Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) leader Hakimullah Mehsud is dead, the US media reported on Thursday, citing counter-terrorism officials.

Both CNN and Fox News quoted senior US intelligence officials as saying that Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief was killed in a drone attack last month, although his death still remains unconfirmed by the Pakistani military.

Fox News noted that this was so far the strongest signal that Washington had offered about Hakimullah’s fate.

Meanwhile, CNN reported that Afghan Taliban commander Sirajuddin Haqqani was the target of the heaviest US drone strikes in North Waziristan earlier this week, but he might just have escaped the assault.

A commander of the Haqqani group told CNN that “Siraj was in the area but had left moments before the strike”.

The TV network said the reported strike on Tuesday night were unusual for the relatively high number of missiles fired — at least 19 — and for the high death toll.

Neither Islamabad nor Washington has officially confirmed the death of Hakimullah, who is complicit in a deadly attack on a CIA base in Afghanistan late last year that left 7 CIA officers dead.

Hakimullah Mehsud issued his own death warrant when he appeared on an Al-Jazeera video sitting beside Humam Khalil Abu Mulal al-Balawi. Balawi is believed to be the person behind attacks on the Central Intelligence Agency in Afghanistan. Shortly before the release of this video, he died while carrying out a suicide bombing, killing eight people including 7 CIA officers at Fort Chapman.

Western intelligence agencies vowed to avenge death of its officials. Drone strikes were increased taking out many including Hakimullah. Attempts are being made to take out Haqqanis – both Jalaluddin and his son Sirajuddin who support Taliban in Afghanistan but have bases in North Waziristan and adjoining areas.

The death toll in Friday’s Lakki Marwat suicide blast has risen to 95 as more bodies are being pulled from the rubble of a sports complex in NWFP. Officials warn the number of victims is likely to increase as recovery efforts moved through their second day.

According to reports, the bombing may be a militant revenge attack against local residents who set up a militia force to combat Taliban insurgents.

The suicide bomber drove onto a crowded field and detonated his explosive-laden vehicle while hundreds of spectators watched the match, including women and children. According to eyewitnesses, at least 400 people were present there during the match.

The bombing marked a bloody start to 2010 for Pakistan, which has seen a surge in attacks blamed on the Taliban in recent months as Islamist fighters avenge military operations aimed at crushing their northwest strongholds.

The huge blast was Pakistan’s deadliest in more than two months, triggering the collapse of more than 20 houses, some with families inside, in a village bordering a Taliban stronghold, officials said.

The bomber detonated his explosives-packed vehicle as fans gathered at a volleyball court to watch two local sides face off in the village of Shah Hasan Khan, in Bannu district, bordering Taliban stronghold South Waziristan.

“The villagers were watching the match between the two village teams when the bomber drove his double-cabin pick-up vehicle into them and blew it up,” district police chief Mohammad Ayub Khan said.

There have been no claims of responsibility, but police officials say it is revenge act by Pakistani Taliban and their operatives as the village which was once their strong hold had turned against them and created a militia to fight them.

The Pakistani Taliban today claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing that killed 45 people in Karachi on Ashura December 28.

Threatening more such attacks, a Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) spokesman told a foreign news agency over phone, “My group claims responsibility for the Karachi attack and we will carry out more such attacks, within 10 days,”

The spokesman Asmatullah Shaheen, who is one of the commanders of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), or Taliban Movement of Pakistan, spoke to a Reuters reporter based in Peshawar. Shaheen’s name appears on a government list of 20 most-wanted militants. “He (the suicide bomber) was our man; his name was Hasnain Muawia,” Shaheen told the reporter.

The high-profile bloodshed in Karachi had all the hallmarks of the Taliban, who often bomb crowded areas to inflict maximum casualties. The blast led some Pakistanis to conclude that several hands must have been involved.

The suicide attack was followed by organized arson and rampage of public and private properties, which resulted in an estimated loss of “Rs 30-35 billion”, with more than 3,000 shops in Bolton Market – Asia’s largest wholesale market, gutted in flames. Over 10,000 people have lost their jobs, Dawn reported.

Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani on Wednesday announced a relief package of Rs1 billion for the affected people of Karachi tragedy.

Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has also pledged support for the Karachi victims. He is expected to pay a visit to the affected areas of the port city. (MAMOSA)

No matter how many troops President Obama orders to Afghanistan, victory will also require a surge across the Pakistan border that the Taliban and al Qaeda—but not American GIs—cross easily. The President knows this, but he hasn’t made Pakistan’s help any easier to obtain by signalling his intention to draw down a mere year after his surge troops arrive in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has slowly expanded its cooperation this year as its public and military have awakened to the threat from their own Islamist militants after a spate of terrorist attacks, including on the military headquarters in Rawalpindi. Long portrayed as noble bearded mountain fighters in Pakistan’s press, the Islamists are at last seen as an existential threat to Islamabad and Lahore. And this year the military has pushed the Pakistani Taliban from the Swat Valley and South Waziristan and, in contrast with past offensives, hasn’t for now ceded back the ground in a misconceived truce. This is progress.

But so far the generals have refused to take on other Islamists they don’t view as a danger and have long cultivated as strategic assets—that is, the Afghan Taliban. This means the Taliban government in exile in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan province, and Afghan insurgents loyal to the ailing Jalaluddin Haqqani and his son Siraj based in North Waziristan. The so-called Quetta shura is led by deposed Taliban leader and Osama bin Laden ally, Mullah Omar, who fled in 2001 and now directs the fighting in southern Afghanistan from Quetta. The Haqqani network is the largest insurgent group in eastern Afghanistan.

We’re told that Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, in a private letter to Mr. Obama earlier this month, promised to take the fight to North Waziristan and Baluchistan. Merely to have a Pakistani politician acknowledge the existence of the Quetta shura counts as progress. The Pakistanis are reluctant to arrest their longtime proxies, Haqqani or Omar, but they could at least disrupt their headquarters and make it harder to operate from Pakistan.

As ever, the final decision rests with the Pakistan military led by General Ashfaq Kayani. According to a story in the New York Times, he has resisted the entreaties and told the U.S. that his troops have their hands too full with their own Pakistani Taliban to expand their operations.

The head of the U.S. Central Command, General David Petraeus, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen visited Pakistan last week to nudge some more. Perhaps they used the opportunity to express U.S. frustration about official Pakistani complicity in the deaths of American troops in Afghanistan. Such messages need to be sent, though the best way is in private.

If Pakistan truly has given up on its old double game of claiming to back America while allowing a Taliban sanctuary within its borders, now would be a good time to show it’s serious. If not, the U.S. has leverage with Islamabad through foreign aid, as well as various military options. U.S. drone strikes can be expanded, including for the first time to Baluchistan, and special forces might be deployed across the porous border.

Both carry diplomatic risks. Though drone strikes have killed about two dozen civilians according to one Pakistani government estimate, the country’s press loves to exaggerate the toll to embarrass the government and stoke anti-Americanism. The presence of U.S. troops in Pakistan, if publicized, could also undermine a Zardari government that’s taken brave risks to help Washington.

This is where Mr. Obama’s decision to announce a July 2011 deadline for beginning to withdraw from Afghanistan has been damaging. Various Administration officials have tried to walk back that deadline, but it has played inside Pakistan as further evidence that the Americans will eventually bug out of the region. Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have long hedged their bets by supporting Mullah Omar and the Afghan Taliban in case the U.S. leaves and for fear that India will try to fill any power vacuum in Kabul. Now they have another excuse not to change.

The reality is that the gravest threat to Pakistan comes from Islamic radicals, especially if they are able to survive the U.S. and NATO surge. Their next targets will be Islamabad and Rawalpindi as much as Kabul, London or New York. The U.S. and Pakistan share a common enemy, and Mr. Obama will have to assure the Pakistanis that the American commitment won’t end with some arbitrary withdrawal deadline made to appease the U.S. antiwar left.

(The Op-Ed first appeared in The Wall Street Journal)

Succumbing to pressure of media and lawyers’ fraternity, who protested twice in front of Police Training College, Sihala, and raised questions about the presence of Americans there, the Government has decided to shift Americans to Islamabad Police Line Headquarters.

Reliable sources informed TheNation on Sunday that the quarters concerned have asked Islamabad police to vacate two blocks of Police Line Headquarters for American who would be shifted there from Sihala.

On the other hand, officials of Islamabad police, who are residing in Police Line Headquarters showed great resistance and demanded of the authorities concerned not to shift Americans there. Police officials suggested their high-ups to shift the Americans somewhere else like Diplomatic Enclave but not at Police Line, which is already at security risk.

It may be recalled here that last year a suicide blast rocked the Police Line Headquarters and the area is considered as a sensitive one and shifting of Americans there would create more problems for police.

A most senior and well-informed police officer wishing not to be named told TheNation that shifting of American trainers to Police Line Headquarters was on the cards and within a week they (Americans) would be shifted there.

“Presently they are giving training to police at Sihala College and possess a lot of training equipments that’s why they would be shifted there, as area is ideal for them for training and security point of views,” he added.

It is relevant to note here that hundreds of lawyers belonging to Islamabad Bar Association (IBA) held an anti-Blackwater rally-cum protest in front of Police Training College, Sihala, the other day. They urged the Government to expel the instructors, whom they termed as officials of Blackwater (Xe Worldwide), who are living in Sihala College situated near Khan Research Laboratories (KRL). lawyers were of the views that they were monitoring Pakistan’s nuclear assets in the guise of trainers.

The lawyers also warned the Government that they would brought a rally-cum protest in front of Parliament on January 5 against the presence of Americans at the college situated near KRL.

Sources informed that Government decided to shift American trainers after the excessive pressure build up by the lawyers and media, particularly to avoid the January 5 protest rally, which could turn into another long march.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and his ruling party have thrown down the gauntlet in the face of calls for him to resign, condemning what they called a witch-hunt and vowing to foil conspiracies again them.

Opposition politicians and hostile sections of the media have called for Zardari to resign since the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down an amnesty that protected him and others from corruption charges.

The tension comes as the United States has been stepping up pressure on Pakistan to go after Afghan Taliban factions in enclaves on the Afghan border, while homegrown militants have been unleashing carnage with a series of bomb attacks.

Here are some scenarios for how the trouble might play out:

MILITARY INTERVENTION

The chance of military intervention at this stage is seen as extremely remote. There is no speculation in Pakistan about a military coup despite rumours in foreign exchange markets in Asia early on Friday, apparently sparked when the defence minister was not allowed to leave the country on the orders of the state anti-graft agency. The minister was on a list of people protected by the 2007 amnesty which the Supreme Court struck down.

The army has had its differences with Zardari, in particular over a U.S. aid bill critics said violated Pakistani sovereignty. But the differences are not seen as serious enough to justify a coup by an army wary of getting involved in politics so soon after the restoration of civilian rule. Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani has vowed to stay out of politics and he played an important role in March in the restoration of a Supreme Court chief whom former president Pervez Musharraf sacked in 2007.

That same chief justice will now oversee proceedings against politicians and bureaucrats who could face prosecution. The judiciary has wide public support while investors have been encouraged by the Supreme Court’s rejection of the amnesty, which is seen as improving transparency.

ZARDARI RESIGNS

Zardari is not expected to step down any time soon. He has always struggled to match the popularity of his charismatic late wife, Benazir Bhutto, and has been dogged by accusations of corruption stemming from her terms in power in the 1990s. He says the charges were politically motivated and he has never been convicted. He is also safe from prosecution because of presidential immunity.

Some opposition politicians, mostly from the party of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, and sections of the media have been calling on him to resign but he has dismissed the calls. He met top leaders of his party on Saturday and they vowed to fight enemies and foil conspiracies with “democracy and constitutionalism” as their weapons.

Even if Zardari were eventually to resign, his ruling Pakistan People’s Party would remain in control of the government and would likely determine who would become the new president, who is elected by parliament and provincial assemblies.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Pakistan’s latest political troubles will play out in the courts, not on the streets. Four ministers, including the defence and interior ministers, were on a list of people covered by the now defunct amnesty and could face legal proceedings. They could eventually resign but their departure would not have a big impact on the war on militancy, which is led by the army.

The danger for Zardari is that the legitimacy of his 2008 election as president could be challenged now that old cases against him have been revived. Much will depend on how aggressive the courts are in going after him. Opposition leader Sharif could call protests against Zardari although he has said he does not want to “derail” the democratic system. He has not called for an early general election but his party is expected to do well in the next polls, due by 2013.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE WAR ON THE TALIBAN

Political turmoil will divert government attention from the fight against militants, to the dismay of the United States. Pakistan’s effort to tackle the Afghan Taliban is critical to U.S. aims in Afghanistan. Ties have been strained by Pakistan’s reluctance to heed U.S. pressure to crack down harder, with Pakistan officials saying they cannot move too fast without provoking a backlash against Zardari. The militants can be expected to capitalise on the uncertainty and step up attacks. (REUTERS)

By Shaheen Sehbai

WASHINGTON: The (US) State Department, specifically Hillary Clinton, has almost categorically declared that they are no longer interested in saving President Asif Ali Zardari if he falls in his current battle for survival, waging in the superior courts of Pakistan. But the message Pakistanis have been sent is to get over with the in-house turmoil and transition as quickly as possible to stabilise the democratic system and focus on the war on terror.

When Ms Clinton claims that she has “no preferences” in Pakistan, it is a clear signal that Zardari is no longer the choice and Washington would shed no tears if he was to be consumed by the current judicial and accountability process. Clinton and all other spokesmen, however, stress repeatedly that they want the system to continue and make its own corrections.

This message from Washington is also accompanied by a quiet but significant reshuffle within the Obama administration, especially dealing the AfPak policy. Richard Holbrooke, who was the point man and spearhead, is no longer in that driving seat and others are calling the shots.

There is a strong feeling that many assessments and evaluations of Holbrooke about Pakistan, Zardari, the Chief Justice and Mian Nawaz Sharif turned out to be wrong and Washington had to face the embarrassment finding itself on the wrong side of the fence and the popular tide.

The Holbrooke camp in the State Department, insiders revealed, was banking too much on the assessments and claims of some Pakistani diplomats and pro-Zardari analysts in the US think tanks. The views of these people were given too much weight while other voices which differed were stifled. Thus a policy emerged, which was based on biased opinions and wishful thinking of some excited diplomats who saw Pakistani politics from their own prism while sitting away from the country and refusing to even visit the actual ground to know the new realities emerging there.

There was a big section of policymakers at Foggy Bottom, the nick name for the State Department, who were worried about the independent analysis and comments in the Pakistani media, which differed widely with the assessments of Pakistanis living in Washington. These media analysts were trashed and rubbished before the US officials but when things started to happen as predicted by these media pundits, officials were taken by surprise.

The unexpected release of the lists of the corrupt with an officially certified stamp shocked many. Despite political pressures on bureaucrats, especially in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and FIA, the lists were not trimmed or tailored and even details of dirty money were given to the superior courts, which left an impression in Washington that the grip of the Zardari group had weakened and some other power centres were playing a balancing and much-needed stabilising role from behind the scene.

According to an informed insider, the National Security team of President Obama was often found wondering what was going on as President Zardari was showing a bewildering lack of interest in running the country when major military operations were launched against the terrorists in Swat, Malakand and Waziristan.

“At times, they were so baffled they would ask us where our president was as his foreign tours were never ending and even the itinerary was not officially announced. So when one leg of the tour would end, officials would be wondering where the president might pop up now. In one visit while he was leaving the US, he did not return to Islamabad for 16 days and was flying off to unannounced destinations, mostly for business deals,” a source, who wanted to remain anonymous, said.

All this lack of focus and attention, coupled with the growing political and media clamour to chop some heads for massive corruption, which had re-emerged as issue number one after the Zardari regime failed to handle the NRO in parliament and the courts kept insisting that they would not allow this bad law to survive, the Washington minds started changing fast, sources say.

The main issue worrying the US policymakers has been how quick and smooth the transition would be, if Zardari was knocked out of the system by the courts or his powers were substantially cut, how much stress and strain the democratic set-up would be subjected to and whether it would survive the shocks. More importantly, who would be the major players to step up and take charge to keep the system going while dealing with the aftershocks of a Zardari knockout.

Insiders say for a while the US leadership was looking at Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani as a stabilising factor because he had maintained his liaison with the opposition leader Mian Nawaz Sharif while keeping himself away, tactfully, from the damage the scrapping of the NRO would cause within the top PPP leadership.

But with the Zardari camp getting prematurely restless, or pre-emptively striking first, and launching the Sindh Card under the garb of a Topi campaign, US thinkers and evaluators are worried that the transition would not be non-violent. They think Gilani would not be allowed to take charge unless he continued to play second fiddle to Zardari but that would not change the equation.

The Sindh Card is not considered as a major threat in Washington because whatever rumpus has been generated by loyal friends and cronies of the president has been limited only to these few individuals and none of the mainstream PPP leaders have joined the Topi-Ajrak campaign. Gathering a few hundred or a few thousand people on the roads is not considered to be a major sign of success, given the support and backing of the administrative machinery. It is also viewed as a sign of weakness that people like Zulfikar Mirza, one of the top three accomplices of Zardari, has been shouting threats and warnings at the media and other individuals, without apparently any serious provocation. “The sense of insecurity appears to be much greater than it actually may be,” was one comment.

In this scenario, the sudden U-turn by President Zardari to turn to Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, a hitherto shunned and discarded leader of the PPP, has also caught the attention of US decision makers. The top think tanks in Washington have kept a close eye on the career of Chaudhry Aitzaz for a long time and at every time of leadership crisis in the PPP, he has been weighed and assessed as an alternative. So again, he has come on the radar at this time as he is seen as a uniter and not a divider like Zardari.

An important member of the think tank community revealed an interesting episode with Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan in mid 2006 when he was visiting Washington and suddenly there was an interest in the decision makers to meet and assess him as a potential leader for Pakistan. At that time, General Musharraf was strong and looking for options to strike a deal with PPP minus Benazir. The meeting was arranged by some friends of Ahsan at a Virginia home and some 10-12 top think tank guys and some 2-3 mysterious but serious looking fellows with some funny visiting cards also turned up to talk to this barrister from Pakistan. An eyewitness said it was like a 90-minute job interview for Pakistan’s top slot and Chaudhry Aitzaz impressed everyone.

But there was a problem in that session, the eyewitness recalled. “A former PPP senator who drove Mr Ahsan to the interview site was also present and the US guys had not anticipated his presence. So the talk was mostly general and Chaudhry Aitzaz was very guarded. As expected, the news quickly traveled to Benazir Bhutto who was reportedly very angry with Aitzaz Ahsan. More such sessions were also planned by the US side but whether they materialised later is not known.

Given such US interest in Aitzaz, it may not be beyond the capacity of Zardari’s handlers in Washington or this side of the Atlantic that they may have pushed him to patch up with Aitzaz Ahsan as a consensus candidate to keep the democratic system going while he himself may be forced to take a back seat if the excited courts and judges knock him out of the real power game. Their real interest is that a stable, credible and effectively political and democratic government runs Pakistan and helps them fight the AfPak war. Mr Zardari, it appears, has been written off, as he cannot deliver this US target.  (The News)

By Anjum Niaz

The Pakistan army may shun a coup; the US army may not. Or if the 17-member bench of the Supreme Court fails to trigger a government change, worry not, climate change can! According to the Pentagon and intelligence agencies, climate change can topple governments; feed terrorist movements and destabilise entire regions. Climate change is therefore the matrix for corruption and terrorism. Pakistan is being warned of the possibility of a US intervention. What’s heat got to do with it? What’s drought got to do with it? What’s an inept ruler got to do with it?

"It gets real complicated real quickly," said Amanda Dory, the deputy assistant secretary of defence for strategy, working with a Pentagon group assigned to incorporate climate change into national security strategy planning. The prospect of famines, drought, floods, mass migration and storms caused by climate change can gun-trigger the American military to enter our territory.

Last August prophets of climate change warned the world that ’shaky’ countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan will become a ‘hotbed of terrorism,’ if not the future headquarters of Al Qaeda, should drought, deluge, earthquakes, pestilence, mass migration (read population explosion) and various other natural disasters occur. The US military has been alerted and Las Vegas (of all the places!) is the epicentre of strategists getting exercised over Pakistan facing the prospects of famine, water crisis and pestilence. The military in America will respond.

Remember what Dick Cheney said: "If there’s a 1 per cent chance that Pakistani scientists are helping Al Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response." The then vice-president spoke of a new type of threat from Pakistan: a ‘low-probability, high-impact event.’

Senator Kerry is paying serious attention to the National Intelligence Council (the source of US security intelligence) warnings that scourges like ‘poverty, environmental degradation and the weakening of national governments,’ are hot button issues screaming for action.

America may have unilaterally given itself the authority for ‘military intervention’ should a natural or man-made catastrophe was to hit Pakistan. In the 2005 earthquake, the then American ambassador Ryan Crocker planned taking charge of relief efforts. He convinced Musharraf that the Americans could do a better job than the Pakistanis. Crocker and his team of army men landed at the Prime Minister’s Secretariat to set up their disaster management headquarters. "Big beefy colonels toting their cell phones and walkie-talkies roamed the corridors barking orders at us," an eyewitness told me. "We were running like scared chickens trying not to get trampled." Fortunately, saner voices prevailed and the Americans were finally told to vacate the premises.

When the army action began in Swat this summer, the American embassy in Islamabad again approached Prime Minister Gilani. Ambassador Anne Patterson offered to help with the logistics. The NWFP government invited the US to help them with the IDPs (internally displaced persons). A junket was organised by the Humanitarian Dialogue for the politicians and non-governmental organisations from NWFP and FATA in Geneva.

The press release from Geneva said: "Participants were able to reach a consensus that effective humanitarian delivery depends on a transparent and structured dialogue with militant actors by humanitarian agencies with the full knowledge, support and agreement of the government."

Pakistan signed away its sovereign rights to the UN agencies, allowing them unhindered access to the militants.

Today the UN conference on climate change is taking place in Copenhagen as is the surge of US troops in Afghanistan. Connect the dots for a complete picture. ‘Af-Pak’ will pop out. That’s target 2010!

(The article first appeared in The News Intl. Views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of PKonweb)

By Syed Talat Hussain

The American road-ahead policy presents Pakistan with a unique all-round policy opportunity to shape the strategic environment in Afghanistan, close festering sources of terrorism in tribal areas, and most crucially, regain broad-based clout with Washington. In other words, the ambitious multiple agenda the US has set for itself in Afghanistan, and partly also in the borders areas of Pakistan, provides exceptional room for Pakistan to make strong purposeful manoeuvres to earn solid diplomatic gains.

Take Afghanistan’s internal challenges first. Even though the US has lowered the bar for its nation-building stride, still it is committed to a tall order. In just under two years, endemic corruption has to be rooted out, drug lords’ formidable empire has to be torn down, and the economy has to be built-up and made self-sufficient. This is not all. In this tight time-frame, administrative efficiency has to reach a level where all of Afghanistan’s nearly 400 districts must have, in the words of General James Jones, the national security advisor, “economic development, good governance, and security”. Also included in the dreamland of benchmarks are “good and competent governors” for all the 34 provinces of the country.

It would be a miracle if even a fraction of this wish list comes true, especially by a weak and politically emaciated president whose second term election President Obama believes was marred by fraud. But Pakistan should resist the temptation of being the Jeremiah, the prophet of doom. Nor prepare to dance with vicarious joy in the event that the situation in Afghanistan defies Washington’s hopefulness. Instead it should, and seriously, partner in these efforts regardless of whether these are doomed to failure or destined for success. It is obvious that to make the first review of the progress in Afghanistan — in the middle of next year perhaps — a worthwhile exercise, the Obama administration will pull every stop to bring about visible change in all these indicators. Therefore, Washington is likely to be far more receptive to productive suggestions on pursuing its development agenda from other countries than it has been so far. Pakistan can step in with plans that enhance Afghans’ capacity to move in the right direction — infrastructure, education, agriculture, irrigation, basic science, technology, water management or many of the dozens of areas where it has expertise to proffer.

Much of Pakistan’s soft clout in Afghanistan in the coming months would be shaped by its ability to tag along with the world’s nation-building efforts. If Islamabad baulks at becoming a strong and willing partner in these, others would fill the gap.

Helping rebuild the Afghan National Security Force, the army and the Afghan National Police, is another area Pakistan ought to eye for gaining goodwill and diplomatic ground in Afghanistan. Many of Islamabad’s objections to the conduct of the Afghan National Army (ANA) deployed on the border with Pakistan are sound. The ANA has lived up to its reputation of being a force viscerally hostile to Pakistan. Elements from the erstwhile Northern Alliance dominate the ANA. Its members are mostly Darri and Persian speaking. They have been trained over the past many years to mistreat Pashtuns, which is part of the problem in Afghanistan.
While this history makes them structurally inimical to Pakistan, the fact remains that for the Obama administration to build a truly national army, the institution’s ethnic imbalance shall have to be rectified.

Pashtuns, former Taliban, even the personal armies of warlords, have to be integrated into the national army to become viable and take over responsibility of stabilising Afghanistan and paving the way for the start of the pull out of US troops. It is not known yet how much Washington would be willing to allow the Pakistan army to team up in efforts to train the ANA. However, for an Afghan force to be functional and effective in the south and the east of Afghanistan, its ethnic composition has to be such that Pakistan’s contribution to its training must be welcomed in any serious effort in building it up along strong durable lines. At any rate, Pakistan must make a solid gesture on this project: ditto should be done on Afghan police reforms. Remember, Pakistan cannot afford to be left out of the efforts to create institutions that would play a critical role in defining Afghanistan’s trajectory in the coming months. Also, international confidence that an Afghan national security force has come of age will help endorse Pakistan’s long-standing argument that the prospects of durable peace are inversely related to foreign troop level in Afghanistan. They will have to leave for peace to be fully restored and the Afghan resistance to be neutralised politically. Then there is the issue of safe havens inside North Waziristan and the presence of the Quetta Shura in Balochistan. On the face of it, the room for agreement between Washington and Islamabad is the least on this benchmark. US officials believe removing these sanctuaries is the first and foremost task to bring about a strategic shift in violence in Afghanistan. Members of Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment see the ‘safe havens’ refrain a stratagem Washington and its allies use to hide their long and spectacular military failure inside Afghanistan to stem the rising tide of the resistance. Beneath this mutual recrimination, however, lies the hard fact that Pakistan and the US have consistently cooperated with each other in combating cross-border movement of the Taliban. Their military operations, not always conceived in perfect harmony, have seen both parties alternately play the hammer and the anvil to smash and squeeze the militants moving across. In the last surge-related operation in Helmand, Pakistan ended up sealing a long stretch of the border with Afghanistan to disallow any spillover effect. A much deeper and wider cooperation will be required to manage far bigger and bloodier operations in the coming weeks.

It is in Pakistan’s core national interest to ensure that safe havens do not become Washington’s excuse for pinning the blame for poor performance in the battles with the Taliban on us. It also serves Pakistan’s paramount security concerns that the wild militant groups in the tribal belt are brought under the heel. The new and vicious wave of urban terrorism has rendered useless the distinction between North and South Waziristan militancy. Government officials themselves admit that much of this terrorism is now flowing out of Mir Ali. This is where Wali ur Rehman, Hakeemullah Mehsud and the other big fish are. Cleaning up this area is critical to making operation Rah-e-Nijat relevant to securing the people from the game of death the terrorists are playing. A hard hit at these safe havens will also take the US pressure off Pakistan and give Islamabad and Washington time to plan about the Quetta Shura.

Pakistani policy makers have a substantial window of opportunity to make wise choices — something they did not do when George W Bush and his neo-con cabal were sending forces into Afghanistan. Pervez Musharraf’s thoughtlessness landed the country in a heap of unintended problems. This nation cannot afford a repeat of a similar mistake now that Washington is seriously thinking about going home.
 

(The article first appeared in the Daily Times)

PKonweb Monitor

DEC 7: A third explosion since morning in Lahore city today killed more than thirty-seven people and wounded at least 150.

Punjab police chief said the twin blasts were timed and remotely operated – one using a motorcycle and the other involved using a vendor stall, reported a private TV channel.

No one has claimed responsibility nor any suspects have been caught as yet but intense investigations have been launched

A suicide bomber was trying to enter into the main police station, said police sources. They told KUNA (Kuwait News Agency) that when the policemen tried to stop him, the bomber blew himself up.

There were reports of two blasts. Some reports suggested that there was only one explosion that put on fire several nearby buildings, vehicles and electricity pylons. The fire triggered gas cylinder explosions, giving the impression of more than one blasts. However, some reports citing police said that there were two explosions. Firstexplosion targeted the police station and the second, only a minute apart, targeted a departmental store, located opposite to the police station.

The explosion took place amid a large number of people including women and children who were busy shopping and eating in nearby restaurants. According to latest reports, more than 37 people were killed and scores were wounded in the blast. Authorities feared rise in the death toll.

Earlier in the day, a suicide bomber struck outside a court in Peshawar killing 10 people and wounding 49 others. It was the latest blast in the city which is beset by Taliban violence.

PESHAWAR: A suicide bomber struck outside a court in Pakistan’s Peshawar on Monday, killing 10 people and wounding 49 others in the latest blast in a city beset by Taliban violence, officials said.

Peshawar, capital of the troubled northwest, had seen the brunt of Taliban attacks avenging military offensives against them across the region, with more than 270 people killed in the city since early October.

Bashir Bilor, a senior minister in the northwest provincial government, told reporters that a man carrying explosives drove up to a district sessions court in the centre of the city in a rickshaw.

‘He got down and tried to enter the building but could not do so because of our security arrangements,’ he said.

‘The injured included three policemen and two lawyers.’

He told AFP that the severed head of the bomber has been found about 70 metres (230 feet) away from the blast site.

Zafar Iqbal, a senior doctor at Peshawar’s main Lady Reading hospital, confirmed that they had five bodies delivered to the hospital, and added that at least 49 people were wounded in the blast, some seriously.

Local television channels showed images of blackened sandals lying in pools of water on a charred road. Smoke filled the streets as ambulances rushed to the scene and fire engines trained their hoses on smouldering cars.

An AFP reporter at the scene said that at least eight vehicles were completely destroyed by the blast, while the site was covered in smashed glass and the blood of the dead and wounded.

Senior bomb disposal official Tanveer Iqbal said that about six to seven kilograms of explosives were used in the suicide attack.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani swiftly condemned the blast, deploring ‘the loss of innocent lives,’ a statement from his office said. (News sourced from website of DawnNews)

DAWN editorial: “Tiresome and wholly unnecessary is how we would describe the American complaints about Pakistan’s alleged reluctance to act against Al Qaeda militants taking refuge on Pakistani soil. On a day that Pakistan Army officers and their family members were brutally attacked in Rawalpindi, the US consul general in Peshawar thought it fit to allege that the leadership, or some elements thereof, of Al Qaeda, in addition to the Afghan Taliban, has taken refuge in Balochistan and that the authorities here know of their presence in the province. Let us be clear: few could rationally argue that there are no Afghan Taliban or Al Qaeda militants in Pakistan, including Balochistan… What advantage, however perverse, does Pakistan gain from protecting and enabling Al Qaeda?…The Americans need to realize something quite obvious to Pakistanis: publicly aired allegations and threats undermine the position of the US in the country…”

Read all of it at:

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/19-us-allegations-hh-03