THE IGNORED REALITY

By: Ghalib Sultan
ZoneAsia-Pk

If there is democracy and people are the most important factor in a democracy then there is something seriously wrong.

There is a news story in Pakistan Today (11.1.12) about the travails of an ex soldier. This unfortunate man made the mistake of helping the police in thwarting a bomb attack on a shrine. In retaliation his son was kidnapped and delivered dead in a gunny bag when no one helped him. Then his other son was kidnapped and given such strong drugs that he died of blood cancer. No one helped him. Now his teenage daughter has been kidnapped since May 2011 and once again no law enforcing or investigative agency is willing to help him. The kidnappers have demanded a huge ransom. The family has hit rock bottom and dead end.

A few days ago a stampede after a musical concert caused the death of three young girls. The concert venue was over crowded with complete disregard for safety. Who is responsible for this tragedy?

Power outages and gas shut downs are causing unimaginable suffering to the common man. No one has an answer. Long lines of cars wait patiently for CNG at gas stations. Businesses are shutting down. Industry is closed. Unemployment is rampant. Trains run erratically if at all and the service is abominable. The national airline is a laughing stock. Poverty stalks the land. No one has any pride left-not in their work, not in themselves and not in the country.

The masses watch helplessly as trivia like the ‘memo’ and NRO take up all the time of the institutions that should be giving them governance, security and justice. No one watches the useless debates on TV—everyone is hooked on the plays even if their themes are depressing. Anything to escape reality.

Drone attacks have restarted with this years first one on January 10th– as have bomb blasts. The horrifying details of 10 soldiers mutilated, beheaded and thrown callously in a ravine did not even make it to the headlines. Bomb blasts are back with 30 killed in Jamrud in just one attack and several injured in other attacks. Surely these events are more important than the shenanigans of those jockeying for power or those trying to survive.

Democracy without the rule of law is chaos. The people matter more than anything else. The reality on the street cannot be ignored any longer. Its time to focus on real democracy and that means addressing the grievances of the people-the sooner this happens the better. The Arab Spring came when the people were driven to the street and were fed up of being ignored.

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?

Unpacking the governance debate

By: Raza Rumi

If the intent of the unregulated media and a recalcitrant establishment is to dismiss the government to achieve better governance then this is at best a delusional goal

Recent weeks have witnessed a supercilious debate on how the current government’s misgovernance is a potent reason to boot it out. Governance is about decisions, resources and management of public affairs. The sad reality is that Pakistan’s media now controls and spins the public discourse on these issues. The popular media never wanted this government to begin with. Since 2007, it sided with the ‘clean’ and morally correct lawyers’ movement that presented an alternative to the corrupt politicians and shunned the 2008 election. First, it vilified Benazir Bhutto for making a deal with the Generals on initiating a transition towards a power-sharing arrangement. This was a classic worldview of the urban middle class, which has never been a keen participant of the messy electoral politics that brings rural politicians with fake degrees at the helm of affairs.

The second critical moment was the election of the President, which sparked an unprecedented media trial with stories (mostly unsubstantiated) of Zardari’s corruption. There was a strong alliance between the local and the global media churning out a thousand stories highlighting his insanity, fallibility and venality. This happened despite the full confidence expressed by Zardari’s party and its allies. A rare federal consensus over the election of a President was undermined and the media perception intensified how all the crooks stand together to rob the country once again.

Now the third moment in the aftermath of the floods has arrived; and the high-pitched voices against the politicians have reached their peak. The charge-sheet is long but, in a nutshell, states that the feudal politicians were inept in handling the July-August 2010 disaster and harmed the poor to save their lands. This is a simplistic conclusion that has emerged without proper inquiry and mainly through anecdotes from the urban anchors visiting rural victims and interpreting their anguish as a condemnation of the politicos.

Discussions around regime change have strongly articulated the displeasure of the unelected institutions of the state on ‘governance’. The media has faithfully reported that the Army is unhappy about the corrupt ministers still in office and the looming economic crisis. The Judiciary is perturbed, as its judgement on NRO remains partially unimplemented and key appointments reek of illegality. The perennial power-seeker class of politicians has started to reconfigure the political landscape while fringe parties like Imran Khan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf and the right wing Jamaat-e-Islami want to seize this opportunity for short term gains. The ever-ready crop of technocrats is also getting anxious due to the anonymous contacts being made by the invisible elements of the state.

This display of crass opportunism by Pakistan’s traditional elites is nothing new. Since 1947 (including that fateful year), they have cared little for the ordinary citizens. But the alarming aspect of our present dilemma is the way Pakistan’s much-touted free media has become an instrument in spurring political instability. The endemic problem with Pakistan’s governance is that regardless of the government in power, the state (if we were to include all the dominant classes in the wider definition) remains disconnected and disengaged with the citizens. What is more worrying is that the state no longer is a monolith as it has delegated the state’s monopoly powers to faith-based militant groups which are ready to exploit its increasing inability to ‘govern’.

With 20 million people still struggling to reclaim their livelihoods, entitlements (such as land), shelter and security, Pakistan’s establishment and its politicians are all but willing to do anything about it. It is therefore problematic to see a legitimately elected government preparing a summary on NRO cases for 34 out of 8,000 beneficiaries and the Supreme Court chiding it like an accused party. Or, to read about the panicky meetings of the PPP while the latter should be strategising about re-enacting the NDMA legislation or preparing a resource mobilisation strategy to rehabilitate the flood victims and reconstruct the damaged infrastructure.

Equally disturbing is to witness the saga of Courts in effect suspending new Constitutional provisions while they are expressly not mandated to do that; and placing abstract notions of people’s will above the Constitution. In a similar vein, the Army has a separate fund for flood relief and the elected Public Accounts Committee cannot be given the details of how and why a Rs 5 billion supplementary grant was given to the country’s premier intelligence agency.

The argument on misgovernance by a coalition government is bogus when unelected institutions of the state are unaccountable, non-transparent and unwilling to accept the oversight of public representatives. Until the Army budgets can be audited, and judges are appointed through parliamentary commissions and the bureaucracy is answerable to legislature, we will continue to swirl in a vicious cycle of political instability.

If the intent of the unregulated media and a recalcitrant establishment is to dismiss the government to achieve better governance, then this is at best a delusional goal. Pakistan cannot afford another upheaval and the recent signals by the Army that it wants stability are welcome. But then Pakistan is an unpredictable polity with a growing constituency for suicide missions. Strange times, indeed.

Waiting for anarchy?

By: Ikram Sehgal

In an attempt to calm the furore raised by his “asking for martial law,” MQM chief Altaf Hussain said: “If my speech is reviewed thoroughly, nowhere have I demanded the imposition of martial law in the country.” He was commenting on his asking “patriotic generals to adopt some line of action on the pattern of martial laws to change the fate of the country. The army should effect change only under the writ of the Supreme Court, invoking Article 190 of the Constitution.” He said he was “advocating a new setup because the present political system will never change even if repeated elections are held under the present leadership. The Bangladeshi model could be followed with some changes in accordance with the specific conditions in Pakistan.”

The deep frustration with his coalition partners who abound with feudals was evident. “The new government should seize all the lands of the corrupt landlords who diverted the floodwater to save their own lands. These people should be hanged.” Strong stuff indeed! The most vocal critics of his asking for a martial law were dismissed as themselves (meaning, specifically, Mian Nawaz Sharif and the PML-N) being “products of martial law.”

Nobody in his right mind wants a martial law, but what is there to stop the systematic breakdown of the rule of law in the country? While the country is not yet in a state of anarchy, the federal government certainly seems to be. As time goes by, damage-control and recovery of stable governance in a rapidly deteriorating situation will be much harder. One can only pick up the pieces if there are any pieces left to pick up. This country may well descend into anarchy while staying true to the concept of the democracy that exists today. While we are not a failed state, our existence as a state may be in question.

The unenthusiastic response from inside and outside the country to the government’s requests for flood-relief aid exposes the government’s trust deficit. However, slow to respond initially, both the international community and the Pakistani public are showing their generosity through donations to private NGOs like the Eidhi and MKR Foundations, UN agencies like the IOM, UNHCR and WEF, or the Pakistani army. Why is Kayani asking businessmen and others across the country to send family packs through the army’s relief teams? Does he know something about the government’s credibility that we don’t? This trust deficit has reached every walk of life.

Cricket is an opiate for the intelligentsia and the masses alike in Pakistan (as it is in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh). Consider the nationwide shock when it was found that our teenage hero, Mohammad Amir, stands accused (with others) of “spot-fixing.” Many actually shed tears over this.

The Sialkot lynching incident shows what happens when an aroused public becomes a mob and the police become bystanders. The prevailing mass feeling is that those at the helm of affairs can get away with anything, and that the Supreme Court and army are simply bystanders. Flouting the rule of law–indeed, the sheer contempt for it–has been in place for five decades. The present government has simply institutionalised this, and is carrying it out in a more brazen fashion than earlier rulers, military dictators included.

Because of the government’s defiance of it, the Supreme Court is unable to get its judgments enforced. They are implemented only when the court seriously so desires; for example, the extension given to the 32 additional judges of the provincial high courts to prevent a judicial collapse in the provinces. Whether it is the Swiss case, the NRO, the Steel Mills scam, the fake-degree holders’ scandal, the government has defiantly avoided executive action. When the Supreme Court instructed that Narcotics Secretary Tariq Khosa should investigate the Bank of Punjab case, the government flatly refused to comply. With their authority and integrity repeatedly questioned, even openly attacked, what about the more blatant contempt of the Supreme Court by various functionaries?

All the good work done by the NAB has been made infructuous. Evidence has openly been tampered with, and case after case in accountability courts has been withdrawn on flimsy grounds. The most shameful act was using Nazi-like strong-arm tactics to get Geo off the air. Even in the face of outright perjury, the Supreme Court had some difficulty enforcing its writ to get Geo transmissions resumed. What about the test case of Joint Secretary Nasreen Pervaiz–the merciless persecution of an honest and upright female civil servant restored by a Supreme Court judgment but which the Election Commission refuses to honour?

The application of the “doctrine of necessity” goes wrong when those who apply it tend to forget that their role is limited, to support governance by technocrats only for a short period and not become part of it. Becoming part of the wrong they came to correct, they force-multiply the wrongs into a catastrophe, like Musharraf eventually did. Enforcing “the Bangladesh model” in 2007, with the full support of the Supreme Court, Gen Moeen, the COAS of the Bangladeshi army, set a wonderful precedence when he returned the army to barracks in early 2009, subsequently retiring after a few months. Could any court in the world prosecute Gen Moeen or any of his associates for pre-empting civil war and anarchy facing the country? What is the failsafe line in Pakistan? It would be useful to read up on the concept of “Clear and Present Danger” enunciated by one of the most eminent jurists of his time, US judge Oliver Wendell Holmes. What happens if the public confidence in the Supreme Court erodes?

Collapse of faith in the superior judiciary will hasten the country’s descent into anarchy. With its hands full, the army may not be able to control the situation without mass bloodshed. That will be fatal for the country and all of us who subscribe to civilised society, and that is exactly what the militants want: the breakdown of the fabric that holds Pakistani society together.

he “doctrine of necessity” then begins to sound palatable despite the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Quite a number in parliament possess fake degrees. Why are the political parties trying to protect them? What credibility does that give to the political process and to parliament? Madame de Stael said of Napoleon’s coup d’etat: “As soon as the moral power of the national representation was destroyed, a legislative body, whatever it might be, meant no more to the military than a crowd of five hundred men, less vigorous and disciplined than a battalion of the same number.”

The army has no business running the government (or businesses, either, for that matter), but it face’s a Hobson’s choice. Will it remain a bystander and let “democracy” run the country out of existence? There is a joke in Western circles that countries have armies but “the Pakistani army has a country.” Unless the Supreme Court can get its judgments enforced, the day may well come when it will be too late and this army finds itself without a country.

NAB asks Swiss govt to reopen cases against Zardari

Letters sent to Federal Office of Justice Switzerland and Geneva attorney; NAB tells SC action being taken against Qayyum

By Sohail Khan

ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that letters had been dispatched to the Swiss authorities for the re-opening of cases against President Asif Ali Zardari.

The apex court on Tuesday gave 24-hour deadline to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to implement its order of December 16, 2009 on infamous National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO).

Naveed Ahsan, Chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB) told a seven-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry that in compliance with the court order, they had transmitted letters to Federal Office of Justice Switzerland and Attorney of Geneva for re-opening of money laundering cases against President Asif Ali Zardari.

The bench was hearing a suo moto notice on non-implementation of December 16, 2009 verdict, declaring NRO as repugnant to various provisions of the constitution. Other members of the bench included Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Tariq Parvez, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday.

The NAB chief while placing on record of the court his statement submitted that they had requested the Swiss authorities to re-open cases against President Asif Ali Zardari in compliance with the court order of December 16, 2009.

The NAB informed the court that action against former Attorney General Malik Muhammad Qayyum was being taken and the NAB had written to the Law Ministry for its opinion in this regard.

The court was further informed that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had been requested to extend its assistance to the NAB for the process of dealing the cases with the Swiss authorities.

According to NAB report, 158 cases in high courts and 16 in Supreme Court have been revived after the apex court’s ruling on the NRO. The NAB officials told the court that 21 inquiries, which were halted under the NRO, have been resumed and sentences of 10 convicts have been restored.

During the course of the proceedings, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday asked the NAB officials why those convicts had not yet been sent to jail whose sentences had been restored. He asked what the status of cases was against President Zardari in Spain. Deputy Attorney General Shah Khawar, however, told the court that no action was taken from here against those cases in Spain.

Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan also presented a reply by Secretary Law about implementation of the NRO verdict. The NAB report said that in compliance with the court orders, show cause notice had been issued to prosecutor general Dr Danishwar Malik and the inquiry would be initiated against him on April 18 at the accountability court for his removal.

The AG informed the court that the number of accountability courts would be increased in Punjab and Islamabad whereas the number of courts in other three provinces was satisfactory.

He further submitted that notification for additional accountability courts would be issued today (Wednesday). He said only Punjab had requested for additional accountability courts in Multan.

He said a reference against former Attorney General Malik Qayyum would also be sent to the NAB. The court directed the attorney general to make a categorical statement about implementation of the NRO verdict on behalf of the government and submit before the court today (Thursday).

The court also gave copies of the reports submitted by NAB and Law Ministry to the attorney general and asked him to study them and explain the measures taken in the report in detail to the court on Thursday (today). The court then asked the NAB chairman and deputy chairman that their presence in the court from tomorrow (Thursday) was not mandatory, however, the court might call them, if needed.

Immunity issue explodes after CJ’s remarks

By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on Tuesday gave the clearest hint that immunity to President Asif Ali Zardari under Article 248 of the Constitution was still an undecided issue and any one seeking it would have to come to the Supreme Court for a judgment.

The issue of immunity was raised by NAB Chairman Navid Ahsan in the Supreme Court while appearing in the Ahmed Riaz Sheikh case and stated that as the president enjoyed immunity, some decisions of the Supreme Court on the NRO could not be implemented so far.

But the chief justice snubbed the NAB chairman, asking him why he was pleading the case of the government or the president and said: “No one has come to us so far to get a verdict on whether any one enjoys immunity.”

The exchange on the immunity issue unleashed a storm in the media and almost every TV channel had judicial and legal experts discussing the pros and cons of the CJ remarks, some speculating whether the Presidency and the chief justice were heading for a collision course, which might shake up the entire system.

But the sudden eruption of the immunity issue also confirmed reports and analysis published by The News and Jang on January 20, 2010, which stated that the NRO judgment did not recognise any immunity for any of the NRO beneficiaries, including President Asif Ali Zardari. If he considers himself to be immune from being proceeded against, he will have to claim it before the court.

The apex court left no doubt on Tuesday that it was the court that would decide whether the president should be given immunity or not. When this question came before the Supreme Court last time, as the then president General Pervez Musharraf claimed constitutional immunity, the SC had denied him. The NRO judgment subtly rejected this extraordinary treatment to an individual or a group of persons by referring to the principle of equality (Musawa’at) as enshrined in the teachings of Islam.

On Tuesday, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry responded to Chairman NAB Navid Ahsan’s plea about the presidential immunity under Article 248, but it was Justice Ramday-led 13-member bench, which had refused to allow this immunity to the then president General Musharraf in the chief justice suspension case decided on July 20, 2007.

The Supreme Court’s detailed judgment on the NRO was released to the media on the evening of Feb 19, 2010. Next day, on Feb 20, the main story in The News and Jang clearly reported: “The Supreme Court’s detailed judgment on the NRO has deprived President Asif Ali Zardari of the immunity that he was supposed to have enjoyed. Now, the president will have to persuade the court if he seeks immunity. The judgment issued on Tuesday does not discuss President Asif Ali Zardari, but like other accused all his corruption cases, both within Pakistan and outside, stand reopened.

Now the onus would be on the president and his legal eagles to argue before the court to prove that Zardari enjoys legal or constitutional “immunity” or “exemption”, so he could not be tried under any criminal offence during his term of office.

Although the government, the PPP leadership and their sympathisers or promoters in the media criticised the Jang Group for this interpretation of the NRO judgment, the Supreme Court judgment plainly talked about the revival of the pre-Oct 2007 situation without any exception and exemption, which was a clear indication that no immunity was given to anyone in the NRO verdict.

The judgment ordered the reopening of “all” the cases, both within Pakistan and outside, closed under the NRO besides directing the NAB and other authorities to freeze the assets of all concerned as was the position on Oct 5, 2007.”

Pakistan’s security environments

By: Brig. Asif Haroon Raja (Retd)

In the aftermath of 1971 Indo-Pak war, many earth shaking geo-political events took place at international and regional levels. India emerged as a major military and nuclear power in the region and Indo-Soviet nexus adopted an active policy to dominate Indian Ocean. Afghanistan became more belligerent and started to propagate Pakhtunistan stunt aggressively. Populist leader Mujibur Rehman who became the first head of state of newly carved secular Bangladesh was assassinated along with his family members in 1974. Gen Ziaur Rahman took over and declared Bangladesh as an Islamic Republic state. USA had to beat a retreat from Vietnam after fighting and massacring Vietnamese for over a decade.

Islamic revolution in Iran ousted Shah of Iran and brought in Imam Khomenei in February March 1979 which impacted the Muslim world and caused consternation to both the super powers. While USA lost an important ally whom it was aspiring to make it into the Persian Gulf policeman, and also suffered the trauma of American hostages in Tehran, Moscow felt concerned for its Muslim Republics of Central Asia.

In December 1979, Soviet troops barged into Afghanistan at the invitation of Parcham Party. In their bid to Sovietise Afghanistan, Soviets unleashed a reign of terror against the Afghan people and installed a puppet regime of their choice at Kabul. Over eight million Afghans were rendered homeless. Pakistan got sucked into Afghan imbroglio when 5 million Afghan refugees trekked into Pakistan and heavily burdened the already dwindling economy. Realising that the big bear would prowl forward in search of warm waters, Pakistan decided to stand up to the challenge. It took the US and other western countries one and a half years to make up their minds and to extend full support to proxy war in close cooperation with Pakistan.

Jihadis were induced by CIA from all over the world, particularly from Middle East and brought to Pakistan which was converted into main base for launching biggest ever covert operations in concert with ISI against Soviet occupied Afghanistan in 1981. In addition to setting up training camps, religious madrassas were lavishly funded, provided arms and ammunition and mandated to motivate and train the youth to wage Jihad in Afghanistan against godless Soviet troops. Mujahideen were pampered and their exploits profusely lauded and projected as holy warriors. Jihad was funded by CIA with the help of drug trade at a large scale.

Notwithstanding ruthless massacre of the Muslim fighters by military machine of USSR, fresh crop of fighters were continuously pushed into the furnace of Afghanistan. For the downtrodden, mostly sustained by madrassas funded by philanthropists and affluent class, which provided them free lodging, food and religious education, it was a new occupation which apart from material and religious benefits had an element of adventure. It gave them a sense of satisfaction and a kick that they were up against a super power and another superpower was at their back. They had a just cause and a base to operate from; hence recruitment never dried irrespective of mass scale casualties.

Pakistan acting as the frontline state had to pay a very heavy price for fighting proxy war. It was subjected to sabotage and subversion by KGB-KHAD-RAW combine together with India-Afghan supported Al-Zulfiqar terrorist outfit. High speed war kept the rulers deeply immersed in trying to deal with threat of Soviet-Afghan forces from our western border, Indian threat from eastern border and internal threat posed by Al-Zulfiqar and RAW agents.

Victory over Soviet forces in 1988 by rag tag Afghan freedom fighters became a genuine cause of celebration. However, death of Gen Zia and senior army officers in a C-130 plane crash in August 1988, which was an act of sabotage, marred the joys. His sudden departure created a vacuum which mercifully got filled up through general elections in November 1988 and PPP led government under Benazir Bhutto coming into power.

Afghan cauldron ultimately proved to be the graveyard of Soviet Union and in 1991 it collapsed from within under the weight of economic disorders. Six Central Asian states and several Latvian states became independent and war of independence erupted in Chechnya. Yugoslavia fragmented into six states because of extreme corruption and weak leadership while Eastern Europe got reabsorbed in Western Europe. Fragmentation of Soviet Empire led to demise of communism and put an end to cold war. In Germany, Berlin wall of belligerence fell and united the two Germanys. These events paved the way for creation of European Union. Much of the world embraced market capitalism and the US under its doctrine of New World Order started to convert the world into a global village.

When the time came for Afghan Mujahideen and Pakistan to get rewarded for the huge sacrifices rendered and for paving the way for USA to emerge as sole super power, USA decided to depart abruptly from this region at a time when its assistance was needed the most. Instead of rewarding, Pakistan was subjected to harsh sanctions under infamous Pressler Amendment in October 1990 due to nuclear factor. It was natural for all Pakistanis to feel deeply vexed and frustrated. To rub salt in their wounds, the US decided to embrace India that had throughout opposed US policies in the region tooth and nail and had sat in the lap of Soviet Union.

The Middle East remained in turmoil due to belligerence of Israel, unsettled Palestinian issue and defiance of PLO under Yasser Arafat. Israel continued to persecute the Palestinians and refused to hand back territories it had captured in 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Its high handed policies and repeated provocations against its neighbours triggered 1973 Arab-Israel war. Breach of unassailable Barlev line across Suez Canal by Egyptian troops became a cause of huge embarrassment for Israel and ultimately led to signing of Camp David peace accord between Israel and Egypt. Peace with Israel resulted in isolation of Egypt among Arab countries.

Saddam Hussein who took over as president of Iraq in 1979 started dreaming of becoming the leader of Arab world. Taking advantage of fluid state of Islamic revolution in Iran and egged on by Washington and London, Iraq invaded Iran in October 1980 to settle Shatt el Arab dispute but got bogged down for the next eight years without achieving any results. The war gave an opportunity to Israel to destroy Iraqi nuclear plant at Osirak in 1983. Iran on the other hand not only succeeded in beating back the aggressor but also completed its cycle of revolution despite being completely isolated. Saddam fell from grace of USA when he prodded by Washington invaded Kuwait in August 1990. It gave an excuse to the US and its western allies to launch 1st Gulf War against Iraq in 1991 and cripple its forces as well as its economy; thus paving the way for Israel to emerge as unchallenged regional power.

In India, several separatist and insurgent movements erupted in number of Indian states and Sikhs in Punjab became assertive. Indian ruthless military operation Blue Star against Sikhs holiest shrine in Amritsar called Golden Temple (3-6 June 1984) was ransacked and almost all its inmates including women and children gunned down. This barbaric act led to assassination of PM Indira Gandhi at the hands of two Sikh bodyguards on 31 October that year which triggered a mad Hindu onslaught against Sikhs mercilessly killing thousands. Most were torched alive and their houses and shops burnt. These gruesome events sparked Khalistan movement demanding their own state in Punjab including Punjabi speaking areas of Rajasthan, Harayana and Himachal Pradesh with Chandigarh as the capital. Sikh movement kept raging for years till it was brutally crushed during Rajiv Gandhi regime in 1989 but its embers could not be extinguished. Over 3.2 million Sikhs have been killed in several genocides. Punjab has been turned into an open jail for Sikhs. Dr. Awatar Singh in exile and many of his Sikh compatriots have kept the Khalistan movement alive.

While India’s hands were full in dealing with Sikh insurgents, eruption of armed freedom movement in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) in 1989 in the wake of rigged state elections came as a bolt from the blue. India pumped in huge number of security forces to quash the movement but when India failed to make any headway it started blaming Pakistan for abetting the freedom fighters. Over seven lacs Indian security forces battled few thousand armed freedom fighters and unleashed a reign of terror that paled Halaku Khan’s atrocities. More than 100,000 Kashmiris have been martyred and rape and torture is used as weapons of war. The civilised world has taken little notice of worst human rights violations.

Indo-US relations warmed up from 1991 onwards and gradually transformed into strategic partnership. Taking advantage of soured Pak-US relations, India stepped up its propaganda campaign to convince Washington to declare Pakistan a terrorist state. Pakistan was also accused of manufacturing an Islamic bomb. Bill Clinton Administration laid the foundation of Indo-US strategic alignment which blossomed in March 2000. While USA got busy in reintegrating Europe, our democratic era got locked up in PPP-PML-N deadly clash, each trying to down the other thereby giving lethal blows to democracy.

Jihadis that had taken part in Afghan Jihad having been refused re-entry into their respective countries settled down either in Afghanistan or in FATA since they had developed deep rooted comradeship with people of the two regions. American supplied armaments together with huge arms dumps left behind by withdrawing Soviet forces were taken over by warring factions of Mujahideen and soon war ravaged Afghanistan got sunk in power tussle resulting in internecine war of attrition which raged till 1995. Poppy growing and arms smuggling became sources of income.

Amidst infighting, Taliban emerged as a new force in 1994 and within a span of two years they captured Kabul and restored semblance of order by reigning in warlords, eliminating social vices through imposition of Sharia. Pakistan recognised Taliban regime and soon the two developed strong and fraternal relations.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Pakistan became a transit camp for drug and arms smuggling from Afghanistan which had debilitating effects on its society. Sectarian war that started to simmer in Pakistan after Islamic revolution in Iran got heated up during the nineties. Several extremist parties like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Sahaba, Sipah-e-Muhammad, Jaish-e-Muhammad cropped up and attacks on mosques and Imambarghs became common. Foreign powers added fuel to sectarian war. Fallout of Afghan war together with Intifada in Palestine and eruption of freedom struggle by Kashmiris in IHK contributed towards militarization of Pakistani society. Large numbers of jihadi groups both in IHK and in Azad Kashmir surfaced to give boost to Kashmir freedom movement.

RAW was assigned to work upon Sindh on the pattern of erstwhile East Pakistan. It made deep inroads in rural Sindh where nationalist leaders were cultivated and idea of Sindhudesh germinated. Ethnic war in Sindh peaked during late 1980s and throughout 1990s because of rural-urban antagonism and MQM’s fascism to make Karachi its fiefdom. Both Nawaz and Benazir during their respective stints in power ordered operations against MQM in 1992 and 1995 to bridle its militancy but failed. Onus of checkmating ill-effects of Afghan war rested on elected regimes from November 1988 to 1999, which were free of pressures of proxy war, and not that of Zia regime that was deeply involved in the war against next door super power. However due to infighting by two mainstream political parties and premature fall of regimes after every two to three years kept Pakistan politically unstable and economically weak and debt ridden. These factors together with increasing poverty, rising inflation, spiralling price hike and growing unemployment heightened violence.

Conduct of nuclear tests by India in May 1998 and tit for tat response by Pakistan nuclearised South Asia and turned it into a flashpoint but mellowed down jingoism of Indian BJP leaders and prompted Indian PM Vajpayee to undertake a bus ride to Pakistan in February 1999. He was the first Indian leader to acknowledge Kashmir as an unresolved dispute. He visited Minar-e-Pakistan Lahore in a bid to dispel widely held perception that India had not reconciled to the existence of Pakistan. High hopes of possible resolution of Kashmir issue and two neighbours living peacefully were dashed with the onset of Kargil conflict triggered by the then Army chief Gen Musharraf without taking Nawaz government into confidence. The conflict which raged intensely for ten weeks reenergised Indo-Pak antagonism. US intervention defused the explosive situation which had all the potential of getting converted into full scale war with nuclear overtones. However, Kargil paved the way for downfall of heavy mandate Nawaz regime on 12 October 1999 and takeover by Gen Musharraf.

Internationally, Pakistan almost became a Pariah state as was evident from visit of Bill Clinton to India and Pakistan in March 2000 when he doled out huge economic and defence endowments to India and laid the foundation of Indo-US strategic alignment but cold shouldered Pakistan. The military regime under Musharraf took off well under its much publicised seven point agenda and produced impressive economic results. But like his predecessors, it did not take long before he lost direction and adopted self serving policies to prolong his rule.

9/11 transformed the global geo-politics which impacted the Muslim world in particular. Gen Musharraf was castigated for accepting all the seven demands of USA on a phone call and taking a u turn on Afghanistan and agreeing to make Pakistan the frontline state to fight US war on terror at his own and that too without seeking benefits matching what all he surrendered. Although Pakistan gained economic benefits but those proved illusory. Fighting US war on terror had debilitating impact on Pakistan’s social, political and economic life. As against $10.5 billion US aid, Pakistan lost over $35 billion. Micro-management of Pakistan’s domestic affairs by intrusive USA resulted in gradual erosion of sovereignty of Pakistan.

Pakistan’s security compulsions came in conflict with the new Bush Doctrine to see the stability of West Asia and South Asia hegemonised by Israel and India respectively. There was a growing Indo-US axis to complement US-Israeli axis. 9/11 came as a blessing in disguise for India since it helped India achieve what it could never have in normal course. It regained entry in Afghanistan and speedily expanded its influence to be able to encircle Pakistan. India got closer to Iran and China. New rules on global terrorism framed by USA and doctrine of pre-emption and shock and awe conceived by George W. Bush led neo-cons helped India to convert Kashmir freedom struggle into terrorism and to brand Pakistan as an abettor of cross border terrorism and a nuclear proliferating country.

Indo-US-Israeli-British-Afghanistan nexus was formed in Kabul in December 2001 after the occupation of Afghanistan and overthrow of Taliban regime and its replacement with US proxy regime led by Hamid Karzai. Besides other regional objectives, the nexus aimed at destabilizing, denuclearizing and de-Islamising Pakistan and turning it into a vassal state of India so as to accomplish its strategic goals. Since sinister objectives were to be achieved under the garb of friendship, USA facilitated Indo-Pak peace treaty in January 2004. India took full advantage of hypocritical composite dialogue to take the steam out of Kashmir freedom struggle and to quietly launch cultural invasion from the east and covert operations from Afghan soil as well as Iran against Pakistan without giving anything in return.

Induction of Army in South Waziristan in 2002 at the behest of Washington and launching of military operations made the militant tribesmen turn their guns inwards because of which the flames of militancy engulfed whole of FATA, greater part of NWFP and even entered Punjab. Balochistan was also lit up by sowing seeds of separatism among the Baloch. Pak Army thus got engaged in fighting its own people and both sides started to bleed each other as a result of which centre of gravity of terrorism shifted from Afghanistan to Pakistan.

Apart from unleashing massive covert operations to foment unrest in Balochistan, FATA and other parts of NWFP, the band of five unleashed sustained vilification campaign against Pakistan to undermine its premier institutions and weaken it from within. Stories of balkanization or breakup of Pakistan were frequently circulated. Maximum pressure was exerted on nuclear program on the plea of its vulnerability and its likelihood of falling in wrong hands.

Musharraf’s popularity graph began to plummet rapidly after his unwise decision to sack chief justice Iftikhar in March 2007, his unwarranted support to MQM for its gory role on 12 May and ill-planned Lal Masjid operation in July. His skewed concept of enlightened moderation to show soft face of Pakistan promoted ultra liberalism which in turn bred religious extremism. These events together with triggering of suicide bombings and lawyers movement shrunk his manoeuvring space and forced him to strike a power sharing deal with Benazir in July 2007. He later issued an unholy NRO on 5 October in return for getting elected for second term.

When the lawyer movement duly joined by civil society started to choke him he was left with no choice but to impose emergency in November 2007 which instead of strengthening him further weakened him. He was thus impelled to shed his hat of army chief and hand over the baton to Gen Ashfaq Kayani and also to announce elections. Murder of Benazir on 27 December was a watershed in the history of Pakistan which made the overall situation volatile and forced Musharraf to advance the election date from 8 January 2008 to 18 February. Her sudden departure paved the way for Zardari to come on the centre stage and become PPP co-chairperson. Much against his and his patrons in Washington hopes of a dream team comprising PPP, PML-Q, MQM coming to power, PML-N upset the plan. PML-Q got consigned to opposition ranks while PML-N formed coalition governments in the centre and in Punjab. PPP-PML-N honey moon lasted for few months because of Nawaz’s serious differences with wavering Zardari who did not stick to his pledge of restoring sacked judges.

Fearing impeachment, Musharraf thought it wise to abdicate in August and thus paved the way for Zardari to occupy his seat. It didn’t take long for Zardari to lose his popularity and credibility owing to his lackadaisical approach, corruption scandals and lack of governance. Instead of making the parliament supreme and abiding by charter of democracy, Zardari chose to arrogate all powers and rendered Gilani led parliament into a rubber stamp. Cronyism, nepotism and corruption have become the hallmark of the democratic government. Load shedding, gas shortage, and acute shortage of essential commodities together with back breaking price spiral have made the lives of the poor and salaried class difficult.

The people have got disillusioned with the democratic government since it has not brought any change in the reviled policies of Musharraf led regime nor given them any relief. New rulers have become more subservient to American dictates. The US influence in Pakistan’s affairs has become too intrusive. War on terror supported by foreign powers based in Kabul has become more menacing. Despite launching series of military operations in NWFP, Malakand Division, Swat, Darra and several agencies of FATA starting June 2008, ‘do more’ mantra is sung by US officials unabatedly. Encouraged by USA, India has adopted an uncompromising and belligerent posture. In its bid to browbeat Pakistan, apart from launching covert operations in Balochistan and FATA at big scale, it is resorting to water terrorism to turn Pakistan’s agriculture lands into wasteland.

Two years of PPP led government has witnessed high spate of suicide and terrorist attacks and drone attacks causing colossal human and material losses. Despite unanimous resolution of parliament and repeated protests to stop this grisly practice, CIA operated drones continue to strike suspected targets in Waziristan in which 98% innocent civilians die. US dictated war on terror which has now become our war has had debilitating impact on Pakistan’s social, political and economic life. Had the Army not turned the tide of terrorism in battles of Swat, South Waziristan and Bajaur, by now situation might have gone from bad to worse. This war will continue to rage as long as US-NATO troops remain in Afghanistan and Indian perverse influence prevails.

Like Zardari, Obama who had promised change is also a disappointment both for the Americans and the Muslim world. Instead of rectifying the wrongs of his predecessor, he is reinforcing failure in Afghanistan by sending additional troops under the vain hope of turning the tide which has gone in favour of Afghan Taliban. Unless the US corrects its course, it will become exceedingly difficult for US-NATO troops to get out of Afghan quagmire with honour. Grant of civil nuclear and defence deals to India by George Bush had disturbed the regional military and nuclear balance which has not been so far corrected by Obama. Under Indian pressure he has backtracked from his commitment to help find an amicable solution to Kashmir dispute. He has so far taken no step towards resolution of Palestine issue. Unresolved issues of Kashmir and Palestine and unjust policies of USA, Israel and India have bred extremism and terrorism.

While the US and western world are quiet over these burning issues, the world at large have become seized with Afghanistan and have arrived at a conclusion that without taking Taliban on board Afghan imbroglio cannot be solved. London conference attended by representatives of 70 countries have endorsed the idea of reconciling with Taliban who till recent were treated as outcasts. It is in this context that Pakistan has figured in US calculus which has been constantly distrusted, maligned and oppressed. This change in thinking has taken place because the US has finally realized that it can neither win the war on terror nor can sustain it because of fast melting economy, declining morale of US-NATO troops and growing home pressure to bring back troops. While the US has become debt ridden, economy of its major foe China has up surged and Russia has become militarily and economically assertive. While North Korea and Iran remain in aggressive mood, Arabian Peninsula has begun to simmer, Iraq is turbulent, large numbers of Latin America states have become rebellious and Al-Qaeda is uncontrollable.

Israel and India, so-called strategic allies of USA are chiefly responsible for its misfortunes but America finds itself utterly helpless. Both are devising plots how to prolong the stay of ISAF or as a minimum, make Washington agree to hand over the baton to India. Outcome of military operations launched in Afghanistan during 2010 will decide the future course of USA. Unless the US manages to depart from Afghanistan with grace, it will not be able to retain its global leadership. This is possible if the US trusts Pakistan and not India.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence and security analyst.

Cold Start: Indian Threat to Pakistan & China

By Farzana Shah

In 2005 India announced a new military doctrine called Start Cold mainly targeting Pakistan as its potential enemy. In November 2009, Indian army chief made a statement that there is a possibility of a limited war between Pakistan and India in a nuclear overhang. In December 2009, Indian chief announced that India is ready to take on both Pakistan and China in a ‘two front war’ simultaneously. These statements spurred a quick reaction in Pakistani media and military establishment.

Indian statements

Indian army chief statement came in a closed door seminar in Shimla based military academy on five year review of its military doctrine and operational preparedness. Full details of the Indian chief speech are not known but what is released to media can be summarized as under;

1. India is in position to mobilize its forces so that they can move into enemy territory within 96 hours to execute its Cold Start military doctrine.

2. India is now ready to take on Pakistan and China both in a “two front war” in a nuclear over hang.

3. India is going to enhance its “strategic reach and out-of-area capabilities” to protect its interests from Malacca strait to Persian Gulf.

4. To achieve above mentioned goals India would attain “operational synergy” between the three services

5. Countering “both military and non-military facets of asymmetric and sub-conventional threats.”

Indian army chief’s statements met with prompt reply from Pakistani military top brass. “Proponents of conventional application of military forces, in a nuclear overhang, are charting an adventurous and dangerous path, the consequences of which could be both unintended and uncontrollable,” said General Kiyani, CoAS Pakistan army. The next day Chairman joint Chief of Staff General Tariq Majeed responded to two front war doctrine in these words, “Leave alone China, General Deepak Kapoor knows very well what the Indian Army cannot and the Pakistan Army can pull off militarily”. He said the Indian Army chief “could not be so outlandish in strategic postulations to fix India on a self-destruct mechanism”.

Although Pakistan army made it clear that it is alive to the threats faced by the nation and recent history has proved that despite its numerical advantage and bigger economy, India was not able to initiate a war against Pakistan. It is important to look at drivers behind these statements by Indian army chief and how come this time Indian military establishment is so confident about their preparedness to take not only Pakistan but also China in a future war whereas in a previous stand off just 8 years ago the same Indian army could not fire a single bullet?

First it would be prudent to seek why these statements by Indian army chief came at this point of the time.

Indian army chief’s statements came when there are lots of things taking place in Pakistan’s internal politics at a rapid pace.

There is a critical political turmoil in the country especially after the Supreme Court of Pakistan’s decision on controversial NRO case. Though no final judgment has been issued but it seems that a large number of government members and ministers would be disqualified as their legitimacy for an elected parliamentarian would nullified once the final decision is announced and these members and ministers would have to leave their seats and criminal cases against them would be reopen in the courts. The danger of disqualification is not limited to ministers but president of Pakistan is also endangered by this decision of SC. If the court decided that President Zardari must come to court to clear allegation of corruption against him this would create another political crisis in the country where law and order situation is already very fragile due to war on terror.

Law and order situation in Pakistan has turned worst in year 2009 due to suicide attacks throughout the country. At the beginning of 2010, situation in previously the calm Karachi city has also turned worrisome regarding law and order. The city witnessed worst kind of riots and arson in history during last three weeks.

Militarily Pakistan army is stretched from Khyber to Karachi, now on both Eastern and Western borders. Pakistan army currently is combating TTP in South Waziristan after taking back Malakand division. According to recent news, Pakistan army has sealed roads to Orakzai agency before launching a full fledge operation there as well.

Recently a group of US senators visited Pakistan and had meetings with top brass of Pakistan army during their visit. It was also indicated by some senators that Pakistan army soon would launch an operation in North Waziristan as well. This will stretch Pakistan army further along with Afghan border. Active part of ‘Operation Rah-i-Rast’ in Swat/Malakand is over though but still Pakistan army units are there as civilian forces, and are not ready to take control of the whole region. Army and the provincial government are building community police setup there, but it would take some time to get control.

Pakistan armed forces are undergoing a massive modernization program which is about to be completed not earlier than 2019. Modernization enhances skills of any force but it also includes a learning cover and time to absorb technology. Pakistan air force would go nearly a complete overhaul as almost entire fleet of PAF would be eventually replaced with new one till 2019.

On the other hand Indian forces are getting latest weapon system since long and are in better position and have a clear numerical strength against Pakistani forces. All above factors made current time more feasible for India to launch its preemptive strikes against Pakistan army and its infrastructure by executing Indian Cold Start doctrine.

Ultimate Indian Plan: Cold Start & 4th Generation warfare (4GWs)

Though Pakistani response at military level was well calculated and prompts along with a strong response from Pakistani foreign office, but still it would be prudent to study Indian military preparedness and the doctrine

The Indian army plan is not new, but Indian military establishment devised this plan to take on Pakistan and China in a war simultaneously some five years ago. A careful look at statement of Indian army chief makes it clear that Indians are eying establishing a strong military footprint in Indian Ocean from Malacca strait to Persian Gulf.

“This would enable us to protect our island territories; also give assistance to the littoral states in the Indian Ocean Region,” said Gen Kapoor.

Cold start doctrine is not about capturing Pakistani territory but inflicting as much damage as possible to enemy forces and infrastructure within matter of hours. It is more like a hit and run tactics giving no time to Pakistan to react.

Indian military adopted Cold start on April 28, 2004, after a 10 months long standoff (Operation Parakram) with Pakistan army along 2500 kilometer Indo-Pak border in 2002. In this stand off Indian army strike formation took almost a month to be mobilized. Contrary to this Cold Start emphasizes on quick deployment of forces and synergize operations of all three services towards destruction of Pakistan army defenses and units in short possible time. But is it all that easily possible? Does Indian military have that kind of inter service coordination to implement Cold Start in real war? This is the point where some Pakistani analysts believe that India still doesn’t have the capability to carry on its Cold Start doctrine against Pakistan. An objective analysis of this aspect is only possible after studying Indian strategic military planning against Pakistan during last five years can answer this important question.

To overcome inter services coordination a separate South-Western Army Command has been formed since 2005 which deals with Indian military deployment and operations along with Pakistani borders only. One of the major reason for raising new command was to fulfill the demands of integrated battle groups consisting Indian army and air force units and squadrons. India is working on its preparedness for surgical strikes with these battles group since 2005, now and the job of fine tuning these tactics is assigned to Army Training Command (ARTRAC) and the Army War College. From statement made by Lt. Gen. Labama it is evident that India is ready to go to war with Pakistan and China simultaneously.

Another reason for adopting Cold Start by India is to minimize the reaction time available for diplomatic solution of any potential crisis like one emerged after Mumbai attacks in November 2008. Indian government and forces were under pressure to carryout some surgical strikes on so called terrorist infrastructure on the Pakistani soil. Under Cold Start Indian military would make sure that any diplomatic solution comes after India gets all its objectives. A war between Pakistan and India would jeopardize the entire war on terror. But still India would need a pretext to execute its Cold Start doctrine and this is where 4th generation warfare comes into equation.

Use of 4th generation warfare against Pakistan is a more dangerous and disturbing angle of Indian designs which most defense analysts in Pakistan have overlooked. This paradigm of warfare revolves around asymmetrical warfare to get a moral victory with minimum nation state involvement. It is necessary to understand major difference between various generations of warfare and figuring out which one of these Pakistan is facing now. First generation revolved around conscription and firearms. Nepoleon wars can be categorized in this generation. Second generation involved nation-state armies, alignment of warfare resources and raw firepower. WWI can be categorized as 2nd generation warfare. Third generation warfare included armored warfare and maneuvering and best example of this generation of warfare was WWII which ended only after usage of nuclear weapons in Japan in 1945.

By the end of 20th century Russia invaded in Afghanistan and this was the start of a new generation of warfare. Though guerilla warfare is very old but in 1982 after direct involvement of CIA in this conflict, this guerilla warfare gave birth to fourth generation warfare (4GWs) that works on principle of lesser to no nation state involvement but rely on ad-hoc warriors and moral conflicts. Other imperatives of 4GWs include adaptation of technology to surprise the enemy and information warfare.

A careful look at what Pakistan army is combating in FATA makes it clear that Pakistan army is dealing with first phase of Indian design against Pakistan which deals with winning a moral war by adopting 4GWs.It cannot be a coincident that Pakistan army is facing an enemy who has; ad-hoc fighters, propaganda warfare capabilities in form of FM radios, very advanced weaponry and communication gear. This is indeed not a war waged just for revenge against Pakistan army to side US after 9/11. If it is then how come the poor tribesmen gathered all these assets within a short period of time and mastered the skills to use them against world’s 6th largest military machine i.e Pakistan army.

Pakistan army and security management have no doubts about Indian support to TTP, a banned terrorist organization committing horrific terrorism nationwide since its inception in 2005 (The same year when India adopted new military doctrine and raised a new military command along with Pakistani border). Pakistan army has seized not only Indian made weapons in Swat and FATA but also has eliminated number of Indian combatants. Proofs have already been given to civilian government to take up the matter at world forums but there is no sign of urgency in this regard in Islamabad which is not only strange but questionable as well.

Though Pakistan army has fought successfully with Indian 4GWs in Swat and FATA but due to lack of political will was unable to gain any higher moral ground in community of nations. On the other hand India already has built a case against Pakistan as a country being used as staging ground for terrorism against its neighbors.

Chinese Slant

Although China is also mentioned in the statement by Indian army chief as a potential enemy in the war along with Pakistan but it is no secret that India has always used foreign military aid against Pakistan. India has one clear advantage over China in current geopolitics in the world. There is an embargo on China for Western high tech military equipment after Tiananmen Square incident 1989. On the other hand India along with a healthy economy has no such restrictions imposed for military hardware despite worst human right conditions thanks to global hypocrisy and double standards of West and US. Still India lacks in many areas when it comes to military balance vis a vis China.

China sensed the importance of indigenization a long ago and started to develop its military production facilities in 1960s. Now Chinese military complexes not only supply advanced weapons to its own forces but also export large amount of these weapons to other countries including Pakistan. Not only this, but China helped Pakistan to build its own military industry after debacle of 1971.

With its well established economy and knowledge base China has crossed many milestones in military hardware production. Now apart from US and Russia China is the only country in the world to run a 5th generation military jet fighter project. Apart from its indigenization efforts sheer number of Chinese forces is another factor why India would never think about carrying out any military adventure against China. Apart from this military comparison China unlike Pakistan or India is a veto power in UN Security Council and can dissuade any move by India in UN against Pakistan or China.

The mentioning of China in Indian chief statement is a mere indication to West and US that now India is ready to take a role of regional power and both US and West can trust India as any ally against communist China. US is banking on India to compete with China in economics and military fields but friendship of Pakistan and China is a big hurdle for India in both these fields. India is eyeing permanent seat in UN since long now and the current statement can also be a signal to US and West to accept India as a big player in the region along with China.

All the military aid would be used against Pakistan in actual war that is evident from history as well when US helped India against China in 1962. Most of US weapons were used against Pakistan in 1965 war.

Cold Start and Possible Pakistani Response

As indicated in its response Pakistani military leadership has made it clear that any misadventure by India can result in unavoidable consequences. Indian doctrine is flawed at many places.

Firstly, India would have to have a solid reason and pretext to launch any attack no matter low limited against Pakistan.

Secondly, Indians have no gauge of Pakistani military planning to counter Cold Start. It must be bear in mind that Pakistan military announced in July 2005 that it is fully aware of Indian Cold Start doctrine. Pakistan may deploy its unconventional arms much earlier than India has envisaged.

Thirdly, Due to Pakistani preparedness there is clear lack in synergy required in Indian forces to implement Cold Start successfully. Indian Navy would not be able to blockade Pakistani Navy in Karachi as now Pakistan Navy has two more naval bases in Omara and Gawadar. Likewise if Indian air force deploys its front line jet fighter and bombers on forward air bases (FABs) Pakistani cruise missile can come into equation much earlier.

Fourthly, a time line of 48 hours or 96 hours to put Pakistan in a military submission to India with help of armor corps and air support can be proved as dangerous as claims of capturing Lahore in one day proved in 1965. A prolonged combat on borders can put strategic Indian infrastructure in danger. Pakistan air force can launch attacks on dams built on Chenab and Jehlam rivers in Kashmir, Pakistan strategic force command would be in position to hit Indian economic centers like Silicon Valley in Banglore.

Fifthly, Indian military establishment failed to see how a handful of Kashmiri fighters made 700,000 Indian army troops permanently stationed in one valley since decades. Despite presence of this force, which is more than total regular army of Pakistan, Indian government has failed to curb freedom struggle in Kashmir and this circumstances any war between Pakistan and India would be last thing the Indian army would ever dream in Kashmir. Indian military would be in no position to control Kashmiris and fight Pakistan army at same time.

Sixthly, Indian military establishment is relying much more on President Zardari’s announcement that Pakistan will not use its nuclear weapon as first strike. In reality it is Pakistan army who will decide which weapon is to be used when and where.

Last but not the least India is relying on its ever increasing air power not only for Cold Start but to neutralize any Pakistani deployed missiles in a preemptive strikes. It seems that time for such an operation has almost gone for Indian air force. In 2010 PAF would be reshaped to take on the challenges of 21st century. PAF has already established parity in Air Born Early Warning capability after inducting SAAB Erieye AEW&C platform. In June 2010 Pakistan would start receiving state of the art F-16 Block52 fighters from US and PAF Air defense system is going to enhance its capabilities manifold by inducting MBDA’s Spada2000 medium range SAM system. Though Indian air force currently is enjoying numerical superiority but India can’t put all its war assets against Pakistan in a war keeping in view size of India.

Another problem which India is going to face during any execution of Cold Start is the gauge of nuclear threshold of Pakistan, a point where Pakistan would decide to go for unconventional warfare. This is where Army Chief Asfaq Perviz Kiyani hinted that consequences of any misadventure in a nuclear overhang can be suicidal for India.

Suggestions

Indian aggression in future would increase. Recent trends of buying military hardware by India are a clear indication to this fact. Pakistan armed forces don’t need to match Indian counterparts but rather require higher level of preparedness. It is not Cold Start that must alarmed security managers but it is 4th generation warfare by Indian intelligence and military establishment that must be a source of contention for Pakistan. Pakistani military and civilian government needs to take some steps in order to defeat Indian 4GWs tactics in FATA and to prevent India from deploying its forces ever again.

Pakistan must maintain a strategic ambiguity about first use of its nuclear weapons against any enemy including India. An early announcement would always put Pakistan on wrong footing as it will provide another opportunity to Indian and world media to talk about Pakistan’s obsession against India.

Pakistan army must complete all the counter insurgency operation as soon as possible and strike units must report back giving control to the civilian forces in areas which have been cleared of militants. The good news is Pakistan army has realized the importance of civilian forces. Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Kiyani vows to support NWFP police with equipment and training while speaking at police academy in Peshawar.

In any future force stand off Pakistan military must make sure that it has deployed enough strategic weapons that can not be compromised by a pre-emptive strike by Indian air force or other strikes.

Pakistan must build a strong case against India and her involvement in Pakistan particularly in supporting terrorism in Baluchistan and FATA. Pakistan army has given proofs to government and the ball is in democratic government’s court to take the case on international forums like UN where Pakistan easily can seek Chinese help in order to unearth Indian intentions against Pakistan and peace in the region.

In any future political crisis in the country, Pakistan army must keep itself isolated from political turmoil and remained focused on external threats as any involvement in politics would degrade Pakistan’s ability to respond to a prompt military challenge posed by India.

Government must ensure that Pakistan armed forces modernization program remain on track and government always has a reliable financing on short notice for an urgent need if armed forces raise a demand.

Pakistan must quit current defensive foreign policy adopted in Musharraf era. Pakistan must make it clear to world that any act of terrorism must not be linked to Pakistan without proper investigations. Recent student crisis in UK has exposed this weakness in foreign policy where government was failed to react in time when innocent Pakistani students were charged for planning a terrorist attack. Similar ineptness was evident on part of government in case of Samjootha Express incident, which was wrongly blamed on Pakistan but the government was failed to respond on international forum.

Media management of Pakistan armed forces and its operations inside country has always been weak. In Pakistan, unlike India, media is not always behind army. Despite the gains by Pakistan army in war on terror in time span of three to five months in Swat and South Waziristan there is still a perception that Pakistan army is unable to combat terrorism and some even go to an extent that Pakistan army might be supporting Taliban. These perceptions are culmination of a weak media policy by government and needs an urgent attention to change these misperceptions.

- Asian Tribune -

SURVIVAL

First published on: Mon Dec 21, 2009

The last government in Pakistan was seen as military backed because the President was the Chief of Army Staff! The present elected government is seen as US backed because that is where they seem to be looking for their survival. This creates the perception that the government is giving in to every US demand even if it is against Pakistan’s own interests. First it was the ambiguous stand on drone attacks, then it was the silence over Indian machinations against Pakistan from Afghanistan, then came the mysterious silence over US contracted ‘civilian agencies’ like Blackwater, Xe etc and the expanded presence in the US embassy plus the row over visas and now there are the revelations about the danger to Pakistan from the transit trade to Afghanistan through Pakistan. The US is reported to have ‘asked’ Pakistan to expand military operations into North Waziristan, Baluchistan and against ‘jihadi’ organizations operating from Pakistan. The US is also reported to have ‘said’ that if Pakistan does not do this then they will do it themselves—they have not explained how but presumably it will be through expanded drone strikes and other technological means. To some in Pakistan from the mysterious activities of US ‘diplomats’ it seems that the US already has ‘ boots on the ground’ in Pakistan—they may not look like boots but they are considered boots!.

It is in this context that the recent Jamaat e Islami (JI) rally should be seen. The demand made was for an end to the relationship with the US and the withdrawal of NATO forces from Afghanistan. The public rally on the streets was well timed in terms of the ‘surge’ in negative public opinion against the US and the ongoing political turmoil with the government backed against the ropes and seemingly looking to the US for survival. In the 2002 elections a military ruler had sidelined the main political parties and the US attack in Afghanistan had created negative opinion against the US. The religious parties came in riding this wave. Is a similar situation on the cards? By apparently opting to ‘face’ and ‘ride out’ the consequences of the Supreme Court decision and by seen to be looking to the US for life support such an environment gets a boost. There also seems to be a covert anti-military mud slinging campaign underway by those who are hanging on the governments coat tails and if not checked this can lead to a coalescing of the forces that are now on the sidelines by choice. This would have implications for the military operations underway. More and more people on the street in Pakistan are listening to those who preach standing up to the US and an end to the war against their own people. The US by its actions and pronouncements is actually speeding up this process—–people ask if this is part of a broader strategy to destabilize Pakistan. It is for the US to comprehend the situation and make policy adjustments. The US option, if there is such an option, of ganging up against Pakistan with India after ‘staging’ another Mumbai is fraught with extremely serious consequences but Pakistan should evolve possible scenarios and prepare—just in case!

December 27 is the date on which Pakistanis lost the leader on whom they had pinned their hopes. Benazir would have looked beyond the NRO to create a sustainable environment with all institutions on board. It would be in the fitness of things if the government uses that date to make announcements that can change the internal landscape. Declare the ‘neutrality’ of the Presidency and the Governors, shift all powers where they belong in a Parliamentary Democracy, ‘right size’ the Cabinet, order a joint civil-military review to forge an Afghan policy and a policy for FATA, declare a willingness to begin a ‘composite strategic dialogue’ with Afghanistan as and when Afghanistan has a government in place, suggest a wide ranging US-Pakistan strategic dialogue by specially constituted teams with the sole aim of balancing the US-Pakistan relationship by addressing all concerns and suspicions, state that a dialogue with India could be resumed if India wants it, announce that all appointments will based on merit and no ‘controversial’ persons will be retained and finally hold out the assurance that all policies will be presented in Parliament before implementation and that all policies will be people centric and in their interest. Lastly hold out the promise of working with the judiciary to keep the system stable and functional.

GHALIB SULTAN