Zardari to Nawaz – Stop criticising the army

By Abdul Manan

The political positions of the two leading parties in the country have come full circle since the 1990s. In a letter written to the eponymous leader of the Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz, President Asif Ali Zardari asked Nawaz Sharif not to criticise the army or the government.

In reply to Nawaz Sharif’s address against govt, president urges all parties to help instead of pointing fingers.

The letter, which was highly critical of the PML-N leadership in polite but pointed language, was made public through a press release by the Punjab government’s information department.

Using references to the highly divisive politics of the 1990s, the president appeared to be playing the role of an elder statesman, asking the leader of the country’s largest opposition party to focus on helping the people of the one province that the PML-N governs rather than concerning themselves with criticising the federal government’s every move.

“The nation does not need provocative speeches, but rather a treatment for dengue fever,” the president’s letter was quoted as saying, in a reference to the dengue epidemic that has plagued Punjab over the past few days.

(Read: Alarming proportions – ‘Dengue out of Punjab government’s control’)

Teaching hospitals in Lahore, the provincial capital, report receiving as many as 600 dengue fever patients a day. A Pakistan Peoples Party spokesperson in Punjab claimed that 10,000 people had been affected by the disease so far.

The president also asked Sharif to spare a thought for the flood victims in Sindh, Zardari’s home province.

“If you do not want to visit Sindh because of me, visit it for the sake of the poor, marooned people of the province,” the president was quoted as having written.

The president even offered Sharif his personal residence in Nawabshah for his stay in Sindh and implied that his hospitality would be a repayment in kind for Zardari’s stay in Kholi (a prison), a reference to the time that Zardari was imprisoned on corruption charges (that were never proven) during the Sharif administration in the 1990s.

“Let’s come together to support the nation and get her out from the clutches of natural calamities,” the press release quoted the president as having said.

(Read: President visits flood hit areas, ensures relief and rehabilitation for affectees)

Allusions to plots

Yet the main thrust of the president’s letter appeared to be to convince Sharif of the need to support democracy in the country and not take any actions to destabilise it. In veiled terms, the president appeared to be referring to reports that have emerged in recent months that the PML-N is planning to seek early parliamentary polls before the March 2012 Senate elections.

Zardari reminded Sharif that the ouster of the PPP government in 1996 by then-President Farooq Leghari gave the PML-N a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly but did not secure democracy in the country, leading ultimately to the military coup by General Pervez Musharraf.

“Democracy requires a hundred years to take hold in a nation but it can be destroyed in an instant,” the president was quoted as saying. “Come out of the world of imagination, idealism and adventurism or else there will come a time when neither you will be able to call me in Kholi nor will I be able to call you.”

That veiled reference to the possibility of another military coup was accompanied with the request to Sharif to stop criticising the army, something that the PML-N leader has been doing very frequently and publicly since the May 2 US raid on Abbottabad.

(Read: ‘Zardari conspiring to create Nawaz-Army rift’)

Zardari asked Sharif to remember what the president considered to be the achievements of the PPP-led government, including the restoration of the 1973 constitution, freedom of expression, and the institutionalisation of the supremacy of parliament and the independence of the judiciary.

Wikileakes: Benazir Bhutto has US support

KARACHI: According to whistleblower Wikileaks, a cable of the US Ambassador dated January 28, 2008 stated that Asif Ali Zardari described the US as “our safety blanket”. He recounted how Benazir Bhutto had returned despite the threats against her because of support and clearance from the US.

Zardari acknowledged that he had believed that the closer he got to General Kayani, the more Kayani would be weakened.

Wikileaks spilled the beans from one of the statements made by Khyber Pakthunkhwa Chief Minister, Amir Haider Khan Hoti. US Counsel Principal Officer in Peshawar Tracy’s cable dated April 30, 2009 sent to Washington said that Amir Haider Khan Hoti has appreciated the drone attacks, but he (Hoti) also said that he could never support it in public.

Lahore US Counsel Principal Officer Brian Hunt said that former Governor Punjab, Salman Taseer flayed Shahbaz Sharif’s government. In a cable dated December 31, 2008, Brian Hunt wrote that Salman Taseer was of the view that Shahbaz Sharif’s government was highly heart burning. “Shahbaz Sharif is hard working, but just like my gardener. Brian Hunt in a memo dated February 7, 2009 wrote that Salman Taseer had nothing to do with the lawyers’ long march and he was getting ready to celebrate Basant and would see whether the people give importance to the long march or choose to party for Basant.

If killings don’t stop, the president has failed- MQM

By Irfan Aligi

KARACHI: After three more Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) workers were killed on Sunday, the party held a stinging press conference to declare that the violence challenged the writ of the president who had promised to tackle lawlessness in Pakistan’s largest city.

As 16 more people shot dead, Farooq Sattar says party can only take so much.

The sharply worded criticism led the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party to galvanise into action, with Sindh Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah ordering the police and paramilitary units to begin cracking down against the violence. It remains to be seen whether the PPP’s actions will be enough to assuage the MQM, which made no secret of its anger on Sunday.

“The MQM had submitted proof to the president on the political patronisation of criminals so now it is his responsibility to ensure action is taken,” said the party’s deputy convener Dr Farooq Sattar at a press conference in Karachi on Sunday evening. “Failing to control the lawlessness would mean that the president has also failed.”

Even during the press conference reports filtered in of more killings. Earlier in the day, hand grenades were lobbed at two of the party’s unit offices. The first office was closed and in the second attack the explosive did not go off. No one was hurt as a result.

While target killings in drive-by shootings have plagued Karachi for years now, this recent spell started ten days ago when a protest took place against a Supreme Court decision to declare invalid the PPP’s appointment of a top bureaucrat. Nearly 16 people have been killed since then.

Sattar remarked that if the president is in the city, the escalation in violence is tantamount to a challenge to his presence and the writ of his government. He said that the president had assured the MQM that the criminals would be dealt with but he has not been able to deliver.

“The MQM’s policy of toleration and forbearance should not be misconstrued as its weakness,” said Sattar. “The government and the people at the helm of affairs must take heed and do something to control the situation.”

The MQM has ordered two ministers, Raza Haroon and Dr Sagheer Ahmed Siddiqui, to concentrate on the day-to-day affairs of the committee put together by the president during his previous visit. However, in order to be effective, the committee needs all of its members to participate. Before Sunday, PPP members of the committee had not been available.

On Sunday, however, Haroon and Siddiqui met with Sindh Local Bodies Minister Agha Siraj Durrani at the chief minister’s mansion in Karachi to put together a joint proposal for tackling the problem of target killing in the metropolis.

The MQM had handed over its recommendations to Durrani who suggested that the proposals be made jointly to the chief minister. The MQM leaders said that they expected the government to begin taking action within 24 hours in order for their demands to be satisfied.

In an apparent response to the criticisms aimed directly at him, President Asif Ali Zardari telephoned the Sindh chief minister to discuss the law and order situation in Karachi.

The chief minister asked the police to provide him with details of the victims of target killing. He also asked the Sindh Police inspector general and the director general of the Rangers to increase patrols in the city and arrest those suspected to be involved in the killings.

Meanwhile, MQM’s Waseem Aftab said that home minister, Zulfiqar Mirza, was directly involved in the ongoing killings.

Bhatti’s post to be offered to his family: Zardari

KARACHI: President Asif Ali Zardari Wednesday said the position fell vacant after the assassination of Shahbaz Bhatti would be offered to one his family members, Geo News reported.

He said this while addressing the Sindh Assembly members belonging to Pakistan People’s Party.

The President said the terrorists cannot, with their cowardly acts, threaten the government or PPP. “We will not let the extremists succeed in their agenda,” he added.

PML-N threatens PPP with ‘other options’

By Zia Khan

ISLAMABAD: Two days after expelling the PPP from its Punjab government, the PML-N Sunday said it would go for ‘other options’ if President Asif Zardari could not take firm measures to curb the unbridled corruption.

“The PML-N will continue to monitor Zardari administration’s performance very closely” – PML-N Spokesperson Ahsan Iqbal.

A spokesperson for the party, however, did not specify in a statement the ‘options’ the PML-N believed were available to it.

“The PML-N will continue to monitor the Zardari administration’s performance very closely,” said Ahsan Iqbal, the party spokesperson and a member of the National Assembly. “It will play its democratic role to check massive corruption prevalent in the government if no concrete steps are taken (to eradicate it).”

Though Iqbal did not mention it explicitly, in recent months the party has been alluding to the possibility that it might call for fresh parliamentary elections this year.

Iqbal said that the party would not have expelled the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) from the Punjab government had President Zardari lived up to his promises of eradicating corruption and improving governance.

“The Zardari administration’s broken promises and poor performance made it inevitable for the PML-N to part ways with the PPP in Punjab,” the spokesperson said.

Corruption, inflation, unemployment and poverty had crossed all limits and were the outcome of the politics of patronage and bad governance pursued by the federal government, Iqbal added. He said that the PML-N went out of the way to help the federal government in implementing the reforms agenda which the country needed desperately but the Zardari administration exhibited no seriousness and concern.

“As a result there was no option left with the PML-N but to disengage with PPP in order to clearly demonstrate that it is not a party to the Zardari administration’s politics of plunder and loot,” said Iqbal.

Iqbal said that the Charter of Democracy (CoD) – an agreement two parties signed back in 2006 – made it binding on both the groups follow politics of good governance and to fight corruption.

“Zardari should have done that, if he wanted us to continue to support him,” the spokesperson explained.

Article 63-A was originally introduced as part of the 14th Amendment to the constitution in the 1990s, during the second term of Nawaz Sharif as prime minister, largely to help prevent the kind of changes in party loyalty that had made coalition politics so volatile during the so-called “decade of democracy.” It was hoped that by making crossing party lines illegal, coalitions would be more stable.

Salmaan Taseer could have been alive…

By: Abid Suleri

I liked the Salmaan Taseer of the 1980s, when he resisted General Ziaul Haq’s dictatorship but felt let down when he accepted an offer to become interim federal minister during General Musharraf’s regime. I felt betrayed when the PPP government tipped his name as governor of Punjab after winning the 2008 elections. One could differ with Governor Salmaan Taseer’s political approach. His governorship might have been controversial; however, his bold stance against the blasphemy law was a reassurance that, despite his political compulsions, he would always uphold secular values.

His life was under threat. He was termed an infidel and a blasphemer. There were fatwas to kill him, with reward money for the killer. Yet one of his last tweets was: “Under huge pressure to cow down before rightist pressure on blasphemy. Refused. Even if I’mthe last man standing.”

He had courage and was bold enough to not be intimidated by so-called self-styled, self-made custodians of Islam and he was not only standing up, but also speaking openly against terrorism and against those who were misinterpreting religion. Many people have already said and written that his death was a shameful day in our history. He was killed because he chose to express his opinion on a law that has been much misused.

I am mourning not only his murder but also the murder of my own ideology – that of ‘live and let live’. And it is an ideology that is common in many religions. I didn’t know what to say to my nine-year-old son when he asked me why Salmaan Taseer had been killed. All I could think of in my mind was that Taseer’s life was as if he were trying to sell mirrors in a city of blind people.

One needs to understand the actors and factors responsible for spreading the cancer of religious extremism in our society. Our rulers, as well as civil and military establishments, have been misusing Islam (in their own way) to prolong their rule, to create ‘strategic assets’, to fight a proxy war and to blackmail the western world. Their shortsighted approach has poisoned society and state institutions to such an extent that not only the CIA and the Pentagon but even ordinary Pakistanis can no longer trust our law-enforcement agencies.

Just imagine the power of Islamic fundamentalist groups: the prime minister of the progressive PPP never publicly approved of Salmaan Taseer and Sherry Rehman’s stance of bringing reform to the blasphemy law and, in fact, the prime minister made it clear that the government would not change the law.

Perhaps Salmaan Taseer could have been alive had prompt action been taken against the mullahs who incited the Gojra carnage. He could have been alive had there been public condemnation by all political parties of the attack on Ahmadis in Lahore. He could have been alive had the government initiated an action against the mullah who announced a cash reward for killing Aasia Bibi. He would have been alive had our media promoted the cause of respecting religious diversity.

Silently bearing this pain will not help any of us. Extremist forces are trying to mute every voice of sanity. We need to say enough is enough and stand and rise against this monster of fanaticism in order to make this country a livable place for our future generations. Religion is a personal matter and we should not let fascist forces impose their version of it on us. We need to struggle for separating the state from religion in accordance with the vision of the founders of Pakistan – founders who were declared infidels and opposed by all Islamic parties of that time.

To me, the best way to pay homage to Salmaan Taseer is to pressurise the PPP government to complete his mission of reforming the blasphemy law. The question is, will the PPP-led government rise to the challenge?

We have to support sane voices like those of Taseer and Sherry Rehman to prove that Pakistan is not a barbarian land. Will Zardari and Gilani join us in paying homage to their deceased governor?

VVIP security: Key politicians trust only personal guards

By: Zia Khan

ISLAMABAD: A majority of top politicians do not trust state agencies for their security and rely on personal arrangements, officials in political parties said a day after Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer was assassinated by an elite police commando.

President, Nawaz Sharif and Maulana Fazlur Rehman all use their trusted men.

Those who prefer their loyalists for security arrangements include President Asif Ali Zardari, former premier Nawaz Sharif and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman.

Pakistan Muslim League-Q chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and Awami National Party (ANP) president Asfandyar Wali Khan also have their personal guards, although personnel of state agencies are at their disposal too.

Officials said an entrenched mistrust in the political leadership is behind the practice of preferring party affiliates over state security.

“If there were any doubts, they must have been removed after the way Taseer was gunned down by his own security guard,” an official in the PPP said.

At least three state agencies – the military, police and Intelligence Bureau (IB) – take care of presidential security. A chief security officer from the military and three from the police are responsible for the president’s security at his official residence and during visits to other places. The official added that Zardari’s personal guards are at the forefront of both intelligence and security arrangements at the presidency and during trips to other areas, especially when he addresses public rallies.

The PPP formed a force to protect former slain premier Benazir Bhutto when she returned to Pakistan in October 2007 after almost a decade of self-imposed exile. A number of party members were killed during a failed and a successful bid on her life. The remaining are now on duty again with the president and some other stalwarts of the ruling party.

Sharif family:

“Call it mistrust, call it watchfulness, a small group of personal loyalists lead Mian Sahib’s security detail wherever he goes,” an official from Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz said.

A long term affiliate Abdul Shakoor leads Nawaz’s personal security entourage. “Under him (Shakoor) personal guards remain alert whether Mian Sahib is at his residence in Raiwind or visits other cities. Even during air travel, the squad accompanies him,” the official added on condition of anonymity.

An associate of the Sharif family said Nawaz keeps changing officials of police and other law enforcement agencies deployed for his security, but his personal guards are the same since he returned to Pakistan after his 10-year exile in 2007.

Several other national and nationalist leaders from Balochistan to Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa have their personal arrangements for security that indicates their mistrust of state protocol. More than 180 million Pakistanis, however, do not seem to have any other option-state security is not good enough to protect them and they cannot afford anything else.

Who killed Benazir Bhutto?

President Asif Ali Zardari, who is also co-chairman of the PPP, spoke in Naudero on the third anniversary of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination in December 2007 and did not make any major revelation about her killers. He had been saying that he knew who had killed her and people on both sides of the political divide wanted to hear him reveal names. The PPP supporters wanted him to finally nail the killers; the PPP-haters wanted to see him get into trouble by naming anyone without proper conviction.

PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari (R) places visits his mother’s grave in Garhi Khuda Bakhsh on the third anniversary of her death.

TV channels actually let their not-so-literate newscasters use sarcastic sentences, as they looked back at President Zardari’s decision to approach the UN to get at the truth, and then, not being satisfied with it, descend into a curious silence before getting a joint investigation team (JIT) to move afresh on the case. During this process, opponents like Mumtaz Bhutto have been hinting broadly that Ms Bhutto was killed by those whom she was close to, making it quite clear that he, Mumtaz, held her husband responsible for her death (without providing any proof whatsoever). Unfortunately, a split within the PPP, headed by Naheed Khan and Safdar Abbasi, swelled the chorus, asking for ‘full investigation’ into the conduct of ‘all present’ at the place of the murder.

The UN inquiry was perhaps the wrong thing to do because the UN could never have fingered the killers. Yet there were things in its report that constituted good pointers. Like the Scotland Yard inquiry, it too reposed credence in the nexus between the Pakistani establishment and the terrorists in Fata. It took seriously the tape that had Tehreek-i-Taliban (TTP) chief Baitullah Mehsud discussing his assassination plot to get rid of Ms Bhutto for al Qaeda, whose spokesman had already warned that she was to be eliminated since she was deemed to be an ‘American asset’. You have to be from outside Pakistan to believe that Baitullah was no saint when he swore that “Taliban do not kill women”. Pakistanis simply refuse to see that a phone call from Islamabad can get anyone killed at the hands of the Taliban, even when it happens again and again in front of them.

The JIT, in November of this year, issued its 48-page inquiry report which said that the TTP had carried out the assassination. It stayed clear of the army personnel and other important members of the establishment but did say that the military “did not allow the team to get statements” from the military hierarchy. But it did something else which would scare off any TV channel know-all anchor: it indicted Baitullah Mehsud, and accused Ibadur Rehman, Abdullah and Faiz Muhammad (former students of Madrassa Haqqania, Akora Khattak in Nowshera), Ikramullah (suicide bomber), Aitzaz Shah, Sher Zaman, Hasnain Gul, Muhammad Rafaqat, Rasheed Ahmed, Nasrullah and Nadir of “carrying out, facilitating and financing the attack”.

Picking up cues from the UN report, the JIT also charged Syed Saud Aziz, a former Rawalpindi police chief, and Khurram Shahzad, a former superintendent of police, with criminal negligence of duty and “hosing down the crime scene”. The electronic media revisited the scene on the third anniversary of the assassination and found eyewitnesses who gave accounts, adding more details to the dossier. The local PPP leader who was in charge of managing the Liaquat Bagh meeting where Ms Bhutto spoke stated that the armoured vehicle which carried her away from the scene had one of its rear tyres flattened and was blocked by a crowd that did not belong to the PPP but could have been organised by persons from within the establishment. This crowd blocked the vehicle and allowed a man to fire at Benazir and a suicide bomber to emerge from Liaquat Bagh to blow himself up near the first assassin. Names have been named and they belong in the list presented to Pervez Musharraf by Ms Bhutto in a letter when he was in power. In this letter, she said that she had been told that the establishment would try to get rid of her. And this establishment contained elements who exercised policy control even after retirement. The JIT report demands action. Will the government be allowed to start action against the well-known “nursery” of jihad named in the report? Or will the trail fade like that of Pakistan’s earlier assassinations?

Plot through WikiLeaks

By: Sajjad Shaukat

New technology is being utilized by the new warriors to carry out all forms of financial, network and especially media attacks. Most of these attacks are of non-military-types, yet they can be completely viewed as equal to warfare actions. In other words, bloody warfare has been replaced by bloodless warfare as much as possible. In this regard, cyber warfare is the most important domain of the modern wars.

Judging in these terms, release of the new secret documents which have targeted Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Syria including some other Islamic countries in general and Pakistan in particular are the plot of their collective enemies through WikiLeaks.

In its surprising revelations, the Wikileaks have disclosed that the Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah had made scathing remarks about the leadership of Pakistan, calling President Asif Ali Zardari as the greatest obstacle to Pakistan’s progress, and have also called Pakistan’s politician of the opposition, Nawaz Sharif as a dangerous man.

Showing Saudi Arabia’s anxiety over Iran’s nuclear programme, the US embassy cables have disclosed that on 29 Nov 2010, the King of the Saudi Arabia had urged the US to attack and destroy the Iranian nuclear sites. Several Arab leaders and their representatives are also quoted as urging the US to carry out an attack on Iran.

The cables indicate that in July 2008, Egyptian President Mubarak called Iranians “big fat liars” and remarked that they sponsor terrorism everywhere. According to the cables, in Oct 2008, Iran used the Iranian Red Crescent (IRC) to smuggle agents and weapons into other countries. The IRC facilitated the entry of Qods force officers to Lebanon during the Israel-Hezbollah war in summer 2006, while in March 2009, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed (MbZ) expressed his grave concerns about the Iranian threat to the region. And in June 2009, Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s administration was blamed for pursuing provocative anti-Sunni practices-harassment of Sunni clergy and congregations including raids on Sunni mosques and other “arrogant” crackdowns.

According to one of the leaked cables, in April 2006, the leadership of the United Arab Emirates considered Hamas a terrorist organization and would not fund Hamas unless they denounce violence and accepted Israel. Another document points outs that in March 2009, Syrian head, Assad hided the Palestinians when asked about human rights violations in Syria.

Regarding Turkey, the document of the web revealed that in January 2010, US Embassy claimed that Turkey was becoming more focused on the Islamic World and its Muslim tradition in its foreign policy.

As regards Pakistan, the WikiLeaks cables show US concern over the safety of nuclear weapons and radioactive material in nuclear power stations of the country, with fears that the same could be used in terror attacks. In this respect, in a May 2009 cable, US ambassador Anne W Patterson said that Pakistan had refused a visit from US experts.

No doubt, Pakistan is the special target of the documents of the WikiLeaks which accused that in a March 12, 2009 cable by the former US ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson stated that the head of the army, General Ashfaq Kayani, considered pushing Zardari from office and forcing him into exile to resolve a political dispute. She aslo alleged that Pakistan continues to support the militant group which carried out the 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai despite its claims to have launched a crackdown on the organisation.

Following the continued blame game of the US high officials and media, the leaked cables incdicated that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI)is behind Lashkar-e-Taiba which had killed 166 people in a series of attacks in Mumbai. In this context, the contradiction of the WikiLeaks is also notable. As it also mentioned that the Chief of Pakistan’s ISI, Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha said that he had conveyed to Washington-threat information that an attack would be launched against India between September-November, 2009 and he had been in direct touch with the Israelis on possible threats against Israeli targets in India.

However, the secret US Embassy cables are now available on WikiLeaks, while the debate goes on about the legitimacy of the leaks.

Various questions arise regarding the aims and authenticity of the disclosures of the secret diplomatic documents of the WikiLeaks. Moreover, it is also notable that who are behind the revelations of this website.

In this connection, it is mentionable that by following the old western policy of “divide and rule”, the foremost purpose of the disclosures of the WikiLeaks is to create a rift among the Islamic countries and to further accelerate their sectarian differences not only against each other, but also inside their concerned countries which are most volatile to this plot.

In this respect, secret agencies such as American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad are behind the revelations of the WikiLeaks as part of a plot, while both India and Israel have still a secret collusion and are acting upon a secret diplomacy. Although whole of the Islamic world is target of Indo-Israeli secret collusion, yet the same has intensified in case of Pakistan and Iran. In this regard, US-led some western countries have also been supporting the Indo-Israeli nexus overtly or covertly.

It is worth-mentioning that documents of the WikiLeaks have given only a little bit coverage to the Indian atrocities in the occupied Kashmir, while the same are silent over Israeli brutal treatment and use of chemical weapons in the controlled territories of the Palestine.

The leaked cables have directly or indirectly favoured India because of the fact America has its political and economic interests in that country which serves as the largest market. And the US has its strategic interests in the region, while New Delhi is its main ally to counterbalance China in Asia. In this respect, US, India and Israeli want to ‘denuclearise’ and ‘destablise’ Pakistan which is the only nuclear Islamic country. It is owing to these collective interests that like his predecessor, President Bush, Obama neglects Hindu terrorism which has now become a dangerous reality. Nevertheless, misdeeds of Hindu fundamentalist parties like the BJP, RSS, VHP, Shiv Sina and Bajrang Dal which have also intensified anti-Christian and anti-Muslim bloodshed with the dissemination of Hindutva (Hindu nationalism) have been ignored by the WikiLeaks.

It is of particular attention that the documents of the WikiLeaks have also neglected Indian secret activities in Afghanistan from where well-trained militants are being sent to Pakistan in order to attack the security personnel, and to commit suicide attacks, while supporting the separatists of Balochistan. In this regard, while preferring New Delhi over Islamabad, the secret cables pointed out that US special representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke had told Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao that Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari’s government was weakening. During a meeting, Rao described the Indian effort in Afghanistan, saying it was focused on strengthening governance by building Afghan capacities and that the Indian engagement is transparent, while Holbrooke also pledged transparency with India on America’s activities in Afghanistan.

Besides other leaders, Pakistan’s former Army Chief Gen (Retd) Mirza Aslam BEg has termed the WikiLeaks report a conspiracy to sabotage relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, adding that US is included in this plot and the report is part of its psychological war. He further explained that US was now giving importance to India by ignoring Pakistan-he had stated 3 years earlier that CIA and Mossad were jointly launching campaign to weaken Pakistan.

In fact, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad with the help of American CIA and strong Indo-Israeli lobbies are working in the US and other European countries against the interests of the Islamic countries-particularly Pakistan. They are well-penetrated especially in the US administration. They have played a key role in preparing and publishing the US embassy cables, especially to malign Pakistan including other Islamic countries and to intensify their blame game against ISI.

Zardari’s Swiss cases cause of govt-judiciary row: Nawaz

By Murtaza Ali Shah

LONDON: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Quaid Nawaz Sharif accused President Asif Al Zardari of harming the country and stopped short of saying that Zardari and Pakistan could not co-exist but said the PPP leader was responsible for all the prevailing political and socio-economic problems of the country.

In a no hold barred news conference in London on Sunday, Nawaz Sharif asked Zardari to stop saving his looted millions and apologise to the Pakistani nation. At his press conference here, Nawaz Sharif came out knuckle-bare against the president of Pakistan and accused him of being behind the current crisis Pakistan was facing and alleged that President Zardari was only interested in saving his looted wealth and was bringing the whole country down with him – for his personal greed.

The PML-N chief said that Zardari had breached all the promises and agreements in the past and he could not be trusted with anything and said he didn’t mean it. Nawaz Sharif admitted that he was finding it at his own cost that President Zardari could not be trusted at all.

He said the Supreme Court had sought a written statement from the PM because the government had lost credibility. He said Zardari was the main cause of confrontation with the judiciary because he was facing Swiss cases and other rules of law. He said Zardari neverwanted to restore the judges but had a complete “setting” with the Dogar Court, the nickname for the Supreme Court headed by Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar.

He blamed the president for all the ills afflicting Pakistan today and said that he should not exploit the country for his own benefits. He believed that if Zardari had not mismanaged politics, economy and the national interests of the country for his personal motives, the situation in the country would be altogether different.

Nawaz said that Pakistan was in a difficult situation and it was a high time to save the country but minced no words in saying that Zardari and his chosen ones didn’t have any solution to take the country out of the current morass.

Nawaz suggested that all the political parties should join hands and set a 25-year new social charter with a consensus for the survival and progress of the country, saying that it would be called the Charter of Pakistan and would be a step ahead from the Charter of Democracy (CoD).

He said the new charter would be binding on all that no one would support dictatorship and believed that the new charter would bring a new ray of hope for the disappointed nation and said that he was mentally ready to sign the new national contract and termed it the only way forward.

Nawaz said the new charter should include foreign policy, Kashmir solution, price hike, education, health, terrorism and other important issues. Nawaz said the new charter would be a step forward from the CoD he and slain leader Benazir Bhutto had signed but which had not been implemented and which Nawaz accused Zardari of trampling upon it in total arrogance and in complete humiliation of the wishes of his late wife. He heaved a sigh of relief, saying that he had signed the CoD with Benazir Bhutto and not Asif Ali Zardari.

Nawaz Sharif was of the firm view that returning the wealth from foreign bank accounts to Pakistan would improve things and expressed the hope that Pakistani nation would forgive President Zardari for doing so. Otherwise, he warned the president, there was no salvation as the corruption charges – and Zardari’s own guilty conscience that he had plundered the national wealth – would continue to haunt the president and he would never have peace of mind.

Nawaz Sharif said he accepted the mandate of the PPP despite knowing that the polls were heavily rigged against his PML-N but he chose the path of reconciliation in the interest of the survival and continuation of the democratic process.

Nawaz Sharif was frank in warning the president that the path of confrontation he had taken against the judiciary – including the leading media house – would not take him anywhere and he was bound to cost him very dearly. In a no hold barred attack, Nawaz attacked Zardari again and again for being greedy and for being possessed by his personal motives and nothing else and feared that Zardari was out to harm the federation.

He accused President Zardari’s top lieutenants and some of the closest advisers of misleading the president and pushing him to the brink. He told the president that these advisers were motivated by self-interest and would be the first ones to abandon him in his difficult time.

Nawaz said Zardari had not honoured a single promise he had made and said that he took out his ministers from the coalition cabinet after realising that Zardari had no regard for any of the promises he had made.

“We had entered into the coalition government with noble hopes of introducing democracy, good governance and prosperity and economic stability of Pakistan and accountability of those who had devastated Pakistan for nearly eight years.

“We wanted accountability of those who killed Nawab Akbar Bugti, those who brought loadshedding and economic mismanagement to Pakistan, those who had handed over Pakistani citizens to foreign countries, and those who had arrested judges and attacked the courts,” Nawaz said, regretting that none of this was done by President Zardari.

Directly addressing President Zardari, the former premier and the PML-N leader said: “Believe me Mr Zardari, if only you had fulfilled your promises, you would not be in the mess you find yourself in today, and Pakistan would not be in its current state. If the independent judiciary had been restored and the process of accountability started, there would be a better government in place and Pakistan would have started with a clean slate.”

He also made a clandestine attack on Army generals who believed in launching political adventures and by this Nawaz clearly meant the likes of Pervez Musharraf. He said he would not allow the insult of institutions and politicians by those who didn’t care for institutions and the Constitution and killed politicians such as Nawab Akbar Bugti because they didn’t like them personally.

He blamed Asif Ali Zardari for the current unrest in Balochistan and said that 100 percent peace would return to the province if the killers of Nawab Bugti were brought to justice.

The PML-N leader said the government’s failure was not the failure of the democratic process because what Mr Zardari and his close friends were doing had nothing democratic about them and it had everything to do with nepotism and corruption. He said he would not be a part of any effort against the democratic system.

Nawaz alleged that President Zardari never accepted the reinstatement of the superior court judges wholeheartedly and never respected the decisions the court was making. He alleged that Dogar courts were Zardari’s favourite idea of the justice system and he was a witness. He advised Zardari to learn to respect the judiciary and the institutions of the country.