پاک بھارت تعلقات

بھارت ہمیشہ پاکستان پر دہشت گردی اور مداخلت کا الزام لگاتا آیا ہے لیکن اس سلسلے میں آج تک کوئی ثبوت نہیں دے پایا ہے، جبکہ بھارتی فوج کے سابقہ سپہ سالار کا یہ اعتراف ‘امن کی آشا‘کی کوششوں پر کاری ضرب ہے۔

امریکہ کے شہر نیویارک میں اس وقت اقوامِ متحدہ کا 68واں سیشن جاری ہے۔ یوں تو اقوامِ متحدہ کا کردار مسائل کے حل کے حوالے سے انتہائی ناگفتہ بہ ہے، لیکن دنیا بھر کے سربراہانِ مملکت کا ایک پلیٹ فارم پر جمع ہونا بہت سے مسائل کے حل کی بنیاد ضرور بن جاتا ہے۔ اس سیشن کے شروع ہونے سے کئی مہینے پہلے سے ہی دو ایٹمی ہتھیاروں سے لیس پڑوسی ممالک پاکستان اور بھارت کے سربراہانِ مملکت کی ملاقات کے بارے میں قیاس آرائیاں شروع ہو گئی تھیں۔ دونوں ممالک کے درمیان اچھے تعلقات ہمیشہ سے ایک خواب رہے ہیں جو باوجود تمام کوششوں کے ابھی تک خراب ہی ہیں۔ گذشتہ روز بھارت کے وزیرِ اعظم نے امریکی صدر باراک اوباما کے ساتھ ملاقات میں الزام لگایا کہ ’’دہشتگردانہ کارروائیوں کامرکز اب بھی پاکستان ہے۔‘‘ انھوں نے مزید کہا کہ ’’نواز شریف سے ملنے کا منتظر ہوں مگر توقعات ذرا کم رکھی جائیں۔‘‘

اقوامِ متحدہ کے اجلاس کے دوران پاکستان اور بھارت کے سربراہانِ مملکت کی ملاقات ہفتوں پہلے سے زیرِ غور تھی۔ اقوامِ متحدہ کے سیکٹری جنرل بان کی مون نے اس مجوزہ ملاقات کو خوش آمدید کہا تھا اور اسے دونوں ملکوں کے تعلقات میں بہتری کے لئے خوش آئند قرار دیا تھا، جبکہ دونوں ممالک کے سربراہوں نے بھی ملاقات کی یقین دہانی کروائی تھی اور خوشی کا اظہار بھی کیا تھا۔ یہ مذاکرات ایک ایسے وقت میں ہونے جا رہے ہیں جب بھارت کے سابقہ آرمی چیف کا یہ اعتراف سامنے آیا ہے کہ ٹیکنیکل سروسز ڈیویژن کے نام سے ایک علیحدہ یونٹ تشکیل دیا گیا تھا جس نے پاکستان کے اندر کاروائیاں کی ہیں۔ بھارت ہمیشہ پاکستان پر دہشت گردی اور مداخلت کا الزام لگاتا آیا ہے لیکن اس سلسلے میں آج تک کوئی ثبوت نہیں دے پایا ہے، جبکہ بھارتی فوج کے سابقہ سپہ سالار کا یہ اعتراف ‘امن کی آشا’ کی کوششوں پر کاری ضرب ہے۔ پاکستانی حکومت کو چایئے کہ یہ معاملہ سنجیدگی سے بھارتی حکومت کے ساتھ اٹھا کر وضاحت طلب کرے اور ساتھ ہی ساتھ اقوامِ متحدہ میں بھی یہ معاملہ اٹھائے کہ پاکستان کی سالمیت اور خودمختاری کے خلاف ریاستی پشت پناہی میں جاری بھارتی خفیہ سرگرمیوں کا عالمی برادری نوٹس لے۔

No Use Meeting India’s Prime Minister

Pakistan had perfectly normal ties with India for nearly 20 years after our Independence. We contested the Kashmir dispute with civility at the UN but retained normal trade and cultural ties with India. 

Ahmed Qureshi – PakNationalists

This was until India started to expand the conflict beyond and outside the UN.  India went to Afghanistan and started promoting independent Pashtunistan and Balochistan and started recruiting Pakistanis to work against their country. 

India’s Hindi-speaking ruling minority, the most extremist segment of Indian population, had been obsessed with punishing Pakistan since 1950. India developed the idea of promoting independent Pashtunistan and Balochistan as a way to prove that Pakistan should not exist.

It is this hate for Pakistan that prompted India and its Hindi-speaking rulers to expand the conflict over Kashmir. Resolving Kashmir is key to helping India understand it needs to accept Pakistan, and accept Kashmiris’ right to decide their fate in a free, UN-sponsored plebiscite.

Some Indians, not all but some, have deep-seated hatred against you if you are a Pakistani. Tonight, at this hour, there are hundreds of Indian families sleeping in the open, in the fields, just 80 miles from New Delhi. Their crime? They are Indian Muslims, who share the same religion as most Pakistanis. So, having the same religion as most Pakistanis is a crime in the eyes of some hateful Indians. The place is called Muzaffarnagar. If they can do this to their own citizens, imagine what they will do to you when they get a chance. 

General Kayani Gives Go-Ahead for Dir Operation

Pakistan’s military chief Saturday visited the headquarters of two infantry divisions in Swat and Malakand Division and reportedly gave final nod to an upcoming targeted military action against the terrorists, almost a week after an army general was killed in a terror hit in nearby Upper Dir district.

PKKH

Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani visited the headquarters of 17 Infantry Div and 19 Infantry Div to review the final preparatory arrangements for and give a go-ahead to targeting the terrorists safe havens in Upper Dir, according to a Pakistan Army brigadier.

The move is clearly linked to the killing of General Officer Commanding (GOC) 17 Infantry Div, Major General Sanaullah Khan, who was taken out in an improvised explosive device (IED) attack Sunday night by the militants near Gatkotal village of Upper Dir, on his way back after a two-night stay at Bin Shahi sector.

Notorious terrorist organisation Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) took responsibility for the attack which also resulted in the death of Commanding Officer Lieutenant Colonel Touseef and Lance Naik Irfan Sattar. The GOC had visited Shahi sector, at a height of 10,000 feet, reportedly to check military preparedness against cross-border incursions from Afghan side.

A military statement on Saturday, however, lacked any mention of the reported military operation, which, according to the brigadier, could be launched anytime now after the approval of the COAS. The statement said that Gen Kayani visited Upper Dir to offer prayers for deceased soldiers of the Sunday attack. Gen Kayani “paid rich tributes to them for their ultimate sacrifice and said that the whole nation would remain indebted to them,” it said.

Mystery Of Missing NATO Containers In Karachi?

A lot has been said about the missing containers. However, we have all missed the point that these containers are not missing at all, particularly for the senders and the recipients. The military accounting system is one of the most stringent and does not allow for things going missing. Let us track how NATO supplies are ordered and supplied.

By Admiral M A Tahir – Opinion Maker

The logistics people in Afghanistan place an order on their supply system for provision of all sorts of materials, from mineral water to armoured Personnel Carriers. Once generated this demand travels through the system and reaches the supply depots. These depots could be located in USA, Europe or regional facilities maintained by US Forces or NATO. These regional facilities may be located in KSA or somewhere else in the Middle East.

The items ordered and approved for shipment are collected, listed and stuffed into the containers. These containers are loaded on vessels and brought to one of the two Pakistani ports, where from these are transported by road through local contractors. Once the goods reach the depots in Afghanistan, they are checked against demand and if found correct, the books stand balanced.

Now if there are items short, the initiator of the demand will immediately raise a report of short supply, informing everyone of the discrepancy in what was ordered and what was received. He will do this first because that is how he knows to work and secondly he does not want to be charged for embezzlement and court martialed when the records are checked by the auditors. If this is true and I know it is so, how could the dispatching depots and the recipient organization not come to know and raise a short supply report for the containers they ordered and did not receive.

Karachi Operation With Fresh Mandate

M A Tahir – Opinion Maker

It comes as a surprise that MQM wants the Pakistan Admiral Army to conduct operation in Karachi. Surprise may be an understatement as there are so many factors hidden behind this demand. It is therefore a very serious, significant and crucially important matter for our country and must be analysed dispassionately by all specially the Army and I am sure that is exactly what must be happening in Rawalpindi as I write this. Let us not approach the issue from a simpleton’s mind and not be gungho about it. I say this because the MQM has a history of tackling various issues with the coolness of an analyst’s mind and this demand and its aftermaths are no different. 

Let us start from the bottom and assume this to be a sincere demand for the peace to prevail in Karachi. This genuineness could arise from a situation that the party is losing the battle for control of the city. This could have happened because of involvement of other equally potent rivals in this bloody game. The history does not favor this assumption as the parties involved in this mayhem have been at it for many years without any of them raising the white flag. The history of the violent city tells us that at worst the parties involved would settle for selective control of different areas.

The next reason could be that the party not being a part of the government fears that all actions from now on will be decided and taken by the ruling party and their workers will be apprehended and prosecuted with party having no clout to intervene and save these elements. The ruling party may also fish out the hideouts and weapons and ammunition storage. This may result in loss of morale and eventual loss of capability to fight on. The Army deployment will ensure equal loss of capability of all the warring parties and hence at the end of the operation all entities will be at the same starting point.

The next and the most serious intent in this demand could be to embroil the Army in the city. This could have a number of consequences, namely; depletion of deployment from the Western as well as Eastern borders, involving the Army in street fights, casualties on both sides, blames of excesses being committed by the Army, hue and cry at the international level, induction of new or activation of sleeping elements already inducted by foreign players, claims of use of unconventional methods and banned substances by the Army, international pressure on Pakistan to engage in negotiations with the anti-social elements and finally some international players actively jumping into the fray. 

Avoiding Media Biases

S. M. Hali – Opinion Maker

Media bias has been defined as the perceived spin provided by journalists and news producers in their selection of events and stories that are reported and how they are covered. The term “media bias” implies a pervasive bias contravening journalistic ethics, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist or article.

It must be emphasized that political bias has been a feature of the mass media since its birth with the invention of the printing press. The expense of early printing equipment restricted media production to a limited number of people. Historians have found that publishers often served the interests of powerful social groups. With the advent of the electronic media, the corporate interests of the media moguls tend to cloud judgment. With the increase in media reach and its exponential growth in capacity, the tendency to use it for vested interests has become more pronounced in a country like Pakistan, whose media operates sans a formal code of ethics.

Some tools used to exercise media bias comprise the following:

Opinion as a Fact—by presenting one’s personal opinion disguised as a fact can easily mislead readers.

Half Truths—Quoting out of context or presenting only one aspect of information is a favourite ploy of propagandists.

Misleading Headlines—the headline writer can propagandize effectively since many see a headline but seldom read the story.

Biased Photographs—presenting best perspective of favourites and worst of undesirables.

Censorship—selective control of information so as to favour a particular viewpoint or editorial position and deliberate doctoring of information or totally disbarring certain undesirable information are certain forms of censorship to create a desired effect.

Wrongful Attribution or Testimonial Technique—in which a journalist may attribute a statement to a veiled or vague authority to gain credence for an incorrect statement.

Yellow Journalism—the term denotes scare headlines, superficial writing, faked pictures and interviews and encompasses all of the above. Originated from William Randolph Hearst – 1887 ‘Examiner’, ‘New York journal’- to gain circulation, he urged in 1900 war with Spain and succeeded in making this uncalled for conflagration with its resultant most unfortunate consequences.

PAKISTAN: THE POLITICAL-MILITARY CONTEXT

By Brig Samson S Sharaf – Opinion Maker

Pakistan’s policy making over the past 65 years is influenced by Pakistan’s security concerns emanating from a hostile neighborhood. There are many reasons why security perspectives eclipsed socio-economic considerations thereby holding the country hostage to elites. Amongst them is lack of credible second tier political leadership post 1949, linkages between the residual political elites, bureaucracy and military high command and facilitation of a corporatocracy during the decade of progress. This elitist and exclusive culture deprived space for the evolution of a broad based popular and sustainable political order. A coterie of few held the entire nation hostage.

In the past five years the question of civilian supremacy over military attracted the liberal circles. Unfortunately, pot shots by illiterate commentators and a trending media relegated the entire discourse to acrimonious debates riding airwaves. Memo-gate is an example in which a peevish effort to garner US support to checkmate the army became public.

A realistic, balanced and mature approach to civil-military relations holds far more promise for the military corporate culture, exclusivism and professionalism than over indulgence in matters that are not its fortes. This is what all developed countries have achieved. South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Turkey, Chile, Argentina and Mexico have grown to become world’s top economies after militaries have been successfully confined to their professional duties. This was not a result of one overawing the other; but because all parties had agreed to a common national agenda.

NGOs; The Guise

According to Issa Shivjiin the African countries, the slogan of the NGOs was ‘structural adjustment programs’, which meant that ‘the African states’ bureaucracies were corrupt, incapable and unable to learn’. 

Men are sentient beings; they feel the pain of others and harbor the urge to help out. The power of empathy binds one man with another, stranger to him, living thousands of miles away. But the fact is that however universal this trait of human nature may be, people who commit their lives for the purpose of others are scarce to find and surely the noblest. To rise from personal needs and fulfillment and to reach the wretched hand of a sufferer is truly a tedious journey on the part of man; a journey the majority among us would not resolve to make. 

Yet, is it possible that empathy may belong to a special group of people, maybe the ones profuse in riches, as they are the only ones who might have respite from normal human toil and the excess to spend lavishly upon others? That would be the same as saying that nobility is concurrent to wealth. Such a notion would make the pursuit of economic wealth the noblest path to tread; exactly the phenomenon entrapping the Western thought in its neoliberal age. Only a belief such as that can allow the institution of the NGOs to prevail as brokers of the ‘love of humanity’ in the length and breadth of the world. 

Non-Governmental Organizations are a network laid throughout the grid of humanity that claim to be the ‘noble ones’; they pose to be cross-border crusades of altruistic people, yearning to bring food, health and human rights to a suffering humanity. But the dilemma of the NGOs is that in order for ‘sympathy’ to operate at continental levels, it has to be broken down into innumerable manageable bits.