Pakistan Ledger: Unbiased World news & views--پاکستاني کھاتا

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی |

Will the new elections in Bharat (aka India) bring about a sea change? Will Mayawati be able to pull a rabbit out of her hat and unite diverse groups? Is Mayawati sell out the Dalit interests for personal gain? The Dalit Muslim Communist alliance has been tried before. Can it work this time?

In 2008 the left lost. The grand alliance between the Dalits, the Muslims, and the Communists failed–just like it failed in the 1940. Then they couldn’t unite. Now they united but were stabbed in the back by some in the opposition who supported the government. The vote of no confidence failed because the Congress spent millions of Dollars in bribes and even allowed convicted members of Parliament who were in jail to come in a vote for Premier Singh’s government.

Their propagandistic deception begins with the simple use of the word democracy. ..country qualifies as a constitutional republic, let alone a true democracy. Rife with election fraud, Corporatism, gross wealth disparities, militarism, belligerent expansionism, toxic nationalism, and a laundry list of traits characterizing a fascist state, the United States could easily qualify as one of democracy’s greatest foes. India does not lag far behind.

Hype and spin aside, determined investigation and fastidious scholarship by people like Bangladeshi barrister M.B.I. Munshi, researcher Isha Khan, and many others reveal the ugly realities behind India’s corporate media façade. India and the United States do share a number of commonalities, but few of them relate to “democracy”, “liberty”, or “solid moral foundations”.

While it is true that both nations were founded by noble people who wrested themselves free of the yoke of Great Britain’s imperial oppression, like degenerate trust fund children, the heirs of liberty have defecated on their family’s reputation and squandered their fortune.

As Munshi’s exhaustive research demonstrates, India’s policies, attitudes, and actions toward its neighbors are quite analogous to the machinations of the United States throughout Central and South America. Replete with its own version of the Monroe Doctrine (Akhand Bharat) and an intelligence agency called RAW (their version of the CIA), India has a long-term commitment to wielding undue power and influence throughout the subcontinent. Accelerating Humanity’s Demise By Jason Miller

There were many visionaries in the Subcontinent who saw he dangers of majoritarianism. A few had the foresight who actually came up with plans to resolve the rights of the minorities in the Subcontinent. His Cabinet Mission Plan was a stroke of genious and would have bridged the gap between Hindu and Muslim, Sikh and Dalit. It was torpedoed by the right wing of the Indian National Congress which shunned not only Jinnah but also Ambedkar and Bose. Thus began the politics of race, religion and creed.

“The Indian society does not consist of individuals. It consists of innumerable collection of castes, which are exclusive in their life and have no common experience to share and have no bond of sympathy. The existence of caste system is a standing denial of the existence of those ideals of society and therefore of democracy. An Indian cannot eat or marry with an Indian simply because he or she does not belong to his or her caste. An Indian simply can not touch an Indian because he or she does belong to his or her caste.” Ambedkar

India: Interaction of Hindus in power with Muslims

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | RUPEE NEWS | March 23rd, 2009 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

Old Socialists never die--they just smell that way!

The Socialists in Pakistan are empowered by the turmoil in the region, the schism between the rich and the poor, the growing disenchantment with America and the fear of the Taliban. There is a lot of discussion about the systems. Many feel that capitalism in a tailspin does not offer solutions for the third world. Others want to seek new avenues for development and seek solace in the economic growth of China and Russia. Some even eulogize Cuba and venerate Venezuela. Most are disenchanted with the corruption of the ruling elite.

Lenin was very clear in this relationship between the revolutionary vanguard and the working class. In "Left wing Communism", Lenin writes:

"If you want to help 'the masses' and to win the sympathy and support of 'the masses', you must not fear difficulties, you must not fear the pinpricks, chicanery, insults and persecution on the part of the 'leaders' (who being opportunists and social chauvinists, are in most cases directly or indirectly connected with the bourgeoisie and the police), but must imperatively work wherever the masses are to be found. You must be capable of every sacrifice, of overcoming the greatest obstacles in order to carry on agitation and propaganda systematically, perseveringly, persistently and patiently, precisely in those institutions, societies and associations - even the most ultra-reactionary - in which proletarian or semi proletarian masses are to be found." (Left wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder, Lenin, pp. 61)

A mass revolutionary upheaval in the next period in Pakistan will outshine even the 1968-69 revolution, which created and gave stature to the tradition of the PPP. Such movements are iconoclastic in character, they create new revolutionary traditions that change societies, reshape destiny and transform history. A revolutionary tendency can play a decisive role in such events.

Even with the relatively small forces of revolutionary Marxism in Pakistan, a subjective factor can give organization and direction to such a movement. Such a revolutionary upheaval can overthrow capitalism, destroy the roots of religious fundamentalism and obscurantism, smash the shackles of feudalism and remove the yoke of imperialist stranglehold and exploitation. Such a feat can only be accomplished through a Socialist Revolution. A socialist victory in Pakistan would open the floodgates of revolutionary upheavals across the South Asian subcontinent from Afghanistan to Burma where the masses are seething with revolt and yearning for a socialist transformation. Socialist dot Net

Several factors led to the defeat and retreat of the Marxist parties in the land of the Indus. Many feel that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had used and abused the leftist forces and them left them out to dry.

the PPP rode to power in the wake of the anti-Ayub movement of 1968-69. This was the height of the Vietnam War (the Tet Offensive had taken place in 1968), the Chinese Cultural Revolution and the Anti-Imperialist movement in the heartland of Imperialism, i.e. the USA. In Pakistan, the movement was lead by the radical sections of the petty-bourgeoise strata with its allies in the working class and the peasantry. Seeing which way the movement was turning, the PPP put the popular slogan ‘Maang Raha Hai Har Insaan - Roti, Kapra aur Makaan’ (Every human being is demanding Bread, Clothing and Shelter!) as well as the slogan of ‘Socialism avay hee avay’ (Socialism is bound to come!). The inclusion of what became the socialism clause are to read against this background and it is immaterial how much the PPP remained true to its word, the point is that the term occupies a central place within the constitution and it is important for its defenders to entreat it. The Red Diary

The judicial killing of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the other was ascent of Zia Ul Haq was the final nail in the coffin of the Hammer and Sickle in the land of the Crescent and Star. After the defeat of the Soviet Armies, and implosion of USSR, the leftist forces in Pakistan went into hiding and hibernation.

Before 1968, politics and political parties were all about the ruling class. There was no mention of the working class and its political role, in the media or among the intelligentsia. But that all changed. The working class rose onto the political scene with an exceptional revolutionary movement, which started as protests against the regime of Ayub Khan led by students in November 1968, growing to a general strike led by the working class within a few months.

Workers started to occupy factories and peasants took over lands from feudal lords. In some areas, the peasantry organised armed struggle against the landlords. Tenants refused to pay rents. The working class took control of the cities and started to run the administration. A few cities remained under workers’ control for more than two weeks. Socialist revolution could be smelt in the air. Socialism was the main slogan in the movement. The ruling class was terrified.

The founder of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), Zulifqar Ali Bhutto, came to its rescue. There was no revolutionary party and leadership able to carry through the revolution and overthrow capitalism and feudalism to establish a workers’ state. Bhutto took advantage of the situation and derailed the potential socialist revolution into a reformist democratic movement. The working class lost this opportunity and later paid the price for this failure. Respective regimes viciously attacked the most militant and conscious layers of the working class, introducing laws to prevent strikes and the formation of unions, and banning trade union activities in many sectors of the economy.

The trade union movement started to decline in the 1980s and has weakened significantly since, the last 15 years being the most difficult time. The collapse of Stalinist Russia and the Stalinist states of Eastern Europe also affected the trade union movement. Many left-wing unions, federations and their leaders fully capitulated to capitalism and started preaching free-market economy to their ranks. Leaders betrayed many struggles against privatisation and neo-liberalism. The main trade union leaderships also adopted the policy of compromise and opportunism against government attacks on workers and trade unions. Now, only 3% of workers are affiliated with trade unions.

The trade union movement is at a crossroad. Compromise and capitulation will lead to further weakness and decline. But struggle and organised resistance can provide strength and much needed confidence to the labour movement. And the numbers of trade unions have begun to increase as new sections of the working class have started to organise. Some important struggles and strikes have emerged in last few years, including the historic strike of PTCL (telecommunications) and textile workers. Teachers are also fighting for their rights, and industrial workers have won some important battles. In next few years, there will be a resurgence of workers’ struggles and strikes.

Zia Ul Haq's patronage of the Ultra Right and the religious press the Leninist and Maoists further underground. The drying up of funding sources from Moscow eliminated the Mazdoor Kisan Party and its breakaway offshoots. Even the Bhashani and Wali Khan's National Awami Party felt the pressure and lost its traditional voting block in the Western provinces of Pakistan. Many had thought that they were dead as a door nail.

...

THE PAKISTAN PEOPLE’S Party was founded in 1967 with just 35 people. Zulifqar Ali Bhutto was the founding chairman. He was a big feudal lord from Sindh and served as minister in the military government of Ayub Khan. He was a clever politician. He correctly understood the mood of the masses and put forward a radical programme with socialist slogans. He put forward demands for bread, houses and clothes for everyone. He also talked about a socialist planned economy and a classless society. In the absence of an organised left party and movement, he came forward with radical anti-capitalist and anti-feudal slogans.

The PPP became the largest political party in Pakistan in just a few months, in the aftermath of the revolutionary movement of the working class. It became the largest party in West Pakistan, while the Awami League trounced the other parties to win a landslide in East Pakistan in the first ever elections in 1970. The military and civil establishment refused to hand over power to the Awami League and this resulted in a civil war and then the separation of East Pakistan (now called Bangladesh) in 1971. Bhutto became the leader of the rest of Pakistan. He came to power with popular support, introducing a few reforms in the early period of his rule, and nationalising more than 70% of the economy.

But he was frightened of a strong working class and used repressive measures against the trade unions. He betrayed the working class and started attacking its advanced layers. His support started to decrease in the last years of his rule. The military organised a coup against him in 1977 after a violent right-wing movement against him. He was later hanged by the military government. His hanging again made him popular with the masses, because it showed he had refused to compromise with the military dictator.Socialism Today

With a resurgent Moscow, a depressed Capitalist world, and the Taliban at the Gates, many of the "Surkas" (Reds), as they are known in Pakistan have come to the forefront. The Reds even a band called "Lal" which is perpetuating its brand of populist socialism egged on by closet and hidden Socialists like Ahtizaz Ahsan. Even Mubbashair Hasan, the Left's darling and the Minister of Health of Zufiqar Ali Bhutto is now out in the open.

It is pedagogical to note that that old Socialists have come out of the woodwork. Clearly the ANP which ha dbeen rejected by the Pakhtuns for decades now is in power. Amazingly the Khans of ANP/NAP are ready to deal with the "TTP" of Swat even though the TTP is the antithesis of the the socialist and secular policies of the founding fathers of the NAP.

Will the future Pakhtuns owe their allegiance to Moscow or Mecca or Mao? This is the latent million Dollar question that will be answered in the coming weeks.

Article 3 and Karl Marx

The ‘Socialism clause’ is Article 3 of the Constitution (above clause 6 for High treason that no one tires of mentioned!) entitled ‘Elimination of exploitation’ and reads:

The State shall ensure the elimination of all forms of exploitation and the gradual fulfilment of the fundamental principle, from each according to his ability, to each according to his work.

The above quote is taken from Marx’s classic work ‘The Critique of the Gotha Program’ where he explicates how the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” can
only be realized in the Classless, Stateless Communist society where material production abounds and for socialist society, arising fresh out of the birth pangs of Capitalism, a better measure would be ‘from
each according to his ability, to each according to the labour performed’. Consequently, the above phrase was included as the cornerstone of the Constitution of the USSR, the first Socialist Country on earth. Despite not actually materializing, Socialism is definitely a part of our constitution. The Red Diary

The left in Pakistan heralds Mohammad Ali Jinnah as a secular cultural Muslim. The right points to his advocacy for a Muslim homeland and butters up this monograph with his statements about the Pakistani constitution derived out the Quran. The left points to Jinnah's earlier lifestyle. And so it goes.

‘Restoration’ and Socialism

It is therefore abundantly clear that the question of the restoration of the 1973 Constitution is invariably tied to the question of Socialism in Pakistan. The fact that it has not been mentioned within
the numerous debates of the past one year may tell us something about the class composition of the Lawyers movement; it may also explain why the broad masses of the workers and peasants of Pakistan, although definitely inspired by the heroic struggle of the lawyers and their allies, have not actively participated in the Defence of the Constitution. The Radicals in the Democratic movement need to bring Article 3 to the fore in order to connect the Constitutional question with the popular classes, as well as to see whether the class loyalties of the ‘Constitutionalists’ take precedence over their Defence of the Constitution. Any Takers? The Red Diary

The implications of the Left vs. Right battle in Pakistan reverberate around the world. Pakistan was the most loyal US ally during the Cold War. It was the front line state which led to the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan which many attribute led to the implosion of the USSR. Pakistanis and the 2 million that died fighting Moscow helped the USA destroy their biggest enemy. That help went unappreciated and was rewarded with en years of sanctions for the Pakistanis.

Today the memory of the non-delivery of the F-16s, that had been paid for with $450 million of Pakistan cash plus the CIAs drone bombing adds to the growing Anti-Americanism. The left in Pakistan plays on this growing Anti-Americanism and propagates a Socialistic Pakistan. Amazingly this has much appeal for the Socialistic Elite as well as the oppressed poor.

The only class which can bring change and transform the lives of the working masses is the working class. Socialism is the only viable system to replace capitalism. The working class has not yet started to move but once it starts the whole political scenario will be different. There is a 43 million strong working class, one third of the total population. The Pakistani working class and masses have showed again and again that they have the potential, courage and capability to conduct a revolutionary struggle against the rotten rulers. The working class needs its own revolutionary party and leadership to organise the struggle. Such a party, with a clear programme, strategy and tactics, and mass support, can win the future for the masses.

Pakistan is heading towards another showdown between the ruling and working classes. The outcome of this showdown will determine the future of this country and for the masses. The working class cannot take full advantage of independence and cannot enjoy real freedom without the overthrow of capitalism and feudalism. Socialism Today

Pakistan is at crossroads. It is threatened by the religious fervor of the Extremist Right and held hostage to the machination of the Left whose purse stings may be held far from the shore of Karachi.

The fanaticism of the religious right is matched by the extremism of the irreligiousness of the fundamentalist left. The Pro-Leninists are at the throats of the the Pro-Jeffersonians who are odds of the the Pro-Caliphists. All factions are also influenced by the ground realities where Iran, Russia, the USA, China are pulling the strings.

Bharat (aka India) scared out of it wits, is pushing for a secular government in Islamabad and Kabul. Washington wants to replicate Jeffersonian democracy in the land of the Indus and the Amu Darya. Moscow waits in the wings to incorporate Afghanistan into its near-abroad.

If one can look into the seeds of time and see which will grow and which will not, one has to see the writing on the wall. The writing on the wall spells the "day after". The "Day after" the US leaves Afghanistan is victory for those who want a Caliphate in Kabul. The "Day after" the America is thrown out of Kabul spells a victory of the anti-imperialist forces of the Pakhtuns. The "Day after' defines a prosperous South Asia for the freedom loving Pro-Western Pakistanis. The "Day after" describes a turning of the tide for he Marxists who had warned the USA of intervening in Afghanistan.

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | RUPEE NEWS | March 11th, 2009 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

Another article about the end of US hegemony has been published in the Atlantic Monthly. Imperial blindness: Another Empire stuck in Af-Pak quagmire unable to extricate itself out of Kipling’s hell. The US has squandered it wealth and prestige in the past decade. The Unipolar world is ending. There are clear signs of a resurgent Russia and a rising China. Parag Khanna says that "India has missed the boat". Europe is a major contender for a World Power. It seems likely that the hegemony of the sole superpower will be replaced by a world with at least four major poles--The USA, Russia, Europe, and China. There may be other contenders and those who want to be counted, but the the quad will rule the world. Each node of the quad will try to manipulate other smaller powers to their advantage. For example during the Bush Administration the US tried to use Bharat (aka India) a counterweight to China. The Obama-Clinton policy is to build a strong relationship with China.

People talk glibly of ‘the total disarmament of the frontier tribes’ as being the obvious policy…but to obtain it would be as painful and as tedious an undertaking as to extract the stings of a swarm of hornets, with naked fingers.” Winston Churchill

Can Obama pull US out of the AfPak quicksand? Choosing China & Pakistan over Bharat (aka India)
Can Obama duplicate Swat peace deal with the Taliban in Afghanistan

The last time the political tectonic plates collided, the eartquake was felt all over South Asia, Eastern Europe and in Latin America. After the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan the USSR imploded under the drunk leadership of Mr. Yeltsin, and was reduced to the status of Latvia and Estonia. It was ignored and humiliated. A resurgent Russia can be analogized to a resurgent Germany after Versailles.

In the past two decades, America was the undisputed leader and the main military power on the planet. Parag Khanna is one of those that feel the USA squandered away that leadership and missed a golden opportunity to lead by example and with moral authority. Python swallows alligator and explodes: Lessons from the Peloponnesian War.

It is 2016, and the Hillary Clinton or John McCain or Barack Obama administration is nearing the end of its second term. America has pulled out of Iraq but has about 20,000 troops in the independent state of Kurdistan, as well as warships anchored at Bahrain and an Air Force presence in Qatar. Afghanistan is stable; Iran is nuclear. China has absorbed Taiwan and is steadily increasing its naval presence around the Pacific Rim and, from the Pakistani port of Gwadar, on the Arabian Sea. The European Union has expanded to well over 30 members and has secure oil and gas flows from North Africa, Russia and the Caspian Sea, as well as substantial nuclear energy. America’s standing in the world remains in steady decline. Paragh Khanna

Castro on collapse of US Imperialism. Decries “Law of jungle”

Why? Weren’t we supposed to reconnect with the United Nations and reaffirm to the world that America can, and should, lead it to collective security and prosperity? Indeed, improvements to America’s image may or may not occur, but either way, they mean little. Condoleezza Rice has said America has no “permanent enemies,” but it has no permanent friends either. Many saw the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as the symbols of a global American imperialism; in fact, they were signs of imperial overstretch. Every expenditure has weakened America’s armed forces, and each assertion of power has awakened resistance in the form of terrorist networks, insurgent groups and “asymmetric” weapons like suicide bombers. America’s unipolar moment has inspired diplomatic and financial countermovements to block American bullying and construct an alternate world order. That new global order has arrived, and there is precious little Clinton or McCain or Obama could do to resist its growth.The Geopolitical Marketplace

While the Obama administration seeks to improve America’s position vis-à-vis Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel-Palestine, Europe, and Asia, the most critical foreign-policy front of all – the home front—is looking brittle. This development is new, as for almost seven decades – ever since Pearl Harbor—policymakers have taken for granted that the homefront would cooperate with military missions and expenditures. America could build ships, planes, and tanks, and assert itself as the pivotal outside power in many parts of the world, and the home front (despite sometimes outspoken political opposition, as during the Vietnam War) would financially support those efforts. This held true from the time of the end of the Great Depression right up until the onset of our current great recession. The emergencies of World War II and the early Cold War years, coupled with a constantly expanding economy, allowed the home front to write blank checks for our endeavors abroad. But the big question in foreign policy today is, Will this continue in the face of the greatest economic crisis since the 1930s?

Soon after the Iraq war turned nasty in 2006, the American people lost their stomach for involvement there. It was only because the surge paid fairly quick dividends, which got Iraq off the front pages, that public disquiet was reduced to low-level muttering. But that was before the economic crisis hit. Given the state of people’s retirement accounts and job prospects, where will the public be regarding Afghanistan a year from now? I’d guess that the Administration has no more than a year to show striking progress in Afghanistan before the public starts to growl like it did at the Bush Administration in the 2006 mid-term elections.

But Afghanistan is only the most obvious potential casualty of the recession. Also at stake are the expensive weapons programs and air and sea platforms that allow the United States to sustain its position as a global military hegemon. Regardless of what happens on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. dominates the air and the main sea lines of communication (SLOCs). Ultimately, it is this fact that makes this country the preeminent global power that it is, and gives our diplomacy the heft it requires to sit at the front of the table at critical gatherings around the world. Yet maintaining that position doesn’t just cost money, it costs lots and lots of money—billions, not millions. Why the recession could spell the end of American dominance by Robert D. Kaplan The Shrinking Superpower. Robert D. Kaplan is a national correspondent for The Atlantic and a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

Already the first signs of friction on the world scene are being felt. The Russian invasion of Georgia as a result of the NATO expansion, the Chinese rebuff of Delhi, the US-Beijing Naval tension, and the Chinese request to America to stop the destabilization of South Asia are some examples of a changing world.

The geopolitical marketplace will decide which will lead the 21st century.The key second-world countries in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, South America, the Middle East and Southeast Asia are more than just “emerging markets.” If you include China, they hold a majority of the world’s foreign-exchange reserves and savings, and their spending power is making them the global economy’s most important new consumer markets and thus engines of global growth - not replacing the United States but not dependent on it either. I.P.O.’s from the so-called BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) alone accounted for 39 percent of the volume raised globally in 2007, just one indicator of second-world countries’ rising importance in corporate finance - even after you subtract China. When Tata of India is vying to buy Jaguar, you know the landscape of power has changed. Second-world countries are also fast becoming hubs for oil and timber, manufacturing and services, airlines and infrastructure - all this in a geopolitical marketplace that puts their loyalty up for grabs to any of the Big Three, and increasingly to all of them at the same time. Second-world states won’t be subdued: in the age of network power, they won’t settle for being mere export markets. Rather, they are the places where the Big Three must invest heavily and to which they must relocate productive assets to maintain influence.Parag Khanna is a senior research fellow in the American Strategy Program of the New America Foundation. This essay is adapted from his book, “The Second World: Empires and Influence in the New Global Order,” Random House.

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | RUPEE NEWS | March2nd, 2009 | Usman Khalid |  اخبار روپیہ |

Asif Scourge Zardari

His role is to discredit the military internally and to co-operate with Indo-US efforts to demonise it internationally.

By Usman Khalid

A cartoon doing the rounds on the Internet shows a Maulana warning from the pulpit, “If you do not mend your ways, a scourge will descend upon you”. The next picture is of Asif Zardari saying, “ I am the scourge”. The cartoon reflects the opinion of the majority of the people in Pakistan. The disquiet in Pakistan is shared worldwide. Brownen Maddox has written a column in The Times (March 3) of London titled ‘A strong President might gain from this (firing on Sri Lankan Cricket Team in Lahore on March 3). Zardari is not that man.’ She wrote, “ Yesterday’s terrorist attacks do not mean that Pakistan is a failed state. But it has a failed President….. (he) is compounding his country’s problems by his pursuit of personal survival at the expense of its Constitution, the rule of law and agreement between the main political parties that they will work together to shore up democracy. He is utterly inadequate to meet the threat that Pakistan is facing.”

Asif Zardari may be worse than inadequate. He has thus far acted as an instrument for preventing the institutions of the state to protect Pakistan, its people and its interests. The Mumbai incident may have been carried out by persons of Pakistani origin but the story of put out by India is unbelievable. The arrival of the terrorists by a sea from Karachi in a fishing boat that is still in Karachi in the custody of Rehman Malik, and that their first action being to kill three top policemen including Inspector General of Police Hemant Karkare who was leading investigation into Samjhota Express and Malegaon blasts unearthing that they were the work of Hindu terrorists groups with a serving military officer – Colonel Purohit- as a member and supplier of military explosives, is ridiculous. The widow of Inspector General Karkare told the press that her husband had been receiving threats from Hindu terrorists groups. She has since been silenced. The woman who was a witness to the disembarkation of Mumbai terrorists from their ‘rubber boat’ has also disappeared. It has come out in the press that Ajmal Kasab identified, from the photographs shown to him of the ‘mastermind’ of the Mumbai plot, which is not of Mr Lakhvi identified as the mastermind in the Indian dossier and readily endorsed by Rehman Malik. But the Chief of Naval Staff of Pakistan has since told the press that Ajmal Kasab did not travel from Pakistan on a boat by sea as alleged. He is right because the boat alleged in the Indian dossier to have been used for sailing from Karachi has been confirmed to have perished, and the one Rehman Malik alleges was used by the terrorists is in his custody. The question is: why is Rehman Malik so eager to accept the Indian propaganda that the plot was masterminded and controlled from the soil of Pakistan? The answer is obvious – that is what his masters want.

An indication what the masters of Rehman Malik want came when Pakistan’s representatives at the UN was asked by President Zardari (without routing the instruction through normal Foreign Office channels) to request the Chinese delegate at the UN to withdraw the technical hold on Jamaat ud Daawa (JuD) and other Pakistani persons and organisations to be included on the UN list of ‘terrorists’. Asif Zardari is not suave enough to have known about UN procedures and how to circumvent/exploit them to put pressure on the Pakistan Army. Clearly his masters do know and they instructed him and assisted him every step of the way. Their target is the Pakistan Army, which, despite General Musharraf’s record of collaborating with the enemy, is still held in high esteem. Shortly before the UN declaring a respected organisation linked to Jihad in Kashmir as a ‘terrorist’, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani was persuaded to sign an order to place the ISI – an entirely military outfit in Pakistan – under Interior Minister Rehman Malik. The order was reversed on a protest by the COAS but the military do not trust this government any longer. It is quite apparent that the Zardari administration is collaborating with India’s propaganda machine to ‘prove’ that the military is continuing to support the liberation movement in Jammu and Kashmir and is doing so despite the government orders to desist. In essence, therefore, the Government of Pakistan is building a case against its own military of ‘disobedience’ and ‘violating the International Law’ on terrorism.

The Americans are unsure if they should walk along the path shown by India and eagerly followed by AZ. They need the co-operation of Pakistan in Afghanistan and doubt the wisdom of being on the wrong side of the military as well as the people of a country with nuclear weapons. India, on the other hand, sees another ‘opportunity of the century’ to crush the military of Pakistan as well as Bangladesh. A number of good friends ask me why should India want to destabilise Pakistan and Bangladesh when its protégés are ruling in both countries? It does not make sense until one understands why does India want to install its puppets in the first place. The imposition of a puppet is not an end in itself; it is means to an end. The end is different in every country. The Indian objective in Bangladesh is to have routes through that country to its North East protected by its own military deployment inside Bangladesh. As long as Bangladesh has an Army enjoying the respect of the people, that objective cannot be achieved. India’s objective in its west is the Balkanisation of Pakistan. That again cannot be achieved as long as the military enjoys the respect of the people. The military would lose that respect if it wages a war on friendly tribes of Afghanistan, NWFP and North Baluchistan and ignores the India sponsored terrorism by some Baluch tribes and the ‘Pakistani Taliban’. The role of Asif Zardari is to discredit the military internally and to co-operate with Indo-US efforts to demonise it internationally.

India’s Hand in BDR Mutiny in Bangladesh

Bangladesh Army comprises of officers and soldiers who were trained and motivated as members of the Pakistani armed forces. Whatever might have been said by authors of books or by Bangladeshi politicians, the soldiery is not ready to accept India as their master or liberator. Soon after the surrender of Pakistani troops in Bangladesh, the soldiers of the new Bangladesh Army got into firefights with the Indian Army to stop looting. That was the main reason why India withdrew so quickly after conquering East Pakistan. The Bangladesh Army became the guardian of ‘national interests’ immediately upon the creation of that country. India realised that and has even since been eager to infiltrate its officer class and challenge its role at the same time. India organised a ‘militia’ called ‘Rakhi Bahini’ to guard the ‘revolution’. This force was organised to be loyal to the party and the President – both symbolised by the person of Sheikh Mujib – not the state of Bangladesh. Members of Rakhi Bahini was equipped and trained by India; they even used the uniforms of the Indian Army. That was widely seen in Bangladesh as facilitating the infiltration and occupation of Bangladesh if India’s puppet lost popularity and control. The junior officers’ coup d’etat of 15 August 1975 was a direct result of a challenge to Army’s role as the guardian of national interest. That the rationale of that only popular coup d’etat in Bangladesh was never properly articulated and explained has led to the India’s Trojan Horse – the Awami League – regaining credibility and now even political power. This time, India is not going to give time to an Army, discredited by machinations under the ‘interim administration’, to restore its position as the final guardian of national interests.

The BDR (Bangladesh Rifles) Mutiny of 25-26 February cannot be explained by demands for better pay and perks. The first target of the mutineers was the BDR Chief, an Army Major General, who was killed along with his wife and the ADC. Altogether 55 officers, seven civilians including two officer’s wives, were killed. Five other senior officers are still missing. Those who were killed include one Major General, two Brigadiers, over a dozen colonels, several lieutenant colonels, captains, majors and two soldiers. Slaughter of such ferocity that included decapitation, severing of limbs and mutilation of bodies cannot be explained by demands unmet. All those slain were from the Army while BDR is technically a police force under the Ministry of Interior. Someone worked on creating hate between the Army and the police. India has experience of doing that. It succeeded in creating so much hate between Punjabi (every one from West Pakistan was called a Punjabi) and the Bengali – both Muslims – that they welcomed the Hindu Army to liberate them. India knows that slaughter once started develops a dynamics of its own and closure is deadly for those who started it with high hopes. BDR soldiers will not get higher pay, many will be hanged and BDR would be disbanded. The Army may have no choice except to agree to a paramilitary force like the erstwhile Rakhi Bahinin, which would challenge its power, role and authority. With so many political and military cats with tails tied to each other, would rob all of them of any freedom of action - unable to guard the freedom of the country. The entire drama has not been played out yet in Bangladesh. But with an Indian protégé in power in that country, no one will blame India, the orchestrator of the plot.

RAW hand in Mumbai and Lahore Incidents

With an Indian protégé also in power in Pakistan, officials are eager not to link India’s Intelligence - Research & Analysis Wing (RAW), with the Lahore incident. Since Indian refrains from using its own nationals for murder and sabotage, it easy to avoid blame. . India uses nationals of another country, usually the target county, who it buys, blackmail or bribes into working for them. With the dust settled, it is now apparent that the Mumbai incident was the work of poorly co-ordinated actions of recruits and renegades of RAW. All the insurrectional activity against Pakistan in the North West is carried out RAW recruits - either by Pakistani Pashtun Islamists or non-Pashtun Afghans. That there is a ruler in Pakistan with no morals or character makes it easy to motivate the recruits. Those who carried out the attack in Lahore have not been arrested but those who have seen them say they are Pashtun. It is easy enough to link them to the Taliban but it does not suit India or AZ to do so. Both are eager to put Lashkar e Tayyiba (LeT) in the frame because it had been a Punjab based organisation and it is easy enough to link it with the ISI and the Army. Just as Rehman Malik does not want to find any fault with India’s story line on Mumbai, he will find no difficulty in India’s story over Lahore. All signs are that LeT would be blamed. Many journalists have gone into Indian dossier over Mumbai and find it utterly unbelievable. It is impossible to obtain a conviction on the basis of that story and ‘evidence’. But the Indian story will not be put to test in a court of law; it is Pakistan that is being put on trial in the court of International public opinion. The rub is that the Government, which is supposed to defend Pakistan’s interests, is fully co-operating in the indictment of Pakistan.

What Happens Next?

Musharraf has joined Asif Zardari in congratulating Altaf Hussain for creating a smoke screen of protests against the ‘desecration’ of Benazir’s portrait while the issue is the imposition of PPP rule in the Punjab as Governor’s Rule. The re-appearance of Musharraf from time to time is another distraction from the excesses of Zardari rule that restores the image of the Army as a ‘demon’. But the ball is in the court of the PML, which went into elections last February on the back of ‘getting Musharraf re-elected as President in uniform again and again’. It has been courted by the modern day Rasputin, Governor Salman Taseer. But it is in opposition already . Is it ready to make an opposition alliance? If it did, it could put the fear of God into hearts of the ‘clever politicians’ ruling the country. Mian Nawaz Sharif could climb down from his high horse and make such a request. But it is too much to expect the Pakistani politicians to understand the intricacies of statecraft. They would persist in their blunderbuss conduct giving RAW every facility to succeed. I wish I could forecast a good end. India is cocksure. Pakistan is in the grip of its enemies. America is bound to listen to the confidant voice of India rather than pay attention to the anguished cries of voiceless Pakistan.

The writer is a retired Brigadier; Director London Institute of South Asia

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | RUPEE NEWS | March4th, 2009 | Dr. Abdul Ruff|  اخبار روپیہ |

Indian Experiments with Farce

Role of MK Gandhi in Kashmir invasion 

India is indeed naive and innocent to the extend that it could not infer the significance of historical events like independence in 1947 when it tactfully, and of course, happily, annexed Jammu Kashmir and began killing the Kashmiri Muslims. After ruling over India for years, Great Britain had to surrender sovereignty eventually back to Indian capitalists who were waging struggles to control Indian economy under the then available leadership of Socialist MK. Gandhi. And when Indian terrorists got freedom from the then powerful UK, Indian leaders like Nehru, Patel &Co could not decode and infer the historical message from the power transfer in New Delhi and, therefore, they sent their military to Jammu Kashmir and annexed that nation and credited to Indian account book, known as constitution. India did not realize then it also has to surrender sovereignty back to Kashmiris after some time. Perhaps, the schools in Allahabad, Rajkot and else where the future leaders of Indian regime studied did not teach the them the basic of morality, politics and logical inference. But India has killed more Kashmiris in decades than the UK did in India for centuries.

India has already become a Hindu state in all practical terms spreading hatred against Islam and targeting Muslims. Today the world is trying to put pieces of available news and facts about Sept-11 event in USA together to make sense out of what the global media reported as asked by the anti-Islamic nations and fascist forces. At the back many, the Sept 11, like similar other events in the world, was the mischievous act of state terrorism. Similarly, many past occurrences need thorough investigations. One of these, the murder of M. K. Gandhi and his possible involvement in annexation of Jammu Kashmir soon after India got freedom from UK.

Despite India’s independence its administration remained under British control for some more years, run by officers in key posts appointed by the British, with Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General and General Boucher as the Army Commander in Chief. Indian leaders, Nehru inclusive, just carried out the British leaders. Divisions of Indian threatened the Indian leaders and they were looking for the right moment to get rid of that “menace”. Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by Natural Gods on January 30, 1948. Gods was accompanied by Nariman Pate. Both were hanged by Indian government and matter closed then and there. It is clear that Pundit Nehru and Home Minister Zardari Patel and Lord Mountbatten jointly decided the matters and due to “security lapse” Gandhi was murdered in New Delhi. After the assassination Jay Parkas Nariman, a socialist and leading freedom fighter alleged that the Home Ministry was criminally negligent by allowing the murder to occur...

Partition was meant to promote peaceful existence with Muslims on both sides. But Hindus in India always use event to target Muslims in the country, while media, shamelessly, insult the hapless section of Muslims.  On June 3 1947 the Congress Working Committee passed the resolution accepting the Partition of India. Gandhi was reportedly isolated by Nehru and Patel and was unhappy. Mountbatten visited him and said he hoped that Gandhi would not oppose the Partition under the Mountbatten Plan. But as India became independent on August 15, 1947 Gandhi became increasingly unhappy with emerging scenario in the country. He was sidelined by Nehru and Patel who moved about in ministerial flagged cars. Gandhi was a marginalized figure.

Fed up with the negative attitude of Indian new rulers pampered by himself, Gandhi finalized plans to travel to Lahore and settle down there to create peace and harmony between India and Pakistan. Gandhi had already written to Jinnah about his desire to settle down in Pakistan. Jinnah said Gandhi was most welcome and invited him to come to Karachi. But Gandhi decided to travel by road to Lahore and settle down there. Plans were finalized for Gandhi and the fifty families to start their journey to Lahore on February 14, 1948. Exactly one fortnight earlier Godse assassinated Gandhi. Had Gandhi carried out his plan he would have been a nuisance for Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel because he would have worked for Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He had already been totally marginalized in the Congress thanks to his erstwhile loyalists, Nehru and Patel. But the same Gandhi after death became the global brand image for the Congress Party. Surprisingly there is little or no mention by historians of Gandhi’s plans to settle down in Lahore.

Gandhism has lost its credibility with an emerging nuclear India and become a show-piece. It is a fact that many so-called Gandhians have utilized the emerging Indian scenario when Gandhi was praised lavishly by them only to garner all benefits from the willing Indian state; governments have been generous in helping the neo-Gandhians, who love imported cigars and brandy, in their efforts to boost their wealth and influences. Earlier, I stated that Gandhi was not at all involved in the decision making of Indian state to invade Jammu Kashmir and he was mostly sidelined by Nehru and his coterie who guessed Gandhi would oppose this scheme tooth and nail and would hinder the pet project of newly Independent India. Then I also retorted by saying that Nehru and Co. might have obtained his concurrence for their JK annexation plans. Both opposing views are possible and are the natural fall out of the bad and mischievous reporting of Indian sources that always want to protect the misdoings of the Indian state by engineering confusion and tensions. I tired to pursue a two-way thought on M. K. Gandhi’s possible role in annexing the then Jammu Kashmir and adding to Indian Union, being established by Nehru government assisted by Patel. Indian Constitution guarantees every thing to Hindus but Indian leaders kill every possible Muslim in India and Kashmir.

Not just the opponents outside India, even the top national leaders could be effectively silenced in India. The so-called father of Indian nation Mahatma Gandhi is a case in point here. One cannot find fault with Gandhi’s non-violent techniques in Indian separatist struggle for independence, but the his close associates found him unacceptable soon after achievement of goal of obtaining sovereignty back from the colonial power of UK. The man led the struggle became a problem and eventually a casualty and the major victim of new regime in New Delhi.  A possibly wage conclusion is that the assassination of MK. Gandhi, whom the Indian leaders later called as “father of nation” had indeed aborted the Lahore plan of Gandhi, possibly considered by Nehru & Co as an anti-Indian crime.  Apparently, as he was increasingly being sidelined by Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel, Gandhi became firm in his resolution of going to Pakistan and spending the rest of his life there among those who adore him as a statesman and human, though India considered, still considers, them as bad guys.

Perhaps, Gandhi did not foresee that Indian capitalists and their paid lobbyists in politics in party uniforms would one day kick him out once the removal of foreign capitalists in India is accomplished and control Indian national economy all by themselves. This Gandhian lesson should be an eye-opener for Kashmiri freedom leaders whom the Indian and pro-India outfits in Jammu Kashmir try to use as pawns