• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Twirp : Terrorist Wahabi Islamic Republic Pakistan 3
<b>Very Funny Indus Tv Karachi</b>
<b>ISI has contacts with extremists: Gates </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->WASHINGTON: The ISI’s contacts with the Hekmatyar, Haqqani and the Nazir groups are a real concern for the United States, says US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates.

<b>Three female education workers killed in Mansehra </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->MANSEHRA: Three female workers and a driver of a USAID-funded Project Rise International were killed by unidentified gunmen here at Kund Bangla area on Monday.
Local people suspect the involvement of militants in the occurrence which took place in the jurisdiction of Shinkiari police station. The incident took place at around 4.30 p.m near a deserted spot.

<b>US wants to break up Pakistan, says minister</b>

ISLAMABAD - <b>“American policies are not of a friend but of a foe and Richard Holbrooke and Mike Mullen are in Pakistan to put a price on our loyalty to our religion and the Islamic State of Pakistan but we are not a saleable commodity.”</b>

Federal Minister for Science & Technology Azam Khan Swati while commenting on the recent visit of the American military and political leadership to Pakistan said this on Tuesday.

According to a press release issued here, Swati said that Nato’s presence in the region was a great threat to the very existence of Afghanistan, Pakistan, China and Iran as well. <b>“American policies aim to dismantle Pakistan, neutralise Iran and contain China to make India a regional superpower to achieve her objectives,” he added.</b>

He said Obama’s administration was following the conspiracy hatched by George W Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield and would lead America towards destruction. He added the US policy aimed to destroy Pak Armed Forces, marginalise state-of-the-art security agency, ISI, and ruin Pakistan.

<b>“To achieve its objectives, Americans are spreading hatred in the mind and heart of the people of world by portraying Islamists as cruel, inhuman and threat to humanity, and are trying to divide Pakistani nation on religious basis,”</b> the Minister said. He added that the people of Pakistan would foil their nefarious designs, as the people of NWFP and Fata were peace-loving and practical Muslims and would never succumb to the pressure of foreign forces.

Let’s not sell our country and destroy ourselves for $ 10 billion or any other amount because peace in country is priceless,” suggested the Minister. He said it was a matter of concern for each and every Pakistani to figure out the price of peace that the country had lost in Swat, Malakand and Fata.

Monitoring Desk adds: The Federal Minister, when contacted by BBC for the confirmation of the statement, maintaind that he had issud the statement as a call of his innerself. Criticising the US and President Obama, the minister said that Obama’s policy was a continuation of the policy of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and President Obama had learnt no lesson from the history.

He also said that India and Nato forces were giving assistance to so-called Taliban through Indian consulates so that they might bring bad name to Islam and Pakistan army. He suggested that Pakistan should refuse US aid as ‘this is meant for destruction of Pakistan.’

Swati declared ISI the jugular vein of Pakistan, adding that the US, Nato and India want to destroy this agency.

When he was reminded that President Zardari, Prime Minister Gilani and other high-ups, in their meetings with Halbrooke and Mullen, were declaring the war on terror as war of survival of Pakistan and on that ground they were appealing the world for help, Swati said that it was no doubt a war for our existence, but the policy that the US was introducing, was not that of a friend, rather it was of a foe.

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>Drama In Islamabad!</b>

<b>1. ISI chief refuses to meet US officials : reports</b>

<i>Updated at: 2235 PST, Tuesday, April 07, 2009</i>

ISLAMABAD: ISI chief Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha declined to meet with US special envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen here on Tuesday.

According to some reports, he refused to meet the visiting American officials in protest against allegations leveled against ISI.

It may be mentioned here that US envoy Holbrooke and Admiral Mullen, who arrived here on Monday for a two-day visit, held separate meetings with President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif and Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

<b>2. ISPR denies ISI chief declined to meet US officials </b>

<i>Updated at: 2300 PST, Tuesday, April 07, 2009</i>

ISLAMABAD: Director General Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major General Athar Abbas denied that ISI chief Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha has declined to meet US special envoy Richard Holbrooke and Admiral Mike Mullen.

He said General Pasha was also present in the meeting of Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani with US officials

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Why these tantrums? Do they want quick checks in banks or Coup ignoring Uncle?
<b>21 killed as Lashkar, police fight Taliban in Buner </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BUNER: Three police officials, two Lashkar (militia) men and sixteen militants were killed in overnight clash between Taliban and Qaumi Lashkar in Buner district, police and residents said on Tuesday.
The fierce fighting erupted on Monday night when the Qaumi Lashkar and local police force made efforts to enter the Gokand valley via Rajagaly Kandow from Pir Baba side to flush out Taliban militants who had sneaked in to the district on Saturday from neighbouring Swat
Why they are differentiating terrorist as "Lakshar" and "militant"?
<b>Four dead in suspected drone attack in South Waziristan </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->‘The drone was flying very low and as soon as militants in a truck opened fire at it, a missile was fired that hit the vehicle and killed three militants,’ Reuters quoted a resident as saying.

‘Drones initially flew over mountains around Gangi Khel, where the Taliban have some positions. There was some ground fire towards one of the drones and they left the area,’ AFP quoted a security official as saying.

Gangi Khel is a village around five kilometres (three miles) west of Wana, the main town in the semi-autonomous South Waziristan district.

‘Drones returned after some time and targeted a vehicle, which was parked near some shops. Three people were killed in the attack. Four others were wounded — they were either shopkeepers or local residents,’ the official said.

<b>Give us the drones; we’ll take out the militants: Zardari</b> <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Pindi HQ will be his first target, next will Nawaz home.
<b>For America, the problem is Pakistan</b>
By Anatol Lieven
Published: April 7 2009 20:11 | Last updated: April 7 2009 20:11
We will need to remind ourselves often in the next few years that the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan is not the Obama administration’s fault. It inherited from George W. Bush a crisis so deep and so horribly complex that dealing with it would tax the powers of St Peter, let alone a US government with many other things on its mind and on its grossly overstrained budget. Improving the situation is the best that we can hope for. Finding a “solution” to the Afghan war and its repercussions in Pakistan is not even a possibility.

On Afghanistan itself, the administration’s new strategy, set out last week, strikes most of the right notes. In particular, it is correct to emphasise the critical importance of building up the Afghan National Army, without which nothing can be achieved in Afghanistan in the long term; and on the need for the US to work towards an exit strategy rather than engage in empty rhetoric about “staying the course”. Talk of creating a modern, western-style democracy in Afghanistan has been drastically scaled back.

The administration has also done something that should have been obvious from the very beginning and reached out to Afghanistan’s northern and western neighbours. When the US eventually leaves Afghanistan, regional powers – perhaps grouped in the Shanghai Co-operation Council – will have to try to manage Afghanistan’s ongoing conflict.

As the administration seems to have understood, Iran is critical in this regard. Iranian support saved the opponents of the Taliban from complete defeat before 9/11 and will be essential to preserving whatever regime the US leaves behind in Kabul when it eventually withdraws. Trade with Iran is vital to the Afghan economy, and aid from Iran could be vital to Afghan development. Finally, because the US and Iran share the same basic agenda in Afghanistan, the US administration is quite rightly using talks on Afghanistan as an avenue towards improving the wider relationship with Tehran.

So as far as Afghanistan is concerned, so far so good. The problem is Pakistan. As the new strategy recognises, the two countries are now hopelessly interlinked, with a Taliban insurgency rooted in the Pashtun populations of each raging on both sides of the border. Putting greatly increased US pressure on the Afghan Taliban will indeed be immensely difficult if this is not accompanied by real help from the Pakistani state and military against Taliban support on their soil.

Yet the US may well have no choice but to proceed without Pakistan. Here, it seems to me, the Obama administration still does not fully recognise the depths of the problem it is facing, or the tremendous risks it will run by trying to bend Pakistan to its will over the Afghan war. For as both opinion polls and my own research on the ground have made abundantly clear, the truth is that a large majority of ordinary Pakistanis are bitterly opposed to Pakistan helping the US, especially if this involves the Pakistani army fighting the Taliban.

It is true that calculations by the Pakistani security establishment and intelligence services also play a part in limiting Pakistani actions against the Taliban; but the basic problem is a democratic one. A democratically elected government cannot afford simply to defy a public opinion this strong. Nor indeed can an army that has to recruit its soldiers from Pakistani villages – not from Mars or Pluto – and ask them to risk their lives. As a Pakistani general put it to me last year: “We can survive without American money and arms if we have to, though of course we don’t want to. But we cannot survive without the loyalty of our jawans [men].”

If the Obama administration wants to have any hopes of transforming such public attitudes in Pakistan then it will need to fund Pakistan to a vastly greater degree than is envisaged in its new strategy, in ways that will visibly transform the lives of many ordinary Pakistanis. This requires above all massive investment in infrastructure – especially relating to water – in ways that will also generate many jobs. At $1.5bn (€1.1bn, £1bn) a year, the new US aid that is promised sounds like a lot – until you remember that Pakistan now has about 170m people. Eight dollars per head is not going to transform anything much in the country. More-over, the US statement emphasises that the aid will be made conditional on Pakistan’s help to the US against the Taliban. This is a recipe for constant hold-ups, congressional blockages and the wrecking of any consistent, long-term programmes.

Unfortunately, it seems as if the new administration has not recognised two critical facts about Pakistan. The first is that the stabilisation and development of this country is not merely an aspect of the war in Afghanistan, but a vital US interest in itself. Indeed, Pakistan in the long term is far more important than Afghanistan. The second is that changing Pakistani opinions will mean changing Pakistani society, and that is a project that will require massive, sustained and consistent aid over a generation.

If on the other hand Washington thinks that it can play Pakistani governments like a fish on an aid hook in order to extract much greater help in the Afghan war, then it will undermine and finally destroy those governments, as it did that of Pervez Musharraf. Even more importantly, if it does succeed in forcing the Pakistani army to do things that its soldiers detest, it may destroy the army. This would be a catastrophe for the US that would dwarf even defeat in Afghanistan.

The writer is a professor in the War Studies Department of King’s College London and a senior fellow of the New America Foundation in Washington DC. He is currently researching a book on Pakistan
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

[center]<b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Pakistani Taliban said moving closer to capital</span></b>[/center]

<b>MINGORA : Pakistani Taliban are moving into a new area in northern Pakistan, clashing with villagers and police in a mountain valley, police and district officials said on Wednesday.</b>

Separately, a Pakistani Taliban commander said the Pakistani military and the United States were colluding in US drone aircraft attacks and the militants would take their war to the capital, Islamabad, in response.

Surging militant violence across Pakistan is reviving western concerns about the stability of its nuclear-armed ally.

Pakistan is crucial to US efforts to stabilise Afghanistan.

US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, were in Pakistan for talks on security strategy this week.

In a development that will deepen the west's concerns, scores of Taliban have moved into Buner district, 100 km northwest of Islamabad, from the Swat valley where authorities struck a peace pact in February aimed at ending violence.

‘About 20 vehicles carrying Taliban entered Buner on Monday and started moving around the bazaar and streets,’ said senior police officer Israr Bacha.

Villagers formed a militia, known as a lashkar, to confront the Taliban and eight of the insurgents were killed in a clash on Tuesday, police said.

Two villagers and three policemen were also killed.

‘People don't like the Taliban,’ Ghulam Mustafa, deputy chief of Buner, told Reuters by telephone.

Muslim Khan, a Taliban spokesman in Swat, was defiant. ‘What law stops us going there?’ Khan said. ‘Our people will go there and stay there as long as they want.’


Authorities agreed in February to impose Islamic law in Swat to end more than a year of fighting.

Critics said appeasement would only embolden the militants to take over other areas.

Pakistan's western allies fear such pacts create safe havens for Taliban and al Qaeda fighters.

Pakistani Taliban commander Mullah Nazeer Ahmed said in an interview with al Qaeda's media arm, Al-Sahab, that Pakistan was behind US drone attacks on militants.

Authorities were misleading the public by saying it was the United States carrying out the strikes, he said, and it was the Pakistani army that sent spies to facilitate them.

‘All these attacks that have happened and are still happening are the work of Pakistan,’ Ahmed said, according to a transcript of the interview posted on Al-Sahab's website.

Alarmed by deteriorating security in Afghanistan, the United States has since last year stepped up drone strikes in Pakistan.

Pakistan objects to the strikes, calling them a violation of its sovereignty that complicates its effort to fight militancy.

Other Taliban commanders said recent violence in Pakistan has been in retaliation for the drone attacks and threatened more.

Ahmed said Pakistani Taliban factions had united and would take their war to the capital : ‘The day is not far when Islamabad will be in the hands of the mujahideen.’

Ahmed also blamed the Pakistani military's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency for sowing divisions between factions, saying the ISI was the Taliban's main enemy.

Some US officials have said recently the ISI maintained contacts with militants and there were indications ISI elements even provided support to the Taliban or al Qaeda militants.

Such accusations have angered Pakistan, although a military spokesman denied reports that ISI chief Lieutenant-General Ahmed Shujaa Pasha had snubbed Holbrooke and Mullen by refusing to meet them on Tuesday.

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>Mudy Ji :</b>

Pakistani Debt Burden is going "Northwards" every day :

<b>Pakistan to approach IMF after FoDP word : official</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->According to Pakistani authorities as well as IMF’s projections for the ongoing fiscal year 2008-09 in accordance with the Fund’s document, Pakistan will receive a total $3.595 billion in shape of total budgetary support for the ongoing fiscal year from multilateral as well as bilateral donors.

<b>Comment :The World Bank loan is part of broader financial support by multilateral institutions for Pakistan, which included a $7.6 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund</b>

<b>TThe World Bank is projected to provide total $800 million to Pakistan in the ongoing fiscal year.</b> The WB had so far disbursed $500 million while remaining $300 million would be provided before June 30, 2009.

The ADB had so far provided $834 million to Pakistan during the first nine months (July-March) period while another $500 million would be provided in the last quarter (April-June), <b>totaling its assistance up to $1.334 billion for the ongoing fiscal year 2008-09.</b>

<b>The Islamic Development Bank (IDB) is projected to provide $761 million to Pakistan during the ongoing financial year.</b> So far the IDB provided $661 million and the remaining $100 million was expected to be given to Pakistan during the last quarter of the ongoing fiscal year.

Pakistan is projected to receive $500 million from bilateral support, which Islamabad has already received. Pakistan is expecting to receive total $200 million in shape of short-term commercial inflows, which have already been received by Islamabad.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In addition Pakistn has received two Tranches of USD 500 Million each from the Chinese.

As such in the present Financial Year Pakistan has received USD 10 Billion - Possibly upto USD 15 Billion.

I suppose the Pakistani External Debt will now have risen to USD 55 to 60 Billion!

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Obama had requested $88 billion for war budget. Atleast $4-5 billions will drop in Pakis kitty.

<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Apr 10 2009, 04:03 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Apr 10 2009, 04:03 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nareshji,
Obama had requested $88 billion for war budget. Atleast $4-5 billions will drop in Pakis kitty.

<b>Mudy Ji :</b>

USD 4-5 Billion will just get lodged in Zardari's Dental Cavities and increase Pakistan's Debt!

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>The reluctant partner</b>
Barack Obama says Pakistan is the centrepiece of America's new policy in Afghanistan. It's a bouquet filled with thorns, writes Graham Usher in Lahore
Click to view caption
A jubilant Pakistani police commando fires in the air after overpowering masked gunmen who had besieged a police academy in Manawan, near Lahore

Three days after United States President Barack Obama unveiled America's new policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan a dozen or so gunmen laid siege to several hundred police cadets in an academy near Lahore. Eighteen people were killed, including eight police trainees. The compound was finally freed after an operation involving helicopters, crack commando troops and a thousand police. Pakistan Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud told the BBC on 31 March the attack was retaliation for US missile attacks against alleged Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants on Pakistan's incendiary border with Afghanistan.

The attack was graphic illustration how -- seven years after 9/11 -- America's fight against Islamic militancy has bled into Pakistan's. But the hope expressed by Obama that assaults like that on the police academy would convince Pakistanis that Al-Qaeda and its "extremist allies" constitute "the single greatest threat" to their future is pious. Many Pakistanis will agree with Baitullah Mehsud that such violence is blowback from their governments' collaboration in America's losing war in Afghanistan, a collaboration Obama seeks to deepen.

The new American president devoted most of his "strategic policy review" to Pakistan, predicated on the belief that "Al-Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the US homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan. For the American people," he said, "this border region has become the most dangerous place in the world."

Obama offered Pakistan a bouquet of bright incentives sprinkled over dark threats to persuade its people that his war was also theirs. The review was welcomed by the Pakistani government, met with silence by the powerful Pakistani army and intelligence agencies and viewed with cynicism by a people who, polls show, still see America as a greater threat to their security than the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.

The incentives were clear. Obama promised "$1.5 billion in direct support to the Pakistan people every year over the five years." Pakistan President Asif Zardari said the aid would "strengthen democracy". Others too welcomed the money, especially if it is used to "build schools, roads and hospitals" in Pakistan's destitute border regions, where currently the Taliban and Al-Qaeda pay higher salaries than the government.

Even more welcome was Obama's promise to establish a Contact Group of regional countries for Afghanistan, including not only American allies like India but rivals like Russia and China and foes like Iran. Pakistan has long believed that Afghanistan's stability rests on the engagement of its neighbours. "The new Obama administration approach is very positive," said Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmoud Querishi. "They are looking towards a regional approach to the situation".

But there were barbs among the roses. "We will not provide a blank cheque," said Obama. "Pakistan must demonstrate its commitment to rooting out Al-Qaeda and the violent extremists within its borders. And we will insist that action be taken one way or another when we have intelligence about high-level terrorist targets."

In other words Obama will not only continue US missile attacks in the Pakistan border regions that have killed 350 people in the last eight months; he may expand them. The CIA remains convinced that "elements" of Pakistan's main military intelligence agency, the ISI, harbours the Afghan Taliban leadership in Quetta in Pakistan's Balochistan province, including Mullah Mohamed Omar. The ISI denies the charge.

America's accusation of the ISI's ongoing complicity with the Taliban is the real subtext of the review. Obama simply let others say it for him. On 25 March the New York Times cited American government officials that the ISI provides "money, military supplies and strategic planning guidance to Taliban commanders" in Afghanistan. After the review senior American military commanders confirmed "indications" of links between the agency and the Taliban and even Al-Qaeda. "Fundamentally that's one of the things that has to change," said Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It won't. Denied officially, few Pakistani observers doubt the ISI has ties with the Afghan Taliban and other Islamic militants. Nor is this simply residue from the days when Pakistan was the Afghan Taliban regime's main regional backer. "It's policy," says a Pakistan analyst who refused attribution.

For the last seven years the Pakistan army has seen its role in Afghanistan reduced to that of a gun for hire; its task solely to police the Pakistan-Afghan border on America and NATO's behalf. At the same time it watched these powers nurture an Afghan regime not only replete with anti-Pakistani Afghan factions but allied to India, Islamabad's great regional adversary. In such a hostile environment it's no surprise the ISI regards the Afghan Taliban as an "asset" even if the latter's alliance with Al-Qaeda and Pakistan Taliban poses a threat to Pakistan no less than Afghanistan, says the analyst.

"The ISI has links with the Afghan Taliban because it wants to use them as a bargaining chip in Afghanistan. The Pakistani army wants to have a bigger say in whatever new regional dispensation America is planning. The view within the army and ISI is if the Afghan Taliban is abandoned, this will strengthen the Afghan government, as well as India in Afghanistan, at Pakistan's expense."

Amongst the "bigger say" the army wants heard is recognition by the Afghan government of Pakistan's western border and resolution of the status of Kashmir, a territory still divided and disputed between India and Pakistan. Without movement on these conflicts the Pakistan army and ISI will remain at best an ambivalent partner in America's war, at worst a saboteur and caught always between rocks and hard places. If they move too much against Al-Qaeda and Taliban in the border region, Pakistan risks the kind of carnage seen at the Lahore police academy. If they move too little they invite American intervention.

Either way "the level of violence will increase," predicts Talat Mahmoud, an ex- general and now security analyst.


Ausaf, Pakistan
American Propaganda Against
Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence

By Editorial

Translated By Mohammed Abuhuraira Akrami

30 March 2009

Pakistan - Ausaf - Original Article (Urdu)

America has said that some of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) members are assisting Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael G. Mullen, has said that ISI has links with extremists in Afghanistan on the western borders (of Pakistan) and extremists in India on eastern border (of Pakistan).

The representative organization of the Pakistan Army Inter-Services Public Relations, while stating that the allegations are baseless, has said that the objective behind this evil campaign is to damage the reputation of our security organizations. The sincerity of how much we are against terrorism can be easily estimated by the sacrifices of our intelligence and security forces.

America’s new Pak-Afghan policy and baseless accusations against ISI demonstrates that America’s negative intentions for Pakistan and that America wishes to obtain its objective by creating insecurity in Pakistan through this propaganda. The propaganda on the existences of terrorists, particularly Al-Qaeda and the Taliban on Pakistani land, and baseless allegations against ISI is the conspiracy through which America desires to have access to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. Further, it wishes to create insecurity in Pakistan in order to fulfill the evil desires of the Zionist lobby on one side, while it also wants to convert the war its losing in Afghanistan into a victory and dreams of obtaining particular interests.

After revealing these dangerous American objectives, it is the need of the hour in which the government should consult all the political parties and strike for the safe-guards of our national interests in order to ensure the our national security and sovereignty.

Ausaf, Pakistan
<b>The New American Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan</b>
By General (RTD), Mirza Aslam Bag
Translated By Mohammed Abuhuraira Akrami
30 March 2009
Edited by Louis Standish
Pakistan - Ausaf - Original Article (Urdu)
There is nothing new in the policy submitted by American President Barack Obama regarding Afghanistan and Pakistan. All of the points were similar to ones used by previous American administrations; however, the threatening and authoritative tone was employed so America could maintain a high morale. In addition to their assertion that they will finish off al-Qaeda’s base, which is merely a pipedream, Obama, with his recent announcement of an exit strategy from Afghanistan, clearly exposed the fact that America and its coalition forces will have to admit defeat. The new policy actually reveals the defeated, hysterical American mentality.

American and coalition forces have lost their war with the Taliban, so now they want Pakistan to convert their defeat into a victory for them, which is not possible. Despite employing all of its military power, it has failed in Waziristan, Bajorh, Deir and Swat. The Pakistani military itself had to make a treaty with Taliban fighters after being defeated on its own territory. America now wants the Pakistani government to break all of its treaties with the Taliban and wants Asif Alif Zadari to invade those regions like General Parvez Musharraf did. In that case, if the government succumbs to American pressure, then it would be just like sawing off the branch on which is sits. We have witnessed the outcome of invading these regions; the attacks made during the reign of Parvez Musharraf erased our own (Pakistani) dominance in the region and caused heavy losses to the nation. Now President Asif Ali Zadari’s and the government’s intelligence is being tested; they have to decide whether they will bow to America’s will and massacre their own citizens, or whether they will support the demand for pushing out all foreign forces from Afghanistan in order to protect Pakistan and its citizens. It is an absolute fact that the dream of maintaining peace in the region is not possible unless American and European forces retreat from Afghanistan.

The threatening manner used by Barack Obama reveals a severely humiliated America who wants to put all of the blame for its defeat on Pakistan’s shoulders, and consequently, there is a great danger of increased American drone strikes on Pakistani soil. Moreover, as occurred last year, American forces deployed in Afghanistan may cross over into Pakistani land. President Obama has said that the tribal region between Afghanistan and Pakistan is the most dangerous region in the world. Now the next question is whether he knows that it was this same region where America won its war against the former USSR by establishing a link with the Taliban and is now pushing to control the mineral resources of Middle Eastern countries, including Afghanistan and Pakistan, even though she is facing the most resistance it has ever faced. America hopes to control Afghanistan by using all of the latest destructive weapons, but all her attempts are in vain, resulting only in failure and disappointment. The world should have to acknowledge the fact that despite having insufficient resources and a lack of manpower, a few thousand Mujihideen (Holy Fighters), powered by faith, have accomplished much, which is probably impossible for the military of any country which has millions of personnel to admit. And the Pakistani army also had to learn that same lesson before finally making a peace treaty with Moulvi Sufi Mohammed to keep the peace in Swat. If the treaty failed to hold, then it would be very unfortunate for the nation as we would have to face further troubles in the near future.

The forces pushing their evil agendas should not forget what happened to the former USSR in the recent past. A handful of Mujihideen (Holy Fighters) had turned Russian pride into dust and the same fate will befall America. So the leaders of Pakistan should not commit the mistake of relying on anti-Islamic forces against the passions of their faithful (Muslim) citizens. It should be noted that in the last thirty years, this region has been acting as the base of support for defensive forces of the Islamic world against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, America in Iraq, Israel in Lebanon and Gaza, and now America and its coalition forces in Afghanistan have been defeated by the same forces. Even our own Pakistan had to fail for its war objectives in Swat, Bajorh and Waziristan to be met. All of the successes of the defensive powers of the Islamic world are miracles, and merely on this basis, a new world order is coming into existence. Can America and its coalition forces fulfill their war goals by neglecting this important fact? America is apprehensive that upon leaving Afghanistan, the Taliban would come into power in Afghanistan and Pakistan, causing these surrounding areas to fall into anarchy. America and Afghanistan should recall whether when America attacked Iraq in 1990 by isolating Afghanistan and Pakistan, the area fell into anarchy? Never mind that the Taliban had established an ideal peace in the country and that democracy has become stronger in Pakistan. Therefore, if the occupying forces vacate Afghanistan, there will be peace and harmony in the whole region like in Iraq after America announced its withdrawal. Therefore, using force, putting pressure on Pakistan and finishing al-Qaeda, as the characteristics of the “new” policy are meaningless and fruitless. Their consequences will not be good for America.

The ground realities and swiftly changing conditions of the region demanding that there should be a new direction in American-Afghan policy. And the matter should be solved through understanding and diplomacy. It is also important that Russia, China, Iran, India and the Middle Eastern countries are also involved in preparing a comprehensive roadmap to be implemented by the UN. As the withdrawal from Afghanistan commences, suitable steps should be taken for the restoration of peace in the region. As conditions improve, our foreign policy should also go in the right direction.

Foreign policy will not go in the right direction unless we have started to go down the right road domestically. The Pakistan’s People Party is a large political party whose responsibilities are also great. Currently, the public is going through a very odd situation, making Nawaz Sharif’s role very pivotal, and the nation demands that he plays an active role to ensure that our national future may not once again fall victim to monarchy. The reinstatement of Chaudhari Ifthikhar is also a tremendous high point for the nation. It is expected that the exploitation of the poor and hapless will end with the establishment of a judicial system where they can receive cheap and equal justice. These are the personalities that can play a very important role in our nation’s history. Now, the nation is looking to see whether the people of Swat will receive that justice or not. Social justice is the thing that can resurrect even the dead.

The statements from the president and the prime minister of Pakistan reveal that they have welcomed the new American policy, which is actually not right since Pakistan could face serious problems if it were implemented. A unanimous road map can be compiled after thorough consideration and a detailed discussion. We have had the experience of doing everything in haste. So, we should take the utmost precautions.

<b>Mudy Ji :</b>

Pakistan is “Leaking” like a Sieve!

On 27-03-2009 the Pakistani F E Reserves were USD 10.0900 Billion

Pakistan then received USD 1.348 Billion from the IMF and WB.

Pakistan’s F E Reserves on 03-04-2009 are USD 11.1710 Billion i.e. an increase of USD 1.0810 Billion.

Thus Pakistan has already lost 267 Million of the “Largesse” received!

I agree with you that our Leadership, both Political and Bureaucratic, are “vacillating” – putting it mildly – in their actions with Pakistan but let me assure you Pakistan has its finger on the “Self Destruct” button and will undoubtedly push it within an year or so!

Thus at this time the Government of India should start to build up its Border Defences with Pakistan to ensure that 50 to 100 Million Terroristani Refugees do not enter India!!!

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>Decline in wheat production to lower GDP growth</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->KARACHI : <b>The GDP growth rate of Pakistan is expected to decline further as the wheat production target would be missed by 6.8 percent, initial estimates of wheat production show.

Federal Committee on Agriculture (FCA) on Thursday informed that initial estimates showed 23.3 million tonnes wheat production against the target of 25 million tonnes.</b>

Any change in the agricultural productivity sends a ripple effect throughout the economy affecting the vital macroeconomic indicators.

This decline in production is in spite of the fact that the wheat sowing target was surpassed. The government had fixed the target of wheat sowing at 8.610 million hectares, while wheat is sown on 8.749 million hectares, an increase of 1.61 percent.

<b>“The GDP growth would further decline to 2 percent, which is the lowest in the past 38 years of Pakistan’s history,” Dr Shahid Hassan Siddiqui said while talking to Daily Times.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[center] <!--emo&Confusedtupid--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pakee.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pakee.gif' /><!--endemo--> <b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>The Idiot's Guide to Pakistan - Nicholas Schmidle</span></b>[/center]

<b>1. The Troubled Tribals</b>

<b>2. A Taliban Who’s Who</b>

<b>3. Kiss My Lashkar</b>

<b>4. Border Guards</b>

<b>5. Finger on the Trigger</b>


Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>ISI being restructured and cleansed: Qureshi</b> <!--emo&:liar liar--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/liar.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='liar.gif' /><!--endemo-->

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)