NEW YORK, AUG 26, 2010: Today is Nawab Akbar Bugti assassination’s fourth anniversary. Restive and now flood-ravaged Balochistan is on payyah jam. Fire, bullets and water engulf the Baloch – reminiscent of the cyclone Bhola in 1970 that devastated Bangladesh and pushed the angry eastern half of Pakistan over the edge – a year later to emerge as an independent nation. Baloch nationalists and Pervez Musharraf-bashers point fingers at him for Bugti killing. There has been no public probe nor can the nation expect one. They are not used to it. The system expects all to follow Lagey Raho Munna Bhai SOP!

Meanwhile, Musharraf is in the headlines. First he announced he won’t come back this year. But his political party APML is quietly and discreetly operating in Pakistan. They intend to make Karachi and Islamabad their staging grounds I am told. Orangi Sector 7 and Rawalpindi – my source tells me. Then came the news that he is forming a foundation for flood relief. Today he called the family of the Sialkot brothers and condoled their deaths. He also strongly condemned the Sialkot police’s silent spectator role in the lynching of their sons. Did he introspect Bugti’s killing today? If he ordered Bugti killing as Army chief then on military’s unified command doctrine he may be responsible. If he did so as the President then on collective leadership doctrine he may have a legal argument in his defense. But the nation by and large feels he overplayed his hands on this onne also. Earlier it was the Lal Masjid. Whether the nation will overlook the matter if and when he returns is another matter. Baloch won’t – specially if you have dishonored them.

Two years back I wrote a blog on Musharraf. It is still relevant. Here it is:

AUG 19, 2008: Musharraf has quit as President- typically in a commando style: resilient, sans apologies – defending his actions – highlighting his achievements – focusing on rivals’ shortcomings and weaknesses – hoping that Pakistan will come out shining but in the same breathe alluding to ominous signs of impending external and internal threats.

His parting diatribes seem to be a borderline case of delusional-cum-polemical chicaneries – an understandable mental manifestation of someone who have been pushed to move his butt off the high altar where he has been sitting so long. If I had a buddy like Bush on my side always, I would probably be the same – may be even worse. Interestingly both have been delusional to the extreme.

While running for the presidentship, Bush couldn’t name the new leader of Pakistan, i.e. Gen. Musharraf. But after Sept. 11, things changed overnight – whether for the good or for the worse only history will tell.

Musharraf became the most crucial but ultimately the most frustrating ally of the U.S and Bush’s personally. In the process, however Musharraf became a “personal friend” of George Bush – the latter often called him his ‘buddy’.

Ironically, U.S. has “no permanent friends nor permanent enemies”. So is it about Musharraf and USA. The region has become so murky that even the strongest Chlorox can’t clean it up. Stains will remain for ever. Welcome to the club, Commando! He once said, he never blinked – because he had “cat’s 9 lives”.

Interestingly though, he is not yet fully depreciated politically (my personal opinion), even age wise and “nuisance value” wise. He has of course proved that he is neither a Ayub Khan nor a Yahya, nor a Bhutto! And, he has already proved he is not a Zia either!

He ended up getting the farewell guard of honor, has a President’s security details, is lodged in Army Chief’s house, shall remain in the country, can speak to the media, etc. and says will issue a White Paper on the dire strait of the economy.

As I watched his unapologetic monologue on the TV, my mind tried to visualize him on the day after. And I saw him out there, kicking and throwing dust all around.

Possibly a comeback kid one day? In some form or the other?

We got to wait to see if that will happen for at least a year or so, since there appears to be a two-year restriction on government officials from entering politics. Meanwhile he will maintain sophisticated connect with the media and the people using ‘surprise’ as a Commando’s greatest weapon!

Muttahida, PML(Q), PML(F), etc…any or all may want him in one way or another. He has the potential to unite or divide the MQMs, provide alternate leadership to the Muhajirs in Karachi, has the knack to attempt to create a Punjab-Karachi constituency for himself – provided the establishment, including Uncle Sam, supports him and wants that to happen. Full of surprises Pakistan politics is.

Since the war on terror will go on….Musharraf, a known ally, offers alternate leadership. The U.S. has spent a lot on him. He is an “asset” by all definitions, some say. Meanwhile take a break Commando. Go golfing!

Note: Here is the link to the original blog written in Aug 2008: http://isalim.blogspot.com/2008/08/phoenix-rising-for-musharraf.html

PS: It’s all about blood, sweat and tears & Pakistan. It’s still in the making – both its ideological and physical boundaries. Meanwhile, here is a poem I wrote way back in 1973 after the fall of Dhaka:

REFUSAL

Oozing out
To travel in time
And growing so large
Till earth appeared;

Affectionately, cajolingly
A cell sucked breaths within
As love’s elixir
Seeped into her
Till it took no more.

Then he came to cry
That world inside
Could where he belong.

He also peeped and
Pageantries in air saw;

But heavenly flowers
Were they whence
Oozing out he’d seen.

So he ceased to cry, to peep
And crept cajolingly back into
His mother’s mound…

As cradle stood and
Lantern trimmed its
Cotton wick availingly

LONDON: Former British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has said that
his party is a true friend of Pakistan and stands shoulder to shoulder
in its hour of distress.

Miliband, who is a contender for the Labor Party leadership, was
speaking at Ramzan iftari and Pakistani Independence Day dinner held
at Waltham Forest Council Assembly Hall, north east London, on Tuesday
evening.

Referring to the devastating floods that have ravaged Pakistan,
Miliband said the country has been widely affected by this natural
calamity.

“Our thoughts go out to the affected people…we are Pakistan’s
friends today…friends of the Pakistani people and we pledge that we
will remain friends in future as well,” he said.

He said the people of Pakistan have also suffered from the terrorism
and thousands of civilians have been killed as a result of this
conflict.

“We do not look both ways to Pakistan, we look one way and we say to
Pakistan that we are your friends and stand with you. We want to make
sure that Pakistan is part of a stable South Asia. We know that there
is no stability in Pakistan when there is instability in Afghanistan.
We call on all countries of South Asia to be a part of our efforts to
establish peace and stability in that region.”

Miliband, who is favorite to be crowned new Labor leader at the next
month’s annual party conference, said Pakistan needs friends for its
economy, security, trade and its democracy.

He pointed out that Pakistan has been ruled for 31 years out of 63
years of independence by the military and the UK believes that the
future of Pakistan lies with the people, for the people and by the
people.

“One of my proudest moment as the Foreign Secretary was when I went to
Islamabad after February 2008 parliamentary elections and I sat with
the representatives of all the political parties.”

He said the struggle of the people of Pakistan for democracy is a
struggle for the Great Britain, too, and they will continue to support
democracy in that country.

Others who spoke on the occasion included MPs Anas Sarwar, Stella
Cracey, Lord Nazir Ahmed, Waltham Forest Mayor Councilor Masood Ahmed,
Councilor Akram Afzal and Chris Robins, leader of the council.

They supported the candidacy of David Miliband for the Labor Party
leadership and expressed hope that under him the party would rebound
and win the next elections due in 2015. They said David was the right
man to lead the party.

Lord Ahmed said contrary to the remarks of Prime Minister David
Cameron about Pakistan in India, Miliband talked about the issue of
Kashmir when in India. He said the remarks of Cameron offended not
only Pakistan but the British Pakistani Diaspora as well. He said
Pakistan has been fighting the war on terror on behalf of USA, UK and
Europe and its sacrifices need to be acknowledged.

Barrister Abid Hussain conducted the proceeding and said the funds
raised from the event would go to Pakistan’s flood appeal.

Shireen M Mazari

It is ISI bashing time again and this comes easy for the Western and Indian media especially, but also for the media at home since the ISI has figured as a larger than life organisation since the US-led war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. And undoubtedly the ISI has at times been highly controversial in the activities it has undertaken especially domestically. Both during period of civilian democracy and military rule, the ISI has been used by those in power and even today the ruling party is not devoid of this temptation, unfortunately.

Of course, like all intelligence agencies with an external agenda, such as CIA and RAW, the ISI has its own external agenda. But it needs to also be understood that the ISI is not an independent entity and the decision-making hierarchy of the organisation comes on routine postings from the military, primarily the army. So its external activities reflect the policies of the government, but especially the military. Be that as it may, post-9/11, the ISI has had to pay for its past sins in seeing itself demonised by the US and India – even though the former is supposed to be an ally of this country. Every time the chips are down for the US in Afghanistan, somehow or the other the ISI is lambasted by “leaks” to the Western, especially the compliant US media. It would appear that the CIA’s failures, as well as the US and NATO military failures, are all a result solely of the ISI! Now if only the ISI was really so effective, efficient and powerful, India’s occupation of Kashmir would have ended and Afghanistan’s future would have been moulded according to its desires! Unfortunately, that is not the case and the ISI is as riddled with inefficiencies as any large bureaucratic organisation is, but undoubtedly, it has better ground intelligence in this region than the US and its CIA since the latter has a blunderbuss approach to human intelligence gathering and has no sensitivity to nuances of any kind.

Be that as it may, the latest round of ISI bashing rather obviously sponsored by the CIA to hide its own failures in Afghanistan, once again, has come with the WikiLeaks’ story. Apart from The Guardian newspaper which showed some healthy scepticism about the leaked information, for the biased US media like The New York Times this was a journalistic feast – enough to feed the deep-seated anti-Muslim and especially anti-Pakistan bias that now dominates the American media. But let us get some facts straightened first and one has to concede that WikiLeaks itself is credible anti-war site. But what the media has done in terms of factual distortions of even these unverifiable leaks is dangerous and cannot simply be ignored by Pakistan because we are once again the targets.

First of all, the leaked documents are based entirely on field reports filed by a variety of operatives in Afghanistan, allegedly primarily belonging to the Northern Alliance. Second, out of the 92,000 leaked documents, only 180 contain ISI references and of these only 30 mention the ISI in negative terms regarding Taliban-supporting activities. Third, of these 180 documents with references to the ISI, most of these reports have a disclaimer by the author at the end where the source was referred to simply as an “informant” and it was stated that this source was either not reliable or working only for monetary gains for either the Afghan intelligence, Indians or Afghan warlords! Or else the source was referred to simply by initials! Interestingly where the ISI is mentioned, it also states in the disclaimer that the information cannot be verified and therefore cannot be “used to make policies” (all this is on the website). So where does that leave the actual content of these leaked reports?

Officials in Pakistan are convinced that the CIA, when it found out about the leaks, sought to divert the expansive details of its own failures in Afghanistan by shifting the focus on to the ISI – a favourite bete noir of the Western media. According to WikiLeaks the source for the leaked documents sought to prevent the publication of some of them for fear of sensitive information! There is also a feeling in some quarters that the CIA has deliberately chosen to once again target the ISI because of the rising anti-war tide within the US. Most observers in the know now recognise that the US and NATO have lost the war militarily in Afghanistan and bad intelligence is certainly one of the causes. So what better way to escape blame than to put everything on the ISI. The timing of the “leaks” is not without purpose.

Be that as it may, the fact is that it is time for Pakistan to sever its links and cooperation with the US. How can we have information and intelligence sharing with a country that has systematically done and continues to do a hatchet job on our premier intelligence agency, as well as the Pakistan military in general? From our nuclear programme to the ISI, there is a continuous ongoing war being waged on us by the US. It may not be a military war but it has economic, political, diplomatic and psychological components. What is simply absurd is why the “PakMil” – a term Mullen has coined to show his intimacy with General Kayani and is used only by him when he meets the COAS apparently – is not seeing the ground realities? Instead of the ISPR issuing press releases now suddenly condemning the drone attacks in an attempt to fool the Pakistani nation, when they know only too well that these are being carried out with the support of the Pakistan civil and military leadership, the military should take a long hard look at what the US is doing to Pakistan on all fronts. If the Pakistani government, including the military, sees the drones as doing more harm than good, why do they remain complicit in this policy? Should they not send a clear message to the US by downing one of these drones?

The evidence is piling up showing US hostile intent and effectively the US itself is becoming less of a friend – if ever it was – and more of an enemy. Even if we feel that is too drastic a conclusion, it is certainly a hostile player from Pakistan’s perspective. So before we lose everything to the Indo-US nexus, let us alter our dynamics with the US and treat it as a hostile state. The US is in a quandary and we are its only way out. Let us use this tiny window of opportunity to assert our national interests and deal with the US on our terms while it remains in its Afghan quagmire. Let General Kayani see who the real foe is – in military terms at least and the rulers rid themselves of particularistic interests to see the real foe in politico-diplomatic terms before it is too late.

By Imran Khan

Before the West invaded Afghanistan my country had no suicide bombers, no jihad and no Talebanisation.

There is now a general recognition that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won militarily. All the Taleban have to do to win is not to lose. The Americans won’t stay and everybody knows that.

The focus has come to rest on the inevitable need to talk with all the militant groups in Afghanistan. While most important players are ready to talk peace, the US remains confused and has still to straighten out its policy. This confusion is once again taking its toll, especially on Pakistan.

As the US and Nato realise the failure of their military policy in Afghanistan, they are seeking to shift the centre of gravity of the war into the north west of Pakistan, the region known as the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). One of the fears raised in the West at the prospect of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan is that it will lead to a Taleban- controlled nuclear Pakistan. That fear betrays a total ignorance about the evolution of the Taleban movement as well as the impact of the War on Terror on Pakistan.

Remember, there was no Pakistani involvement in 9/11. Nor throughout the period of the Taleban regime in Kabul was there Talebanisation in Pakistan .

When the Americans were drawing up their military response to the 9/11 attacks, they drew up a list of seven conditions for Pakistan to meet to attract US support. The assumption was that General Pervez Musharraf, the former President of Pakistan, might agree to three or four. Instead he unilaterally signed up for the lot. These conditions were a total violation of the human rights of the people of Pakistan and the sovereignty of the country.

This was a leader with whom President Clinton had refused to shake hands when he came to Pakistan before 9/11, for fear of being seen to support a dictator. It was quite shameless how the Pakistani leadership capitulated and how the US gave Musharraf the embrace of legitimacy. This was reminiscent of the Cold War era when tinpot dictators were routinely supported by the US.

In 2004 Pakistan’s Government sent troops into Waziristan, where al-Qaeda was allegedly present. I was one of the only politicians from outside the tribal areas who had been to Waziristan and I opposed the move in Pakistan’s Parliament. Anyone who knows the region and its history could see it would be a disaster.

Until that point we had no militant Taleban in Pakistan. We had militant groups, but our own military establishment was able to control them. We had madrassas, but none of them produced militants intent on jihad until we became a front-line state in the War on Terror.

The country is fighting someone else’s war. We never had suicide bombings in our history until 2004. Now we have 30 to 40 deaths a day from shells or bombings and the suicide attacks continue to increase. While we have received about $15 billion in aid from the US, our own economy has lost about $50 billion.

We have borrowed a record amount of money from the International Monetary Fund, which was only given to us because of our role in the war, not because we could afford to pay it back. Our social and economic fabric is being destroyed because of the conditions that the IMF has imposed.

Millions of our people have been displaced and a massive radicalisation of our youth has taken place as they see the Pakistani state becoming a puppet doing US bidding. The military operations by Pakistan in FATA have led to 40,000 casualties in indiscriminate aerial bombardment and ground fire.

The attacks by US drones, in which the Government of Pakistan is complicit, have also killed thousands of civilians, leading to a growing hatred becoming embedded among the local population. There is deep resentment of the war in the frontier regions, where high unemployment feeds the discontent.

The war in Afghanistan is justified as a stabilising force for Pakistan, whereas in truth the country is collapsing under the pressure. We are like Cambodia in the Vietnam War. After the Wikileaks revelations yesterday reports are being floated that the ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service, is aiding the Afghan militancy. The fact is that the ISI is not that powerful, but certainly in an environment of chaos and uncertainty Pakistan will need to protect its interests through all means necessary.

It is unfortunate that the US was unable to use the window of opportunity that it had in the immediate aftermath of the removal of the Taleban Government in late 2001. It could have brought in a truly broad-based Afghan government and invested in the development of the country. Instead, it continued its military actions and brought corrupt and criminal elements into power in Kabul.

Pakistan, supposedly an ally of the US, is bearing the brunt of American failure in Afghanistan. A recent poll showed that 80 per cent of Pakistanis consider the US a bigger threat to their country than India. Nor is this view about the US solely because of the “War on Terror”. Pakistanis also blame the US for brokering the “National Reconciliation Order”, which was intended to sustain Musharraf in power while also bringing rogue Pakistani politicians back into the political landscape.

The result is a total collapse of governance in Pakistan today. There is no danger of Talebanisation in Pakistan but there is a very real threat of chaos and radicalisation, especially of the youth.

There is only one solution to this chaos. This is to implement an immediate ceasefire and commence talks with all militant groups in Afghanistan. Either America leaves or Pakistan withdraws from this war.

The US should not worry about Pakistan. Once the bombing stops, it will no longer be jihad and the suicide attacks will immediately subside. About 18 months ago the former head of the CIA’s Kabul station, Graham Fuller, wrote in the

International Herald Tribune that once the US leaves the region Pakistan will be stable.

Political leaders in the US and UK should realise that people in the streets of New York and London are not threatened by the people in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan but by the growing radicalisation of their own marginalised Muslim youth.

(The article first appeared in The Times UK. Imran Khan is the founder and chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (the Movement for Justice Party. )

NOTE: The views of the authors and commentors do not necessarily reflect those of PKonweb. PKonweb reserves the right to remove or edit comments that are posted

New York Times
Editorial

There is a lot to be disturbed by in the battlefield reports from Afghanistan released Sunday by WikiLeaks. The close-up details of war are always unsettling, even more so with this war, which was so badly neglected and bungled by President George W. Bush.

But the most alarming of the reports were the ones that described the cynical collusion between Pakistan’s military intelligence service and the Taliban. Despite the billions of dollars the United States has sent in aid to Pakistan since Sept. 11, they offer powerful new evidence that crucial elements of Islamabad’s power structure have been actively helping to direct and support the forces attacking the American-led military coalition.

The time line of the documents from WikiLeaks, an organization devoted to exposing secrets, stops before President Obama put his own military and political strategy into effect last December. Administration officials say they have made progress with Pakistan since, but it is hard to see much evidence of that so far.

Most of the WikiLeaks documents, which were the subject of in-depth coverage in The Times on Monday, cannot be verified. However, they confirm a picture of Pakistani double-dealing that has been building for years.

On a trip to Pakistan last October, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested that officials in the Pakistani government knew where Al Qaeda leaders were hiding. Gen. David Petraeus, the new top military commander in Afghanistan, recently acknowledged long-standing ties between Pakistan’s Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, known as ISI, and the “bad guys.”

The Times report of the new documents suggests the collusion goes even deeper, that representatives of the ISI have worked with the Taliban to organize networks of militants to fight American soldiers in Afghanistan and hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders.

The article painted a chilling picture of the activities of Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul of Pakistan, who ran the ISI from 1987 to 1989, when the agency and the C.I.A. were together arming the Afghan militias fighting Soviet troops. General Gul kept working with those forces, who eventually formed the Taliban.

Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States said the reports were unsubstantiated and “do not reflect the current on-ground realties.” But at this point, denials about links with the militants are simply not credible.

Why would Pakistan play this dangerous game? The ISI has long seen the Afghan Taliban as a proxy force, a way to ensure its influence on the other side of the border and keep India’s influence at bay.

Pakistani officials also privately insist that they have little choice but to hedge their bets given their suspicions that Washington will once again lose interest as it did after the Soviets were ousted from Afghanistan in 1989. And until last year, when the Pakistani Taliban came within 60 miles of Islamabad, the country’s military and intelligence establishment continued to believe they could control the extremists when they needed to.

In recent months, the Obama administration has said and done many of the right things toward building a long-term relationship with Pakistan. It has committed to long-term economic aid. It is encouraging better relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is constantly reminding Pakistani leaders that the extremists, on both sides of the border, pose a mortal threat to Pakistan’s fragile democracy — and their own survival. We don’t know if they’re getting through. We know they have to.

It has been only seven months since Mr. Obama announced his new strategy for Afghanistan, and a few weeks since General Petraeus took command. But Americans are increasingly weary of this costly war. If Mr. Obama cannot persuade Islamabad to cut its ties to, and then aggressively fight, the extremists in Pakistan, there is no hope of defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Pakistani Talk Show Views On News with Dr. Shahid Masood discusses the massive leak of secret US military files that allegedly describe how Pakistan’s spy service ISI aid the Afghan insurgency. What is behind the leak and its timing. Guests: Gen (R) Hamid Gul (Ex-DG ISI), Imtiaz Gul (Security Analyst), Jamal Leghari (PML-Q), Rustom Shah Mohammad (Afghan specialist), Hassan Nisar (Columnist)

The White House National Security Advisor James Jones has said that the irresponsible leaks about Pakistan supporting Afghan insurgency will not impact the US’s ongoing commitment to deepen partnerships with Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The White House on Sunday denounced a massive leak of secret military files that allegedly describe how Pakistan’s spy service aids the Afghan insurgency, but said the information was no surprise.

In all, some 92,000 documents were released by the web whistleblower Wikileaks, containing previously untold details of the Afghan war through Pentagon files and field reports spanning from 2004 to 2010.

According to the New York Times, one of the first three media outlets to review and report on the leaks, “suggest that Pakistan, an ostensible ally of the United States, allows representatives of its spy service to meet directly with the Taliban.”

Britain’s Guardian newspaper said the files, many of which detail growing numbers of civilians dying at the hands of international forces as well as the Taliban, painted “a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan.”

The White House issued its condemnation shortly before the leaks were posted online, saying the information could endanger US lives but also pointing to the administration’s long-held doubts about links between Pakistan intelligence agents and Afghan insurgents.

“The United States strongly condemns the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organisations which could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk, and threaten our national security,” said White House National Security Advisor James Jones. “These irresponsible leaks will not impact our ongoing commitment to deepen our partnerships with Afghanistan and Pakistan; to defeat our common enemies; and to support the aspirations of the Afghan and Pakistani people.”

The White House also released a series of remarks made in the past by top officials expressing their concern about links between Pakistan spy services and militants in Afghanistan.

Among them was one from Defense Secretary Robert Gates dated March 31, 2009: “The ISI’s contacts with [extremist groups] are a real concern to us, and we have made these concerns known directly to the Pakistanis,” referring to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency.

The New York Times said it, along with the Guardian and the German magazine Der Spiegel, had received the leaked material several weeks ago from Wikileaks, a secretive web organisation that often publishes classified material.

The source of leak was unknown. The last person suspected of providing classified material to the outlet is an American soldier who has been charged with two counts of misconduct for allegedly providing video footage of a US Apache helicopter strike in Iraq in which around a dozen people were gunned down in broad daylight.

Describing “secret strategy sessions,” the NY Times said Pakistan spy services “organise networks of militant groups that fight against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders.”

US senator John Kerry, chair of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the leaks “raise serious questions about the reality of America’s policy toward Pakistan and Afghanistan. “Those policies are at a critical stage and these documents may very well underscore the stakes and make the calibrations needed to get the policy right more urgent.”

With nearly 150,000 US and Nato troops in Afghanistan, President Barack Obama has set a deadline of July 2011 as the start of a gradual drawdown of US troops, after a nearly nine-year mission that began in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Jones, who did not address the veracity of the information contained in the leaks, said that the documents mainly cover the time period of January 2004 to December 2009, when former president George W Bush was in office.

He pointed out that President Barack Obama on December 1, 2009 announced a new strategy that boosted resources for Afghanistan, and put increased focus on al Qaeda and Taliban safe-havens in Pakistan.

“This shift in strategy addressed challenges in Afghanistan that were the subject of an exhaustive policy review last fall,” Jones said.

A US official who asked not to be named added: “I don’t think anyone who follows this issue will find it surprising that there are concerns about ISI and safe havens in Pakistan.

“Some of the disconcerting things reported are exactly why the president ordered a three month policy review and a change in strategy,” the official said, adding: “Wikileaks is not an objective news outlet but rather an organisation that opposes US policy in Afghanistan.”

Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani said leaking unprocessed reports from the battlefield was irresponsible. “These reports reflect nothing more than single source comments and rumors, which abound on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and are often proved wrong,” he said in a statement.

By Irshad Salim

Army chief Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has been given another full-term (3 years) extension of service. Instead of retiring in November this year, he will now hopefully walk into sunset in November 2013 – almost right after the next elections are held.

Gen. Kayani had been averse to accepting any tenure extension, published reports have said. However, former COAS Gen (R) Waheed Kakar was said to have played an important role in convincing him to accept the extension in the larger national interest and that of the armed forces institution in particular.

Some observers feel the range of forces behind Kayani’s incumbency is as vast as the vested interests of war on terror and in the “re-making of Pakistan” as a “progressive, liberal, secularist society.”

The announcement of Kayani’s extension was made by none other than Prime Minister Gilani himself. Gilani’s public announcement was one of the shortest on TV in Pakistan’s history. In his two-and-a-half-minute burp, Gilani said that owing to the ongoing military operations against militants, it was important to maintain continuity in the military leadership.

The army chief will now become the first to enjoy the longest ever tenure, notwithstanding those who extended their own tenures in the like of Gen Ayub, Gen Zia, Gen Musharraf.

According to some of these observers, the move heralds the potential of long-term consequences on the country’s political and military landscape including present and future civil-military relationship. Two dynamics are inter-playing: The civil-military relations as envisaged in the Kerry-Lugar Bill and the one as planned by the establishment itself for the long haul.

According to reports, the decision was earlier planned to be announced by July 18. However, it was deferred till the visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A poker-faced Clinton said in Islamabad last week that the United States did not and would not comment on Pakistan’s internal matter, when asked about Kayani’s extension. But Pakistan watchers smiled at that. Hillary did however stress that the United States would like democratic setup to continue!

Kayani positioned himself in the overall war against terror’s dispensation with his entry, thanks to Gen Musharraf, as DG ISI. His more than cursory involvement in Musharraf team’s negotiations with Benazir Bhutto, of which he was an integral part, is well known.

When Musharraf in November 2007 gave up his army chief role, he pinned that badge on Kayani. Elections were thereafter held making PPP win enough seats to form a secular government in the center. While Bhutto met untimely death, Musharraf was forced to quit – and in a twist of fate, Zardari and Kayani became new power players representing either side of the divide – or shall we say – from the same side in the great game!

Once a military assistant to the late prime minister Benazir Bhutto as well as a trusted protege of her rival Musharraf, Kayani has been recognised as a chameleon in surviving Pakistan’s treacherous political waters, AFP reported.

Today, a more relaxed and cheerful Gilani praised Kayani for his “commitment to democracy”, recalling that the military chief had termed “democracy inevitable” for peace and development in Pakistan. Read “progressive, liberal, secular forces” in place of “democracy”. The PM also quipped that all four major power balls – the army chief, the PM (himself), the President and the Chef Justice will remain in their seat until 2013!

Kayani has thus come out in the open as the key force in the power structure. He was then and is now, and will remain so in future also, until a mixed bag of nationalistic-secularist-progressive force emerges in the country. Such an ideological boundary for Pakistan may not make all the stake-holders happy though; but then in every successful negotiations – one party is always the grim reaper. Who is or who are the grim reapers – only time can tell. All that can be conjectured right now is that no matter who took the insurance from whom – the underwriter is the same!

WASHINGTON – While recognising Pakistan’s security interests in Afghanistan, the US envoy for the region says that it doesn’t mean that Islamabad has the right “to determine what happens next door”.

At the same time, Richard Holbrooke, Special Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan, underscored the importance of Pakistan’s participation in successful outcome of the conflict in Afghanistan.

“For our part, our focus on Pakistan is based on the fact that we recognize — and this has not been recognized in the past — that Pakistan has legitimate security interests in its neighbour with an undefined border, and those have to be taken into account,” he said in a hearing on the Capitol Hill before his travel to the region.

“But at the same time, nobody is saying that Pakistan has the right to determine what happens next door. It is simply that we hope they can get along, and we’ve been encouraging that. And we believe that recent dialogue between Islamabad and Kabul has been beneficial,” he told the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Holbrooke also praised the sacrifices made by Pakistan in fighting the terrorists. “We cannot forget that the Pakistani people and armed forces have made huge sacrifices as part of this fight,” he said.

“In the past month alone, scores of innocent Pakistanis have been killed or wounded in suicide attacks. Hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis have also had their lives upended.” (The Nation)

Two high profile American personalities associated with the US war on terror today talked about Pakistan’s critical role in its success against the faceless enemies of its so-called war on terror.

One is Sen. Carl Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and the other is the newly appointed US military commander in Afghanistan General Petraeus.

Both American foreign security personalities stressed on Pakistan’s participation and role in its war against the militants in Pakistan but had different style and approach – with common objective – that is, to insure Pakistan’s additional input in their security objectives in Afghanistan.

The senior US senator urged Pakistan today to crack down on the al-Qaida-linked Haqqani insurgent network, which operates on both sides of the country’s border with Afghanistan.

Levin said Pakistan’s reluctance to push into the North Waziristan area run by the Haqqanis is hurting the war effort in Afghanistan.

Levin said he does not think the Haqqani network will ever make peace and he vowed to push to include the group on the US terrorist blacklist.

“They are not following through and have not followed through by going after one of the truly great threats that face us here in Afghanistan, which is the coming into Afghanistan from Pakistan of Haqqani fighters,” the Democrat from Michigan told reporters in Kabul on Sunday at the end of his two-day visit.

Meanwhile today in Islamabad, the American commander for Nato and International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan General David Petraeus said their success against militants was not possible without Pakistan’s collaboration.

General Petraeus, who arrived in Pakistan today, met with the Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani at the GHQ.

General Petraeus reportedly told Kayani that for effective operations and success against militants in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s support is indispensable.

Separately, US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson met with General Kayani at the GHQ on completion of her term as America’s envoy to Pakistan.