Book Now
Twitter
Home Blog Page 85

We must welcome and listen respectfully & understand John Kerry but we must not be afraid of sanctions or any other US action!

Admin
-
0
We must welcome and listen respectfully & understand John Kerry but we must not be afraid of sanctions or any other US action!

Moeed Pirzada | FB Blog |

Hi! as you all know Senator John Kerry is in Pakisan. He is a great visionary, a man of advanced consciousness, an able statesman, and a leader who thinks in terms of positive solutions for the world and for this region. I will say he is a friend of Pakistan. Had he won the elections in 2004 instead of George Bush history might have been somewhat different. However we all know that he is comming here at a very difficult moment and through the New York Times story which I posted on this page we know that he is brining certain tough demands and conditions.

But we need not fear for a single moment. Whereas this Osama Bin Laden saga is deeply embarrassing, and we are under pressure from international media and community but lets be clear in our own minds first that we as a country or people had nothing to do with that ass hole or his stupid irrational Al-Qaeda. The American allegations against Pakistani military or ISI of being soft on Afghan Taliban may have substance and make sense given our Pakistani reservations on Afganistan and we do understand these conflicts, but given the whole history of the last 10-15 years we should have no doubt in our minds that “Bin Laden” was of no use to us, he was an enemy whose terror brigades in the form of Al Qaeda and TTP wreaked hell on Pakistan and Pakistanis. Al Qaeda killed 3000 innocent on Americna soil but it also lead to the deaths of almost 40, 000 Pakistanis many of whom were our friends, loved ones and neighbours. If TTP mourned OBL’s death then we know that TTP is the number one enemy of Pakistani defense establishment and Pakistani state that even attacked our sacred places like Data ki Nagri.

Given this moment and the way it has played across the world and the doubts that have been genuninely created (and then purposefully exaggerated by vested interest and lobbies) John Kerry may – and more than him, certain black sheep in our own midst- will try to frighten us of international isolation, of US sanctions, end of KLB or military aid, end of IMF tranches and so on… we must listen respectfully and carefully, this is their moment and we are on defensive so we must respectfully listen but we not be afraid and we must not budge. Why?

I will tell you why? the way this OBL episode has played, it is getting abundantly clear that there was no Pakistani complicity in hiding OBL and deep down in their hearts the American policy makers know it and they know it for sure. They won’t say it, it is in their interest to pose that they might have evidence that may prove ISI complicity and that OBL was still operational. This is all non sense; actions speak louder than words. We know for sure (thanks to Americans changing their story many times) that they only wanted to kill Osama Bin Laden (and this vital question that why they wanted to kill and not capture puts them on defensive) and they never wanted to captutre him alive. Ask yourself why this is important to us? this is vitally important because if they really believed that ass hole, living with 3 wives and 13 children, was operationally active then they would not have killed him, they would have captured him alive for investigation. This story of several flash drives and computer hard drives looks good to unsuspecting eyes and for lay press but has no real merit. What is the significnace of Flash Drives when you don’t care or not interested in capturing the master mind of everything…???…Osama Bin Laden’s death was a big psychological achievement for Obama Administration but they know it and we know it that this was a symbolic and ceremonial victory, a trophy that helps complete the “Closure on 9/11” but that does not change much on ground…in this region…and using that to pressurise Pakistan is smart clever politics but then we also know that this is “clever smart poltics”.

We must tell John Kerry honestly and sincerely that we are going to do a massive investigation through an “Independent National Commission” as approved by the parliament and will punish if some officials are found complicit and we will publish our findings to the whole world. And that we are determined to improve and reform our security and intelligence systems and will plug holes and will increase coordination between ISI, FIA and Police. And that we will be hunting for Al Qaeda and Ayman Al Zawahri more than ever before but we also want to disucss our differences in open. And we are shocked the way US has invaded an ally that has been fighting on its side for the last 10 years! …an ally that adopted America’s war against terrorism as its own war and paid with 40, 000 lives…Bin Laden was important but even then US has shown utter disregard of the political, regional and psychological impact of its actions. And that we do have national interests in the outcome of American end game in Afghanistan and whereas we like America want peace and stabiltiy in Afghanistan we are concerned that America has no clear road map for Afghanistan and shows no or little sesnitivity to our national interests there…and that whereas our goals are same our approaches towards achieving those goals could be different..

We must not show those childish emotional reactions which are then quoted as Anti-Americanism; we must be respectful and polite and patient but we must know that despite all that has happened America, espeically at this stage of the end game in Afghanistan and the comming US Elections needs us as much as we need them. If our economic problems necessitate their help and attention then they also need to disperse aid to manage our poltiical system. Aid gives them influence and control inside Islamabad. This is a a mutual game. This is mental chess. We lost it when we quiet unnecessarrilly accepted Kerry Lugar Bill in 2009 but now we should not let “Pakistani stooges” play their game again. If US wants to extract concessions on Afghanistan which we cannot give and they dangle the threat of “Aid cut off” then let them do it because if we did’nt deal wisely and carefully with the US pressure and demands then it will become even more difficult for us later. In fact we are in deep shit today, and perceived to be on the wrong side of the international community, because in 1980’s we were often irresponsible in our efforts to please the US.

If despite all what we have done or stood for, the US still cuts off our aid, then let them do it. It will only prove those right that always claimed that all US promises of a sustained relationship are fake and the US is unable to have anything more than a transactional relationship with Paksitan, a relationship contingent upon Pakistani miilitary playing their game in the region. Consequences of their irresponsible actions will be as hard for them as for us. Also over the last 10 years the $20 billion which US media repeatedly quotes had about $9 Billion of Coailition Support Funds (CSF) which was a reimbursement of the cost incurred by Pakistani military and that was a contractual obligation between Pentagon and the military, and only $200 million has flowed from the Kerry Lugar Bill…bottom line is that cutting off of aid can be painful but we can survive.

In the end, we all must be clear in our own minds that America is not our enemy, for the past 50 years of our history we have tried always to be on the American side; we have no ideolgoigcal or territorial issues with America. We are not stupid or irrational to be conceiving a conflict with a Super power like the US. Why should we be enemies of the US? or even perceived as such? We have always done more than any other country to help the US in this region but this does not mean that we will ignore our long term interets and fears in Afghanistan or this region or should be so afraid or guilty that we cannot air them or take a logical position about them…this is the time to air our differences, sot that they can be deabted and resolved…

Bottom line is that yes we are embarrased on this OBL episode for our inability to capture him for he was also our public enemy one, but lets act like mature people, this is not the end of the world and does not prove anything, and any attempts to arm twist us by making us over-guilty by this OBL story looks very suspect… lets look toward the stable future of this region in which United States has to play a constructive role with responsibility and not through the narrow needs of an “Election year”…..

 

Media meets the senior military & intelligence officials & this is what we learnt?

Moeed Pirzada
-
0

Moeed Pirzada |

Hi! At a time when Pakistan’s foreign Secretary Salman Bashir was holding a press briefing on the Post-Osama Bin Laden Killing Issues, a select group of Pakistani media was invited to meet a few senior military and intelligence officials at an undisclosed location and this is what we learnt:

Was not finding and taking action against Osama Bin Laden an intelligence failure? Yes! strictly speaking, it was, we never had an actionable intelligence on Osama Bin Laden. If we had, we would have acted first and it would be added to our international prestige, bargaining ability, and national security. However, this failure needs to be understood in its context. Intelligence is not a black & white commodity that you have it or not. It comes and flows in from different directions and you have to develop it to make it actionable. We have taken lead in tracing and arresting more than 100 significant Al Qaeda operatives and such arrests helped us and CIA to better unravel Al Qaeda. We have been chasing leads on OBL as well. The arrest of Faraj Al Libi in this area by ISI was the first link that later helped CIA a lot to develop this intelligence further. Such high-level operatives of Al Qaeda never speak up immediately. Libbi volunteered little information in the beginning. As a practice and past understanding, we handed over such foreign nationals (whose countries did not accept them) to the US Authorities ie CIA. It was much later, perhaps over a period of 2-3 years that Libbi provided information about OBL’s Courier to the Americans.

Read more: Face to face with Bin Laden

What about the area from OBL was finally tracked? We have been collecting leads from that area; these leads originated when we tracked telephone calls that originated in that area (not necessarily the OBL Compound) bound for Saudi Arabia in Arabic and mostly about financial transactions. We started to share that with CIA, the lead CIA talks of from August originated with us, however, while CIA developed that intelligence into “Actionable Intelligence” it didn’t share its subsequent findings with us. Intelligence agencies do that to take full credit for achievements, however, penetrating our territory, taking action on our soil and then blaming us for somehow collusion with OBL are mere political point scoring rather than anything supported by evidence and is unfortunate. We have to admit that we don’t have the kind of resources – like the satellite viewing and listening abilities- CIA has, and in the last few years, CIA has deployed even greater human intelligence on ground as compared to us. The events of the last few years including Kerry-Lugar Bill, the sequence of events that followed like the visa relaxations have played an important role in this new development and needs some reflection.

we learnt that most who are associated with Regional Affairs Office are in fact working for CIA, similarly most who are assigned under “Security” are also affiliated with CIA, could this explain CIA’s increasing footprint inside Pakistan? certainly, this is subject to a national debate..

When we found out? we found out as soon as the guards at PMA Academy reported the firings, blasts, and accident of a helicopter. But contrary to what has been reported PMA is basically a training school and not a military installation. Academy was closed after the passing out, PMA guards are not supposed to take care of events outside the academy. This OBL Compound which media has reported within 500-600 yards of the PMA is actually 4 Kilometers away (500-600 yards is the crow flight distance and is irrelevant). We first spent some time checking out if we had any helicopters in the area and we had none. At that point we suspected intruders and our first thought was of Americans, we alerted all strategic installations and the Air Force and PAF scrambled its jets. However, could we have shot down the low flying helicopters? probably not since our best machines are F-16’s and we suspect that Americans would not send something into our territory that was easily detected by the electronics fitted onto our F-16’s. (many such assertions lead to lots of questioning and counter-questioning but I am not going into that). Were our radars jammed? No, radar jamming is immediately detected, had they done that we would have been alerted because of the jamming, they used low flying and the broken down helicopter reveals improvised stealth technology (which probably no one has except the Americans, so Indians should forget about such fancy ideas- he did not say that, I am adding myself).

What about the 100, 000 or so Pakistani troops at the western borders? were they not supposed to take shots at the low flying helis? ..counter question: do you bother about every aircraft that is flying overhead? border guards are not supposed to detect or take shots at the passing over air-traffic, it is the job of radar installations. If guards start shooting at the passing over helicopters then you will have a total mess. Americans knew of our radar installations, which are much smaller at the western frontier as compared to the east since we don’t except intruders from the western frontiers. And since our radars are active rather than passive, it was easy for them to digitally map the terrain and then chart a flight path accordingly.American helicopters certainly came from Afghanistan, Americans have no helicopters at Gazi Brotha in Tarbela.

But could this intrusion into Abbottabad means that our key installations are unprotected? actually, there is no comparison between a residential compound containing 2-3 guards and few family members, which just happened close to a military school like PMA and a well defended military installation or a strategic asset with its own defense perimeter. Even if Indians want to cross over into our border, shoot a few fisherman or farmers in a desolate area, and then go back then they can do it. We can also do it, but that is not how States run their relations. No nation, including the United States, protect every inch of its large territory from such sneak entry. Operation in Abbottabad can be appreciated as intelligence operation and its marvel lies in the use of newly developed stealth technology, militarily speaking it was quite unimpressive; it was an undefended residential compound with two guards and a family living there. Any police force or militia could have done that. It was all about precise intelligence.

Was Obama there? given the family of OBL that includes three wives, and 13 kids the evidence emanating from them supports that he was there and it was, in fact, Osama Bin Laden who was taken away by the Americans. But how do we know that he was dead? well, his wife who got injured in her leg reported that when she lost consciousness he was alive and was being taken into custody. However, OBL’s daughter reports that Americans first arrested him and then suddenly shot him and then dragged him away. But the senior officer talking to us was unable to categorically confirm if Osama Bin Laden was, in fact, dead. Why? because his own information is either from the information released by the Americans or from the OBL’s family. And OBL’s daughter has only reported his father being shot and then dragged by the Americans for taking away. In fact, we were told that Americans took away two men and one of them was OBL.(So was it OBL that was apparently thrown into the Arabian sea for fish? we have no option but to rely upon the credibility of CIA and President Obama, whereas CIA is a dubious case may be we can trust when Obama says so).

We have to admit that we don’t have the kind of resources – like the satellite viewing and listening abilities- CIA has, and in the last few years, CIA has deployed even greater human intelligence on ground as compared to us. The events of the last few years including Kerry-Lugar Bill, the sequence of events that followed like the visa relaxations have played an important role in this new development and needs some reflection.

We found out that Mike Mullen called Gen. Kiyani, around 5am, Pak Time and said: “General, we got Osama Bin Laden, but he is dead” General Kiyani then congratulated him on this success, this much has already been reported but the officer who spoke with us disputed the context in which this conversation was reported by the US Media. Moving ahead, Kiyani then asked Mullen to announce it quickly, asap, so that confusion ends and asked him that Pakistan be acknowledged by President Obama for its role in leading up to OBL. Mullen affirmed. Earlier President Obama was supposed to speak a few hours later, probably in the early US morning but as a result of the chat between Kayani and Mullen, President Obama’s speech was first decided for 7.30am and finally appeared at 8.30am Pak time. And it was this speech in which Obama mentioned Pakistan’s role in leading to OBL. Why Pakistani military and intelligence not responding against this transgression into its territory? why not suspend all intelligence sharing and counter-terrorism with the United States? after all, for all practical purposes, the Americans invaded the territory of an ally? …well is this for the military or intelligence to decide? or is it up to the government and the parliament to decide?

Note: There was more in this discussion, that related to why NCTA (National Counter Terrorism Agency) could not be formed? why has Pakistan not changed its criminal and prosecution laws since 9/11? amend what are the implications? some discussions that erupted in the question-answer session about 450 visas issued in a day, in fact in a night, from Pakistan’s embassy in Washington without security clearance when President signed a letter to the Prime Minister and PM then signed that authority to Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington and how more than 7000 visas were issued since July of 2010 for various US persons working inside Pakistan. Why so many visas? apparently, these persons come to work on various projects related to Kerry-Lugar Bill, however, we learnt that most who are associated with Regional Affairs Office are in fact working for CIA, similarly most who are assigned under “Security” are also affiliated with CIA, could this explain CIA’s increasing footprint inside Pakistan? certainly, this is subject to a national debate..but I am sure you will find lots to read on all this in the morning papers of 6th May and do watch the 8 pm and 10 pm programs repeat on Pk Politics on the internet to get a diversity of views and perspectives on this since most Anchors were there.

Many had promised to tear down the officers before this meeting but the angry and loud opening debate soon turned into a point by point discussion, It was informative and sobering and most if not all concerns were addressed. To every question, there was an answer. Was America denounced? absolutely not, in fact, we were told that despite all difficulties it is a vital relationship. Was India discussed? not even once. So are we satisfied? No! all governments and state institutions have the right to inform, disinform and spin and it’s the aware citizenry’s responsibility to dissect what is told and we will continue to do that……it now belongs to you for tearing down… Good luck!

 

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Global Village Space’s editorial policy. This piece was first published in Moeed Pirzada’s official page. It has been reproduced with permission.

Media meets the senior Military & Intelligence Officials & this is what we learnt?

Admin
-
0
Media meets the senior Military & Intelligence Officials & this is what we learnt?

Moeed Pirzada | FB Blog |

Hi! At a time when Pakistan’s foreign Secretary Salman Bashir was holding a press briefing on the Post-Osama Bin Laden Killing Issues, a select group of Pakistani media was invited to meet a few senior military and intelligence officials at an undisclosed location and this is what we learnt:

Was not finding and taking action against Osama Bin Laden an intelligence failure? Yes! strictly speaking it was, we never had an actionable intelligence on Osama Bin Laden. If we had, we would have acted first and it would added to our international prestige, bargaining ability and national security. However this failure needs to be understood in its context. Intelligence is not a black & white commodity that you have it or not. It comes and flows in from different directions and you have to develop it to make it actionable. We have taken lead in tracing and arresting more than 100 significant Al Qadea operatives and such arrests helped us and CIA to better unravel Al Qaeda. We have been chasing leads on OBL as well. Arrest of Faraj Al Libi in this area by ISI was the first link that later helped CIA a lot to develop this intelligence further. Such high level operatives of Al Qaeda never speak up immediately. Libbi volunteered little information in the beginning. As a practice and past understanding we handed over such foreign nationals (whose countries did not accept them) to the US Authorities ie CIA. It was much later, perhaps over a period of 2-3 years that Libbi provided information about OBL’s Courier to the Americans.

What about the area from OBL was finally tracked? We have been collecting leads from that area; these leads originated when we tracked telephone calls that originated in that area (not necessarily the OBL Compound) bound for Saudi Arabia in Arabic and mostly about financial transactions. We started to share that with CIA, the lead CIA talks of from August originated with us, however while CIA developed that intelligence into “Actionable Intelligence” it didn’t share its subsequent findings with us. Intelligence agencies do that to take full credit for achievements however penetrating our territory, taking action on our soil and then blaming us for somehow collusion with OBL are mere political point scoring rather than anything supported by evidence and is unfortunate. We have to admit that we don’t have the the kind of resources – like the satellite viewing and listening abilities- CIA has, and in the last few years CIA has deployed even greater human intelligence on ground as compared to us. The events of the last few years including Kerry Lugar Bill, the sequence of events that followed like the visa relaxations have played an important role in this new development and needs some reflection.

When we found out? we found out as soon as the guards at PMA Academy reported the firings, blasts and accident of a helicopter. But contrary to what has been reported PMA is basically a training school and not a military installation. Academy was closed after the passing out, PMA guards are not supposed to take care of events outside the academy. This OBL Compound which media has reported within 500-600 yards of the PMA is actually 4 Kilometers away (500-600 yards is the crow flight distance and is irrelevant). We first spent some time checking out if we had any helicopters in the area and we had none. At that point we suspected intruders and our first thought was of Americans, we alerted all strategic installations and the Air Force and PAF scrambled its jets. However could we have shot down the low flying helicopters? probably not since our best machines are F-16’s and we suspect that Americans would not send some thing into our territory that was easily detected by the electronics fitted onto our F-16’s. (many such assertions lead to lots of questioning and counter questioning but I am not going into that). Were our radars jammed? No, radar jamming is immediately detected, had they done that we would have been alerted because of the jamming, they used low flying and the broken down helicopter reveals improvised stealth technology (which probably no one has except the Americans, so Indians should forget about such fancy ideas- he did not say that, I am adding myself).

What about the 100, 000 or so Pakistani troops at the western borders? were they not supposed to take shots at the low flying helis? ..counter question: do you bother about every air craft that is flying overhead? border guards are not supposed to detect or take shots at the passing over air-traffic, it is the job of radar installations. If guards start shooting at the passing over helicopters then you will have a total mess. Americans knew of our radar installations, which are much smaller at the western frontier as compared to the east, since we don’t except intruders from the western frontiers. And since our radars are active rather than passive, it was easy for them to digitally map the terrain and then chart a flight path accordingly.American helicopters certainly came from Afghanistan, Americans have no helicopters at Gazi Borotha in Tarbela.

But could this intrusion into Abottabad means that our key installations are unprotected? actually there is no comparison between a residential compound containing 2-3 guards and few family members, which just happened close to a military school like PMA and a well defended military installation or a strategic asset with its own defense perimeter. Even if Indians want to cross over into our border, shoot a few fisherman or farmers in a desolate area, and then go back then they can do it. We can also do it, but that is not how States run their relations. No nation, including the United States protect every inch of its large territory from such sneak entry. Operation in Abottabad can be appreciated as intelligence operation and its marvel lies in the use of newly developed stealth technology, militarily speaking it was quite unimpressive; it was an undefended residential compound with two guards and a family living there. Any police force or militia could have done that. It was all about precise intelligence.

Was Obama there? given the family of OBL that includes three wives, and 13 kids the evidence emanating from them supports that he was there and it was in fact Osama Bin Laden who was taken away by the Americans. But how do we know that he was dead? well his wife who got injured in her leg reported that when she lost consciousness he was alive and was being taken into custody. However OBL’s daughter reports that Americans first arrested him and then suddenly shot him and then dragged him away. But the senior officer talking to us was unable to categorically confirm if Osama Bin Laden was in fact dead. Why? because his own information is either from the information released by the Americans or from the OBL’s family. And OBL’s daughter has only reported his father being shot and then dragged by the Americans for taking away. In fact we were told that Americans took away two men and one of them was OBL.(So was it OBL that was apparently thrown into the Arabian sea for fish? we have no option but to rely upon the credibility of CIA and President Obama, whereas CIA is a dubious case may be we can trust when Obama says so).

We found out that Mike Mullen called Gen. Kiyani, around 5am, Pak Time and said: “General, we got Osama Bin Laden, but he is dead” General Kiyani then congratulated him on this success, this much has already been reported but the officer who spoke with us disputed the context in which this conversation was reported by the US Media. Moving ahead, Kiyani then asked Mullen to announce it quickly, asap, so that confusion ends and asked him that Pakistan be acknowledged by President Obama for its role in leading upto OBL. Mullen affirmed. Earlier President Obama was supposed to speak few hours later, probably in the early US morning but as a result of the chat between Kiyani and Mullen, President Obama’s speech was first decided for 7.30am and finally appeared at 8.30am Pak time. And it was this speech in which Obama mentioned Pakistan’s role in leading to OBL. Why Pakistani military and intelligence not responding against this transgression into its territory? why not suspend all intelligence sharing and counter terrorism with the United States? after all for all practical purposes the Americans invaded the territory of an ally? …well is this for the military or intelligence to decide? or is it up to the government and the parliament to decide?

Note: There was more in this discussion, that related to why NCTA (National Counter Terrorism Agency) could not be formed? why Pakistan has not changed its criminal and prosecution laws since 9/11? amend what are the implications? some discussions that erupted in the question answer session about 450 visas issued in a day, in fact in a night, from Pakistan’s embassy in Washington without security clearance when President signed a letter to the Prime Minister and PM then signed that authority to Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington and how more than 7000 visas were issued since July of 2010 for various US persons working inside Pakistan. Why so many visas? apparently these persons come to work on various projects related to Kerry Lugar Bill, however we learnt that most who are associated with Regional Affairs Office are in fact working for CIA, similarly most who are assigned under “Security” are also affiliated with CIA, could this explain CIA’s increasing foot print inside Pakistan? certainly this is subject to a national debate..but I am sure you will find lots to read on all this in the morning papers of 6th May and do watch the 8pm and 10pm programs repeats on Pk Politics on internet to get diversity of views and perspectives on this since most Anchors were there.

Many had promised to tear down the officers before this meeting but the angry and loud opening debate soon turned into a point by point discussion, It was informative and sobering and most if not all concerns were addressed. To every question there was an answer. Was America denounced? absolutely not, in fact we were told that despite all difficulties it is a vital relationship. Was India discussed? not even once. So are we satisfied? No! all governments and state institutions have the right to inform, dis-inform and spin and it’s the aware citizenry’s responsibility to dissect what is told and we will continue to do that……it now belongs to you for tearing down… Good luck!

US action in Abottabad: where was Pakistan Air Force???

Moeed Pirzada
-
0

Moeed Pirzada |

Yesterday Pakistan Foreign Office issued a detailed Press Release which I have posted on this Facebook Page. (and just posted on the other Profile Page a few minutes ago, so do read it carefully) There are many things that surprise but one thing bothers me a lot, and that is if American copters took 20-25 minutes flying in from Afghan border to Abottabad and then another 40 minutes in operation and then another 20 minutes in flying back..then why the Pakistani Aid Defense never appeared? I am not saying that we would have necessarily engaged them in a firefight but had we challenged them or demanded IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) then at least they would have the need to identify themselves at the highest level…which would be the SOP for all such interactions…but we are told is that Americans told our side after they had successfully left, which makes it around 1 hour and 20 minutes?

There are many things that surprise but one thing bothers me a lot, and that is if American copters took 20-25 minutes flying in from Afghan border to Abottabad and then another 40 minutes in operation and then another 20 minutes in flying back..then why the Pakistani Aid Defense never appeared?

Just add the flight in, fighting and then flying out…so what does it mean? either we had a tactical understanding that you can do it and we won’t react? or else we are totally totally incompetent that four helicopters and around 79 or 90 military personnel conducted an operation deep inside our territory and we did not know till the end? (I am also intrigued by the 100% agreement among Obama’s team and the Pakistani military that Pakistanis knew nothing, in fact both sides are competing against each other to insist on this, in a way supporting each other, though from opposite angles).

Anyway moving ahead, I am worried because we don’t waste any opportunity saying that we are a Nuclear country and our nukes are safe…and so on…but when a challenge to our Air Defense arose we have not demonstrated any presence or will at all… the Foreign Office Press Release of 3rd May mentions Pakistan scrambling its jets but the explanation is very very unconvincing… I raised this point in Talat’s program yesterday Once again I am not suggesting at all that we would have engaged them in a fight, I am sure such a commando force, (US Navy Seals) whose activity on ground was being watched by the US President and Secretary of State, would have powerful backing from the US Jets somewhere up, a few minutes away..but I am only asking is that PAF had to show some presence at some stage? …What is the meaning of their not being on scene? were they told not to interfere? not to even appear? or they were so slow and incompetent that they take hours in moving up and reacting? What is their reaction time? in 2009 when Indian jets violated Pakistani space for few minutes PAF did show a reaction, why not this time for an intervention lasting One hour and 20 minutes? Am I asking a rational question? do you see my point?.. don’t we need answer from Gen Kiyani and Air Chief? they better explain us what is happening? As citizens and tax payers of Pakistan we need answers..??

 

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Global Village Space’s editorial policy. This piece was first published in Moeed Pirzada’s official page. It has been reproduced with permission.

US Action in Abottabad: Where was Pakistan Air Force???

Admin
-
1
US Action in Abottabad: Where was Pakistan Air Force???

Moeed Pirzada | FB Blog |

Yesterday Pakistan Foreign Office issued a detailed Press Release which I have posted on this Face Book Page. (and just posted on the other Profile Page few minutes ago, so do read it carefully) There are many things that surprise but one thing bothers me a lot, and that is if American copters took 20-25 minutes flying in from Afghan border to Abottabad and then another 40 minutes in operation and then another 20 minutes in flying back..then why the Pakistani Aid Defense never appeared? I am not saying that we would have necessarily engaged them in a fire fight, but had we challenged them or demanded IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) then at least they would have the need to identify themselves at the highest level…which would be the SOP for all such interactions…but we are told is that Americans told our side after they had successfully left, which makes it around 1 hour and 20 minutes? just add the flight in, fighting and then flying out…so what does it mean? either we had a tactical understanding that you can do it and we won’t react? or else we are totally totally incompetent that four helicopters and around 79 or 90 military personnel conducted an operation deep inside our territory and we did not know till the end? (I am also intrigued by the 100% agreement among Obama’s team and the Pakistani military that Pakistanis knew nothing, in fact both sides are competing against each other to insist on this, in a way supporting each other, though from opposite angles).

Anyway moving ahead, I am worried because we don’t waste any opportunity saying that we are a Nuclear country and our nukes are safe…and so on…but when a challenge to our Air Defense arose we have not demonstrated any presence or will at all… the Foreign Office Press Release of 3rd May mentions Pakistan scrambling its jets but the explanation is very very unconvincing… I raised this point in Talat’s program yesterday Once again I am not suggesting at all that we would have engaged them in a fight, I am sure such a commando force, (US Navy Seals) whose activity on ground was being watched by the US President and Secretary of State, would have powerful backing from the US Jets somewhere up, few minutes away..but I am only asking is that PAF had to show some presence at some stage? …What is the meaning of their not being on scene? were they told not to interfere? not to even appear? or they were so slow and incompetent that they take hours in moving up and reacting? What is their reaction time? in 2009 when Indian jets violated Pakistani space for few minutes PAF did show a reaction, why not this time for an intervention lasting One hour and 20 minutes? Am I asking a rational question? do you see my point?.. don’t we need answer from Gen Kiyani and Air Chief? they better explain us what is happening? As citizens and tax payers of Pakistan we need answers..??

Shahbaz Bhatti’s Murder: Challenge for the Politics of Pakistan?

Admin
-
0
Shahbaz Bhatti’s Murder: Challenge for the Politics of Pakistan?

Moeed Pirzada | Chowk.com |

Few years ago, Shahbaz Bhatti confided in a friend: “ I don’t want to get married, because I know that sooner or later an assassin’s bullet will find me; it will only be unfair to that woman and my children.” That friend, a Pakistani origin Christian now lives in exile in Sweden.

The last time I met Bhatti, it was at the eve of a diplomatic farewell to Jan De Kok, the EU Ambassador to Pakistan. He wore his usual smile that often reminded me of Jaggit’s ghazal, “ kewoon itna tum muskara rahay ho, kiya ghum hay jisay chupa rahay ho?” (Why you smile so much? What hurts so much that you need to hide?). We spoke briefly about Taseer’s murder, the Blasphemy Laws, our inability to create a political consensus to reform them and his caution to appear in tv programs due to mounting threats. I also told him that his heading the parliamentary committee that was supposedly reviewing these laws is a political mistake; for this gives an excuse to obscurantist elements to block all progress on this issue. This soft spoken, quiet gentleman paused and reflected and surprisingly agreed with me. Little did I realize that the shadowy assassins will soon cite this as a cause to puncture his torso with thirty holes.

It is only natural when people compare this with Taseer’s murder. Yet there are chilling differences that should not be missed. Mumtaz Qadri’s act, however despicable, in the end, represented the state of mind of an impressionable individual. That desperado derived his permissibility from an atmosphere of political frenzy created by the street agitation and irresponsible sloganeering by all those religious parties and outfits who were trying to expand their political space by piggybacking on the Namoos-e-Risalat controversy; an amateurish media that often reported without critically analyzing added to the enabling atmosphere in which Qadri could derive justification for his tragic actions. But Bhatti’s murderers, irrespective of who they really are, have done a conscious calculated attempt to shift back the Pakistani political field away from nationalistic sentiments generated by “Raymond Davis Affair” bringing it back to the regressive mindless politics of religious identities.

But there is yet another difference. Religious parties like JUI(F) and JI were trying to gain space at the expense of the mainstream political parties for in the end they see their future inside the parliamentary democracy. However these so called, “Punjabi Taliban”, whose nature we can endlessly debate, are now trying to extract ground from these established religious parties of Pakistan. Through this brazen act they are now trying to squeeze more milk out of an issue that was first irresponsibly handled by PPP, main stream religious parties and the liberal intelligentsia. And an issue that was effectively displaced in the agendas of religious parties and public consciousness by the more worldly “Raymond Davis Affair”

This raises number of issues: One, it confronts religious parties with a challenge as to how should they react? Mostly there has been an eerie silence; so far only JI has condemned the Bhatti’s murder but they have taken the interesting position of accusing Americans and more specifically the CIA; Second, Pakistani politicians need to clearly see an extra-parliamentary foe that is capable to shift and control the political field without the capacity or the need to win elections and is thus forcing them to adopt positions which don’t define them; PPP is the biggest victim of this dynamic after Taseer’s murder so far but PMLN is suffering too, whether it realizes it or not. The Senate’s inability to offer prayers for Taseer speaks volumes about the pressure being generated upon the collective political system.

But the challenge to Pakistan’s military establishment, if they care to understand, is humungous. Internally it is faced with an “undefined enemy” that can take away territory without having an army, and if not checked effectively can penetrate inside and like a science fiction saga change the character of the army itself; externally with every such incident Pakistan is seen as a country that is increasing its nuclear stock piles and missiles but has lost control to shape a rational political discourse. If there is a mounting concern from Washington to London, from Beijing to Delhi then you can’t blame them anymore. Can you?

VIEW: Welcome to a raucous, multi-polar but democratic Pakistan —: Dr Moeed Pirzada

Admin
-
0
VIEW: Welcome to a raucous, multi-polar but democratic Pakistan —: Dr Moeed Pirzada

Moeed Pirzada | Daily Times |

 

It is time to take a step back and find new solutions, solutions beyond carrot and stick diplomacy. Let’s not turn the Raymond Davis affair into the murder of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria. Despite its many failings, US-Pakistan relations are a splendid construct of mutual dependence and have great potential for peace, growth and stability in this region. Senator John Kerry is arriving; he is flying in straight to Lahore, where among other meetings to assess the situation, he will also speak to the Pakistani media. Kerry, the custodian of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, is often introduced as a friend of Pakistan. I think this chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee represents that American school of thought that is a marriage between Wilson’s idealism and Kissinger’s realism. We in Pakistan will expect him to find an out-of-the-box solution, something different from the usual carrot and stick, but does he have one?

In my last column I had used the term “RoboCop” for Raymond Davis. Since then, novelist Mohsin Hamid has described him as a “predator”. Will Hamid’s pen turn him into a character in his next novel? I do not know. But I wonder if Mr Davis’s mother would have believed the soothsayer who told her that little Raymond in the 37th year of his life will become an important chapter in US-Pakistan history.Because I have little doubt that soon the students of US-Pakistan relations will find the ‘Raymond Davis Affair’ as part of their textbooks.

For they will read that Pakistan’s then foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was also devoured by the ‘Raymond Davis Affair’.Unfortunately, the damage is still continuing and much of this is happening because the governing elite in Pakistan and the decision-makers in Washington have failed to appreciate that a new Pakistan has emerged. And this despite the fact that they including people like Kerry and Biden have been advocating the ideas that have shaped this new Pakistan.

When after Tunisia, Egypt started to rock with shouts of “revolution”, an important western embassy in Pakistan ordered an immediate “risk assessment” to determine if Pakistan could be “next”. The ambassador was told: “Don’t you worry, for while Pakistan presents all factors ripe for revolution, sadly it does not have any leadership to lead this.” This is certainly true, but it is only part of the explanation. I would have told him: “Excellency! Relax and welcome to a multi-polar, raucous but democratic Pakistan.”

This is precisely what many in Islamabad and certainly Washington have not realised not so far. When some of us were naively whispering in worried American ears: “Sir, we will fix it up in a day”, they did not realise that the country has changed; today it has many centres of political authority, dozens of TV channels all trying to outwit Fox, hundreds of chirpy radio stations and countless racy publications. And precisely because of this multi-polar and multi-media situation, our courts have found the space to assert themselves as independent entities and they in turn add to the depth of a rough, volatile and fragile mix that despite its many failings is the new democratic dispensation in which no one is all-powerful, no one, not even the good old GHQ has total control. If they are creating impressions of ‘control’, they too are bluffing.

This is why Shah Mehmood Qureshi found it difficult to overwhelm and order the Foreign Office (FO) chaps to issue a note of immunity when they were adamant that immunity does not exist. It is not that the bureaucrats and financial wizards have lost their calculators or marbles and are not telling Prime Minister Gilani of the consequences of a US financial squeeze or that Zardari is any less worried for losing his date with Obama or that the Sharif brothers are taking revenge for all the nice things Anne Patterson wrote about them in her memos to dear darling Julian Assange. The reality is: none of them today has the kind of power their predecessors used to have in the past.

Pakistan has changed but many in Washington are still searching for the old traditional levers of control, the one-window operation of the Musharraf era, and when they do not find one, they get furious. And with every new fit of fury, they do more arm-twisting with Zardari and Rehman Malik. They must stop. Any more pressure will only backfire. Almost all thinking minds between Lahore and Islamabad are focused on how to send Raymond back. What is needed is a solution that can be neatly packaged and sold to the public and absorbed by the collective consciousness as the product of a process.

Today we need a solution. But we do not find those on the horizon who can create solutions through ‘out-of-the-box thinking’. We do not see any tall characters who could have joined heads behind the scenes to work upon some new innovative ideas, some De Bono-style lateral thinking, rather than endlessly insisting on the Vienna Convention, section this and that. When there is a deadlock, one needs to look sideways and move laterally to discover something new. This is why many in Islamabad are now mourning the absence of Holbrooke, for despite allegations of tough talk, he was a ‘solution finder’. And this needless removal of ex-foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi from the scene at a time when his energies, his accumulated understanding, his contacts of the last three years were most needed, is a classic example of decisions made under stress.

It is time to take a step back and find new solutions, solutions beyond carrot and stick diplomacy. Let’s not turn the Raymond Davis affair into the murder of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria. Despite its many failings, US-Pakistan relations are a splendid construct of mutual dependence and have great potential for peace, growth and stability in this region. For the last few years all of us, including Senator Kerry, have been talking of ‘strategic dialogue’ and enduring partnership. If all this could be quickly sacrificed at the altar of one “RoboCop” and his seven bullets, it will mean that our dreams had flowed from a fractured flawed imagination. I am sure Senator Kerry will help find a solution that can be sold in Lahore, Islamabad, Washington and to the people of Pakistan. Amen!

 

The writer is an anchorperson and Director World Affairs with Dunya News TV. He can be reached at director@media-policy.com

Raymond Davis Saga: Lessons to be Learnt

Admin
-
0
Raymond Davis Saga: Lessons to be Learnt

Moeed Pirzada | Daily Times |

In all fairness, the Raymond Davis saga, irrespective of the technicalities being discussed in Pakistan, may prove a fit case for the world to review the whole concept of ‘diplomatic immunity’

When Secretary Clinton came to Pakistan in July of 2010, I again got an opportunity to moderate a discussion with her. But that morning I struggled hard to find an opening sentence that could encapsulate the rather sedate mood since her earlier visit in October of 2009. And I opened by saying, “Secretary, I am afraid you are coming to a somewhat boring Pakistan; today no one is talking of Blackwater and of Americans running with Pakistani nukes.” She laughed and said, “Thanks! Boring is good.”

Unfortunately, thanks to the Raymond Davis saga, and the way we all handled it — and that includes both Pakistanis and the Americans — this is not boring anymore. Seven months ago, almost like a public barometer, I could feel that relentless engagement and public diplomacy by Clinton, Holbrooke, Mullen and Petraeus on the one hand and countless Pakistanis within and outside the government on the other. There started to appear a level of trust and stability on the horizon of the US-Pakistan relationship, the kind of stability which if sustained can do much good for countless millions in this troubled region. But the events of the past few days have re-ignited the old fears, mistrust, paranoia, and conspiracy theories. The genies of ‘Blackwater’ and ‘denuclearisation’, however unfounded they may be, have again become part of the public discourse. Viewed from the tunnel of time and space, Pakistan looks like Somalia and the US like imperial Rome.

We have an awful lot of cathartic thinking to do. We can blame the Punjab government for not consulting the foreign office before the arrests and judicial remands; we can blame the foreign office for not determining something that is not for the courts to decide; we can blame ourselves in the media for our insatiable hunger for the sensational; we can blame the US Consulate in Lahore for their contempt of the local laws, and we can blame the US Embassy in Islamabad for showing far less sensitivity than was needed under the circumstances. We should certainly blame General Musharraf and the idiots around him who struck a Faustian bargain with the Bush administration to allow these ‘RoboCops’ in our cities. One person we should not blame is the contractor code-named Raymond Davis, for he did what he was trained to do. This disaster was built into that stupid policy; it had to happen one day.

Rather we should be wary of those pseudo-intellectuals and ghost writers who are trying to belittle the enormity of all that happened in Lahore by creating a fiction that the Vienna Convention is tailor-made to deal with such situations or that there was an easy way out.

Proverbially, diplomats can get away with murder. But in reality, death and especially murder by diplomats has been rare and almost always created difficult, ugly and often messy situations. When, in January 1997, Georgia’s Gueorgui Makharadze, the Harvard-educated Deputy Chief of the Mission, had a car crash in Washington that killed 16-year-old Joviane Waltrick, he sought immunity but President Clinton and Republican Senator Judd Gregg pressured the then financially beleaguered Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze to lift the immunity for its second top diplomat. Makharadze was tried in DC and sentenced to seven years in jail. In 2002, British Prime Minister Tony Blair personally intervened to pressure Colombia into waiving diplomatic immunity when its diplomat was accused of murdering Damian Broom, a 23-year-old Tesco warehouseman.

But perhaps the death of British policewoman, Yvonne Fletcher, during the Libyan Embassy siege in London in April 1984 is most instructive to help understand the kind of reactions and messy outcomes that may follow. Fletcher was killed in St James Square, when apparently bullets were fired on protesters from inside the embassy. The situation remains confusing to this day; the murderer or shooter could never be identified. In 1997, a Channel 4 Dispatches documentary, ‘Murder in St James’s’ in which ballistic expert Colonel George Styles, home office pathologist Hugh Thomas and Professor Bernard Knight testified that technically Fletcher could not have been a victim of bullets from inside the embassy. In 1999, while Libya was desperate to mend fences with the West, it accepted a general responsibility and paid compensation though the mystery of Fletcher’s death could not be conclusively resolved. But guess what happened in 1984?

In 1984, tempers were so high that a furious London Metropolitan Police continued an armed siege of the Libyan Embassy for 11 days. Colonel Gaddafi shouted obscenities on the violation of diplomatic immunity and ordered a counter-siege of the British Embassy in Tripoli. Finally, relations broke down and diplomats were ordered to leave under police escort. Some argue that Fletcher’s murder and the tensions that followed later became the major factor in Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s decision to allow US President Ronald Reagan to launch the USAF bombing raid on Libya in 1986 from American bases in Britain.

Even a moment’s reflection would help us understand that situations differ and political challenges may arise that do not offer neat, clean and easy solutions. And the tragedy in Lahore — a double murder, arguments of self-defence that look less than convincing to many, illegally possessed weapons, a third death by manslaughter, issue of fake identity, association with a Blackwater-type organisation, and a diplomatic status that, at best, is controversial — is clearly a unique challenge. Add to this the Pakistani public’s colourful narratives of ‘Blackwater’, ‘denuclearisation’ and ‘ruling elite as American stooges’ and now a widow committing suicide and you will start to realise the immense difficulties of all those who are working to find a solution. In all fairness, the Raymond Davis saga, irrespective of the technicalities being discussed in Pakistan, may prove a fit case for the world to review the whole concept of ‘diplomatic immunity’.

Let us not kid ourselves; this is not going to be settled inside the Vienna Convention. This needs to be resolved inside the bilateral relations. I wish the indefatigable Holbrooke were around today. Anyway, it is not a secret that Washington has much leverage in Islamabad, so a rough solution may be emerging within the next few days. But as both sides wriggle to get out of this, it is imperative that a small tactical victory should not be allowed to jeopardise the gains of diligent public diplomacy of the last few years. Two things are vital: one, whatever happens should not emasculate those in Pakistan who take inspiration from the US as a beacon of hope for the rule of law; second, it may be the time to review and do the cost-benefit analysis of the Faustian bargain struck between a military dictator and the most cerebrally challenged president in US history.

Jaswant Singh’s Exclusive Talk with Dr. Pirzada, Part-2

Admin
-
0
Jaswant Singh’s Exclusive Talk with Dr. Pirzada, Part-2

Dr. Moeed Pirzada’s exclusive discussion with Jaswant Singh, Ex Indian Foreign & Defense Minister. Interview was recorded in Delhi, India on 25th December, 2010 after the launch of Jaswant Singh’s controversial book titled Jinnah – India, Partition, Independence. On 19 August 2009 Jaswant Singh was expelled from BJP after criticism over his remarks in his book which allegedly praised the founder of Pakistan. In his interview Jaswant sigh explained that Jinnah was great leader and due to his book on Jinnah people realized importance of Jinnah.
He said that partition of subcontinent was the greatest trauma of the 20th Century. He said humanity suffered forms this partition. He said there is still that line of blood between two countries India and Pakistan and there is need to demonize between both countries. We started distorting the facts and history. He said that main reason for partition was to bring peace in the countries but unfortunately we don’t see peace in India Pakistan and Bangladesh. He said that obviously no one can erase the borders now but at least India Pakistan should work with each other and it is also his dream to see Peace in Pakistan and India.
He said that India and Pakistan are neighbors and it is illogical to say that one will not get affected form distress in neighboring country. He said that it was quality of Muhammad Ali Jinnah that he was a logicians who had irrefutable logic. He said in the program that Jinnah was of very compromising nature but Jawahr Lal Nehru was in hurry to take the hold of government after British were leaving. He said that it was a mistake but that doesn’t mean that I deny the existence of two countries.

Jaswant Singh’s Exclusive Talk with Dr. Pirzada, Part 1

Admin
-
0
Jaswant Singh’s Exclusive Talk with Dr. Pirzada, Part 1

Dr. Moeed Pirzada’s exclusive discussion with Jaswant Singh, Ex Indian Foreign & Defense Minister. Interview was recorded in Delhi, India on 25th December, 2010 after the launch of Jaswant Singh’s controversial book titled Jinnah – India, Partition, Independence. On 19 August 2009 Jaswant Singh was expelled from BJP after criticism over his remarks in his book which allegedly praised the founder of Pakistan. In his interview Jaswant sigh explained that Jinnah was great leader and due to his book on Jinnah people realized importance of Jinnah.
He said that partition of subcontinent was the greatest trauma of the 20th Century. He said humanity suffered forms this partition. He said there is still that line of blood between two countries India and Pakistan and there is need to demonize between both countries. We started distorting the facts and history. He said that main reason for partition was to bring peace in the countries but unfortunately we don’t see peace in India Pakistan and Bangladesh. He said that obviously no one can erase the borders now but at least India Pakistan should work with each other and it is also his dream to see Peace in Pakistan and India.
He said that India and Pakistan are neighbors and it is illogical to say that one will not get affected form distress in neighboring country. He said that it was quality of Muhammad Ali Jinnah that he was a logicians who had irrefutable logic. He said in the program that Jinnah was of very compromising nature but Jawahr Lal Nehru was in hurry to take the hold of government after British were leaving. He said that it was a mistake but that doesn’t mean that I deny the existence of two countries.

Admiral Mike Mullen & Anne W Patterson’s Special talk with Dr. Pirzada

Admin
-
0
Admiral Mike Mullen & Anne W Patterson’s Special talk with Dr. Pirzada

An exclusive discussion with US Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson. The discussion was exclusively recorded for Dunya News on 17th December, 2010. Interview was conducted with Admiral Mullen visited Pakistan to discuss with civil and military leadership the new strategic vision of Obama administration for Pakistan and Afghanistan. US admiral Mike Mullen was known for his strong strategic knowledge about central and south Asian countries. Dr Pirzada asked him hard hitting questions like did he get to hear the truth when he used to meet the military and civilian leadership in Pakistan? Interview was conducted when SWAT military operation was in full swing and Pakistani military leadership was achieving its targets in Sawat valley. Mike Mullen showed his satisfaction over the operation and his condolences to the losses of life during the operation. He discussed that he went to the field himself and realized the requirements and resources not only on military grounds but on civilian side as well. He assured that Pakistan is an important ally and friend of US and US government is keen to support and help Pakistan in different field.

Imran Khan in an Exclusive discussion with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Admin
-
0
Imran Khan in an Exclusive discussion with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Imran Khan in an exclusive discussion with Dr. Moeed Pirzada in year 2010 and discussed future of Pakistan Tehreek e Insaaf in Pakistan’s Politics. Interview recorded on 12th December, 2010. It was the time when Imran Khan suggested to the Government that on willingness of government Imran Khan can talk to the tribals and Taliban for the dialogues between them and Government to find political solution of the conflict but he suggested that government must guarantee that these dialogues and the solution should be kept free from pressures of US. And Imran Khan revealed that Taliban’s few fractions have contacted himself and showed confidence to play this role but government has not replied on this offer.
In the show it was discussed that how realistic and wise is this offer of Imran Khan as a politician? Imran Khan strongly presented his argument that military solution should not be last option as India also wants Pakistani army to get involved in military operation against militants but India has never been well wisher of Pakistan. Imran Khan said that even Interior minister Rehman malik mentioned that India is involved in terrorism activities in the country. He gave an example that after fighting and conducting military operations against Taliban for more than eight years in Afghanistan, now US agreed to get involved in dialogues and negotiations. He said Hamid Karzai always opposed Mulla Umar but now he realized that military actions are not long lasting solutions so he is welcoming even Ameer of Taliban Mulla Umar for dialogues .
Imran Khan argued that if Afghanistan can do it than why shouldn’t Pakistan do it and go for dialogues instead of military operations against Taliban. He also said that after every military operation extremism increase.

General Hameed Gul’s Exclusive Discussion with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Admin
-
0
General Hameed Gul’s Exclusive Discussion with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

General Hameed Gul’s Exclusive views on Afghan War and the role of Pakistan with Dr. Moeed Pirzada. Dr. Moeed points some important historical statements of Hameed Gul’s after 9/11 incident which he terms as mystery unsolved or more as a inside job, Start of U.S invasion on Afghanistan, which not only deteriorated Pakistan’s peace but also put State of Pakistan in difficult situation in terms of taking action against the “Taliban” and wider challenges of the region.

Events are happening really fast, Gul has repeatedly stated that Pakistan must end its pro-Western stance in the war on terror. Pakistan only supports the West because it needs American money, he has said, adding that at some point, Allah willing, Pakistan won’t be dependent on outside help, Gul clearly pointed out his stance that irrespective of US military superiority, it will fail to get control on Afghanistan though its military muscle and a U.S-India nexus will be formed to put more pressure on Pakistani military and civilian leadership. General Gul’s many critics believe and admit that many of these predictions have proven right and somehow or another U.S is pushing Pakistan “To do more”.

Dr. Pirzada critically analyze the current changing situation of Afghanistan and U.S strategy to tackle those challenges by the Obama administration, while on the other hand the changing political dimensions in India and its role in Afghanistan can bring different perspectives to the regional peace and stability. Time will answer all these Questions ? Watch Interesting discussion.

Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness in first ever Exclusive Discussion on Pakistan Media

Admin
-
0
Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness in first ever Exclusive Discussion on Pakistan Media
Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness in first ever Exclusive Discussion on Pakistan Media. A lawyer, a businesswoman, a campaigner and a cabinet minister, Sayeeda Warsi has had many roles, but she is best known for being the first Muslim to serve in a British cabinet and the foremost Muslim politician in the Western world. She served in David Cameron’s Cabinet, first as the Minister without portfolio between 2010 till 2012, then as the Senior Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Her father, a former mill-worker and bus driver who set up his own business, instilled in her values of freedom, responsibility and aspiration. These are the values that inspired her to get involved in the Conservative Party and it was there that she became Vice Chairman and adviser to the leader, Michael Howard, in 2004. “Northern, working-class and Muslim, Sayeeda Warsi has evolved a language of diplomacy that is all her own. She takes people with her, rather than dictates. She represents modern multicultural Britain in all its complexity, and she’s a Conservative. She is on her way to inventing a new type of politics for the looming age of authenticity”.Dr. Pirzada critically discussed the politics in Britain, Change in the society of Great Britain and the politics of Labour and Conservatives. This interview was recorded by Dr. Moeed Pirzada in year 2010.

Hillary Clinton: Exclusive Talk with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Admin
-
0
Hillary Clinton: Exclusive Talk with Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Dr. Moeed Pirzada recorded an exclusive interview with Hillary Clinton in Washington D.C, US Secretary of State on the sidelines of US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue, July 2010.

Dr. Pirzada raised important questions on Strategic dialogues importance and concerns of Pakistani public as these dialogues are taking place in context of Afghanistan, however Pakistan, faces serious dilemmas regarding its partnership with the U.S. Though the U.S. and Pakistan share decades of friendship, the relationship has remained unstable. Number of issues like water, energy, economic cooperation, security, education, communication and diplomacy were identified on the agenda of this meeting but no signs of meaningful progress on the issue of Free trade agreement between US and Pakistan. So the question remains: How will this relationship sustain itself in the post-Afghanistan scenario?

Dr. Pirzada also pointed out the issue of water and problems linked with this in the context of South Asia. Will the U.S play a role of a mediator between India and Pakistan on the issue of water, keeping in view the original essence of Indus Water Treaty? Dr. Pirzada asked US Secretary of State if any progress is expected on US-Pak Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and U.S concerns related to Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal during these strategic dialogues?

1...848586...90Page 85 of 90