Greg Mortenson to be sued by tribesmen he said kidnapped him

Greg Mortenson, the author and philanthropist accused of fabricating large parts of his autobiographical writings, is to be sued by the Pakistani tribesmen he claimed kidnapped him.

Greg Mortenson poses with schoolchildren in northeastern Afghanistan. The author has been accused of fabricating his autobiography.

In his bestselling books about building schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan, one of the most startling stories tells how he was kidnapped by the Taliban and held hostage in Waziristan, the most dangerous part of Pakistan’s western tribal border area with Afghanistan. A photograph in one book showed him with a dozen tribesmen, some armed, who were supposedly holding him captive.

However, as with much else in the books, Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools, the tale is unravelling, following a US television exposé earlier this week.

Mansur Khan Mahsud, who featured in the photograph, said that Mortenson came to his village of Kot Langer Khel, in the Laddah area of South Waziristan, in July 1996. Mahsud, who is the research director of a thinktank in Islamabad that specialises in the tribal area, said that the Taliban did not appear on the Pakistani side of the border until 2002, following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan.

“Greg Mortenson came with a relative of mine and he was a guest of the village. He stayed for about 10 days. He was living in the village, sightseeing, taking photographs. He had a really good time,” said Mahsud, adding that some of the tribesmen carried guns to protect Mortenson.

In Mortenson’s account, his hosts from the Mahsud tribe have been turned into the then better-known Wazir tribe, while the location has morphed to Razmak, North Waziristan.

“It’s lies from A to Z. There’s not one word of truth. If there had been a little exaggeration, that could have been forgiven,” said Mahsud. “The way that he’s portrayed the Mahsuds, as hash-smoking bandits, is wrong. He’s defamed me, my family, my tribe. We are respected people in my area. He’s turned us into kidnappers.”

Mahsud said that he had decided to file a lawsuit against Mortenson and was in contact with a lawyer in the US.

“I am looking into how to sue him,” said Mahsud, who only found out about the story in the book when he was contacted in February this year by a whistle-blower, Jon Krakauer, who was featured in the US investigative show 60 Minutes on CBS News.

The programme raised serious doubts over how many schools Mortenson had actually built in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and even his original story that he vowed to build his first school, for a Pakistani village, after its inhabitants rescued him when he got lost mountaineering. It also questioned the use of the millions in charitable funds he collects each year for the schools.

Mortenson, whose charity is now under investigation by US authorities, has defended his work, admitting to only “some omissions and compressions”.

US contemplating raids in Pakistan

By: Sultan M Hali

A number of pieces of the puzzle fell into place when the media learnt that the senior military leadership in Afghanistan was propagating that the path to victory in Afghanistan lay through ground attacks in alleged miscreant hideouts in Pakistan. The US media has been continually hinting towards the so called frustrations of the US towards Pakistan, regarding Pakistan’s supposed reluctance to root out militants in its tribal areas. The “New York Times”, which some people consider as the mouthpiece of Capitol Hill discloses a plan to launch attacks in Pakistan’s tribal regions. The daily lets on that the proposed plan has not been approved yet but with the deadline of the commencement of the withdrawal of US forces approaching closer, a sense of urgency is being felt. Gung-ho US analysts are opining that despite the risks involved in military operations inside Pakistan, the use of American Special Operations troops in Pakistan’s tribal regions could bring an intelligence windfall, if militants were captured, brought back across the border into Afghanistan and interrogated. Perhaps these armchair analysts are oblivious of the history of the tribal region. It is fraught with perils for every invader; and history is replete with examples where ambitions of would be conquerors were buried forever in the hostile terrain. It is not that the US troops have not attempted forays across the border into Pakistan. Each has resulted in disaster. The latest on September 30 this year brought such a backlash from Pakistani forces as well as the people that the US had to beat a hasty retreat in any plans to continue with operations ingressing across the Durand Line. The episode infuriated Pakistan’s government, which temporarily shut down American military supply routes into Pakistan. Several fuel trucks sitting at the border were destroyed by insurgents, and American officials publicly apologized. Two years earlier, in September 2008, American commandos carried out a raid in Pakistan’s tribal areas and killed several people suspected of being insurgents. The episode led to outrage among Pakistan’s leaders – and warnings not to try again. It really is not understood how US defence planners have concluded that there is now a shift in policy and Pakistanis would welcome any adventurism in their sovereign territory.

If lessons have not been learnt from the disastrous results of the CIA-operated drone attacks in the region, then the US has only itself to blame. America’s clandestine war in Pakistan has for the most part been carried out by armed drones operated by the C.I.A. Additionally, in recent years; Afghan militias backed by the C.I.A. have carried out a number of secret missions into Pakistan’s tribal areas. These operations in Pakistan by Afghan operatives, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams, have been previously reported as solely intelligence-gathering operations. The decision to expand American military activity in Pakistan, which would almost certainly have to be approved by President Obama himself, would amount to the opening of a new front in the war in Afghanistan, which enters its tenth year and has become highly unpopular with US citizens. It would run the risk of angering a Pakistani government that has been an uneasy ally in the war in Afghanistan, particularly if it leads to civilian casualties or highly public confrontations. The drone attacks have caused a different type of backlash, in which a resident of the tribal region, Karim Khan, also a journalist has filed a lawsuit against the CIA and named the head of the intelligence agency in Pakistan, blowing his cover. Resultantly, Jonathan Banks, the CIA operative, who was named in the lawsuit by the plaintiff, had to beat a hasty retreat to safer climes to escape from the wrath of an angered group of survivors of the drone attacks, who are baying for an end to the death from the skies.

It is not that Washington does not have sane elements who will weigh the option of launching forays into Pakistan very carefully. Ground operations in Pakistan remain controversial in Washington, and there may be a debate over the proposal. One senior administration official said he was not in favor of cross-border operations – which he said have been generally “counterproductive” – unless they were directed against top leaders of Al Qaeda. He expressed concern that political fallout in Pakistan could negate any tactical gains. Still, one senior American officer said, “We’ve never been as close as we are now to getting the go-ahead to go across.”

The best bet for the US is to understand the security imperatives for Pakistan, whose ground forces are already outstretched. They have been deployed in Swat and South Waziristan, areas, that have been cleared of miscreants but are fraught with danger until a civilian infrastructure of law and order is in place. Nearly 150,000 Pakistani troops have been deployed in the region. Additionally, the hostile attitude of Pakistan’s eastern neighbour precludes the necessity of placing sufficient troops along the Line of Control in Kashmir to thwart any adventurism by India. The US should contemplate capacity building of Pakistani troops to tackle the miscreants in the area suspected of harbouring miscreants, which would be more productive in the longer run rather than sending US troops. Even before finalizing any plans to increase raids across the border, the Obama administration has already stepped up its air assaults in the tribal areas with an unprecedented number of C.I.A. drone strikes this year. Since September, the spy agency has carried out more than 50 drone attacks in North Waziristan and elsewhere – compared with 60 strikes in the preceding eight months. Instead of challenging Pakistan’s sovereignty, the US is advised to work with its ally Pakistan to eliminate common enemies.

U.S. Military Seeks to Expand Raids in Pakistan

By: MARK MAZZETTI and DEXTER FILKINS

WASHINGTON – Senior American military commanders in Afghanistan are pushing for an expanded campaign of Special Operations ground raids across the border into Pakistan’s tribal areas, a risky strategy reflecting the growing frustration with Pakistan’s efforts to root out militants there.

The proposal, described by American officials in Washington and Afghanistan, would escalate military activities inside Pakistan, where the movement of American forces has been largely prohibited because of fears of provoking a backlash.

The plan has not yet been approved, but military and political leaders say a renewed sense of urgency has taken hold, as the deadline approaches for the Obama administration to begin withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan. Even with the risks, military commanders say that using American Special Operations troops could bring an intelligence windfall, if militants were captured, brought back across the border into Afghanistan and interrogated.

The Americans are known to have made no more than a handful of forays across the border into Pakistan, in operations that have infuriated Pakistani officials. Now, American military officers appear confident that a shift in policy could allow for more routine incursions.

America’s clandestine war in Pakistan has for the most part been carried out by armed drones operated by the C.I.A.

Additionally, in recent years, Afghan militias backed by the C.I.A. have carried out a number of secret missions into Pakistan’s tribal areas. These operations in Pakistan by Afghan operatives, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams, have been previously reported as solely intelligence-gathering operations. But interviews in recent weeks revealed that on at least one occasion, the Afghans went on the offensive and destroyed a militant weapons cache.

The decision to expand American military activity in Pakistan, which would almost certainly have to be approved by President Obama himself, would amount to the opening of a new front in the nine-year-old war, which has grown increasingly unpopular among Americans. It would run the risk of angering a Pakistani government that has been an uneasy ally in the war in Afghanistan, particularly if it leads to civilian casualties or highly public confrontations.

Still, one senior American officer said, “We’ve never been as close as we are now to getting the go-ahead to go across.”

The officials who described the proposal and the intelligence operations declined to be identified by name discussing classified information.

Ground operations in Pakistan remain controversial in Washington, and there may be a debate over the proposal. One senior administration official said he was not in favor of cross-border operations – which he said have been generally “counterproductive” – unless they were directed against top leaders of Al Qaeda. He expressed concern that political fallout in Pakistan could negate any tactical gains.

Still, as evidence mounts that Pakistani troops are unlikely to stage a major offensive into the militant stronghold of North Waziristan, where Al Qaeda’s top leaders are thought to be taking shelter, United States commanders have renewed their push for approval to send American commando teams into Pakistan.

In announcing the results of a review of the strategy in Afghanistan, Obama administration officials said they were considering expanded American operations to deal with threats inside Pakistan. They offered no specifics.

In interviews in Washington and Kabul, American officials said that officers were drawing up plans to begin ground operations to capture or kill leaders from the Taliban and the Haqqani network. American officers say they are particularly eager to capture, as opposed to kill, militant leaders, who they say can offer intelligence to guide future operations.

Even before finalizing any plans to increase raids across the border, the Obama administration has already stepped up its air assaults in the tribal areas with an unprecedented number of C.I.A. drone strikes this year. Since September, the spy agency has carried out more than 50 drone attacks in North Waziristan and elsewhere – compared with 60 strikes in the preceding eight months.

In interviews, the officials offered a more detailed description of two operations since 2008 in which Afghans working under the direction of the C.I.A. – a militia called the Paktika Defense Force – crossed the border into Pakistan. They also offered a richer account of the activities of these militia groups throughout the country.

According to an Afghan political leader, one of the raids was initiated to capture a Taliban commander working inside Pakistan. When the Afghan troops reached the compound, they did not find the Taliban commander, but the Pakistani militants opened fire on them, the Afghan said.

An American official disputed this account, saying that the C.I.A. militias are not sent over the border to capture militant leaders, but merely to gather intelligence.

In a second raid, the Paktika militia attacked and destroyed a Taliban ammunition depot and returned to base, officials said. Both of the C.I.A.-backed raids were aimed at compounds only a few miles inside Pakistani territory.

The Paktika Defense Force is one of six C.I.A.-trained Afghan militias that serve as a special operations force against insurgents throughout Afghanistan. The other militias operate around the cities of Kandahar, Kabul and Jalalabad as well as in the rural provinces of Khost and Kunar.

One American service member, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the C.I.A.-backed militia near Khost had recently deployed in the mountains along the Pakistan border, where it would spend the winter trying to intercept Taliban fighters. So far, the C.I.A.-backed force has proven effective, he said.

“The rockets we endured for the past seven months suddenly dried up,” the service member said.

In the past, the American military has had only limited success in its few cross-border operations. In October, an American military helicopter accidently killed a group of Pakistani soldiers during a flight over the border in pursuit of militants. The episode infuriated Pakistan’s government, which temporarily shut down American military supply routes into Pakistan. Several fuel trucks sitting at the border were destroyed by insurgents, and American officials publicly apologized.

Two years earlier, in September 2008, American commandos carried out a raid in Pakistan’s tribal areas and killed several people suspected of being insurgents. The episode led to outrage among Pakistan’s leaders – and warnings not to try again.

Breaking free from the quicksand

Ameer Bhutto

It is said that whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. With each passing day the Zardari administration grows more rash and reckless in the absence of any sane restraining political force. This recklessness vividly illustrates a schizophrenic pattern of behaviour that borders on political suicidal tendencies which threaten to derail a lot more than just their power joyride. The latest examples of their out-of-control egos are the clandestine promulgation of the NAB Ordinance on September 16 and the appointment of the new NAB Chairman in contravention of the rules and laws. These acts of government go beyond defiance of laws. They are an open challenge to the rule of law and the state institutions entrusted with safeguarding them.

All that seems to matter to those who have sneaked into power, not on a mandate based on merit but on a sympathy-vote after Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, and are wreaking havoc with the nation with their pyromaniacal conduct, is their own draconian will. Rule of law, judicial verdicts, the constitution, the imperatives of democracy and decent transparent conduct be damned. The fact that nearly every significant move this government makes is challenged in court is itself a moral indictment against them.

If the new NAB Ordinance was issued on September 16, why was it kept secret till several days later? Why was the prime minister kept completely in the dark about it? Parliament alone enjoys the direct mandate of the people to make laws and govern. Why was the new NAB law not placed before it instead of being issued as an ordinance by the president, who was elected not by the people but the members of parliament? Governance through presidential ordinances is an undemocratic attempt to bypass the will of the people vested in parliament to establish one-man dictatorship. Predictably, the legality of this ordinance has been challenged in court.

Similarly, the appointment of Deedar Shah as the new NAB Chairman reeks not just of blatant nepotism but a poorly veiled effort on the part of this NRO government to escape accountability for their corruption and other crimes by appointing a handpicked man who might shield them from the law. The Supreme Court verdicts in the Al-Jihad and NRO cases make it clear that the NAB Chairman is to be appointed after meaningful consultation with not just the leader of the opposition in parliament, but also the chief justice.

In fact, the government sought more time from the Supreme Court to make this appointment on the specific grounds that such consultations had not as yet been undertaken. Having bought time, the government went on to abuse the privilege by appointing their handpicked man without meaningful consultations with anyone. Apart from the legal problems with Deedar Shah’s appointment as Chairman NAB, there are political and moral issues as well. This man thrice contested on a Peoples’ Party ticket for a Sindh provincial assembly seat, winning twice. He is still well known as a confirmed jiyala and everyone knows where his loyalties lie. How can he be expected to be impartial in cases against his party leaders?

Keeping in mind the glaringly obvious violations of the rules and requirements of impartiality, how could the government possibly conceive that it would get away with his appointment? It too has been challenged in court. But the more intriguing question is why would they want to take actions that are bound to land them in thicker soup than they already are in? Does this not illustrate a comprehensive and arrogant disregard for the due process of law? Does this not point to an all-encompassing political death wish?

This is not good governance. This is not even bad governance. It is an unabashed rape of law, democracy and state institutions and it has been going on for two and a half years. This government has gotten away with it because it has been given carte blanche to do as it pleases under the preposterous justification of preserving ‘the system’.

During the tenure of this government, real opposition has existed for just one day; March 15, 2009, the day of the long march, which produced results within hours. Other than that, the government’s sleaze has flowed pretty much unimpeded. Even before the devastating floods, the people had voluntarily abdicated their democratic responsibility of holding their leaders accountable. But since the floods they are engaged in a day-to-day battle for survival and issues of legal and constitutional propriety couldn’t be further from their minds. As such, the government now feels totally unrestricted in pursuing its agenda of corruption.

How long can this go on? The answer is very simple; it will go on for as long as the people are willing to bear the pain and suffering in silence. The Zardari administration has done more than anyone or anything since the Ayub/Yahya days to push the country to the precipice of revolution. If the people wish to survive the corruption and incompetence that characterise this government, they have to make a last ditch-stand against this government, just as it has made a last ditch-stand against the rule of law. The people have been badly let down by their leaders in government and opposition alike. They will have to wipe the slate clean and begin afresh, with a new order, a new vision, a new ideal, led by clean, able and competent leaders who must rise from amongst their ranks rather than from a hijacked dynasty.

Does all this sound like an idealistic dream? Yes, very much so. But it is precisely conditions such as these that breed idealism and it is from the belly of idealism that all the great popular revolutions of the world have been born. This is the way it will have to be in Pakistan too if we want to survive and thrive. There is no future for this nation under the decay of the status quo and its proponents who are running the country like a Tehsildar runs a Tehsil.

The seeds of salvation cannot be found in the quicksand of a failed and painful present or past. We must break free from this quicksand. It is shocking that some people still take Musharraf seriously. It is only a reflection of the horrible mess this government has made that even he now appears more palatable than the current lot. But what hope of a better future could possibly emanate from a man who carried out a military coup first against an elected government and then against the judiciary, shredding what remained of democracy and the constitution, ruled with the aid of corrupt and disreputable political mercenaries, sold Pakistani citizens to foreign powers for a fistful of dollars and mortgaged national sovereignty before them in exchange for power? It does not suffice to set a country down the path to oblivion and then say “Oops, I am sorry!”.

Perhaps as a consequence of the repeated letdowns and betrayals we have suffered at the hands of supposed messiahs and saviours, we have reached the point of being terrified of anything new, novel and unfamiliar and prefer to seek solace in the already known. That is why, instead of moving ahead towards a bright new future, we look for answers in the past, which we dronishly cling to despite the harm it has caused. Is it any wonder that we keep going round in circles and find ourselves standing at the edge of the same precipice time and again?

India Desperate For A Photo Op, Pakistan Shouldn’t Give It

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-A joint photograph of Pakistan’s foreign minister with his Indian counterpart in New York could do wonders on the pro-freedom demonstrators in Indian-occupied Kashmir, Indian officials have concluded.

India is desperate in Kashmir and is hoping that a joint photograph of Indian and Pakistani foreign ministers in New York would prove a damper for the Kashmiri demonstrators, showing them Pakistan is ‘onboard’ with India’s handling of the killings in the disputed region.

This is why the Indian government is using every India-sympathizer in Washington and inside the Obama administration to convince Pakistan to send its foreign ministerto shake hands with India’s S. M. Krishna for the cameras.

Would Pakistan do it?

The race is certainly on and it seems there are some key figures in Islamabad who wouldn’t mind obliging the Indians and the Americans.

Early morning today a frantic text message reached Dr. Shireen M. Mazari, the editor of Pakistan’s The Nation daily newspaper. The message was simple:

“[President] Zardari & [Pakistan envoy to Washington Husain] Haqqani are desperately arranging for [Pakistani foreign minister] Shah Mehmood Qureshi to meet Indian foreign minister without agenda & without concrete Indian commitment to talks. Shah Mehmood is reluctant but US is pressurizing to give Indians chance to show Kashmiris that Pakistan is on board.”
Strangely, the message didn’t mention the name of Abdullah Haroon, an India-enthusiast appointed by Mr. Zardari as Pakistan’s envoy to the UN.

Dr. Mazari came on television by midday to break the news on a television channel owned by her newspaper.

If the move succeeds, India will walk away with an important psychological achievement at a crucial time, while Pakistan won’t get much, as usual.

The Indian desperation for this photo-op can be judged from the diplomatic moves India has initiated in the last five days to lure Pakistan into a meeting.

To ensure Pakistan falls for the trap, Indian officials have been generously mentioning ‘Kashmir’ and ‘Pakistan’ in the same sentence, creating the right atmospherics for jubilation in some Pakistani circles ['Wow, India is conceding its position on Kashmir …'].

But a careful look at these statements shows a desperate India cooking up a ruse

NIRUPAMA RAO: The India foreign secretary was apparently the first to be tasked with luring Pakistan into a photo-op in New York. She issued a misleading statementin Boston, US, saying India is ready to discuss ‘all outstanding issues’ with Pakistan ‘including Kashmir.’ Unfortunately, much of the Pakistani and world media ignored the remainder of her statement. Buried somewhere else in her media interaction was the line, “It is an internal affair because it (Kashmir) is an integral part of India.” So, is India discussing Kashmir or not? Ms. Rao’s next line explains it all: “The issue of Jammu & Kashmir comes up in our relationship with Pakistan and we’ve said very clearly, very confidently and very transparently that we are prepared to discuss all outstanding issues with Pakistan.” What India’s second most senior diplomat is saying is that ‘Kashmir does come up in our bilateral relationship’ with Pakistan in the form of the so-called cross-border terrorism and Pakistani meddling in Kashmir. The choice of words is careful not to indicate any concession to Pakistan.
S. M. KRISHNA: Her boss, the foreign minister, has reiterated over the weekend that Pakistan can’t force India to discuss Kashmir in future talks because his country won’t accept ‘preconditions’, which means another round of endless talks where India will keep delaying Kashmir while insisting on discussing nonissues such as trade and cultural exchanges.
S. M. KRISHNA: In a classic sign of Indian desperation, Mr. Krishna couldn’t wait a day to throw coldwater on the feel-good effect of his number two’s statement when he childishly advised Pakistanto ‘stay out of Kashmir’ and vacate ‘its side of Kashmir’ before ‘lecturing’ Indian on what to do in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
These statements underline how desperate India is this time on Kashmir.

If Pakistan goes full throttle now and demands international intervention to stop Indian state-sponsored Kashmir genocide, New Delhi can’t cry foul. It can’t say Pakistan is feeding the insurgency, not when thousands of Kashmiris have shown they want Indian occupiers out. Nor can India’s usual supporters in Washington and London cover up the clear signs of Indian genocide in Kashmir.

Pakistan and the Kashmiris have India by the tail this time. Whatever Islamabad does, it shouldn’t grant India a photo-opportunity so it could use it to demoralize Kashmiri demonstrators.

Held Kashmir: the agony goes on

By Bassam Javed

Ten weeks into Jammu & Kashmir’s surge of violence, the use of force against un-armed civilians continues unabated. This time the struggle for their rights through street protests has cost the peaceful movement over 60 dead, mainly Kashmiri youth in their teens and twenties, and hundreds of innocent injured.

The surge of violence in the Kashmiri movement with protesters chanting ‘Go India Go’ slogans commenced after teenager Tufail Mattoo’s brutal death at the hands of Indian security forces on June 11 this year. The movement through street protests just keeps picking up in intensity with each passing day and has been so fierce at times that security forces were forced to retreat.

Whatever the protestors are demanding in the streets today is nothing new and is absolutely the same agenda what their elders have been fighting to achieve through their life times. There is no deviation in the basic agenda of seeking their right of self determination.

The ferocity in the current uprising is amazing despite the fact that their leadership is confined to their residences by force and is not allowed to move around. They have not even been allowed to meet and sympathise with the families whose beloved ones have been killed by the Indian security forces. But India remains in a denial mode.

Initially, India had tried to give a turn to the current spate of violence by terming it as terrorism perpetrated from across the border, a popular outlet they find in Pakistan to cover their inabilities to either recognise the gravity of issues that plague their security or their failure to control the fallouts of these issues.

The anger on the streets of Indian held Kashmir today is a clear manifestation of decades of deprivation of their statehood and identity. From official counts till 4th of August, 872 stone throwing incidents caused injuries to 1,456 security men. Elsewhere nine police stations, police posts, a camp of services special operations group, two houses of political activists,

round 10 government vehicles, a train coach besides a railway station itself and 13 government office buildings have been destroyed as revenge for killing over 60 Kashmiris, mostly teenagers by security forces deployed in Kashmir. A police officer was quoted as having said: “They are taking over the country and we are to face their wrath. It is not a simple law and order problem.”

The fact that the Indian leadership always viewed the core issue of Kashmir as a security issue rather than a political one has made the people of Jammu and Kashmir robust in their demands. During the past 20 years, it has been recognized by India and Pakistan as the core issue that mars the security of the region.

Many a times the echoes of ‘out of the box’ solution gathered optimism but as always have been in the India-Pakistan context, that remain a far cry. Meanwhile, the Kashmir’s current wave of struggle driven by the valiant youth continues to claim innocent lives at the hands of Indian security forces.

WHAT HAVE WE DONE?

Who are the victors?

It will be hard to find another example in military history where the armed forces of a country were used to devastate its own people so mercilessly to serve the interest of a foreign power for so little in return.

Rustam Shah Mohmand

The devastation could not be more heartbreaking. From one end to the other, the whole tribal area presents the spectacle of a war zone. Houses blown up, villages decimated, infrastructure no more.

Add Dir, Buner and Swat to that. Vast swaths are in ruins in Maidan, in the Dir region. Whole villages in Buner have disappeared. Matta and the adjoining areas in Swat present a picture of a powerful cyclone having devastated the whole area.

Between Khar and Nawagai, in what once was a most fertile area, villages on both sides of the road have been razed to the ground.

Many of the returning IDPs of Bajaur and Dir could not determine where their villages had once stood, to say nothing of their homes. They had to make return journeys to their camps.

In Qaudahari, in the Safi area of Mohmand, the situation is no better. The wreckage of a war is everywhere, with houses and villages having ceased to exist.

Bara, in Khyber Agency, an area once administered by an Assistant Political Agent, presents the picture of a ghost town.

Orakzai, once a most peaceful area, is a battle zone where on, an average, 20 people get killed in aerial bombing everyday. With tens of thousands of people having left, life has come to a standstill there. The relentless punishment, indiscriminate and merciless, continues with no regard to its horrendous implications.

As in other tribal areas, there is no definitive figure of the number of those killed or wounded in Kurram. But who would care? The “natives” deserve this fate.

Likewise, life remains paralysed in both Waziristans. Institutions are shut, public services suspended. Mobile telephone services have been discontinued. Bombing by helicopter-gunships is commonplace. As a matter of fact, it’s surprising if, on a particular day, bombs are not dropped and shells not fired. As elsewhere, it is innocent civilians, including women and children, who bear the brunt. People are weary of burying the dead and treating the wounded.

Life has almost come to a stop across the tribal area, and parts of Malakand Dir.

Movements are restricted. Every three miles there is a check post where passengers are ordered to disembark, to be searched and interrogated, before they are allowed go onwards, with the procedure repeated at the next stop.

Commodities of daily need are scarce. In an ironic twist, people in Mohmand, Kurram and Wazirstan are dependent for things like vegetables and cooking oil that are brought on mules from Afghanistan across the border, rather than the other way around in more peaceful times.

Women and children are most traumatised. Their lives have been permanently and irreversibly damaged. People live in constant fear of the security forces personnel knocking on their doors taking away adult males for “interrogation.” Many of these have not returned.

The whole area is virtually barricaded. Entry and exit points are under strict watch and control.

Why have people who have lived peacefully for generations been subjected to such humiliation, as well as being killed in such large numbers? Could there be other options? Had other options even been explored? And why were fighter-bombers, helicopter-gunships and heavy artillery made weapons of choice? And why did otherwise peaceful tribesmen turn against the government?

Some soul-searching and introspection must be done. Have we accomplished what we set out to achieve? For example, have state institutions begun to function properly and have people even remotely begun to live a normal life?

The embattled tribal areas will never be the same again. The institutions could never be revived to the point where they were before 2003-04.

Our aligning ourselves with the so-called war on terror was a disaster. To pursue that policy with ever greater use of force, with scant regard to the human toll it exacts, is a continuing catastrophe.

In terms of peace, in terms of stability and in terms of institutions, who are the victors?