‘90% of girls in rural Balochistan remain unschooled’

Around 90% of girls in rural Balochistan are deprived of schooling.

The insurgency is the key reason, while a lack of necessary funds, absence of a well-defined education policy, lack of girls’ schools, acute shortage of teaching staff, and poverty are other factors which contribute to the backwardness.

 Except for provincial capital Quetta, educational institutions are non-existent in Baloch-dominated areas of the province.

You will not find any school from Mastung to Gwadar.

Most neglected parts of the province where Baloch girls are not educated are Buleda (Makran), Kharan , Bolan and Marri and Bugti tribal areas.
There are government-run primary schools in other parts of the province, but high schools have not been established so far.

Bureaucratic hurdles and financial corruption are also other major factors that have destroyed the future of thousands of girls.

Many religious schools established in mosques and madrassas have filled the vacuum of schools, but such religious schools are only imparting religious education.

Some foreign countries are interested in helping build schools in the province, but their experts and diplomats are not being allowed by Islam­abad to visit Balochistan due to security concerns.

Pakistan Army should expand its education network in the province. Army-run schools are providing better educational facilities in the most backward tribal areas of Marri, but the military should also set up schools in other parts of the province where non-Baloch teaching staff is not willing to serve.

It is very unfortunate that most teachers of Punjabi origin are not willing to serve in the Baloch-populated districts of the province after the killing of several teachers by the insurgents during the past many years.

The Mufti of Kazakhstan Urges Women to Wear Kazakh National Dress NOT the Hijab

Filed under: Islam,moral issues,religious,Russian — 01varvara @ 00.00
Tags: Kazakh, Kazakhstan, modesty, Muslim

Mufti Absattar Derbisali, the Supreme Mufti of Kazakhstan, appealed to those who wear the hijab to dress appropriately in the Kazakh tradition. At a theological forum in Astana on Wednesday, he said, “Recently, the hijab’s become fashionable in our society. There’s been thinking about this question, and I think that there’s a civilised way to resolve it. Recently, in Almaty, we held a symposium devoted to women’s apparel, attended by renowned fashion designers, showing off our national dress for women. We plan to carry out such meetings annually”. As for Mufti Derbisali’s personal view, he thinks that we must bring women to see that “the Kazakh national dress is beautiful. We shouldn’t have to wear the national dress of Pakistan, for instance. Why should we ape another nationality’s fashions?”

ONLY in Russia… The Largest Koran in the World is in Kazan!

Filed under: Islam,religious,Russian — 01varvara @ 00.00
Tags: Kazan, Koran, Qolşärif Mosque, Tatarstan, Volga Bulgaria

_______________________________

The Koran al-Karim is largest Koran in the world, it’s kept at the Qolşärif Mosque in Kazan. The book weighs 800 kilos (1,764 pounds); it measures 2 metres x 1.5 metres x 25 centimetres (6.5 feet x 5 feet x 10 inches). It has 632 pages, each of which weighs 250 grammes (a little under 9 ounces), which means that the pages alone weigh 158 kilos (349 pounds). The cover has gold leaf, silver, malachite, jasper, turquoise, and topaz decorations. In May, they plan to transfer the Koran to the ancient city of Bolgar in Tatarstan, which is where Volga Bulgaria officially accepted Islam as its state religion in 922. It’s a popular venue for wedding party photos.

All-Russian Muftiate Favours Government Ban on Wahhabism in Russia

“What’s that? We’re supposed to hate all ‘infidels’ and ban their churches? We’re true sons of Allah here… my pops got on well with the Russian neighbours, so do I, and so shall my son… you got a problem with that? Wanna rumble?”

******

THIS is the face of Russian Islam… do NOT listen to the hate spewed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. If you vote for the Republican Party, you vote for religious hatred and bigotry… NEVER forget that.

______________________________

According to the Russian Islamic Conciliar Association (all-Russian Muftiate) (RAIS), the Russian state should outlaw the ideology of Wahhabism. Mufti Farid Salman, the head of the Ulema Council of the RAIS, wrote in an article published on Interfax-Religion, “Should we ban Wahhabism in Russia? Yes! It’s a necessity. The very future of the Russian state hangs upon finding a solution to this most pressing problem”. In Mufti Salman’s opinion, banning Wahhabism in Russia “can’t be affected by our relationship with one or another country. In some countries (like Saudi Arabia: Interfax) Wahhabism may be the state ideology, if that’s what the people there want. If we prohibit Wahhabism throughout the Russian Federation, the Russian state authority would operate within the framework of its legal code, it would uphold its sovereignty, and, most importantly, it would be for the sake of our future”.

Let’s Not Rush to Win in Russia

By BORIS AKUNIN

On Sept. 24, when it was announced at the congress of the ruling party of Russia that our next president will once again be Vladimir Putin, my wife said to me: “That’s it. We need to leave. I don’t not want to spend the rest of my life in the country of Mister Dobby.” “This is not his country,” I replied. “Let’s wait some more. There will be a social eruption. People are not idiots, they will not agree to this castling move.”

But days passed, weeks, and there was no social eruption. Yes, a few of the usual anti-Putin grumblers — me among them — grumbled. As for the rest of Russia, it seemed to care less: if Putin, let it be Putin. Another 12 years? Let him stay for life, no problem. So I also started to think seriously of leaving. If we — those whom the Putin government makes sick to our stomach — are so few, why should we keep our tranquil compatriots from living happily?

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the rest of the autumn was one of the most depressing periods of my life. It’s hard to feel like a stranger in one’s own country — especially for a writer.

Then came December, and in literally a few days Russia awoke and became an entirely different country. Suddenly it was apparent that people like me were not a marginal minority, that we were many. In Moscow we’re actually a clear majority.

All talk of leaving vanished in my circle, as if it had never happened. The discovery that made us euphoric can be summed up in four words: “This is our country.” The last time we felt this way was 20 years ago, when the Communist regime collapsed.

From outside, the events in Russia may resemble the revolutionary storm that swept through Arab countries, ridding them of authoritarian regimes. But the analogy is deceptive. The only similarity is the important role of social networks in organizing spontaneous protests. What is happening in Russia is quite different, and quite unusual: a revolution of the middle class, a class that is inherently nonrevolutionary.

To many people, including Russians themselves, the sudden awakening of society seems like a miracle. But it is not a miracle. It is a consequence of a natural social process. More precisely — two diametrically opposed processes.

The first is the profound changes that have taken place in Russian society over the past two decades. Millions of people learned to live in “wild” capitalism — making a living without government intervention, surviving in a brutally competitive environment, providing a reasonable standard of living for their families. These seeds germinated underground, almost invisibly to the naked eye, and suddenly grass was sprouting everywhere. The black, naked earth suddenly turned green.

This sudden spring was accelerated by a second social process, which also started a few years back: the deepening degradation of the Putin regime. In the absence of any control by elected deputies, courts or the media, the system lapsed into the illusion that everything is permitted, and began to make mistake after mistake, not even realizing that it was destroying itself.

The Russian Spring in the dead of winter was a direct consequence of the Putin-Medvedev swap announced on Sept. 24 and the equally shameless fraud in the parliamentary elections. Suddenly it became clear that Russians would no longer tolerate such stuff. They had grown up, and the authoritarian diapers had become too tight.

Between the two giant rallies on Dec. 10 and 24, Putin still had a chance to reason with the protesters. But the “national leader” (as his supporters like to call the prime minister) made another mistake, a fatal one: He publicly insulted the participants in the movement, saying they were brainwashed and had sold out. After that, the main object of public indignation was Putin himself, and not the ruling party.
In those two weeks, Putin lost the country.

He, of course, has not realized this yet. He thinks it’s all just noisy Muscovites, and that the rest of the country still supports him. Moreover, he truly believes that he will win the presidential election.

In the current circumstances, that can happen only through colossal fraud. And there is no doubt that the enormous crooked machine in charge of counting votes will not stop at any fraud. But the victory will be Pyrrhic. Putin will lose what’s left of his ratings, and will become an all-Russian object of hatred and ridicule. This will be a very weak president, unlikely to survive long in office.

Paradoxical as this may sound, I would prefer if Putin’s regime did not collapse too quickly. Let him resist at least another year or so. If he left right away, without squandering his popularity to the end, he might yet come back in a fully democratic way — when the crisis hits the living standard, people will begin to talk nostalgically of the “fat years.” A “second coming” would be a catastrophe for the country.

In addition, the still very young shoots of civil society need time to grow and become stronger. The best way for them to mature would be a continuing assault on a rigid, unyielding authoritarianism. In such a struggle, civil society would strengthen and learn to organize. A palette of real political parties would develop — not puppets, as in Putin’s Parliament: a powerful democratic center, with the new left of socialists and communists to one side, and the new right of nationalists on the other.

If the change of power occurred after this process was complete, post-Putin Russia would enter relatively painlessly into the next stage of the evolution of the state. Politically, this would be a tumultuous country, with parliamentary crises, abrupt changes of government, demands for impeachment and all the other attributes of a developing democracy.

But in a country in which a middle class had awakened and realized its power, neither the “siloviki” (the power ministers) nor the oligarchs would be able any longer to monopolize power. Nor could one person.

Boris Akunin is the pen name under which Grigory Chkhartishvili, a Russian writer and literary scholar, has written dozens of best-selling historical detective novels. Under his own name, Chkhartishvili is an expert on Japanese literature. The article was translated from the Russian by the IHT.

Pakistan Watches Iranian Nuclear Assassinations

 

Despite stringent security measures, Pakistan remains a ‘soft’ target. A key area to watch: exposing Pakistani nuclear personnel to foreigners under the garb of UN or academic interactions.


 Pakistan—The clockwork mystery assassinations of Iran’s nuclear scientists pose an important security question for Pakistan, the next-door nuclear-armed nation whose strategic programs have been demonized in British and American media.
The latest attack occurred in Tehran on Wednesday, killing a chemistry expert linked to the country’s main nuclear agency, the Iran Atomic Energy Organization.
Pakistan must be watching this development closely. Iran accuses the United States, the UK and Israel of involvement.

Pakistan’s experiences in pursuing nuclear technology are different to Iran’s. But Islamabad has been a target no less. What helped Pakistan is its high diplomatic stature on the world stage and strong network of ties with key nations.
For example, while the possibility of threat from Israel has been real, both Islamabad and Tel Aviv managed to establish some form of communication through third countries to avoid fatal misunderstandings.
Israel has curiously refrained from talking about Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic programs [not even in the Israeli media]. But unlike Israel, the Brits and the Americans have been vocal, often through official design, in spreading fear and disinformation about the safety of Pakistani nukes.
Washington has become more hostile toward Pakistan in the past decade, spreading fear about Pakistan’s nukes where none exist. To American embarrassment, a more immediate nuclear security threat emerged in Japan, a US ally, with catastrophic consequences that continue to exist.
The key question here is this: Pakistan will probably never go assassinating individuals involved in the nuclear programs of other countries, but what would Islamabad do if someone creates a list of Pakistani nuclear experts and begins to assassinate them one by one? Or targets them for recruitment as Trojans or saboteurs?
Pakistan has been firm in protecting its nuclear personnel and installations. But even then the country is overall ‘soft’ in protecting itself. Foreign operatives from the US, India, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and former Soviet Union have breached Pakistani security at different stages.
For example, diplomats and intelligence agents from France and the United States were caught in Pakistan red handed attempting to spy on Pakistani nukes.
A new level of security breach occurred in 2007 and continues until now with the induction into power individuals with known links to foreign governments and intelligence agencies.
And Afghanistan continues to be an anti-Pakistan outpost under the control of US, NATO and India.
Islamabad is trying to normalize ties with US, which means resetting US ties from ‘high-level meddling’ to ‘normal diplomatic ties’.
Until this situation is resolved, no level of security is too much in Pakistan’s case.
A key area to watch for Pakistan is the level of access it gives the outside world to its nuclear community.
The Strategic Plans Division [SPD] of Pakistan’s National Command Authority [NCA] is the government agency monitoring this access. It is a world-class operation, designed and implemented twelve years ago.
SPD’s security blueprint is the latest in the world. Many countries interested in civil nuclear applications are studying this model.
Despite its high-level security model, SPD needs to study how the names of Iranian nuclear experts and scientists leaked through the UN and IAEA. This is not to say the two international bodies were willing instruments of spying on Iran. But the information they collected – including names, identities and designations of key Iranian nuclear officials — ultimately fell in the hands of foreign spy agents who are now assassinating them one by one.
So, until Pakistan makes the transition from a ‘soft’ to a ‘strong’ state, it needs to watch closely how Iran’s nuclear establishment is being cornered and terrorized. This sets a new model of coercive containment of a potential nuclear-armed nation. And it’s a model that those in charge of nuclear security must watch closely.
[See Iran’s official letter to UN Security Council, General Assembly and Secretary General on the latest assassination.]

Did This Pakistani General Teach Politicians A Lesson In Obeying The Law?

 

The army chief shows respect to law. The politicians flout the law and defy the Supreme Court. But that’s not all.

Pakistan—General Kayani, the army chief, has given the country’s politicians a lesson in tactics. While politicians often opt for knee-jerk responses to serious matters or follow their staffers’ improvisations, the general has chosen to play by the book.
He was prompt in answering the Supreme Court’s notice and thus distanced himself, in this case at least, from the politicians who are getting flak for avoiding compliance with the judiciary’s directives. He sent his statement to the Defense Ministry, as per rules. If the ministry did not follow the procedure laid down in the Rules of Business inscribed in a moth-eaten file of 1973, he cannot be blamed. That makes the PM angry at a time when he needs to be cooler than cucumber.

This display of tactics is the result of more than six decades of training in the art of autonomous management of an organization that – unlike Pakistani politicians – never stops widening its knowledge base and regularly puts its theoretical formulations to practical test. It is also the result of governments’ age-old policies of allowing the military great freedom of operation and autonomy not only in its own sphere but also beyond it.
Among the many matters civil society organizations dabble in, without unfortunately pursuing their efforts with due diligence, the question of imbalance in civil and military relations figures prominently. While it may be possible to blame the generals for assuming responsibilities that lie outside their professional mandate, the politicians have to accept a greater blame for the straits they have landed themselves in. They have yet to realize that the imbalance they complain of cannot be corrected by tinkering with this office or that and that the process is going to be long and arduous.
Two things are necessary. First, it needs to be understood that nobody can trifle with the military and its task of defending the country against external aggression. The people must be proud of their sons who give their lives to secure their freedom from external threats. But no good military gets involved with politics, even with civil administration (Ayub Khan too called it the route to corruption) because that will undermine the interests of the state and the military both.
Anyone who goads the military into intervening in politics is not its friend.
Secondly, the way to the establishment of the people’s sovereignty lies in breaking the colonial model to which the state is shackled. The state of Pakistan needs to be re-structured in accordance with modern democratic models. Only then will its organs, and institutions subservient to them, will be able to find their legitimate places.
Until these two conditions are met the politicians will continue to be outmaneuvered by men in khaki.
Mr. Rehman is Secretary General of the independent Pakistan Human Rights Commission [PHRC]. This is an excerpt from his longer article published in The News on Sunday.

US-Pakistan Relation: A Troubled Geostrategic Marriage

US-Pakistan relations date back to the establishment of Pakistan and have gone through ups and downs. The first significant bond between the two was in the context of the 1955 Baghdad Pact, which allied the Muslim nations bordering the USSR and was supposed to serve as a buffer against Soviet expansion into Asia. During the India-Pakistan War of 1965, America’s refusal to send weapons to Pakistan led to a sense of betrayal and distrust on the part of many Pakistanis towards the US. This sentiment grew stronger when the US cut military aid in 1979 after the Pakistani nuclear program came to light. We also see US Embassy in Islamabad Burnt to Ashes that year by Pakistani’s.
Relations improved later that year when the USSR invaded Afghanistan and the US Congress authorized the resumption of security assistance, despite Pakistan’s nuclear program. The nuclear test Pakistan conducted in 1998, in response to a nuclear test by India, again derailed relations with Washington. The 9/11 attacks against the US in 2001 served as a catalyst for a renewed closeness of relations, largely due to the understanding by General Musharraf, who headed Pakistan at the time, that Pakistan had better join the angry United States after the attacks rather than be identified as an opponent and risk a direct confrontation, as was the case with Iraq and Afghanistan. For the US, helping Pakistan becomes a more stable and democratic nation fighting radical Islamic terror elements became a central goal in the post-9/11 era.

The targeted killing of Osama Bin Laden by the United States in early May 2011 and the complex sequence of related events, including the terrorist attack by the Pakistan-based Haqqani network on the American Embassy in Kabul in early September, have thrown the complicated relationship between the US and Pakistan into the spotlight. The two nations are deeply divided with regard to the war on terrorism, reflected in recent months by increasingly loud calls by members of Congress to end military and economic aid to Pakistan in light of suspicions and accusations by senior US Army officers.
Hostile Pakistani public opinion and concerns about Pakistan playing both sides have damaged the willingness of several US lawmakers to continue to budget either civilian or military aid to Pakistan. Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) conveyed this sentiment when he remarked, “We spent all this money and they still hate us.”
In addition, Pakistan has time and again failed to maintain its military achievements in the war on terrorism or translate them into successes in the civilian realm; areas that were cleared of terrorists are reclaimed by terrorists in the absence of a stable local government (in some areas, the military has engaged in a third round of cleansing in the last two years). Therefore, it is not inconceivable that the next stage in the war on terrorism in Pakistan may go beyond the FATA borders and entail expanding American drone attacks into the Balochistan region.
Some of the current tensions between the US and Pakistan may be attributed to the sudden death of America’s special envoy to the region, Richard Holbrooke, who enjoyed a special status there, was an expert in all regional matters, and was a proponent of a policy that placed greater emphasis on the civilian aspect than on the military
Still, despite the angry reverberations from declarations by senior American government and military personnel, a closer examination of Pakistan’s war on terrorism demonstrates that America’s copious criticism is both overstated and imprecise in several ways. First, of all the nations’ fighting terrorism, including the United States, Pakistani security forces have suffered the highest number of casualties, with close to 4,000 dead. Second, Pakistani security forces have succeeded in catching senior Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, such as Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, the brain behind 9/11. Third, the Pakistani army and border patrol have long been fighting the terrorist organizations in FATA, and have paid for this with serious retaliations on the internal arena following the establishment of the Pakistani Taliban, which carries out many attacks targeting both urban centers and the security services.
Because of reading all that if you are thinking China as an Alternative to the US, then no you are WRONG my friends.
An examination of past confrontations between Pakistan and India (1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999) shows that China did not help Pakistan in any significant way in any of them, and even sided openly with India in 1999 in the Kargil conflict.
Moreover, as a member of the UN Security Council, China has voted for defining the Jamaat-ud-Dawa as a terrorist organization, in clear contrast to the Pakistani position. An examination of Chinese aid to Pakistan shows that the major portion is military, with only a small allotment to civilian needs. For example, after the destructive floods in 2010, China offered Pakistan the relatively modest sum of only $100 million, as opposed to the $500 million given by the US. China’s clear interest lies in maintaining the tension between India and Pakistan in order to impede India’s growth and keep it from vying with China for regional hegemony.
Therefore China might be expected to continue providing Pakistan with military aid, thereby preventing a disruption of the balance of power favoring India and an armed conflict between India and Pakistan. By contrast, leaders of the Pakistani regime are using the strategic alliance with China as a tool in negotiations with the US. About a week after the successful attack on Bin Laden, Prime Minister Gillani left for a visit to China and even declared in Pakistan’s parliament that China is “an all-weather partner” – a dig clearly directly at Washington.
US is the largest donor to Pakistan in terms of Civil and Military Aid ,The Full-bright Scholarship Program and the assistance provided by US Govt. in the Flood are just to name few efforts by the US Govt. for the people of Pakistan.
It’s time for all to understand that now we are with US in this war against extremism, we should fight and stand together by US until this over.
Friends have some good and bad moments, and right now we are just having some bad moments with our friend.
The Best Solution in the time is that drone control should hand over to Pakistan so any drone attack in Pakistan should be carry under Pakistani supervision and permission. The Supply Route to NATO forces should be opened against that agreement.
Pirzada Hasaan Hashmi
Writer is a Blogger ,Inter-faith Expert & Works as Spokesperson for IHRP (www.ihrp.net)

Hateful Indians At It, Again

Pakistan faces a political crisis, the result of a failed democracy and fake democrats. But who is more excited about this? It is the Indians, who surface like autumn frogs at every story concerning Pakistan. They offer themselves as top experts on anything Pakistani. And their arrogant refrain is becoming laughable to everyone: ‘Since we’re a democracy, we can lecture Pakistan as experts.’
Today there is a political crisis of sorts in Pakistan, where a pro-US government faces collapse thanks to an angry public opinion, corruption cases in courts, and decisions by this government that amount to serious national security breaches.
You would think American news organizations would invite Pakistanis to speak about their country and explain it to the world. Not so. The purpose of most US officials, think tanks and media these days is to demonize Pakistan. So some of these anti-Pakistan Americans prefer to invite hateful Indians to do the job of explaining Pakistan to the world.

The latest frog to leap, so to speak, is Mr. Sadanand Dhume, a self-styled Pakistan expert working for American Enterprise Institute. American thinks tanks receive a lot of funding from various US government departments. They have turned anti-Pakistan a decade ago as part of a plan to paint Islamabad as the enemy, ally US with India, contain China and occupy Russia’s central Asian backyard.
In fact, there is a consistent effort to put the US on a warpath with Pakistan.
In the last decade, the American academia and media has churned out more anti-Pakistan stories than India ever did. To solidify the new anti-Pakistanism in the United States and brainwash the good American people into hating one more country and people, a large number of hateful Indians have been recruited into the think tanks and media organizations.
So there is a political crisis today in Pakistan, the result of a government working on protecting the interests of a foreign country, the United States, more than the interests of Pakistan. No wonder the vast majority of Pakistanis are up in arms against this government. A key aide in this government, a former envoy to Washington, faces possible treason charges for allowing hundreds of CIA operatives into Pakistan and turning this country into another American war zone and weaken it in favor of Indian strategic interests. Go to Pakistani online forums of every stripe and color and you will hear the worst things said about the government of President Zardari.
But the hateful Indians working in the US are up in arms defending this government.

Mr. Dhume appears today in the Wall Street Journal. This is a professional business paper. But it’s editors appear to have outsourced its Foreign Desk to CIA analysts, old and serving colleagues of leading independent thinkers like Bruce Riedel, for example. Tho Foreign Desk of this paper is anti-Pakistan and often acts as conduit for CIA planted stories on Pakistan, Russia, China and other countries.

Pretending to be a Pakistan expert, Mr. Dhume begins with his masterpiece today with this boring cliche:

Who gets to decide when a democratically elected government’s time is up? To the average Japanese, Indian or American, the answer is obvious: the same people who voted it into office in the first place. Not so for the average Pakistani.

I have issue here with India’s democracy, which I will explain shortly.
The Indian writer claims that an elected government in Pakistan will not complete its term because the military will topple it.
In all honesty, he is either lying or is a propagandist on an agenda.
Either Mr. Dhume lacks information and research skills, which brings into questions his positions as researcher and columnist at AEI and WSJ. Or he is outrageously lying for disinformation purposes, which simply proves he’s one of those seasonal Indian frogs that leap out on every Pakistani story.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan [HRCP] is often accused of being anti-military. I find many of their reports biased against the military and supportive of anyone working against Pakistani military, even if they are terrorist recruits into anti-Pakistan groups that enjoy refuge in US-controlled Afghanistan.
But a senior director of HRCP, Mr. I. A. Rehman, concedes in an op-ed in The News International on Sunday that Pakistani military is abiding by the law in dealing with the pro-US government of President Zardari.
Here is a quote:

[Chief of Army Staff] General Kayani, the army chief, has given the country’s politicians a lesson in tactics. While politicians often opt for knee-jerk responses to serious matters or follow their staffers’ improvisations, the general has chosen to play by the book. He was prompt in answering the Supreme Court’s notice and thus distanced himself, in this case at least, from the politicians who are getting flak for avoiding compliance with the judiciary’s directives. He sent his statement to the Defense Ministry, as per rules. If the ministry did not follow the procedure laid down in the Rules of Business inscribed in a moth-eaten file of 1973, he cannot be blamed. That makes the PM angry at a time when he needs to be cooler than cucumber.

This analysis is not unique. Most observers in Pakistan agree that the military has done the right thing. It has given its opinion to the government through proper channels on matters concerning national security. It refrained from destabilizing the government.
It is also a fact that, under the current Chairman Joint Chiefs, Army Chief, Air Force and Navy chiefs, the military as a whole has become apolitical more than ever.
The current crisis in Pakistan is not about ‘civil-military relations’ or ‘civilian authority over the military’ as Indian propagandists like Mr. Dhume are trying to portray.
This is a crisis about an incompetent government that has lost the trust of the people who voted for it.
Is the military trying to overthrow this government?
If anything, it is this failed democratic government that is doing everything it can to provoke the military into a coup. This government has gone as far as misleading a Chinese newspaper into publishing an interview with Zardari’s prime minister attacking Pakistani military [The Chinese paper has withdrawn the interview since.] The military is trying to help this government complete its five-year term. The ruling PPPP can ensure this by removing tainted characters from its senior positions and replacing them with cleaner people. Let the tainted, corruption-ridden people face the courts without destabilizing democracy. But this is not happening because the party is firmly controlled by the tainted and corrupt.
Now I come to the Pakistan obsession of hateful Indians, like Wall Street Journal’s Mr. Dhume.
India has the world’s biggest concentration of poverty and disease. The world’s biggest genocide against baby girls occurs in India every year. See India’s Deadly Secret at http://bit.ly/tHVRHI . By virtue of the size of the poor, India faces a host of other problems related to public hygiene and health. The Indian government is rich, with up to $300 billion dollars in savings. But it won’t share this money with the poor. Instead, the money is being spent on militarization because Americans [such as AEI that Mr. Dhume works for] are busy convincing India it is destined to be a superpower, crush Pakistan and take on China. Despite massive arms purchases, the Indian military is yet to deliver. See Indian Military Might Is Overplayed at http://bit.ly/xvcvLJ .
The quality of Indian democracy is questionable. Low-caste Hindus are raped and murdered with impunity. Girls are buried alive. All non-Hindu minorities are persecuted. Most British and American news bureaus in New Delhi hide the truth from readers back home mainly because London and Washington want to see India continue to challenge China and act as an Anglo-rented soldier in Asia. That’s cheaper than sending US and UK soldiers to die in faraway lands.
All of this should have left serious academic men and women like Mr. Dhume busy for the next decade. But no. They are busy with Pakistan because they are working on an agenda.
Nowhere is that agenda clearer than on Twitter, where hordes of Indians are busy with nothing else except Pakistan. See Twitter Is Infested With Indians Campaigning Against Pakistan at http://bit.ly/pACedo .
India saw the first genocide of 21st century, in 2002, when more than 2000 Indian citizens were butchered and burned alive in a single Indian city in the course of three days. Their mistake was believing in the wrong religion. Hindu extremist mobs have also burned alive an Australian missionary and his two under-ten boys as they slept in their car. Their crime? The father and sons used to distribute clothing and food to poor Indians. This crime occurred in 2000 and extremist Hindu groups continue to operate with impunity.
In 2007, some 50 Pakistanis believed Indian claims of peace and booked seats on a ‘peace train’ traveling to New Delhi from Pakistan. They were burned alive midway and the attack was blamed by the Indians on Pakistani intelligence. It turned out that Hindu terrorist groups collaborated with serving Indian intelligence officers to kill the Pakistani visitors. India is yet to punish the culprits and the blood of 50 Pakistanis remains unaccountable with a pro-US government in power in Islamabad that refuses to pursue the case.
The US is turning into an exporter of extremism. Last year activists had to force Harvard University to expel an Indian politician who used his teaching course to spread hate. SeeHarvard Drops Indian MP Subramanian Swamy’s Courses at http://bit.ly/s5dQYz . Why would Harvard harbor a hatemonger like that? For the same reason that Wall Street Journal invites an Indian like Dhume to explain Pakistan.
The Norwegian massacre suspect Anders Behring Breivik said last year his hate ideology was influenced by American evangelists.
Good Americans and Indians need to watch these promoters of hate and war and stop them. Mr. Sadanand Dhume can begin with getting busy with improving the lives of hundreds of millions of poor Indians instead of promoting war at his well-paid jobs at AEI and WSJ.

U.S. Costs Soar For New War Supply Routes

 

WASHINGTON — The U.S. is paying six times as much to send war supplies to troops in Afghanistan through alternate routes after Pakistan’s punitive decision in November to close border crossings to NATO convoys, the Associated Press has learned.
Islamabad shut down two key Pakistan border crossings after a U.S. airstrike killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers in late November, and it is unclear when the crossings might reopen.
Pentagon figures provided to the AP show it is now costing about $104 million per month to send the supplies through a longer northern route. That is $87 million more per month than when the cargo moved through Pakistan.

While U.S. officials have acknowledged that using alternate transportation routes for Afghan war supplies is more expensive and takes longer, the total costs had not been revealed until now. The Pentagon provided the cost figures to the AP on Thursday.
U.S. officials said Thursday the elevated costs are likely to continue for some time, as U.S.-Pakistan tensions remain high and Pakistan has not yet offered to restore the transport arrangement or to begin negotiations on the matter. Until the closure, the U.S. had relied on Pakistani routes to move about one-third of all war supplies for Afghanistan.
The U.S. has given Pakistan more than $20 billion in aid since 9/11, including civilian and military assistance. But over the past year, relations with Islamabad have been strained by a series of incidents, including the U.S. assault in Pakistan last May that killed Osama bin Laden.
Pakistani leaders have also complained about repeated U.S. drone strikes into their country. The strikes, largely by the CIA, target militants hiding along Pakistan’s border who launch attacks against NATO troops in Afghanistan.
The final straw, however, was the Nov. 26 cross-border attack, which hit two Pakistani border posts, enraging the Pakistani government and further eroding already shaky relations.
The U.S. blamed the errant airstrikes on a series of communications and coordination errors on both sides. American officials expressed regret but have not apologized for the incident, insisting that Pakistan fired first. Pakistan denies that and has called it an unprovoked attack.
In addition to closing the border crossings, Pakistan ordered the U.S. to vacate Shamsi air base, which the U.S. was using to launch drone strikes at al-Qaida and Taliban militants.
Over the past year or so, the U.S. military has been shrinking its reliance on the Pakistani routes, which are used to transport fuel and other non-lethal supplies. U.S. officials say they could manage indefinitely without that access if Pakistan either makes the closure permanent or offers to reopen it under unacceptable conditions.
Officials said that moves by Pakistan to briefly close the supply routes on two previous occasions after disputes with the U.S. prompted the Pentagon to begin shifting more to the northern crossings. Officials also believe that even if Pakistan eventually opens the supply routes, that there will be additional fees charged, so the alternate routes would help avoid those extra costs.
On the other hand, sending NATO convoys through Pakistan is seen by Washington as a significant piece of the overall U.S.-Pakistani partnership. Failure to reinstate those routes would signal a more severe diplomatic breach between the two countries at a critical time in the Afghan war and the ongoing battle against insurgents who seek sanctuary on the Pakistan side of the border.
According to U.S. officials, 85 percent of fuel supplies for the war effort in Afghanistan are now going through the northern supply routes, along with 30 percent of the supplies that had routinely come through Pakistan.
The northern routes connect Baltic and Caspian Sea ports with Afghanistan through Russia and Central Asia and the Caucases. And they combine sea, rail and truck transport.
There may be, however, some movement by Pakistan to allow certain civilian Afghan supplies through the closed routes.
Dependent on Pakistan for its imports, landlocked Afghanistan has asked authorities in Pakistan to release hundreds of vehicles stacked with goods and fuel that are being held up along with NATO supplies.
Pakistani officials say they are sorting through the thousands of stranded vehicles to push through supplies for Afghans. So far, the Pakistanis have given no indication of when they will open the border for NATO supplies to Afghanistan.
There has been limited contact between top U.S. and Pakistani officials.
Last week, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, talked by phone with his Pakistani counterpart, Army Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, their first contact since Dec. 21. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has not spoken to Pakistani leaders since the incident.