Benazir Bhutto in her last public appearance

One did not need to wait four hundred and twenty three days and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars from the cash starved national exchequer to reach this conclusion, since the TTP had laid claim to the assassination on day one. What is preposterous is the vow by the Interior Minister to bring back former president Pervez Musharraf to Pakistan through Interpol over his alleged negligence in not providing proper security to Benazir Bhutto.

By S. M. Hali

Four years one month and twenty five days after her assassination and inquiries by Scotland Yard, Interpol, the UN and local agencies, the ruling government has announced vowed to bring former president Pervez Musharraf back to the country through Interpol over his alleged negligence in not providing proper security to Benazir Bhutto. Unveiling the report of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) formed by the federal government in the Sind Assembly, the Interior Minister reveals that according to the report, the assassination was planned and implemented by the Taliban, while at least 27 terrorist groups associated with Al-Qaeda and Tahreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) had been planning to eliminate Benazir because of her firm belief in democracy and strong stance against the extremists.

One did not need to wait four hundred and twenty three days and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars from the cash starved national exchequer to reach this conclusion, since the TTP had laid claim to the assassination on day one. What is preposterous is the vow by the Interior Minister to bring back former president Pervez Musharraf to Pakistan through Interpol over his alleged negligence in not providing proper security to Benazir Bhutto. If culpable evidence is there that the former President indulged in deliberate negligence to providing adequate security, then charity brings from home. Benazir Bhutto’s personal security team, comprising the current Minister for Interior and a number of other stalwarts from the Pakistan People’s Party are guilty of the same crime. These trusted lieutenants of the former Prime Minister, had not only declared allegiance to Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto but vowed to defend her with their own blood. Unfortunately, they were the first ones to disappear from the scene of the crime when the assassination took place, leaving their beloved leader to meet her Maker in a pool of blood.

It is ironic that the ruling junta gave a fond farewell to the erstwhile military dictator on 18 August 2008, when he decided to render his resignation rather than face impeachment. The ruling Pakistan People’s Party even went to the extent of providing a formal Guard of Honour and a safe exit when he decided to leave the country. Now it’s having the temerity to ask Interpol to bring him back.

The popular and charismatic former Prime Minister had gone into a self imposed exile but on her triumphant return, Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto survived an assassination attempt at Karachi during this homecoming. En route to a rally in Karachi on 18 October 2007, two explosions occurred shortly after she had landed and left Jinnah International Airport returning from her exile. The Mohtarma was not injured, but the explosions, later found to be a suicide-bomb attack, killed 139 people and injured at least 450.The dead included at least 50 of the security guards from her Pakistan People’s Party, who had formed a human chain around her truck to keep potential bombers away, as well as six police officers. A number of senior officials were injured.

After the bombing Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto had asked President Musharraf for greater security, including tinted windows, jammers for bombs, private guards, and four police vehicles. These calls were echoed by three US Senators, who wrote to Musharraf. Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto's supporters and the Pakistani government have now concluded that she was not provided adequate protection. The Israeli newspaper “Maariv” reported that Ms. Bhutto further asked the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Britain's Scotland Yard, and Israel's Mossad several weeks before the assassination to help provide for her protection. Israel had not yet decided whether or not to provide aid because it did not want to upset relations with Pakistan and India. The claim by “Maariv” regarding upsetting relations with Pakistan is equally ludicrous since Israel has no relations with Pakistan, in fact Pakistan does not even recognize Israel. Ms. Bhutto also tried to obtain private security personnel, approaching both the U.S.-based Blackwater and UK-based ArmorGroup. However, the Pakistani government refused to give visas to the foreign security contractors. Despite this, American diplomats provided Bhutto with confidential U.S. intelligence on threats against her. After the assassination, President Musharraf denied that Bhutto should have received more security, saying that her death was primarily her own fault because she took "unnecessary risks" and should have exited the rally more quickly.

The Interior Minister however, quotes renowned journalist Mark Siegel, who in his statement said President Musharraf, in his presence, threatened Benazir in a telephonic conversation not to return home before the 2007 polls. Mr. Rehman Malik said he tried to get a confirmation of Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s statement, who had advised Benazir not to return to Pakistan as terrorists were planning to kill her, but Karzai refused to do so. Similarly, former US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, who in her book claimed that she arranged a reconciliation between Benazir and Musharraf, but she was also not ready to record her version.

The fact is that the ruling Pakistan People’s Party owes its current rule to the sad and violent assassination of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. It rode on a crest of public sympathy for the slain leader and has ever since exploited her shahadat to political advantage. The ruling of the Supreme Court directing the government to communicate with the Swiss authorities regarding the unauthorized siphoning of public money to the Swiss Banks in pursuance of the case challenging the National Reconciliation Order (NRO) has been declined that it will be “desecration of the Shaheed Bibi’s grave.” The NRO was a controversial ordinance issued by the former President General Pervez Musharraf, on October 5, 2007, granting amnesty to politicians, political workers and bureaucrats who were accused of corruption, embezzlement, money laundering, murder and terrorism between January 1, 1986, and October 12, 1999, the time between two states of martial law in Pakistan. It was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on December 16, 2009, throwing the country into a political crisis. Current Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani faces contempt of court charges in not abiding by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Using the name of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto to hide its sins is tantamount to flogging a dead horse.

By Naveed Tajammal

Nawab Akbar Bugti receiving M A Jinnah, founding father of Pakistan

Now a days, the basic problem is that people are not aware of history, everyone goes by what the media feeds them and media is Zionist dominated. What the media is telling are what the Zionists want to achieve therefore they engineer the facts; in most cases the facts are removed or replaced by the people in between so that no linkages can be established.

Since past sometime, United States, the United Kingdom and one silent participant Australia are busy distorting the facts and presenting stories out of context. In this game, as admitted by Manmohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister in a meeting with Yousaf Raza Gillani at Sharmal Shaikh that India has linkages with Baloch insurgency and dissidents. The role of Zionist Israel cannot be ruled out since it’s behind everything that’s happening in the world but more so in the Muslim World. In case of Pakistan Zino-Hindutwa axis are very strong.

Our educationists and sociologists have failed to impart the education of history in its true perspective that is precisely the reason that today we are a lost nation. Everyone tends to believe what the West says and they go by it. Politicians are not aware of the history as most people in the assemblies consists of those who either are not aware of their own history or are in the process of taking new identities to delink from their past. With this sort of people in the parliaments, one can never expect anything good but what suits them the best.

In 1910, a Scottish-American, Andrew Carnegie, who had made, his fortune in 'Steel Industry', left a $10 million Endowment for international peace-which is the fore-runner of other Carnegie related ventures, however, what his intentions had been, and what the endowment has created are two different aspects. The Carnegie Journalist program, was launched in 1974, though with an outward image to anticipate, 'Near-Horizon' problems, in reality it was to induct journalists from world over, to create a hype, to keep a check on, the soviets (USSR) global moves. The journalists went for superficial, which an average reader could co-relate with. So, started the 'Awareness of the Baluchistan issue.'  

An insurgency was very much so on ground, however no one bothered to find the reason why? The British legacy had left their created Sardars, who while retaining their feudalistic powers, wanted to gain, the political legitimacy as well. They followed the policy of what is mine is mine, and what is yours (of the people of their tribes) is also mine!

The royalties taken on concessions, were technically for the welfare of the people, within the tribal setups, but spent by the Sardars as their own bounty, while the poor people, had no recourse but move in an exodus, from the regions, as is seen, in the last over 100 years, to seek a living elsewhere.

The tribes of the Sindh valley over the past 1600 years or so have been constantly on the move; as one studies and discovers, natural calamities, plagues, and wars all took their toll. The transformation from one major tribal setup to another, had been a question of survival or escape from the domination of the strong and the cruel. Our Social mores, are based on an egalitarian society, and people of the area have always hated the feudal system to the core of their hearts, and hence the refuge in the wilderness or the remote valleys, But the intruders have from time to time imposed on us their lackeys or the willing amongst us who sold their souls, for a gain.

The geographic boundaries, which Pakistan was thrust with were legacy of our past rulers, though with reference to region under study its bulk area came, affiliated with either old Alor or Multan, Administrative, boundaries, Even in the Jam Nizam ud din Nandah period, (1461-1508) In the west, Till Bolan, inclusive of the Kaachi plains, was the part of, throne of Sindh. As were the Tal-chotiali, chacha, and barkhan regions, regions, wherein comes the present Mari and Bugti areas. It was in Akbar's time that Kandahar provinces, limits were extended till Duki. Rest being part of Multan Suba, as was Bolan and Kaachi areas, too.

The areas were well populated, and fertile, with Saraiki speaking people, when Naseer khan Barrohi, was given these areas,1740, for the services rendered, he pushed out the old people and transplanted them, with people of his own confederacy, the Eastern passes, of the Rohe Suleiman Range had been gateways of Trade, since Ancient Times, In the Mughal era with opening of Khyber pass, majority of Trade routes suffered, the cause, being the Movements, of Bayazids Ansari, heretics, and expansion of Safavid's in the east.

Now coming to the most pertinent question, which being, is the present head of Bugti tribe and its Sept's (clans), Actually Balochi???

For that a study of the Notes on the Balochi, Barrohi, and the Sindhi tribes, should suffice.

Immediately after the creation of Baluchistan entity by the British, the Government ordered,

that the data be made of the Ethnic composition of various tribes of the region and inter-related ones, all the Mukhtiars and Mahaska’s, in the revenue departments, in the districts concerned were ordered, The reports compiled, from, communications, histories, manuscripts and the popular oral accounts, which also covered, profession of, various, tribes, matrimonial, and other related customs, were submitted to  Drum. Daudpota, member, Sindh public service commission, and published in 1901.

The excerpts of the report state (p-26/27), covering the Bugti tribe, In January 1890,on the recommendation of Robert Sandmen, Shahbaz khan, was conferred with the tittle of a Nawab, he was also later given a large tract of land on the Jamrau canal, for rendering assistance, during the outbreak of the ,HUR, in 1896/1897.Here without going in the details of the 24 Sept or clans of Bugti Confederacy, the report states, that, The chief of the tribe is Nawab Shahbaz Khan, Rahejo Bugti, son of Ghulam Murtaza Khan rahejo Bugti, A popular account says that Rahejo or more commonly called, Rahuja, are from the Major Sindhi tribal set up of the 'Samma', to which the great ancestor of the present Bugti chief belonged, and that by Association with the Balochi's and settlement in the old Bugti hills and streams, his descendants became Bugti Baloch, and if we study the Samma, tribal Sept's/clans which number in all 766,we find Raheja, very much so part of their entity (pages-44 to 53,and for more details in minor off shoots, pages 89 to 97)

If one follows the Baloch population, one would more Baloch living in the Punjab alone than what are living in Balochistan; then there is a strong Baloch population in Sindh as well. All these Baloch shifted out from Balochistan for various reasons and one of them was the treatment meted out to these people by the Sardars therefore they took a refuge away from their ancestral places.

These Sardars have always demanded money for their loyalties but never spent a penny on the welfare of their people. When one meets the tribesmen, they show resentment and unhappiness with these Sardars and their system.

Makran Coast is a different ethnic and cultural background. It was under the occupation of Sultanate of Oman. In 1956, Feroze Khan Noon, then the Prime Minister of Pakistan had bought it by paying cash to Oman. Therefore it does not form part of Balochistan, also the Pathan population of Balochistan is over 50% and then there are settlers and Brohis also. Thus the entire land does not belong to the Baloch.

Have people and media men in particular forgotten that on the 1973 constitution even the Baloch Sardars had their signatures to approve it unanimously now how can they claim that Pakistan has occupied their lands forcefully. 

Imran Khan addressing a rally

By Nosherwan Shahid Shaikh

The people of Pakistan have the talent of following one another, be it in the quest of choosing a career or choosing a leader. Pakistan has successfully created doctors, engineers and MBA’s all in one lineage. And have now embarked on following the one and only Imran Khan, whom no one cared for the last fifteen years. Where was all the youth fifteen years ago, where were all these people who have joined PTI now fifteen years ago?

Leading and managing a victory in Cricket is way different than running and leading a country. Barack Obama also came to power with slogans for change and even Imran Khan is branding the same slogans of change, but does that really mean he can bring change. Is he really going to be the one bringing about change or would a parliament headed by him bring about a change?

I am not against Imran Khan, maybe my vote will go for him, but this colonial ideology of following each other needs to be broken down. Even before he has been in power the rumour mill has it, that he has the support of the establishment, what will happen once he comes to power, what mockery the establishment will make out of him is yet to be seen.

The people of Balochistan have suffered and they seem to suffer again, as Imran Khan says he will go talk to the Baloch people in Quetta, tell me how many Baloch live in Quetta? Baloch live in rural areas, it is those people like the people in Mianwali who he need to go and talk to, not the urban elites of Quetta. It is the Mengal’s, the Bizenjo’s, like the Chaudry’s and Malik’s of Punjab.

People were ardent fans of Musharaff when he was in power, they were ardent fans of this Gilani led government when they came to power, did they all not meet the same fate. How the youth of today is blindly following the caravan of Tsunami is difficult to gauge as Imran Khan has never had a chance to prove what he is about.

It has also been observed by many notables, that it is more about Imran Khan than about PTI, PPP is not about Zardari, not about Gilani, but about Aitazaz Ahsan, Makhdoom Amin Fahim and many others who had the chance to work with Z. A. Bhutto or Benazir Bhutto. PML-N is not about Nawaz Sharif or Shahbaz Sharif, but about Ahsan Iqbal and Ch. Nisar. But, PTI seems to be about Imran Khan alone. PTI has won the support of Shah Mehmood Qureishi, Javed Hashmi who previously enjoyed great positions in other political parties, but PTI has failed to attract any notable woman who could rally for the support of women in Pakistan.

Building a Hospital and a University creates no doubt about Imran Khan’s intent to make Pakistan a better place to live in, but is it important that this is done by being in Politics. Prof. Yunus Grameen of the Grameen Bank, Bangladesh was met with extreme opposition when he tried to stand for elections, it is not imperative that helping the poor, working for the social sector guarantees you political support. Politics is widely viewed as a dirty game by wise people, so is Imran Khan really wise, or is he the best of what is there who has not had a chance?

It is important for us, the youth today to think before we leap when we make decisions for our beloved country. It is high time we learn from our past experiences and PTI learns from the mistakes of other political parties to make Pakistan a better place to live in. Pakistan Zindabad!

NOTES FROM A SOCIAL SCIENTIST

By Dr. Haider Mehdi

A wise adversary’s intrusiveness is better than a foolish friend’s counsel. (adapted from an old proverb)

Three fundamentally vital points in this proposal need to be clearly stated at the very outset: One: The COAS is the most important actor in the conceptualization, making and the management of the military’s operational and strategic organization. Hence, any issue pertaining to the military’s conduct and policy-making must be addressed to its top leadership, namely the COAS. Two: All over the world, the military has the right of legitimate institutional input into the overall political system of the country, both domestically and in external affairs. Be mindful, the emphasis here is on constitutional and legitimate institutional input. So this universally accepted practice for efficient working relations between the civil and military institutions must be respected and accorded to the Pakistani military as well. Three: A mutual understanding and clear demarcation of the rules of engagement between civil and military institutions must be clearly defined and respective institutional prerogatives respected. 

It is not important here in the present context to go into the past history of civilian-military relations in Pakistan. Indeed, the army generals have overstepped their political role and successive civilian political administrations have time and again failed in their democratic mandates to deliver sufficiently to the masses. As a result, both the civilian and military institutions have mismanaged their respective part in the conduct of national affairs and have caused the nation to suffer indefinitely, hopelessly and almost incurably. Hence, today’s Pakistan stands at the crossroads virtually fighting a battle for its future survival.  Because of the grave political challenges facing the nation, the need for a rational approach to find a political solution has never been greater.

One of the fundamental problems in the checkered history of Pakistan has been that the military leadership has historically turned national political issues into military confrontations. It is the mindset and training of soldiers that a sufficient use of force can terminate adversaries in an actual battlefield as well as in the arena of political dissidence and discourse. The military-political history of Pakistan from Ayub Khan to Pervaiz Musharraf is a testament to that fact.

Now we are faced with yet another grave national crisis: the fastly-deteriorating political situation in Balochistan may lead to another disintegration of the nation.  The US has internationalized the Baloch issue, and those who think that the US is only making tactical moves to pressure Pakistan into resuming NATO supplies are certainly mistaken.  The move in the American Senate is part of the US doctrine of global expansion of power through regime changes and the shifting of territorial boundaries in this region for its greater geo-political hegemonic objective of containing China and Russian.  Make no mistake about it: the US will employ all means – manipulative, coercive, military, diplomatic – and the use of political force to get what it wants.

So the question is: Cognizant of the fact that Pakistan’s civilian regime is inefficient, dysfunctional and helpless in the face of American demands, how is Pakistan’s military leadership going to act in the political resolution of Balochistan and save the country from the impending crisis of further destabilization? Indeed, rightly or wrongly, much of the Baloch problem has been pinned on the conduct of military leaders (turning  political issues into military confrontations) past and present alike. General Kayani, the incumbent COAS, has recently stated publically, that the military is neither engaged in Balochistan nor are its troops stationed there. On February 17^th, the Inspector-General of Frontier Corp (FC), a serving two-star military general, in a TV talk show, confidently articulated the role of the FC as a credible force of stability, peace and development in Balochistan. However, the IG admitted that there are 50,000 soldiers stationed under his command with the FC having access to all civilian administrative departments in every district of Balochistan – assisting the civilian administration on the constitutional and legitimate request of the provincial democratic government.

Let’s assume that what IG, FC has said is true. But the Balochi perception of the FC role is quite the contrary.  It is not perceived as legitimate; it is perceived as a “de-facto” military power engaged in terror against the Balochi citizens and dissidents.  As it is said at many important conjunctures, “perception is reality,” and here for historical and conceptual reasons, the Balochi perception of the FC must be considered as the political reality.

And here is a word of the warning for the COAS: Given the ground political realities in Balochistan’s simmering situation, it is not time to offer technical or legal justifications of the army’s role and its presence there. Indeed, the FC is a part of the military outfit – and that is a fact. It is the need of the hour to make visionary, imaginative, versatile, determined, and effective political judgments on the Baloch issue – that is how the federation of Pakistan can be saved and national sovereignty safeguarded. The COAS would be well-advised to counsel the civilian leadership in the country to completely disengage the FC force from civilian affairs in Balochistan and pave the way for a political resolution in the province. Nothing less will suffice.

An inspired, dedicated, well-informed and enthusiastic political activist associated with the movement for Balochistan’s provincial autonomy and the rights of the Balochi people, has suggested (personally to me) a 10-point agenda for a peaceful political resolution of the Balochistan issue. It is produced verbatim here:

“The problem in Balochistan is more complicated than it seems and it is difficult to bring people who have crossed the Rubicon back to fold. But attempts should be made.

First: All the Frontier Corps should be withdrawn from Balochistan. Cantonments reduced and Coast Guard pickets be removed.

Second: Those responsible for the abduction and killing of nearly 400 persons should be brought to book.

Third: Guarantees regarding demographic changes should be iron-clad.

Fourth: The consent of the local population in any development project in any area be made essential. This should include road building as well.

Fifth: The land rights and consequently the right over minerals including oil, gas, etc. of tribes be accepted.

Sixth: the principle for positive discrimination be enforced for at least 15 years in all job quotas for Balochis.

Seventh: The right to carry arms should be respected.

Eight: Naval bases should be limited in size and number and should in no way hinder fishing.

Nine: Apologies for previous nuclear tests and dismantling of all nuclear and missile testing facilities in Balochistan.

Tenth: Free and fair elections with unhindered international monitoring be held.”

Military generals and some vested-interest political groups might consider Balochi political activists and dissidents as their enemies as well as enemies of the state – but as the old proverb goes, “A wise enemy is better than a foolish friend.” 

It is time to pay heed to what the perceived enemies of the state are saying – before it is too late!

The hounds are at our doors! Don’t provide them an opportunity to manipulate and control the situation!

The COAS must act now to disengage the FC from Balochistan.

After the cold war, West has taken Islam  as the number one threat to replace Communism. Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunis, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Libya are examples of creating instability and destabilizing the Islamic world lest they unite and become a force to reckon with.

By S. M. Hali

The resolution by US House of Representatives on Balochistan is not only in extreme bad taste but amounts to interfering in Pakistan's internal affairs, contrary to UN mandate. Balochistan is an integral part of Pakistan, the Khan of Kalat, signed the letter of accession on March 27, 1948, while the other states, which were under British rule, became part of the newly independent country in 1947. Since then a number of vested interests have tried to fish in troubled waters through separatist movements trying to wrest control from the government of Pakistan through an armed struggle. The first was led by Prince Karim Khan, the brother of the Khan of Kalat in 1948, and later by Nawab Nowroz Khan in 1968. These tribal uprisings were limited in scope; a more serious insurgency was led by the Mari and Mengal tribes between 1973 and 1977. The aspiration of these groups has been for the existence of a “Greater Balochistan”— a single independent state ruled under tribal jirgas (a tribal system of government) and comprising the historical Balochistan region, found within Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. In 2005 there was another struggle to achieve these aims; in 2006, Nawab Akbar Bugti the leader of the movement was killed in an armed clash with Pakistan Army. During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the intelligence agency of USSR, the KGB created inroads by arming insurgents in the strife torn province to destabilize Pakistan and reduce the pressure on its troops by Mujahedin attacks launched and supported by Pakistan. Security reports indicate that the same KGB agents have been rehired this time by the US to destabilize Pakistan and pressurize it to stop its alleged support to the Taliban targeting US troops in Afghanistan.

Perhaps moving a resolution on Balochistan by lawmaker Dana Rohrabacher is part of a grand plan commenced by former US President George W. Bush, who in a Freudian slip had called it the “Crusades”, in which the Islamic world is being targeted. After the cold war, West has taken Islam as number one threat to replace Communism. Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunis, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Libya are examples of creating instability and destabilizing the Islamic world lest they unite and become a force to reckon with.

Balochis have been a fierce and warlike race. The British first came across them during the First Afghan War in 1839, when the British army marched through the inhospitable barren tracts of Balochistan and was confronted by the ferocious Balochi tribes, whose incessant marauding attacks caused heavy losses and sufferings to the marching columns and baggage trains. After the Indian War of Independence in 1857, in which the British nearly lost everything, they realized the solution to their problems in India lay in recruiting natives with warlike qualities to serve in the British army. Recognizing the brave and fearless qualities of the Balochis, the British raised the Baloch Regiment, which fought for them resolutely in the Abyssinian Campaign of 1868, the Second Afghan War in 1878 and both the World Wars. Now the US, aided by its partner in the crime India, is using the Baloch to foment insurgency.

The grouse of the Balochis is not unfounded, since successive Pakistani governments, even those led by Baloch themselves have done little or nothing for the uplift of the backward province. The feudal and tribal system prevalent in the troubled province has not helped matters since the warlords endeavour to keep their minions immersed in the darkness of ignorance to keep them subservient.

However, the attempt by the US and its lawmakers to fish in troubled waters is a deliberate attempt to interfere in the sovereignty of Pakistan. The move follows the last two or three years of souring relations between Pakistan and the US. Blackballing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, installing CIA agents in Pakistan, the Raymond Davis affair, the Osama bin Laden episode, the unwarranted attack on Pakistani military check-post in Salala and now the resolution on Balochistan are all part of the greater plot. What the US forgets is that the erstwhile USSR had also indulged in similar machination but paid dearly by becoming destabilized itself and ultimately disintegrated into the Central Asian States. By following in its footsteps and indulging in numerous wars, the USA has overstretched its resources; its economy is on the verge of collapse and there is a strong possibility that its 50 states will disintegrate into independent ones. It should concentrate on stemming its own rot rather than sullying Pakistan’s affairs.

By Ellen Brown

In an article titled “Still No End to ‘Too Big to Fail,’” William Greider wrote in The Nation on February 15^th:

Financial market cynics have assumed all along that Dodd-Frank did not end "too big to fail" but instead created a charmed circle of protected banks labeled "systemically important" that will not be allowed to fail, no matter how badly they behave.

That may be, but there is one bit of bad behavior that Uncle Sam himself does not have the funds to underwrite: the $32 trillion market in credit default swaps (CDS).  Thirty-two trillion dollars is more than twice the U.S. GDP and more than twice the national debt. 

CDS are a form of derivative taken out by investors as insurance against default.  According to the Comptroller of the Currency, nearly 95% of the banking industry’s total exposure to derivatives contracts is held by the nation’s five largest banks: JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, HSBC, and Goldman Sachs.  The CDS market is unregulated, and there is no requirement that the “insurer” actually have the funds to pay up.  CDS are more like bets, and a massive loss at the casino could bring the house down.

It could, at least, unless the casino is rigged.  Whether a “credit event” is a “default” triggering a payout is determined by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), and it seems that the ISDA is owned by the world’s largest banks and hedge funds.  That means the house determines whether the house has to pay. 

The Houses of Morgan, Goldman and the other Big Five are justifiably worried right now, because an “event of default” declared on European sovereign debt could jeopardize their $32 trillion derivatives scheme.  According to Rudy Avizius in an article on The Market Oracle (UK) on February 15^th, that explains what happened at MF Global, and why the 50% Greek bond write-down was not declared an event of default. 

If you paid only 50% of your mortgage every month, these same banks would quickly declare you in default.  But the rules are quite different when the banks are the insurers underwriting the deal. 

MF Global: Canary in the Coal Mine?

MF Global was a major global financial derivatives broker until it met its unseemly demise on October 30, 2011, when it filed the eighth-largest U.S. bankruptcy after reporting a “material shortfall” of hundreds of millions of dollars in segregated customer funds.  The brokerage used a large number of complex and controversial repurchase agreements, or "repos," for funding and for leveraging profit.  Among its losing bets was something described as a wrong-way $6.3 billion trade the brokerage made on its own behalf on bonds of some of Europe’s most indebted nations.

Avizius writes:

[A]n agreement was reached in Europe that investors would have to take a write-down of 50% on Greek Bond debt. Now MF Global was leveraged anywhere from 40 to 1, to 80 to 1 depending on whose figures you believe. Let’s assume that MF Global was leveraged 40 to 1, this means that they could not even absorb a small 3% loss, so when the “haircut” of 50% was agreed to, MF Global was finished. It tried to stem its losses by criminally dipping into segregated client accounts, and we all know how that ended with clients losing their money. . . .

However, MF Global thought that they had risk-free speculation because they had bought these CDS from these big banks to protect themselves in case their bets on European Debt went bad. MF Global should have been protected by its CDS, but since the ISDA would not declare the Greek “credit event” to be a default, MF Global could not cover its losses, causing its collapse.

The house won because it was able to define what “ winning” was.  But what happens when Greece or another country simply walks away and refuses to pay?  That is hardly a “haircut.”  It is a decapitation.  The asset is in rigor mortis.  By no dictionary definition could it not qualify as a “default.”

That sort of definitive Greek default is thought by some analysts to be quite likely, and to be coming soon.  Dr. Irwin Stelzer, a senior fellow and director of Hudson Institute’s economic policy studies group, was quoted in Saturday’s Yorkshire Post (UK) as saying:

It’s only a matter of time before they go bankrupt. They are bankrupt now, it’s only a question of how you recognise it and what you call it.

Certainly they will default . . . maybe as early as March. If I were them I’d get out [of the euro].

The Midas Touch Gone Bad

In an article in The Observer (UK) on February 11^th  titled “The Mathematical Equation That Caused the Banks to Crash,” Ian Stewart wrote of the Black-Scholes equation that opened up the world of derivatives:

The financial sector called it the Midas Formula and saw it as a recipe for making everything turn to gold.  But the markets forgot how the story of King Midas ended.

As Aristotle told this ancient Greek tale, Midas died of hunger as a result of his vain prayer for the golden touch.  Today, the Greek people are going hungry to protect a rigged $32 trillion Wall Street casino.  Avizius writes:

The money made by selling these derivatives is directly responsible for the huge profits and bonuses we now see on Wall Street. The money masters have reaped obscene profits from this scheme, but now they live in fear that it will all unravel and the gravy train will end. What these banks have done is to leverage the system to such an extreme, that the entire house of cards is threatened by a small country of only 11 million people. Greece could bring the entire world economy down. If a default was declared, the resulting payouts would start a chain reaction that would cause widespread worldwide bank failures, making the Lehman collapse look small by comparison.

Some observers question whether a Greek default would be that bad.  According to a comment on Forbes on October 10, 2011:

[T]he gross notional value of Greek CDS contracts as of last week was €54.34 billion, according to the latest report from data repository Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC). DTCC is able to undertake internal netting analysis due to having data on essentially all of the CDS market. And it reported that the net losses would be an order of magnitude lower, with the maximum amount of funds that would move from one bank to another in connection with the settlement of CDS claims in a default being just €2.68 billion, total.  If DTCC’s analysis is correct, the CDS market for Greek debt would not much magnify the consequences of a Greek default—unless it stimulated contagion that affected other European countries. 

It is the “contagion,” however, that seems to be the concern.  Players who have hedged their bets by betting both ways cannot collect on their winning bets; and that means they cannot afford to pay their losing bets, causing other players to also default on their bets.  The dominos go down in a cascade of cross-defaults that infects the whole banking industry and jeopardizes the global pyramid scheme.  The potential for this sort of nuclear reaction was what prompted billionaire investor Warren Buffett to call derivatives “weapons of financial mass destruction.”  It is also why the banking system cannot let a major derivatives player—such as Bear Stearns or Lehman Brothers—go down.  What is in jeopardy is the derivatives scheme itself.  According to an article in The Wall Street Journal on January 20^th:

Hanging in the balance is the reputation of CDS as an instrument for hedgers and speculators—a $32.4 trillion market as of June last year; the value that may be assigned to sovereign debt, and $2.9 trillion of sovereign CDS, if the protection isn't seen as reliable in eliciting payouts; as well as the impact a messy Greek default could have on the global banking system.

Players in the future may simply refuse to play.  When the house is so obviously rigged, the legitimacy of the whole CDS scheme is called into question.  As MF Global found out the hard way, there is no such thing as “risk-free speculation” protected with derivatives.

In an article titled “Still No End to ‘Too Big to Fail,’” William Greider wrote in The Nation on February 15^th:

Financial market cynics have assumed all along that Dodd-Frank did not end "too big to fail" but instead created a charmed circle of protected banks labeled "systemically important" that will not be allowed to fail, no matter how badly they behave.

That may be, but there is one bit of bad behavior that Uncle Sam himself does not have the funds to underwrite: the $32 trillion market in credit default swaps (CDS).  Thirty-two trillion dollars is more than twice the U.S. GDP and more than twice the national debt. 

CDS are a form of derivative taken out by investors as insurance against default.  According to the Comptroller of the Currency, nearly 95% of the banking industry’s total exposure to derivatives contracts is held by the nation’s five largest banks: JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, HSBC, and Goldman Sachs.  The CDS market is unregulated, and there is no requirement that the “insurer” actually have the funds to pay up.  CDS are more like bets, and a massive loss at the casino could bring the house down.

It could, at least, unless the casino is rigged.  Whether a “credit event” is a “default” triggering a payout is determined by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), and it seems that the ISDA is owned by the world’s largest banks and hedge funds.  That means the house determines whether the house has to pay. 

The Houses of Morgan, Goldman and the other Big Five are justifiably worried right now, because an “event of default” declared on European sovereign debt could jeopardize their $32 trillion derivatives scheme.  According to Rudy Avizius in an article on The Market Oracle (UK) on February 15^th, that explains what happened at MF Global, and why the 50% Greek bond write-down was not declared an event of default. 

If you paid only 50% of your mortgage every month, these same banks would quickly declare you in default.  But the rules are quite different when the banks are the insurers underwriting the deal. 

MF Global: Canary in the Coal Mine?

MF Global was a major global financial derivatives broker until it met its unseemly demise on October 30, 2011, when it filed the eighth-largest U.S. bankruptcy after reporting a “material shortfall” of hundreds of millions of dollars in segregated customer funds.  The brokerage used a large number of complex and controversial repurchase agreements, or "repos," for funding and for leveraging profit.  Among its losing bets was something described as a wrong-way $6.3 billion trade the brokerage made on its own behalf on bonds of some of Europe’s most indebted nations.

Avizius writes:

[A]n agreement was reached in Europe that investors would have to take a write-down of 50% on Greek Bond debt. Now MF Global was leveraged anywhere from 40 to 1, to 80 to 1 depending on whose figures you believe. Let’s assume that MF Global was leveraged 40 to 1, this means that they could not even absorb a small 3% loss, so when the “haircut” of 50% was agreed to, MF Global was finished. It tried to stem its losses by criminally dipping into segregated client accounts, and we all know how that ended with clients losing their money. . . .

However, MF Global thought that they had risk-free speculation because they had bought these CDS from these big banks to protect themselves in case their bets on European Debt went bad. MF Global should have been protected by its CDS, but since the ISDA would not declare the Greek “credit event” to be a default, MF Global could not cover its losses, causing its collapse.

The house won because it was able to define what “ winning” was.  But what happens when Greece or another country simply walks away and refuses to pay?  That is hardly a “haircut.”  It is a decapitation.  The asset is in rigor mortis.  By no dictionary definition could it not qualify as a “default.”

That sort of definitive Greek default is thought by some analysts to be quite likely, and to be coming soon.  Dr. Irwin Stelzer, a senior fellow and director of Hudson Institute’s economic policy studies group, was quoted in Saturday’s Yorkshire Post (UK) as saying:

It’s only a matter of time before they go bankrupt. They are bankrupt now, it’s only a question of how you recognise it and what you call it.

Certainly they will default . . . maybe as early as March. If I were them I’d get out [of the euro].

The Midas Touch Gone Bad

In an article in The Observer (UK) on February 11^th  titled “The Mathematical Equation That Caused the Banks to Crash,” Ian Stewart wrote of the Black-Scholes equation that opened up the world of derivatives:

The financial sector called it the Midas Formula and saw it as a recipe for making everything turn to gold.  But the markets forgot how the story of King Midas ended.

As Aristotle told this ancient Greek tale, Midas died of hunger as a result of his vain prayer for the golden touch.  Today, the Greek people are going hungry to protect a rigged $32 trillion Wall Street casino.  Avizius writes:

The money made by selling these derivatives is directly responsible for the huge profits and bonuses we now see on Wall Street. The money masters have reaped obscene profits from this scheme, but now they live in fear that it will all unravel and the gravy train will end. What these banks have done is to leverage the system to such an extreme, that the entire house of cards is threatened by a small country of only 11 million people. Greece could bring the entire world economy down. If a default was declared, the resulting payouts would start a chain reaction that would cause widespread worldwide bank failures, making the Lehman collapse look small by comparison.

Some observers question whether a Greek default would be that bad.  According to a comment on Forbes on October 10, 2011:

[T]he gross notional value of Greek CDS contracts as of last week was €54.34 billion, according to the latest report from data repository Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC). DTCC is able to undertake internal netting analysis due to having data on essentially all of the CDS market. And it reported that the net losses would be an order of magnitude lower, with the maximum amount of funds that would move from one bank to another in connection with the settlement of CDS claims in a default being just €2.68 billion, total.  If DTCC’s analysis is correct, the CDS market for Greek debt would not much magnify the consequences of a Greek default—unless it stimulated contagion that affected other European countries. 

It is the “contagion,” however, that seems to be the concern.  Players who have hedged their bets by betting both ways cannot collect on their winning bets; and that means they cannot afford to pay their losing bets, causing other players to also default on their bets.  The dominos go down in a cascade of cross-defaults that infects the whole banking industry and jeopardizes the global pyramid scheme.  The potential for this sort of nuclear reaction was what prompted billionaire investor Warren Buffett to call derivatives “weapons of financial mass destruction.”  It is also why the banking system cannot let a major derivatives player—such as Bear Stearns or Lehman Brothers—go down.  What is in jeopardy is the derivatives scheme itself.  According to an article in The Wall Street Journal on January 20^th:

Hanging in the balance is the reputation of CDS as an instrument for hedgers and speculators—a $32.4 trillion market as of June last year; the value that may be assigned to sovereign debt, and $2.9 trillion of sovereign CDS, if the protection isn't seen as reliable in eliciting payouts; as well as the impact a messy Greek default could have on the global banking system.

Players in the future may simply refuse to play.  When the house is so obviously rigged, the legitimacy of the whole CDS scheme is called into question.  As MF Global found out the hard way, there is no such thing as “risk-free speculation” protected with derivatives.

By Dr Shahid Qureshi

A smile that says all!

While having dinner in 2006 late Benazir Bhutto asked me in London’s Kundan Restaurant; “shall we make ‘Nelson Mandela’ (Asif Zardari) prime minister of Pakistan”? I replied to her quietly; “well you are the leader of the party and surely you can make a decision”. Later she called Wajid Shamsulhasan and told him: “keep in contact with me (Shahid Qureshi) ”. (Wajid Shamas Hassan is current high commissioner of Pakistan in UK).

Billion dollar question is how Asif Zaradri managed to survive all that time and defeated all the conspiracies against him? ‘He did it with outside help’. It is like someone who never studied but passed all the exams. In short all the ‘foreign assets’ across the board in Pakistan followed the instructions in supporting his (Zardari) regime.

A senior journalist said to me: “why do you think famous lawyers Asma Jhangir and Atizaz Ahsan both jumped in support of the regime which is the most corrupt and treacherous? Surely someone must have asked them to do so. Otherwise who would dirty their hands and reputation with this filth?” That is true in all spheres of Pakistani elite.

“Did Pakistan People’s Party conduct an internal poll and after finding out that you (Atizaz Ahsan) is the most popular leader who could replace Benazir Bhutto in the party, and after finding the out the results you were deliberately ignored by the leadership (and replaced by Jhangir Badar)”, His (Atizaz Ahsan) response was; ‘That is true’. I asked Atizaz Ahsan famous Pakistani lawyer in Pakistan High Commission London few years ago. Historically PPP never allowed any powerful leadership to grow from Punjab but on the other hand people in Punjab always supported Zulifqar Bhutto and the rest. 

In April 2008 (after PPPP formed government in Pakistan) while travelling as a British media delegate to Pakistan I met Atizaz Ahsan again at Lahore airport. We travelled to Islamabad on the same flight. I reconfirmed with him what he told me few years ago in London. Atizaz Ahsan ran a successful campaign but his own party (PPP) let him and Pakistan down by not restoring the illegally deposed Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry chief justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan as promised. While collecting our luggage at Islamabad air port I told him (Atizaz Ahsan) that, “reformers and feudal cannot work together”. Surely as a lawyer Mr Ahsan is allowed to choose his client but representing Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani and his government which is not only most corrupt as well as involved in ignoring the orders of the Supreme Court, installing, hiring, and appointing, convicted criminals on sensitive and high positions. A senior analyst said, ‘Atazaz was a pseudo intellectual like many others who took his fair share in the fruits of government by seemingly taking legitimate contracts of LPG.

It is not a mere coincident that current Pakistani regime of Asif Zardari has stolen $94 billion in four years without any support both outside and inside of Pakistan. His regime is fully supported in money laundering i.e. illegal transfer of state money outside Pakistan and deposit in foreign banks and investment in properties and businesses all over the world.

“Pakistan has lost an unbelievably high amount, more than Rs8,500 billion (Rs8.5 trillion or US$94 billion), in corruption, tax evasion and bad governance during the last four years of Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani’s tenure, Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) claims. The TIP advisor, Adil Gillani, told The News that the real impact of corruption in the country’s economy is far more than what is generally estimated or what is formally uncovered. He believes that Pakistan does not need even a single penny from the outside world if it effectively checks the menace of corruption and ensures good governance. Adil Gillani, the TIP representative, who too has been haunted by the government during these years for producing corruption reports, explained that the TIP pointed out corruption of Rs390 billion in 2008, Rs450 billion in 2009, Rs825 billion in 2010 and Rs1,100 billion in 2011 under the present regime. The total of these identified cases of corruption is Rs2,765 billion; reported Ansar Abbasi of The News.

One must salute the producer and writer of Indian movie ‘Knockout’ released not long ago. The theme of the movie is political, financial corruption and how to get money back from the Swiss Banks into the (India) country. Pakistan should write to Swiss Government asking for information about money deposited in its banks by Pakistani nationals. Indian politicians surely are more politically mature than Pakistanis but both are corrupt as each other the only difference is that Indians ask for their ‘cuts’ in agreements after but Pakistanis asked for their ‘cuts’ before the agreement and leave the companies decide the prices’ said a senior bureaucrat.

“Pakistan cannot be left on its own devices”, said a diplomat in a TV program in London. It is that patronage of the corrupt politicians and actors by foreign governments which made Asif Zardari survive all that time?

Well done Mr President. 

Kashmiri girls crying over the detention of their kins

It’s Endangering Security of Asia

By Brig Asif Haroon Raja

Under the partition plan worked out by the British in June 1947, the 600 princely states had been given the choice of either joining up with India or Pakistan, giving credence to communal demographic milieus and geographic proximity. India in connivance with British Viceroy Lord Mount Batten annexed all the princely states including Junagadh, Hyderabad Deccan and Manavadar whose Muslim rulers had desired accession to Pakistan. India annexed these states on the pretext of communal affinity and contiguity. However, the same approach was not adopted in Kashmir which was heavily Muslim populated and contiguous to Pakistan but was ruled by an autocratic Hindu Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh.

Jawaharlal Nehru led Congress leaders who opposed division of India tooth and nail till the very end didn’t want to part with Kashmir at any cost. In connivance with Viceroy Lord Mount Batten and Sir Cyril Radcliffe, a plan was hatched to falsify Two-Nation Theory, negate the partition principle of self-determination and to cripple Pakistan at its birth by means of mischievous Radcliffe Award. After blatantly dividing Punjab and Bengal and further depriving Pakistan of its rightful lands to convert the newly born state into moth eaten Pakistan, Boundary Award was deviously altered by Radcliffe at the behest of Mount Batten to make predominantly Muslim majority district of Gurdaspur district in East Punjab part of India.

This treachery was committed to make Kashmir contiguous to India and give a reason to Indian leaders to lay claim over it. By this perfidious act, which Mount Batten himself admitted at a later date, he not only subjected Muslim majority area to the eternal curse of Hindu domination, but also sowed the seed from which was to grow the Indian domination of State of Kashmir inhabited by 80% Muslims.   

On July 19, 1947 All J&K Muslim Conference unanimously adopted a resolution that their sole goal was accession to Pakistan. Maharaja was asked to respect the wishes of the people. While the people of Kashmir yearned to become part of Pakistan, the Maharaja under the heavy influence of Congress leaders and Mount Batten kept dilly dallying. To placate the people he entered into a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan. This was a ruse to buy time since his inclinations were to either remain independent or as a last resort join India. Top Congress leaders including Mahatma Gandhi held meetings with him in Srinagar to influence his decision. Hari Singh obliged them by meting out harsh treatment to those favoring accession to Pakistan. Thousands of armed members of infamous RSSS comprising extremist Hindu thugs and Sikhs Jathas infiltrated into Kashmir and started a wave of unprovoked calculated terrorism against the Muslims in order to subdue them into surrendering their democratic aspirations to the fanaticism of their despotic ruler.

The Maharaja undertook construction of Road Pathankot-Kathua-Jammu to link India with Kashmir. In collusion with India, Hindus were inducted in Jammu province, heavily populated with Muslims, and were secretly armed. In conjunction with Dogra police, the terrorists forced the Muslims living in Jammu to flee to Pakistan and in matter of days the province was cleansed of its Muslim population. (That is how Muslim majority Jammu was converted into Hindu majority province). The Maharaja after disarming Muslims in Poonch, repeated this experiment in that town as well, which housed 90% Muslim majority. 200,000 Muslims were butchered and thousands of girls abducted. It was a deliberate act of Maharaja to provoke Pakistan to react so that he could find an excuse to seek India’s military assistance.

Fearing similar fate of Jammu Muslims, 50,000 ex servicemen in Poonch resorted to armed struggle in first week of October 1947 against Dogra troops at their own without any support from Pakistan. Impassioned appeals of hapless Kashmiris for help went unheard. The ones who managed to reach Pakistan in pathetic condition narrated harrowing tales perpetrated by Hindu extremist gangs, causing deep resentment and anger among the Pakistanis. When the sorry plight of the Kashmiris could no more be tolerated by the tribesmen of NWFP and FATA, they formed a Lashkar and rushed to their rescue on 24 October. They battled their way through Muzaffarabad and then advanced along the road leading to Srinagar, clearing series of towns and reached Baramula, 35 miles away from Srinagar on 26 October.

On that day, the marooned Maharaja who had fled to Jammu wrote a frantic letter to Mount Batten seeking his help. Governor General Mount Batten in consultation with gleeful Nehru promised him the desired help but subject to his accepting the accession of the state to the dominion of India. Instrument of Accession was coercively obtained from him by VP Menon with the approval of Sheikh Abdullah after the Indian troops had been air dashed to Sri Nagar on 27th. Accession letter was otherwise provisional and subject to ratification by Kashmiris. Maharaja was flown to India and detained where he died unwept.   

But for the valiant resistance put up by Azad forces of Kashmir and the tribesmen, Hindu terrorists in concert with Dogra Army would have cleansed whole of Kashmir of the presence of Muslims. Azad forces after liberating Poonch, Bhimber, Mirpur, Jhangar, Naushera and Kotli, joined up with tribal lashkar in Muzaffarabad and started advancing towards Srinagar. Had the tribesmen not wasted two days at Baramula and had entered Srinagar on 26^th, which was only two hours journey, or even on 27^th when Indian troops were being air landed through an air bridge, story of Kashmir would have been different. By the time they moved forward on 29^th, Indian forces had gathered sufficient combat strength in the capital city to turn the tables on the tribesmen.

Once the tribesmen started withdrawing with the same speed with which they had moved forward and the Indian columns supported by air started to advance towards Muzaffarabad and had reached up to Chakothi, Maj Gen Akbar Khan reorganized the defences with the help of ex servicemen and the tribesmen and blocked their advance and also pushed them back beyond Uri. Gilgit Scouts captured Gilgit, Skardu and surrounding areas.  

Plunging fortunes of the Indian military compelled Nehru to rush to the UNSC on 01 January 1948 to make a complaint against Pakistan and seek ceasefire. However, his real purpose was not to disengage but to portray Pakistan as an aggressor and supporter of tribal lashkar and project Indian intervention as a defensive act to save Kashmir, which in his perverted logic was part of India. Contrary to undertaking given to UNSC that Kashmir situation will not be aggravated, Indian military launched a two pronged offensive in April 1948. The offensive in Jhelum and Neelum valleys directed towards Muzaffarabad directly threatened the security of Pakistan. At that stage Quaid-e-Azam had to ultimately order dispatch of one infantry brigade of Pak Army into Kashmir on 20 April 1948. Beefing up its strength with irregulars, it took up positions in Jhelum and Neelum Valleys in May and successfully contained the Indian Summer Offensive in the two Valleys. With induction of additional brigade, a counter offensive launched in July in both the Valleys succeeded in recapturing Pandu complex and Pir Kanthi in Jhelum Valley and Chunj-Pir Sahaba complex in Neelum Valley.

The UNSC then affected ceasefire through its resolution dated 13 August 1948 and another resolution dated 5 January 1949, which was accepted by India.

PM Liaquat Ali Khan agreed to ceasefire since Nehru had pledged that a plebiscite will be held under the supervision of the UN to allow chance to the people of Kashmir to decide their future. The UN also accepted rights of self-determination and demilitarization of the state and declared Kashmir a disputed territory.   

In spite of the adverse relative strength of the two sides, Pak forces were well poised to make further progress since by then the Indian forces had started to suffer reverses on several fronts.  The military situation after 15-month war of liberation had become precarious for India because its Army had lost its cream. Had Jammu road, the sole entry into Kashmir from India been blocked, Indian troops would have got locked for eventual destruction and Kashmir would have fallen in the lap of Pakistan like a ripe apple. 1951 mutiny was attempted by Gen Akbar and his team because he was convinced that ceasefire was uncalled for and victory could easily be achieved. He felt if Jinnah was alive, he would never have accepted ceasefire.      

While ceasefire took place, demilitarization couldn’t be realized due to India’s intransigence. Without withdrawal of troops plebiscite couldn’t be held. While Pakistan accepted all the proposals floated by UNSC so that a plebiscite could be held, India rejected all and refused to pull back its troops. Even arbitration proposal was discarded. India kept changing goalposts to buy time and balk a solution of the dispute. Nehru dragged his feet by saying plebiscite would be held as soon as law and order was restored in Kashmir.

Having achieved the desired objective of averting the danger, the Indians then began to slip out of their commitment to hold plebiscite. Nehru after making pledges on several occasions backtracked from his commitment in March 1956 on the plea that Pakistan by joining SEATO and CENTO had become a threat to India and that Pakistan armed forces were receiving American aid. (Six years later, India felt no compunction in receiving massive military aid both from USSR and USA and western world after its border clash with China). Nehru then absorbed Kashmir within Indian dominion by drafting a new constitution and advanced a bizarre claim that Kashmir was part of India since it was mentioned as such in Indian Constitution. About plebiscite he brazenly said it was no more valid and also took the plea that it would disturb law and order in Kashmir.

Sheikh Abdullah heading National Conference who had been duped by Nehru by calling him his personal friend was installed as PM in Kashmir soon after Indian troops occupied it. When he showed reluctance to ratify Article 370 of Indian Constitution through the Kashmir Assembly, which would have meant extension of jurisdiction of Indian Supreme Court and the Election Committee to Kashmir, doing away with separate president, flag and national anthem, it angered Dogra Hindus and Nehru had to arrest him in 1953 on a trumped up charge. Intriguer Abdullah languished in jail for 11 years and so was the case with leaders belonging to Muslim Conference.

Another puppet Bakhshi Ghulam Muhammad was chosen by Nehru as his replacement because he agreed to what his predecessor was not willing to do. He ratified Kashmir’s accession to India through Jammu & Kashmir Constituent Assembly in February 1956 and in May Indian President promulgated constitution order. Bakhshi ruled for ten years and helped India in consolidating its hold over occupied Kashmir by holding bogus elections and forcing people to vote for puppets under the barrel of gun. He closed Defence Services for Muslim Kashmiris and made Pundits and Dogras eligible for induction. In order to please his mentors in Delhi, he upgraded the fortunes of Hindus and reduced the Muslims to serfs. His successor GM Sadiq went a step further to please his mentors in Delhi by fully supporting integration of the state with India. Another Indian tout Mir Qasim replaced him in 1972 and after his death Sheikh Abdullah was released from jail and made the PM. Other string-puppets who followed him after 1982 kept dancing to the tunes of India and are still dancing.    

Whenever the situation got out of control of the dummy state government, governor rule was imposed by Delhi and a reign of terror let loose upon luckless Kashmiris by applying draconian laws. 1965 Indo-Pak war took place essentially because of India’s intransigence Tto settle the dispute as per UN resolutions. Had the Kashmiris risen in revolt as they had done in 1989, Operation Gibraltar followed by Operation Grand Slam would certainly have succeeded and Kashmir would have become part of Pakistan. In the 1971 Indo-Pak war, a deliberate effort was made by 23 Division under Maj Gen Iftikhar Janjua to make a decisive push into Occupied Kashmir across River Tawi, but the offensive got stalled since the brave General died in a helicopter crash.

After 1972 Simla agreement, ceasefire line was renamed as Line of Control (LoC), which was to be respected by both sides. Policy of bilateralism was enforced by India so as to keep third party mediation out. While India kept preaching resolution through bilateralism, it simply refused to discuss Kashmir issue, stubbornly maintaining that Kashmir is not a disputed territory but an integral part of India and any discussion on it amounted to interference in its internal affairs. It was like ‘heads you lose, tails I win’. When India was reminded that ingresses in Siachin Glacier in June 1984 and in several other areas across the LoC had killed the spirit of Simla agreement, it looked the other way. Bilateralism otherwise had little chance of success since it excluded the main party to the dispute – the Kashmiris.

All peaceful efforts aimed at changing the status quo have met with outright obduracy. Armed uprising from 1989 onwards followed by unarmed movement in 2008-10 in the bleeding vale of Kashmir resulting in deaths of tens of thousands at the hands of Indian security forces didn’t soften up cold-blooded Hindu Brahman rulers. After killing over 100,000 Kashmiris, men, women and children and incapacitating the same number in a mad frenzy to crush the movement, neither there is any let up in Indian atrocities nor in the freedom struggle of the Kashmiris. Thousands have gone missing or killed in fake encounters and not a single killer has ever been made ccountable. Indian soldiers, paramilitary forces and police employed in Occupied Kashmir are above law.   

India falsely claims that secession of Kashmir, for that is precisely what a plebiscite in the State would mean, would become a precedent for other Indian states to secede from the fractionally divided, internally restive, artificially cemented Indian Union. This weird logic is preposterous and it is mockery of justice. Why the Kashmiris should be made the sacrificial lamb for the sake of unity of Indian Union which has been unable to overcome factionalism and communalism. Dozens of insurgencies and separatist movements in about 20 Indian States out of total 28 States speaks for itself that there is something terribly wrong in so-called shining India which the advanced world never tire applauding.

The impotent UNO has failed to implement its own resolutions since the sufferers are Muslims and the perpetrators are non-Muslims. East Timor and South Sudan have been made independent through the UN arbitration since the inhabitants of the two regions are Christian heavy. In case of Kashmir, the sole super power callously says that the UN resolutions are outdated. It has ganged up with India and dubs the Kashmiri freedom fighters as terrorists. Even unarmed teenagers are dubbed as Pakistan motivated terrorists. Instead of restraining India, it is encouraging India to crush the movement with full force. Pakistan’s moral, political and diplomatic support irritates India and the US. The duo dubs it as interference and goes a step further by alleging that Pakistan is involved in cross border terrorism.

While duplicitous USA considers the whole lot of Kashmiris, suffering state terrorism of Indian forces for over six decades, as terrorists deserving no mercy, it considers 2000-2500 terrorist Balochis supported by foreign powers involved in sabotage, abductions, target killings, killing of security forces and demanding independence of Balochistan as freedom fighters. Pak security forces are censured for carrying out human rights abuses. In collusion with India, the US is actively working on a sinister conspiracy to make Balochistan independent as is evident from the bill moved in US Congress for independent Balochistan on 17 February 2012. The bill states that Balochi people subjected to violence and extrajudicial killing have an innate right to self-determination and their own sovereign country. Instead of worrying over the fate of the Kashmiris and trying to solve the oldest dispute of Kashmir, the unjust and callous US leaders are more worried about Balochistan which is integral part of Pakistan and 97% people of Balochistan are patriotic Pakistanis.    

The world as a whole has turned a deaf ear to the cries and shrieks of the Kashmiris agonizing in open hell and overlooks India’s atrocities. They have been denied their indisputable right of self-determination as promised by the UN and the Indian leaders. India’s belligerence and apathy of the world powers to resolve the oldest dispute of the world has bred extremism and poses a serious threat to the security of the entire continent of Asia. Kashmir has now become a flashpoint with nuclear overtones. Instead of fishing in troubled waters of Balochistan, the US should worry about the molten lava simmering in Kashmir, which is now at the brink of eruption.

“America must learn to behave with maturity and not act as a shooter from the hip like a western cowboy movie. Any misadventure can cost world peace; never take chances with a nuclear power. When might is forced upon weaker and smaller nations that have the ability to hit back, reactions can be unpredictable and dangerous.” Raja Mujtaba

By Dr Raja Muhammad Khan

On February 9, 2012, the US Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation convened a congressional meeting and held an exclusive discussion on the internal situation of Baluchistan province of Pakistan. Chaired by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, the committee mainly deliberated on human rights situation in the province. Later on, the same Congressman along with two other lawmakers introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives of United States on February 17, 2012. The resolution says that, “Baloch nation has a historic right to self-determination.”  Pakistan has seriously protested over this US act and declared that this is a direct interference in its internal affairs.

Contravening all established international norms and standards, this U.S Congressional hearing on Balochistan is not only ill-motivated, but also a gross violation of the UN charter article 2.7 and a serious infringement of the sovereignty of an independent country. On its part, “Pakistan views this hearing with serious concern and considers it unacceptable in no uncertain terms. This kind of an exercise constitutes interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs. The hearing will be detrimental to building mutual trust and confidence and will add to suspicions in Pakistan about the US motives in the region and concerning Pakistan.”

 Pakistani Foreign Office has unequivocally conveyed its concern to US officials in Washington beside US Ambassador Cameron Munter in Islamabad. As per FO spokesperson, “We have conveyed our concern in Islamabad and Washington on the issue of discussion on Balochistan by the US Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee and expressed our feelings. We believe that Washington fully understand our position on this issue.” Without any iota of doubt, this Congressional hearing on Balochistan is an “ill-advised and ill-considered” move by US Committee on Foreign Affairs as rightfully declared by Pakistani Ambassador to US, Ms Sherry Rehman and amounts to direct involvement in the internal affairs of Pakistan. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, who organized and chaired the session, has also recently co-authored an article with Congressman Louie Gohmert building a case for the dissolution of Pakistan by making an independent Balochistan state.

Contrary to the conspirators’ whims, Balochistan Province remains the crowned half of Pakistan and such ill-witted acts of aiding and abating dismemberment of Pakistan will be deterred by the resilient nation of Pakistan. This congressional hearing is not only against international norms and against the UN Charter, but also disregards the basic concept of nation state and over and above the international law. It is an exclusive right of Pakistani citizens, prerogative of legislators and the elected representatives of the state, to debate and address the grievances of the local people. Certainly in the long haul, this US Congressional act will have serious repercussions for the Pak-US relationship which is already passing through a critical juncture. Though the spokesperson of the US State Department, Victoria Nuland, clarified that US Government neither supports such debates nor endorses autonomy or independence of the Baluchistan province from Pakistan, yet, these discussions by Congressmen aimed at ‘redefining’ US policy towards Pakistan are highly undesired, and US Government and State Department cannot absolve itself from the conduct of this meeting. In reply to a question, Ms Nuland said that, “Our view on Balochistan has not changed. We are aware of this hearing. As you know, Congress holds hearings on many foreign affairs topics. These hearings don’t necessarily imply that the US government endorses one view or another view. I’d underscore that the State Department is not participating or involved in this hearing.”

As a nation, Pakistanis condemns this US Congressmen act and hope that US would apologize over this unprecedented blatant interference in the domestic affairs of Pakistan.  Owing to its geo-strategic and geo-economic significance, U.S think tanks and CIA has been covertly debating and planning about the future of the Baluchistan province of Pakistan for many years now. In fact, Balochistan, almost 43 percent territory of Pakistan, is considered highly enriched in natural resources with huge quantity of hydrocarbons and other precious minerals such as gold and copper deposits. Since the geographical positioning of this province serves as a gateway, linking various regions of Asia either through sea or overland, therefore, global powers have continuously kept eyes on the Baluchistan for centuries. This was true for Tsarist Russia and British India and now it stands true for the Atlantic super power, United States.

Being strategically located, the province earned renewed and enhanced global attention in the recent years, mainly because of the rapidly changing global and regional political and security situation. Securing the resources, international maritime and overland routes, and denying its use to others, as part of “New Great Game” has further enhanced the importance of this province of Pakistan. Apparently, the rapid escalation in Persian Gulf as US–Iran situation intensifies, Middle Eastern crises and steadily blossoming Pak-China strategic relationship are the significant aspects, which might have impelled United States lawmakers to hastily divulge their long-term designs for Pakistan, otherwise debated secretively among the US strategic quarters for years.  There is also a need to be mindful of the fact that, as a policy, US State Department (White House) and Pentagon does not politically owns up controversial policy-advising their think tanks, law makers and their political analysts divulge upon.

This is a significant part of a broader US exercise, carried out to channelize public mood and perceptions, and consequently steer the policy course, in the light of intelligence received from relevant quarters. U.S has been successfully employing these means for conceiving and implementing strategies throughout the globe during cold war as well as in post cold war era. In the pretext of global war on terrorism in Afghanistan and ‘evidence’ of WMD in Iraq, coupled with smokescreen of human rights and democratic objectives, US led invasion of these two independent countries are contemporary examples of nefarious US policies. As a part of this process, covert agents mostly CIA operatives, hire the locals, particularly notables of the areas, pay them heavily and exploit them subsequently, thus paving way for the accomplishment of the neo-colonial designs of the US.  Similarly, simultaneous public sector contribution, through scripted electronic and print medium stories complimented by State Department deliberate leaks, US administrations molds and frames public perceptions to favor policies. Ironically, for domestic consumption, generally US is hailed as selfless power safeguarding and championing the cause of human rights,  regardless of the documented sponsor of widely accepted notorious illegal prison camps such as Guantanamo Bay, Bagram Base and Abu Ghariab.  

These malevolence strategies are designed to reiterate US ‘exceptionlism’ around the globe, paste Americans as guardian of basic human freedoms and savior of falling living standards. Similarly over a stretch of years, local feudals (sardars) have exploited there people so much, that majority is unable to make their both ends. Therefore, as soon as the same sardar is able to distribute handful dollars on the behest of a foreign power, local people are tactfully lured to obey the commands of the sardar, including anti-state acts, without questioning the consequences. Among these who display reservations and reluctance to fall prey to notorious hidden agendas, heinous miseries are unleashed to make examples out of them. Those who prove more hardened to follow imported scripts and agendas, are then put through torture and subsequent brutal murders, later putting blame on the local government, intelligence agencies and security forces with an intent to defame them.  This is not it; in order to provoke and further incite anti-state feelings, some of the anti-state elements are also killed. During this exercise, those people are also targeted who tend to differ from their format and attempt at reconciling their patriotic and nationalistic obligations with the state of Pakistan. Indeed, their murders are committed more brutally and inhumanly to make them examples for rest of the people, who may consider rejoining the ranks and file of patriotic citizens, and who may try to leak out foreign conspiracies to locals, government officials and agencies. In the absence of factual statistics, these targeted murders are consequently exploited to incite hatred among the lot who are still hovering at fence with neutral thoughts. Under the fear of their and their family’s lives, these neutral people are then forced to take part in anti-state activism. During the Congressional meeting, Mr Ali Dayan Hasan, Director of Pakistan Human Rights Watch (HRW), was particularly critical of the role of security forces of Pakistan in Baluchistan. He recommended the US Government to, “communicate directly to the agencies responsible for disappearances and other abuses, to demand an end to abuses and facilitate criminal enquiries to hold perpetrators accountable.”

 From the other side of the spectrum, it is widely suspected that CIA, globally known as a killing machine, along with its sister intelligence agencies like RAW and Mossad, has devised new nefarious methods of murdering the people in Balochistan, and disposing their disfigured bodies (after inhuman killings) at public places for creating; more anti-state emotions among those who are still patriotic nationals, and to largely engineer defaming and malicious public campaigns against security institutions and State of Pakistan, by using US and Western media. These CIA agents, who at times have two or more covers; a hidden one of being a CIA operatives and an overt but softer more acceptable one either; as a law maker, member of think tank, media group, an analyst and a writer and at time the members of very humanistic NGOs.

This game and gimmicks do not stop here. The powerful CIA, having the unlimited supply of dollars behind, have been showering these dollars to some of the very powerful people in Pakistan. Those who have been ‘blessed’ with US appreciations include; prominent media men, scholars, think tanks, politicians and even academicians. This US baptized quarter keeps on praising the US acts while maligning Pakistani security forces and ISI on the behest of United States and other anti-Pakistan forces.  For them, dollars, US blessing, frequent visits to US and Western institutions are more important then the national prestige and national interest. Alas!

The most important query is; after all why as a nation we have failed to make public, the evil designs of the CIA, its collaborating intelligence agencies and unveiled covert faces within Pakistan, who support foreign format and agenda against the state of Pakistan. Why our think tanks, academicians, analysts, media and above all the politicians, are not raising voices against these spreading and intensifying conspiracies? Rather some of them are truly following the foreign script. It is very convenient to point fingers against their own security forces and ISI, but they are unable to unveil the real actors; the CIA, RAW, Mossad and many other, who kill Pakistanis (Balochs in particular). Mutilated and disfigured bodies are deliberately disposed at public places by design to defame Pakistani security forces and ISI.

It would not be a sane conclusion to draw that Pakistani security forces are able to brutally kill Baloch masses and disfigure their bodies to earn hate for themselves. Fairly recently, Pak Army enrolled over 20,000 Baloch youth in different roles within Army in order to dispel such an impression of enmity and to provide equal opportunities for service in the Army. Besides, Pak Army is running many developmental projects, including some entirely sponsored from its own resources, in both FATA and Baluchistan. Should there still be some logic in the accusations that Army is killing masses in Baluchistan? Above all, can Army afford that, being a national Army? Thus, some sort of wisdom should prevail among the CIA local followers and those having special love for the teaching of Bal Thackeray.

There have been rare, yet worrying, occasions where it has been unearthed that some among the most instrumental media players in Pakistan, have been following the script of foreign media, which in turn pursue the anti-Pakistani themes. Most of our anchors, the owners of the TV channel, and print media maintain close liaisons with foreign media advisors especially of US and Western countries. There is a glaring influence of Indian media and culture on Pakistani media, especially TV channels. This influence is creating two things; firstly, dimension of Indian cultural invasion and secondly, between the lines sugarcoated Indian propaganda against Pakistan. While these are challenging realities, as a nation, we need to think and contemplate the future of Pakistan, rather be pawns at the hands of foreign intelligence agencies for few dollars or for merely appreciations of those who are conspiring against the national integration of Pakistan. It is quite evident, that US infamous agenda against Pakistan is unveiling rapidly, therefore, about time to undertake serious and concrete counter measures to deter such notorious agendas. The best way would be to promote national integration, and redress the grievances of Baloch people on utmost priority. At the same time, state must identify and take legal actions against those Pakistanis, who are playing in the hands of foreign spying agencies. In this regard, there is a dire need to formulate a practicable wholesome national response through a well thought out security strategy and by mobilizing the masses to counter propaganda campaigns against Pakistan and its security institutions.

US Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Senator Feinstein

By Lawrence Davidson

Part I – Real Threats?

In mid-February 2012 an array of top U.S. intelligence chiefs appeared before Senate Intelligence Committee to give their annual report on "currant and future worldwide threats" to national security. Those testifying included CIA Director David Petraeus, National Intelligence Director James Clapper, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. General Ronald Burgess, and FBI Director Robert Mueller. Their presentations on what is and is not a real threat to the nation, as well as the reaction of the senators holding the hearings, turned out to be an exercise in one dimensional thinking. What is real? Well, what comports with your point of view. Here are two examples from their testimony:
?
1. The Enemy Within – Rogue individuals operating "within the ranks" of the intelligence community and armed forces" now constitute a major threat to U.S. security. According to Lt. General Burgess these people are "self-radicalized lone wolves." He then pointed to the "recent massive Wikileaks disclosures."
?
Everyone involved in these hearings agreed with this assertion even though it is based on a
dubious, yet unquestioned, assumption. The assumption is that the behavior of U.S. government forces is a model of acceptable normal military and intelligence behavior. Those who work for the government but find this behavior unacceptable, and indeed a criminal betrayal of all that is humane, and then do something about that conviction, are "self-radicalized"dangers to national security.
?
But what if the support of oppressive and racist regimes, the invasion of other countries based on lies, the killing of thousands upon thousands of civilians, and the official use of torture and extraordinary rendition constitutes radical and unreasonable behavior? Then those who expose such extremism would not be the radicals at all. They would be champions of a more reasonable norm and also heroes.

My suggestion is that this is exactly the case. The country’s pursuit of its alleged national interests is being directed by a bunch of thugs in suits who have taken it upon themselves to label as "radicals" those citizen heroes who point out this fact. They are afraid that more and more citizens might see the real barbaric nature of their policies and call them to account. So, to prevent this, they criminalize the truth tellers.
?
2. The Iranian Threat – According to James Clapper, the National Intelligence Director, "despite the hype surrounding Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology, the country’s leaders are not likely to develop weapons unless attacked." In addition, the Iranians are unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict."
?
How was this news greeted by the senators on the intelligence committee? Most of them refused to believe it, which is par for the course for the Congress as a whole and most of the US media. In this case the norm was laid out by Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican) of South Carolina who told Clapper that "I’m very convinced that they’re (the Iranians) are going down the road to developing a nuclear weapon."
?
Wait a minute. These are your boys, Senator Graham. You and your ilk are the ones who claim that the nation’s intelligence services are best in the world and know what they are talking about. All of a sudden you don’t believe them! Why not? What other source of information on Iran do you have that you consider better, more reliable than the CIA, the DIA, the NSA, etc.?
?
Try the Zionist lobby. Graham and his fellow senators’ main source of information on anything touching on Israel (and the Iran business is a prime example of Israeli paranoia) is an American Israel Public Affairs Committee briefing book. They will never cross this Lobby even when it tells them things that contradict U.S. intelligence. That is because the Lobby financially contributes to their campaigns and threatens to work to unseat them if they do not follow its lead. The intelligence community simply cannot compete with that.
?
So once again we are confronted with definitions that are designed to support idiosyncratic views. What is "radical"? Exposing the government’s crimes is what is radical. What is "real" when it comes to Iran? What the organization that funds your reelection campaign says is real.
?
Part II – What is Real For Everyone Else?
?
Just about everyone thinks he or she knows what is real. And in some important categories we truly do know. We all know that if you jump off of a high building the reality of gravity takes over with dire consequences. More generally, most of us know what is real within the immediate environment in which we live. What do I mean by this?
?
Most of us live most of our lives within a relatively small local space. Within that space we have direct, interactive, day-to-day experiences and through these come to accurately know what to expect. Our experiences have good predictive value. If someone comes along and says something ridiculous, like the next town over is developing atomic weapons and is determined to use them to blow up your neighborhood, we will know that this is crazy.
?
But what about things going on beyond the horizon? Most of us don’t go to those places, don’t have day-to-day experiences with them. Nothing in our lives allows us to make a judgment on what is real or not real about activities there. So what do we do? Well, we ignore those places unless there is some reason to believe they can impact our lives. Then most of us rely on those we are led to believe are "experts"on things foreign – usually government officials or media "talking heads."
?
This can be a problem. How do we know that they are experts and can be trusted? How do we know that they don’t have some undeclared agenda that skews their judgment? As the two examples given above suggest, government officials can work on assumptions which, when looked at dispassionately, are just anti-human. And government officials, allied to special interests, can dismiss what their own intelligence experts tell them is real. What are we locals suppose to believe?
?
Part III – Some Rules to Follow When You Don’t Know What is Real
?
When one cannot determine what is real or is not real, there are perhaps some rules that can be followed so as to encourage policy makers to act in ways that will minimize mistakes. For instance, in cases of uncertainty citizens should:
?
1. Be very skeptical of what the government and media tell them is real. Remember the past disasters (most recently the invasion of Iraq) that easy acceptance of such portrayals of alleged reality have caused. Concerned citizens owe it to themselves and their nation to seek multiple sources of information.
?
2. Demand that policy makers initially act on the basis of a best case scenario even as they prepare for the worst. Most of the time the "expert" advice we get on foreign threats is either ideologically driven and therefore exaggerated or just plain wrong (for instance, the case of Vietnam), or is driven by the agenda of some lobby or special interest (for instance, the case of Iraq, the threat from Iran, or the "sainted" status of the Israelis and the "terrorist" status of the Palestinians). The resulting worst case depictions of reality are almost always inaccurate and generally lead to unnecessary death and destruction.
?
3. Demand that, in foreign relations, diplomacy always be pursued first and foremost. War should be the very last resort because it is truly a radical and extreme undertaking of which few policy makers have any direct experience. If they did, they would be much more hesitant to commit their fellow citizens to it.
?
4. Demand punishment for those who knowingly lie and break the laws governing international relations and human rights (such as the Geneva Conventions and laws prohibiting torture). There are good reasons why these laws exist. Not to enforce them is to condone a return to barbarism.

Part IV – Conclusion
?
Oddly enough, in a democracy citizens who do not participate in political discussion, who do not attempt to influence policy, end up having responsibility for whatever policies their government takes up. This is true because in a democracy if a citizen chooses not to be political he or she abdicates their potential influence to those who do act politically. It is only those who fight for what they think is right and real yet do not win who can say they are not responsible for the behavior of a government they actively opposed. So if you want to be able to say this you cannot retreat into a wholly private existence. If you do so others, who you might find to be thugs in suits, will more likely succeed. And in the end, they will act in your name.