it seems dismal, is not due to any diabolical Indian designs to fragment Pakistan. Pakistan has been brought to its present dismal state, because of the megalomaniac obsessions of its military rulers and its bureaucratic elites, of imperial pretensions of harking back to Mughal grandeur and the divine right of Muslims to rule Hindustan. Pakistan in these sixty years of its existence has been in a constant �state of denial� about its strategic asymmetries with India. To redress the existing asymmetry it has resorted to balance India by offering itself as a �rental state�( in the words of a noted Pakistani analyst) to USA and China. Pakistan has not succeeded in this game as despite Pakistan acting as a regional destabilizer it has failed to arrest India�s emergence as a regional power and a key global player. At the beginning of the 21st Century the stark reality is that India is on an ascendant curve towards remarkable economic growth whereas Pakistan continues to be in the mire of a �garrison state� and a �rental state�. It cannot survive without an American economic life support system and military support of China. By no stretch of imagination can this be termed as the attributes of a nation with imperial pretensions. It is now becoming evident to the Pakistani masses that their military rulers have led them to this dismal state of affairs, when they compare India�s relative progress in all fields to their own. To the growing peace constituency emerging in the Pakistani masses, which want peace with India, this author as an average Indian would like to project to them the following viewpoints: Indians, by and large, desire a stable and �DEMOCRATIC� Pakistan, secure both within and without.
  • India has never officially or clandestinely organized any hate campaigns against Pakistan.
  • India�s aim all along has been to make stride towards its destined emergence as a key global player within a democratic framework and bridging its cultural , religious and ethnic diversities; and all this without being distracted by the propensity of Pakistan�s military rulers towards military adventurism against India.
  • India has an overwhelmingly large peace constituency which is hyper-active in promoting peace with Pakistan.
  • Within India, a distinction is dawning in differentiating the Pakistani establishment�s propensity for conflict with India.
  • (using terrorism tinged with religious hostility as tools of state policy) and the growing yearning for peace of an enlarging peace constituency in Pakistan.
  • Pakistan�s failings and its dismal state of progress are not of India�s making. The bogey of an Indian threat has been manufactured by the Pakistan Army Generals to provide a pretext to stay in political power in Pakistan and all that goes with it financially for them.
India has gone out of the way to promote peace with Pakistan, not from a position of weakness but from a confidence of its inherent strengths and a firm conviction that a stable and democratic Pakistan is in its own interests of having a stable neighborhood. A democratic Pakistan devoid of military control by Pakistan Army Generals is the only solution for Pakistan to wade away from the muck that its military rulers have placed it in, including the present one. If Nepal within a span of few weeks could dramatically replace the existing order and usher in democracy with peoples power, what holds back the dynamic people of Pakistan ?  

Security at high alert


Air raids were carried out by Israeli cobra helicopter gunships in and around Jerusalem while Israeli police remained on high alert, deployed in and around East Jerusalem, restricting entry into Al-Aqsa mosque to men over 50 and women of all ages. Residents of West Bank were restricted from entering the mosque for prayer, many of them were returned at the checkpoint as only those with special permits are allowed access to Jerusalem. Dozens of rock-throwing Palestinians clashed with police in several locations in East Jerusalem. Police responded with tear gas and rubber bullets. Medical officials said at least 40 Palestinians were treated in East Jerusalem hospitals. Police said two policemen were hurt.

In short


The other world news stories of the day in brief... 
US believes top al-Qaeda figure killed in strike 
WASHINGTON – A US drone strike in Pakistan last week appears to have killed a senior al-Qaeda planner who Washington believes helped organise December’s suicide bombing at a CIA base in Afghanistan, US officials said yesterday. The CIA has stepped up the intensity of attacks since the December 30th bombing, which killed seven CIA agents. – (Reuters)
Togo president’s poll win confirmed 
LOMÉ – Togo’s constitutional court yesterday confirmed incumbent president Faure Gnassingbé’s victory in a March 4th election that opposition leaders said was rigged. The vote in the tiny west African nation was widely seen as a test for democracy in the region. – (Reuters)
Carter urges Israel policy shift  
ATLANTA – Former US president Jimmy Carter called yesterday for direct talks between Israel and Palestinians towards a two-state Middle East solution, but said this would take a dramatic shift in Israeli policy. 

World’s High-Speed Train Makers Set Sights on U.S.


Walt Disney World in Florida may be the next stop for bullet-train makers in Japan and China. Central Japan Railway and China South Locomotive & Rolling Stock are competing for the $8 billion that President Barack Obama has granted for 13 high-speed corridors across the United States, including a line between Tampa and Orlando in Florida that may include a station at the Walt Disney resort near Orlando. The Japanese company, also known as JR Central, is eyeing North America as a shrinking population at home limits its growth. Alstom of France, Siemens of Germany and Bombardier of Canada also want to sell trains, tracks and operating equipment under an initiative that the U.S. transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, called “an absolute game-changer for American transportation.” Other high-speed corridors run between New York City and Buffalo, New York; Los Angeles and San Francisco; and Chicago and Detroit. “High-speed rail is going to be a big industry in the U.S.,” said Masayuki Kubota, a fund manager at Daiwa SB Investments in Tokyo. “A lot of companies are going to try and get a piece of the action.”  Bullet trains are generally considered to be those traveling faster than 180 miles, or 290 kilometers, an hour. Japan is home to the world’s first “shinkansen,” or high-speed train system. It also has the biggest high-speed network, which carried 308 million people in the 12 months through March 2009. JR Central runs the busiest bullet-train line in Japan.

Well done, Mr President!


President Asif Ali Zardari has announced that he will donate all his body organs after his life. Instead of getting into a debate on whether he is the first president or the last to make such an announcement, he should be appreciated. The president must have read the quotation, “Don’t take your organs to heaven with you. Heaven knows we need them here.” Unfortunately, none from his coterie followed suit as some announcements were very much expected. Even the president’s remarks that Benazir Bhutto’s philosophy of living for others convinced him to make such a decision could not persuade his inner circle. At least we were expecting the same announcement from Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani.  Apparently his core team left no stone unturned to prove their love and loyalty with the president. Instead of proving loyalty in a bizarre way, the best way is to follow the footsteps of the person whom you claim to love. I believe if the president appeals to his party workers to donate their organs, we can get rid of the menace of selling human body parts to needy persons.  If the rest of our leadership could set aside political point scoring and have the same stance over the issue, it would be a great service to humanity.  In developed countries like the US, people commonly donate their organs and the words ‘organ donor’ are even mentioned on their national identity cards, hence people respect them and doctors keep it in mind at the time of their death. If our politicians could reach a consensus over constitutional reforms or the Charter of Democracy to achieve their political goals, why could a consensus not be evolved for the service of humanity?  There are countless people lying in hospitals across the country, including those whose kidneys have failed or those who have not been blessed with eyesight since birth, but they could be able to see the light of the world if a person donates his eyes after his death.  Medical science has made several advancements in organ transplantation and such a move in a developing country would definitely make the whole world wonder the way it did when we recently gave the transvestites their rights as citizens of Pakistan. In fact, President Zardari has set a new trend for politicians. If the entire nation followed him, Pakistan could be the biggest bank of human organs, which would help several needy people. It could also save the lives of thousands of Pakistanis and help others to live better lives. Leaders like Mian Nawaz Sharif can also play their roles in convincing the Right-wingers to let such a thing happen in Pakistan, although many known religious scholars have already supported such moves.  If he could not follow the path of the president, he could at least urge his followers to come forward and contribute. We expect the same from Quaid-e-Tehreek Altaf Hussain and believe thousands of his followers will respond positively if he asked them. In Les Brown’s words, “Shoot for the moon. Even if
you miss, you’ll land among the stars.”