Wednesday, 27 July 2016

Afghan President Preferred India over Pakistan


By Tariq Rizwan
Despite the recent clashes on Torkham border between the two sides’ border forces, Afghans consider Pakistan as their second home after Afghanistan. Millions of Afghans are still living in Pakistan and unwilling to go back either due to security situation back in their country or due to their established business in Pakistan.  Since 1980 when they thronged into Pakistan and Iran as refugees after Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, Afghanis are living across Pakistan, running their business. There are about 1.5 million Afghans, living in Pakistan as refugees, according to UNHCR estimates. Though Iran was ruthless and able enough to confine them to refugee camps and sent them back to Afghanistan once peace was restored to their country after the ouster of Taliban in 2002.
Pakistan is facing tremendous administrative problems in terms of economic surveys and distribution of resources in areas where these refugees are residing. They are being considered as economic burden by the locals as they have procured local CNICs and grabbed property and business in their own names. Despite the recent terror spell in the country, Pakistan has banned extension of visas to all foreigners, including Afghans in March 2012. Yet, Islamabad owns all these poor Afghans whole heartedly, irrespective of their cast and sect whether Pashtuns, Baloch, Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, sunnis or shias and caters for their well being as per UNHCR rules. During this odd and terrible time, India was with former USSR and helped the communist regime in ruthlessly bombing and mining Afghan territory which resulted in loss of immense human life and destruction of infrastructure.  
Indeed, it is quite unfortunate that Afghan leadership views Pakistan as foe and India as a friend.  While talking to a Geo News Anchor Saleem on 23rd July, 2016, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani stated that relations with Pakistan are a bigger challenge for his country than the existence of terror groups such as Al-Qaeda and Taliban. He alleged that Pakistan provides sanctuaries to terrorists and trains them. He said "We cannot understand when Pakistan says it will not allow a group of terrorists to amend its constitution, army act and prepares a National Action Plan (NAP) against them. Simultaneously, Pakistan tolerates another group which attempts to undermine the government and bring horror, death and destruction to Afghanistan". He claimed, he can provide addresses of Taliban leaders in Quetta. He asked Saleem Safi whether he can show any operation against Haqqani network Mullah Omar, against Mullah Mansoor while Afghan LEAs have carried out 11 attacks against Fazlullah group on Afghan soil. He alleged that terrorists wounded in Afghanistan are openly treated in Pakistani hospitals and the Afghan designated terrorists also hold open meetings in Islamabad."
The Afghan President, while answering a question, stated Afghanistan is proud of its friendship with India, as India shares Afghanistan's democratic aspirations. He said "India is a historical friend, and helping them in building dams in Afghanistan, it is a democratic country and shares our democratic aspirations".
He also revealed some measures for Pakistan, if interested to restore confidence level between Pakistan and Afghanistan as well as bringing lasting peace in the region. The measures include a swift action against the declared terrorist groups especially those Afghans who reject peace talks should be evacuated from Pakistan.
Though it is a hard nut to crack to find out those who reject peace talks in Afghanistan but his formula is not difficult to follow and implement. All Afghan Refugees may be returned to Afghanistan as done by Iran, at the earliest and action taken against all good or bad Taliban to purge the western belt of militancy. To achieve such goals, it is of paramount importance to implement National Action Plan (NAP), introduce reforms in FATA, bringing it in the mainstream in no time, secure the border to block easy crossing of militants but not at the cost of cross border business and tribal movement. Besides, Islamabad may extend unconditional support to President Ghani administration to neutralize growing Indian influence in Afghanistan.
The writer is freelance journalist


UN asks India to repeal Armed Forces Special Powers Act


Sp
NEW DELHI:  The United Nations has asked India to repeal the controversial Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, saying it had no role to play in a democracy. This comes amid clamour for withdrawal of AFSPA from Kashmir.

A United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur today urged India to repeal the controversial law that gives its military special powers to act in troubled areas. Christof Heyns, UN's Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, told reporters here that the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act has become a "symbol of excessive state power" and "has no role to play in a democracy".

His comments came after the conclusion of his 12-day fact-finding mission to examine situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in India.

"During my visit to Kashmir, AFSPA was described to me as 'hated' and 'draconian'. It clearly violates International Law. A number of UN treaty bodies have pronounced it to be in violation of International Law as well," said Heynes.

Accountability is circumvented by invoking AFSPA's requirement of obtaining prior sanction from the Central government before any civil prosecutions can be initiated against armed forces personnel, he said, quoting the report. "Information received through RTI applications show that this immunity provision effectively blocks any prosecution of members of the armed forces," he added, recommending immediate repeal of the law.

As part of his fact-finding mission Heyns visited Gujarat, Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Assam and West Bengal and met secretaries of various ministries, police officers, human rights activists and other officials in these states.

The UN Special Rapporteur's final conclusions and recommendations will be submitted as a comprehensive report to the Human Rights Council at a future session in 2013.

"The main finding in my report is that despite constitutional guarantees and robust human rights jurisprudence, extrajudicial killings continue in India and it is a matter of serious concern," Heyns said.

Salutary guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court, many of which have been incorporated through amendments in the Code of Criminal procedure are not sufficiently complied with, he claimed.

Prevalence of communal violence, encounter killings, custodial deaths, 'honour' killings and plight of dalits and adivasis are other areas of concern mentioned in the report. In the report, Heyns proposed a number of provisional steps to be taken to address these concerns, including the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry, consisting of respected lawyers and other community leaders.

"India also should ratify a number of international treaties, including the Convention Against Torture and the International Convention for the Protection of All persons from Enforced Disappearance," he said.

Heyns' visit is the first mission to India by an expert mandated by the UN Human Rights Council to monitor and report on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.


Kashmir in Crisis


Once again, the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir is convulsed in lethal violence pitting stone-throwing youths against armed police officers and security forces. The unrest is a major setback for peace in the long-troubled region claimed by both India and Pakistan, where an insurgency movement peaked in the 1990s, then waned, but never completely disappeared.
The trigger was the killing on July 8 by Indian security forces of Burhan Muzaffar Wani, a charismatic, 22-year-old separatist who wanted an independent Kashmir and had built up a following on social media among disaffected Indian Kashmiri youth. Since Mr. Wani’s death, some 40 people have been killed, including one police officer, during confrontations between protesters and security forces. Thousands have been injured, many by pellet guns wielded by the police and security forces as a crude form of crowd control. Kashmir’s hospitals are overwhelmed, and more than 100 people, mostly young, are threatened with blindness by pellets lodged in their eyes.
Meanwhile, many Kashmiris are living in a state of siege, under a strict curfew with access to basic communication — including cellular, landline and internet services — cut off by authorities. On Saturday, police raidednewspaper offices in Kashmir, and state authorities banned publication for three days, a measure that is profoundly troubling in democratic India.
A major cause of the uprising is the resentment among Kashmiri youths who have come of age under an Indian security apparatus that acts against civilians with impunity. Kashmir is subject to India’s Armed Forces Special Powers Act, or Afspa, which grants the military wide powers to arrest, shoot to kill, occupy or destroy property. The result is a culture of brutal disdain for the local population.
Troubling questions about the timing and the circumstances of Mr. Wani’s death remain unanswered. So too are questions about the apparently indiscriminate use of pellet guns. These and other questions argue for an independent investigation into the use of force by security forces, and for the reform of practices — including censorship, communications blackouts, and those allowed by Afspa – that are unworthy of India’s democracy.
A failure to take these steps will only push more young Kashmiris into militancy, and make impossible a political solution that alone can bring an end to the desperation that has, once again, gripped the region.


Tuesday, 26 July 2016

Kashmir Case: A Story of Letters and Telegrams


By Sohail Parwaz
The miseries and sacrifices of Kashmiris have different angles. It has been covered by the writers, researchers and the historians in different ways. Thousands of books and papers have been written about the gruesome tales. Amongst them few have taken pain to cover and documented them chronologically. Of them one is the Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi who published a 15 volume book in 1991, under the title ‘Documents on Kashmir Problem’. It’s a culling and compilation of original historic documents i.e. letters, telegrams, treaties and resolutions etc. Although it’s very difficult to extract the letters and telegrams from all the 15 volumes since it’s difficult if not impossible, however, while taking its first volume, the dates and chronology of some documents revealed the intentions and aim of the then Indian government. It clearly exposes the Maharaja Hari Singh’s and the Indian government’s nefarious nexus. It shows that the stage was set for the Indian forces landing in the valley. The plan was made immediately after the passing of the resolution by the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference about accession of the State with Pakistan, while the correspondence with the Pakistan government and the authorities was merely a cover up or eye wash. Some of the vital documents are being appended below without any or in some cases with brief comments just to explain in case of need.
Astoundingly in August 1947, an exchange of telegrams between the Kashmir government and the Pakistani authorities exhibited that both were engrossed and agreeing upon an idea of Standstill Agreement on all issues and that is confirmed through a telegram dated August 12, 1947, from Prime Minister, Kashmir State, to Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, States Relations Department, Karachi, where the Prime Minster clearly agrees that:
“Jammu & Kashmir government would welcome Standstill Agreements with Pakistan on all matters [….]”. The same was warmly reciprocated through a telegram of August 15, 1947, from Foreign Secretary, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, to the Prime Minister Jammu & Kashmir at Srinagar, “Your telegram of the 12th. The Government of Pakistan agrees to have a Standstill Agreement with the Government of Jammu &Kashmir[….]”
Interestingly, when a telegram exchange on the same subject, between the Kashmir Government and the Government of India took place, the reply from India was:
The Government of India would be glad if you or some other minister duly authorized on this behalf could fly to Delhi for negotiating Standstill Agreement between Kashmir Government and Indian Dominion. Early action is desirable to maintain intact existing agreements and administrative arrangements.”
The point is that if the Pakistan Government could trust the Kashmir Government’s intentions merely on the basis of a telegram exchanged then what compelled the Indians to ask for an instantaneous one-on-one meeting?
In fact something had already started cooking up in the ‘Kashmir Kitchen’, under the supervision of the ‘Indian Chefs’ and it was soon after the passing of the resolution regarding accession to Pakistan, by the Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference. Surprisingly, merely within 100 days, the Indian forces had their boots in the Valley. Obviously it was not possible in such a short time unless preliminaries had already not been tied up.
Although through a telegram of 12 August 1947, the Prime Minister of Kashmir assured Pakistan about strictly adhering to a Standstill Agreement, nevertheless, the events on ground were negating any such assurance. The Pakistan’s government machinery smelled fishy maneuvers, hence decided to contact the Kashmir government. A text (given below) was immediately telegraphed to the Prime Minister Kashmir. The telegram dated October 12, 1947, from Foreign Secretary to the government of Pakistan to the Prime Minister of Kashmir said:
“Men of Pakistan Army who have recently returned from leave at their homes in Poonch have report that armed bands, which includes troops are attacking Muslim villages in the State [….] one feature of the present situation in Poonch which, however, makes it peculiarly dangerous to the friendly relations which the Pakistan Government wishes to retain with Kashmir, is that the Pakistan Army obtains a large number of recruits from Poonch. Feeling in the battalions to which these men belong is rapidly rising and the situation is fraught with danger. The Pakistan Government wishes to avoid such a situation as they are sure do the Government of Kashmir, but if it is to be avoided, immediate and effective steps must be taken to end the present state of affairs, and in particular, if it is true that state troops are taking part in the attack on Muslims, to ensure the restoration of their discipline. The Government of Pak would like to be informed of the action taken”.
The telegram clearly spelled Pakistan’s concern and worries which were certainly valid; however, instead of satisfying the Pakistani Government, the Prime Minister of Kashmir leveled counter charges and attempted to justify the killings done by the Dogra forces through his reply. Unexpectedly, the Kashmir prime minister couldn’t hide his despicable aim in his reply. Reply of the Prime Minister of the Kashmir dated 15 Oct 1947 to the Government of Pakistan:
“This Government has ample proof of infiltration. As is the result in every Govt, including Pakistan Dominion, Military has to take action when disturbances caused cannot adequately be dealt with by Civil Administration. [….] If unfortunately this request is not heeded Government, much against its wishes, will have no option but to ask for assistance to withstand aggressive and unfriendly actions of the Pakistan people along our border”.
One wonders if anyone had ever gone into these minute details to extract the actual wicked intentions of the Maharaja and his collaborator, the Indian Government! After sending the telegram of 15 July, 1947 the Kashmir government appeared to be in a haste and couldn’t hide her excitement, hence, sent yet another telegram just after 3 days, to a person nothing less than the distinguished Governor General of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Telegram dated October 18, 1947 from the Prime Minister of the Kashmir to the Governor General of Pakistan:
“[….] Finally the Govt wish to make it plain that it is not possible to tolerate this attitude longer without grave consequences to the life, property of people which it is sacredly bound to defend at all costs. The Govt even now hopes that you would personally look into the matter and put a stop to all the iniquities which are being perpetrated. If, unfortunately this request is not heeded the Govt fully hope that you would agree that it would be justified in asking for friendly assistance and oppose trespass on its fundamental rights. (Copy telegraphed to Pakistani Prime Minister also)”.
The sender probably forgot that the person he addressed was an exemplary statesman and a politician of unmatched ethical standards. Even the British Lords and Viceroys would think hundred times before conversing with him. Consequently, the prime minister of Kashmir got the dose. It was a historical reply and no one could say that it was written by the head of the state of a country that got freedom hardly few weeks back. Telegram dated October 20, 1947 from the Governor General of Pakistan, to the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir
“I have received telegram of the 18th October from your Prime Minister regarding the situation in Kashmir which I regret was released to the press before it reached me and before I could deal with it. My Government has already been in communication with your Government and I deplore that your Prime Minister should have restored to the tone and language adopted in his telegram to me which embodies a threat to seek outside assistance and is almost in the nature of an ultimatum. This is hardly the way for any responsible and friendly Government to handle the situation that has arisen. [……] in the circumstances I am, reluctantly, forced to the conclusion that the unfounded allegations and accusations are only a smoke screen to cover the real aim of your Govt’s policy. A recent instance of this policy is the differential treatment accorded to the leaders of the Kashmir National Conference and the Muslim Conference. […..] the course which your Government is pursuing in suppressing the Mussalmans in every way, the atrocities which are being committed by your troops and which are driving Muslims out of the State, various indications given in the press, particularly the release to the Press of your Prime Minister’s telegram addressed to me containing unfounded allegations and the threat to enlist outside assistance, show clearly that the aim of your Government’s policy is to seek an opportunity to join the Indian Dominion. This policy is naturally creating deep resentment and grave apprehension among your subjects 85 percent of whom are Muslims. [….]
Any sensible person would consider it as a ‘Shut-up’ call, given in the diplomatic way.  However Maharaja was looking for this opportunity and as the Indian Government and the Raja had already premeditated, within a week the Maharaja scripted a letter to the most controversial Viceroy of the Subcontinent, Lord Mountbatten, who was now the Governor General of India. Text of letter dated 26 October 1947 from Sir Hari Singh, Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, to Lord Mountbatten, the Governor General of India:
My dear Lord Mountbatten,
I have to inform your Excellency that a grave emergency has arisen in my state and request immediate assistance of your Government. [….] if my State has to be saved immediate assistance must be available at Srinagar. Mr. Menon is fully aware of the situation and he will explain to you, if further explanation is needed.
In haste and with kindest regards,
Yours sincerely
Hari Singh
The Palace Jammu                                                                                                 ,
26 October 1947                                                                                                             
The whole stage was set for these few lines. It was enough of an excuse for invading a peaceful state against the wishes of the majority of the public. So, within next 24 hours Lord Mountbatten replied to Maharaja assuring him ‘assistance’. Text of Lord Mountbatten’s reply dated 27 Oct 1947 to the Kashmir Ruler signifying his Acceptance of the Instruments of Accession:
My dear Maharaja Sahib
Your Highness’ letter dated 26 October has been delivered to me by Mr. V.P. MenonIn the special circumstances mentioned by Your Highness my Government have decided to accept the accession of Kashmir State to the Dominion of India. [……]
Meanwhile, I respond to Your Highness’ appeal for military aid action has been taken today to send troops of the Indian Army to Kashmir to help your own forces to defend your territory and to protect the lives , property and honour of your people.[….]
With kind regards,
 I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Mountbatten of Burma
New Delhi
October 27, 1947                               
That’s how the new tale about the miseries of the inopportune Kashmiris started. Ever since then, the number of the Indian troops is increasing in the Kashmir Valley and so is the severity of the atrocities committed by the brutal Indian Army. The irony is that on one hand the innocent Muslim Kashmiris of Jammu & Kashmir were suppressed and tortured while on the other hand the clever Indian Prime Minster Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru was assuring the world at every forum, about extending the plebiscite right to the Muslims of the Valley. That’s the most tragic episode of this unresolved issue. What Pandit Nehru assured to the outer world and what he executed and accomplished internally is a different story being kept pending for some other time.

Why a grieving Kashmir hurts India's sovereignty


BY INSHAH MALIK

When I first heard about the death of 22-year-old Kashmiri rebel Burhan Wani, I was on my way to a friend’s place. Unexpectedly, his death brought a feeling of extreme doom and a sharp pain in my ribcage. I went on to finish my day, all the while scrolling through news updates on my mobile phone.
As a Kashmiri, feeling sorrow over death is a natural response, as killings are not dehumanised in popular Kashmiri culture. There is a social demand that one must, at least, say a few words to express sadness. 
This sadness is in me despite the fact that there is a long trail of deaths that mark the public memory and one more won’t do so much for the historical cause of freedom. Yet, the feeling of absolute doom reigns over my analysis.
I spent the rest of the evening with my housemates in suburban Tehran, engaged in conversations about Burhan and protestor deaths that had begun to mount.
To be honest, I had never watched any of his videos or taken the Indian media's coverage about him seriously, because I couldn’t trust the construction of his political formation in the sensationalised reportage.
As a scholar, my research in Kashmir has taught me to discredit sensationalism around Kashmiri political figures. Thus, from my conversations in Kashmir, I was aware that Burhan has come to dominate the popular imagination because of his moral challenge to the Indian state.
The romance around his personality and its charisma swaying the young in Kashmir is an all-too-real and ignored aspect of his political figuration.
It is interesting these aspects of the discussion are considered irrelevant, foreign or mere extrapolations of the "terrorism" inducing thinking of Pakistan.
An extraordinary Kashmiri response on the streets shows I was not the only one to grieve. Kashmiris felt enormous grief, and the mammoth commemorations that followed were in line with the traditions of grieving in the Valley.
This grieving, which seemed unwarranted or unauthenticated from the state's point of view, must be presenting some grave challenge to the Indian state that it chose to resort to gunfire and pellets in response, which have killed more than 49 civilians and blinded 30 others at last count.
By the time I reached home that night, I was exhausted in forming coherent lines about what is transpiring in Kashmir. Only now has this event begun to create some very basic questions in me; most of these questions, perhaps, are a historical repetition, and need to be answered from a holistic point of view. 
The Parliament session held on July 19, 2016 saw home minister Rajnath Singh  reiterating the current problem in Kashmir was Pakistan-sponsored, that Kashmiris were misguided about their rights and that he would ensure the Valley was guided the right way.
From this assertion arise two important questions: Why should Kashmiri political figures be treated as "misguided"? And how does the civilian grieving become a threat to India’s sovereignty claims in the Valley?
These two questions can evoke even more important questions such as should civilian grieving prompt the state to kill, maim, rape and sensor Kashmiri people? Why should the majority in India simply lap up these claims the state makes about Kashmir?
Right-wing politicians in India will have you believe India’s sovereignty is in grave danger in Kashmir, and their Left-wing counterparts will invoke the law to hold the state’s sovereignty accountable. This farcical sense of Kashmiris' relationship with sovereignty emerges from a lack of understanding of how India’s sovereignty works in Kashmir.
The sovereignty of India, historically, has functioned through exclusions or exceptions.
The Indian political culture is thus fraught with debates about Kashmir (see, for instance, in mainstream media) without allowing Kashmiris to enter such debate. In some exceptional circumstances, the debates that Kashmiris bring to the fore are often the debates that have to be sanctioned by the law of the Indian state.
Therefore, the question of Indian sovereignty becomes more basic than the question of law. Consequently, in the case of thousands of human rights violation cases, it’s the state that ultimately decides whether the law applies or not.
Take, for example, the cases of the Kunan and Poshpor mass rape, or the Gaw Kadal massacre that remain uninvestigated despite being documented by human rights organisations. 
In India’s political culture, the Kashmiri is reduced to bare life. Law doesn’t apply and political action is termed "misguided". Instantly, a Kashmiri becomes one who can be killed, but not sacrificed.
The Kashmiri comes to signify the process of brainwashing: a mere body that has no capacity to think and reflect, and is full of vengeance but cannot be patriotic. It is a body that can be corrupted, but not trusted.
Burhan Wani’s body is where the war of India’s claim of Kashmir being an "integral part" of its Union is being played.
It is here that the state gives itself the ultimate power to determine who can be killed, and how that killing cannot be called a sacrifice.
When the state makes such a decision about the dispensability of people for strengthening its political claims, it assigns grieve-ability to such bodies. Thus, the media and political class in defence of the state create the distinction of who is to be grieved (soldiers) and who we mustn't grieve for (in this case Burhan).
In some cases, the extreme nature of such defence is visible. Take, for instance, a statement from Kashmiri Hindu activist Sushil Pandit, who regretted the state’s decision to return Burhan’s body and wished instead that it was "burned along with garbage".
Grieving Burhan is so wrong because the state tells me he is not grieve-able, and if I do grieve him, I will be shot or maimed or killed; even be used as a body on which the war of sovereignty will be played with the complete backing of the political class and media. Therefore, the questions I began to ask, seem even more urgent as the entire population of Kashmir now seems to be in the line of fire.
As is visible on the 12-day siege that has crippled the Valley. Why must the entire population be under siege if only Burhan Wani is a problem?
Does the analysis about Burhan Wani’s body extend to the entire population in Kashmir? And what is the nature of this sovereignty claim, if the entire population of say the Valley of 6.5 million people are outside its fold?
The investigation of India’s sovereignty claims over Kashmir leads one to think in a more effective way about the relation between politics and morality. In the milieu of the bare life that a Kashmiri is reduced to being within the Indian structure, Kashmir’s mourning cements its moral position in challenging India.
This has been the reality of Kashmiris in their alternative, repressed world, where the body of Sheikh Abdullah (the former-prime-minister-turned-chief-minister of the state) becomes a "sell-out" from being the Lion of Kashmir.
The bodies of Maqbool Bhat, Ashfaq Majeed Wani, and Afzal Guru represent the symbolic grieve-able witnesses of India’s war on the Kashmiri. Both Afzal and Maqbool were denied to Kashmiris to ensure Kashmiris do not mount on a memory of resilience against the Indian state's sovereignty.
It is important to understand that India’s sovereign oppression on Kashmir is historical, and so is the grieving in the Valley. Ashfaq Majid Wani was the 23-year-old commander of Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). His death invoked even more public grieving on March 30, 1990. Even then Kashmir's political reality was mocking India’s self-congratulatory analysis on the Valley.
In its historical response to Kashmiris, India's wish to not return a rebel's body has actually been fulfilled in the past and failed. Maqbool Bhat, a Kashmiri revolutionary known both in India and Pakistan as a double agent, was hanged and buried in Tihar Jail in 1989 so as to disallow Kashmiris a chance to grieve.
The Kashmiris who wanted to grieve Maqbool then were not even a handful, as is the case with revolutionaries; but by 1989, Maqbool was a revered political figure in every household. With the armed revolutionary Ashfaq Majid Wani coming to the fore, Maqbool was immortalised as a witness and Ashfaq as a martyr.
In recent public memory, Afzal Guru’s hanging, a widely debated event, although remembered as an isolated incident in India, was seen as a continuation of the repressed history of Kashmiris. Thus, the grieving that follows Burhan’s death is not merely about Burhan, but about hundreds of such Burhans who were killed while they rejected their state-induced bare life. 
By killing some more, India is only strengthening Kashmiri bodies to reject its sovereignty and become struggling witnesses to the war that is being played out against them.


Sunday, 24 July 2016

Some State Actors behind the Munich Shooting

By Sajjad Shaukat

The lone gunman killed 10 people and wounded more than 20 in Munich after the deadly shooting in Olympia shopping mall and outside a nearby McDonalds on Friday (July 22, 2016). Then, he killed himself.

There are conflicting reports came from the German media, authorities and police. Initial reports claimed that there were three gunmen who killed 15 people, “but officers have now said there was just one deranged terrorist responsible for the massacre…German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier stated the motives for this abhorrent act have not yet been completely, clarified we still have contradictory clues…police, citing eyewitness accounts had initially said they were looking for up to three suspects in the shooting attack at the Munich Olympia Shopping Centre that sent shoppers fleeing in panic and shut traffic across the city.”

The German law-enforcing agencies have indentified that the shooter was an 18-year old dual German-Iranian citizen. In a news conference on early on Saturday (July 23, 2016), the German officials revealed, “The shooter was believed to have staged the attack alone, opening fire in a fast food restaurant before moving on to the mal…killed himself…they were considering all possibilities, including Islamist and right-wing terrorism.”

Police in the German city of Munich have asked members of the public to submit any videos, photos or audio recordings from mass shooting. Police will give an update on their investigation later on Saturday (July 23).

A video posted online shows voice of the shooter who yells out an obscenity about Turks and says “I am German.” Police verified the video, but did not comment on it.

On the social media, supporters of the Islamic State group (Also known as Daesh, ISIS, ISIL) celebrated and hailed the shooting rampage in Munich.

The shooting came just four days after a refugee attacked people with an ax-and-knife in a German train near Bavarian city of Wuerzburg, leaving five people severely injured The attacker, who was shot and killed by police, was registered as an Afghan refugee. Through its Aamaq news agency, the ISIS claimed responsibility the attack on a German train. But, the German authorities said it appears the 17-year-old Afghan asylum seeker who was shot and killed by police as he fled the scene appears to have self-radicalized and had no direct link to the extremists.

It is major terror attack in Munich, Germany, which happened just after a week of terror assault in the French city of Nice where a truck driver had killed 85 people and ISIL had claimed responsibility for the Nice carnage. A French anti-terror prosecutor stated on July 7, 2016 that the driver, who was killed, appeared to have planned the attack for some time, adding he may have embraced Islamic extremism as early as the attack on Charlie Hebdo.
While police called the shooting in Munich an act of terrorism, but, at the same time explained that they had no indication it involved Islamic extremism and at least one witness said he heard a shooter shout an anti-foreigner slur.

However, Munich shooting cannot be seen in isolation, as it is part of the other terror attacks, especially of the recent past, which occurred in Europe and the US. Some state actors who were behind those terror assaults are also behind the Munich shooting.

In this context, some state actors like the US and especially Israel are still acting upon the secret strategies of the old political thinkers like Hobbes, Machiavelli, Morgenthau and Kissinger to achieve their selfish aims in wake of the modern world trends such as renunciation of war, peaceful settlement of disputes and economic development, while social media or internet has not only accelerated the peoples’ interaction of various countries for the development of their mutual related-fields, but also exposed the hidden game of some state actors.

In this regard, there is a co-relationship of the double game, secret strategy and false flag operations which continue unabated.

Like the terror attacks in Paris, Brussels, Orlando, San Bernardino, Nice, the latest one in Munich is also a false flag operation and is part of the secret strategy of American CIA and particularly Israeli Mossad which are in collaboration with each other in order to obtain the covert aims of their countries. Mossad might be alone involved in the terror assaults of Munich.

After the false flag operations of Paris and Brussels, the shooting at San Bernardino, California etc., Israel achieved its several sinister designs. Like the drastic aftermath of 9/11 tragedy, rulers and politicians of the US-led Western countries, especially of Europe, including their media have been misguiding their general public by creating chauvinism against the Muslims. They are propagating the so-called threat of Islamophobia. In one way or the other, the Muslims are being persecuted in the US and other Western countries, particularly in Europe which has been put on high alert, as these subversive acts were being taken as attacks on the whole continent. Owing to the irresponsible approach of Western leaders, right-wing parties and “Stop Islam” movement in the West, especially in Europe are becoming popular by largely attracting their people. Besides, Muslims in the continent are facing severe backlash in form of attacks on them and threats (In some countries) in wake of anti-Muslim protests. Without caring for human rights, several Muslim refugees have been expelled from various European countries.

Besides revival of the fake global war on terror, Israeli-led America also got the support of its Western allies (NATO) against Russia in relation to Syrian civil war, and as part of the double game and secret strategy, American jet fighters and those of its Western coalition started targeting the ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

But, some developments have frustrated the Israelis. Russian-led coalition of Iran, Iraq, the Syrian army-the National Defense Forces (NDF) and Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which had broken the backbone of the US-CIA-assisted ISIS terrorists, Al-Qaeda’s Al-Nusra Front and the rebels who have been fighting to oust the Syrian President Assad’s government and against the current Iraqi regime as part of America’s double game to obtain Israeli interests. Moscow also exposed the smuggling of oil by ISIS-controlled regions of Iraq to some European countries and inaction of their governments including America in this respect. Russian-supported Assad’s forces have retaken several territories from the control of the rebels and the ISIS terrorists who are on flee in Syria and Iraq. Lebanon has also considered inviting Russian military to cope with the CIA-Mossad-led ISIL militants. Israeli-led American scheme of re-intervention in Libya also seems to be failure. Recently, on June 26, 2016, Russian-backed Iraqi forces have recaptured the city of Fallujah. Following dual strategy, Pentagon welcomed the retaken of Fallujah, and the US Secretary of State John Kerry has offered Moscow to fight the ISIS terrorists jointly, in case Russia stops targeting the Syrian rebel groups. Nevertheless, it is due to skillful diplomacy of the President Putin that very soon, Syria will be liberated from the hold of the Israeli-led Western powers. Now, the scenario in Syria shows that the CIA-prepared plan-B of Syria’s partition will also fail.

Some other developments such as criticism of the controversial Turkish-EU refugee deal by a number of human rights groups, especially Amnesty International, success of first Muslim Pakistan’s origin Sadiq Khan as mayor of London by defeating the Conservative rival Zac Goldsmith-a wealthy Jew who was supported by the former British Prime Minister David Cameron, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (EU), after the referendum (Brexit) on June 24, 2016, despite President Obama’s instance on London to keep aligned with the EU, prospects of Scotland and some other countries for separation from the EU, and the divide between the elite class which run multinational companies with the direct or indirect control of the Jews and the general masses who are suffering from multiple problems in wake of differences on the refugee crisis, Syrian war, Greece’s weak economy, recent violent protests against the labour laws in France etc.—the chances of European Union’s disintegration which will giving a greater blow to the US-Europe alliance against Russia, a rift between the NATO countries, as noted in the recent past by the “Stop NATO protests” in Europe are quite opposite to the Israeli secret interests.

Meanwhile, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s rebuke of European nations, accusing them of dictatorship and cruelty for keeping their frontiers closed to the refugees, fleeing the Syrian conflict created a rift between the West and Turkey, the close ally of NATO. On February 10, 2016, President Erdogan lashed out at the US over its support for Syria’s main Kurdish group, saying, “The failure to recognize the Democratic Union Party (PYD) as a terrorist group is creating a “sea of blood”. He explained, “The PYD, on which the US relies to battle so-called Islamic State in Syria, is an offshoot of the banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party.”

As regards the failed rebellion-attempt  of July 15, this year, Turkey’s president Erdogan and top officials of his government have held the US and CIA for the failed coup to topple his regime by backing and replacing Erdogan with the CIA’s “designated figurehead”, cleric Fethullah Gülen, currently living in Pennsylvania in the US.

By neglecting American pressure, President Erdogan who has taken steps in the end of June, this year to improve relations with Russia to strengthen its hand in fighting against militants, stated that the attack at the Istanbul airport should serve as a turning point in the global battle against terrorism. Reports suggest that Ankara is also considering a military agreement with Moscow.
Nevertheless, these developments have also frustrated Tel Aviv. Besides, a prolonged war of history in Afghanistan by the US-led NATO countries, continued ambush attacks on their military installations and personnel by the freedom fighters (Taliban) have demoralized, particularly American military personnel who think that they have been sent abroad—Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere in the world to maintain the supremacy of Israel, instead of protecting American national interests or their citizens. The cost of the endless war in Afghanistan is rapidly increasing, adding to the plight of ordinary citizens of the US and its Western allies. In order to divert the attention of Americans and its Western public, Mossad-CIA are acting upon the secret strategy of the US and Israel.

Meanwhile, the long-awaited 28 secret pages from the Congressional Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 Commission report were released on July 15, 2016, indicating that the alleged hijackers may have been in contact and supported by individuals connected to the Saudi Arabian government. On May 1, 2016, in connection with the Congressional investigation, CIA Director Brennan said that documents which could link Saudi Arabia to 9/11 terrorists should be kept classified, as like CIA and Mossad, Saudi Arabia has also been funding the ISIL (The Sunni group) against the Syrian government and Yemen.

Even, CIA-Mossad scheme to promote sectarian violence in the Islamic World on larger scale, after creating a rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran could not succeed, as after the recent bombings in Saudi Arabia, Saudi people have started thinking about the double game of America and Israel.

It is mentionable that the US-led West, especially Europe has already started a new Cold War with Russia. The US has decided to station permanently additional troops in Eastern Europe as part of NATO move to defend the continent against the presumed threat of Moscow. In response, Moscow also responded that it would send 30,000 Russian troops along its western and southern borders. Especially, Tel Aviv wants to intensify this new Cold War so as to avoid the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, as some European countries have been emphasizing on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to stop the expansion of West Bank settlements and restart a negotiation process for the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue in wake of the EU rule to boycott goods produced in Israeli settlements on the West Bank.

Here, connections of the Israeli secret agency Mossad are also noteworthy. In March 2015, Iraqi Special Forces pointed out that they had arrested several ISIL’s foreign military advisors, including American, Israeli and Arab nationals and four foreign passports in an operation in Mosul. Last year, a senior aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin also stated that Mossad is training ISIL terrorists, operating in Iraq and Syria. Meanwhile, arrest of Israeli Col. Shahak in Iraq, his admission, proving links of Al-Qaeda and ISIS with America and Mossad and medical treatment of the ISIS warriors in the Israeli hospitals might also be cited as instance. Mossad links with the ISIS terrorists can also be judged from the fact that this terrorist outfit conducted several suicide assaults and bomb blasts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan. But, it did not target Israel.

Notably, Israel and Zionist lobbies which are clandestinely assisting America’s anti-Muslim, pro-Israeli Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee want to see him as the president of the United States. Trump who is well-known for his anti-Muslim rhetoric not only exploited the terror assaults of Paris and Brussels, but also the shooting at the gay night club in Orlando, Florida which killed at least 50 persons.

This false flag operation was exposed when on June 28, 2016, The New York Times wrote, “The mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla., on June 12 included a curious phrase:  false flag…the victims in the shooting? They were “crisis actors” hired to promote the story as a pretext to impose tighter gun restrictions, the theory goes…the term false flag relates to naval warfare when a ship would fly a flag that would conceal its true identity as a way to lure an enemy closer. Today, it is commonly a shorthand for an act of deception…conspiracy theorists have applied the label to high-profile attacks, including the shootings by a husband and wife last year in San Bernardino, Calif, that killed 14…the phrase has even been used to doubt the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.”

In an interview with Brazilian TV on June 14, 2016, the ex-wife of the Orlando shooter Omar Mateen Sitora Yusufiy disclosed that American FBI pressurized her to keep quiet about his homosexuality. Since the attack, Mateen has been dubbed an Islamic terrorist by the politicians, senior officials and commentators in the US, following reports he had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group, as they wanted to downplay the personal and self-hating nature of the assault which was also admitted by President Obama.

It is worth-mentioning that Russia’s Defense Ministry hosted the fifth Moscow Conference on International Security, held in Moscow on April 27-28, 2016 with the participation of high military officials and experts from around the world to discuss the fight against terrorism and other pressing security challenges. In this connection, Russia’s analyst Martin McCauley said on April 27, 2016, “Only Russia and the US, the two major global powers can bring a solution to the many problems threatening peace…unless they make concessions to each other and share information, the progress is unlikely to be achieved...the head of America’s National Intelligence Agency, James Clapper and European intelligence agencies stated…there are Islamic State [ISIS] cells already in England, Germany and Italy. They are saying things which perhaps they should have been saying in Moscow. But, they have been saying these things and they are warning Europe that there is a formidable threat from Syria, from jihadists returning from Syria, North Africa, Iraq…the Americans say that more and more closer cooperation between states is necessary. They are…saying that it’s very, very important to collaborate. But of course, their top people should be in Moscow saying that.”

In this respect, Russian foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had also stated, “Security cooperation with Russia was one of the projects frozen by NATO. We are willing to work together in this sphere…it is very unfortunate. There is so-called Cold War between American and Russia at present… at a time when information sharing, working together against terrorism is necessary.”

In fact, the US and Israel have been implementing secret strategy and double game by providing CIA and Mossad to conduct false flag operations in the US and Europe. Hence, as to why, they should share information with Moscow.   

Nonetheless, various developments disheartened particularly Israel which gave a free hand to ISIL terrorists to arrange various terror assaults in the US and especially Europe, while, American and European intelligence officials and counterterrorism experts and analysts have been predicting prospective terror attacks in Europe and the US, which were manipulated by Mossad in connivance with CIA operatives.

Experience of the recent acts of terrorism show that general masses start pointing fingers at the ISIS, without going into depth to know the role of some state actors like America and Israel who are behind this outfit and as to what the covert aims, these countries want to achieve through their double game. General masses also forgot that as part of the double game, if President Bush (The Senior) and George W. Bush franchised Al-Qaeda on global level, President Obama’s dual policy franchised both Al-Qaeda and ISIS to obtain the unfinished agenda of the Zionist Jews and for a greater Israel at the cost of the Muslim countries and the patriot Americans. By following Israeli-led US flawed policies, consciously or unconsciously, European politicians are also providing Mossad with golden chance to exploit the ant-Muslim phenomena of Europe and to use ISI militants and their home-grown terrorists to conduct terror attacks in the continent.

When Iraq-based ISIS which itself broke away from Al-Qaeda, proclaimed a worldwide caliphate by its leader Abu Baker al-Baghdadi, on 29 June 2014, ISIS’s criminal actions had widely been criticized in the world, with many Islamic communities judging the group to be unrepresentative of Islam. One of ISIS’s goals has been to establish a radical Sunni Islamic state in Iraq and Syria Jordan, Palestine etc. (Levant region). It has been used by the CIA and Mossad for distorting the image of Islam and for inciting the feelings of Western Christians and Kurds against Muslims. Besides some Islamic countries, a majority of the religious extremists (Muslims) from the western world joined the ISIS. In this context, oblivion on the part of America and Europe about ISIS recruits from their countries is questionable.

Scholars of international affairs agree that “foreign affairs are too foreign” to the citizens of a country. Renowned scholar Prof. Hoslti opines that “issues and situations” have “influence on public opinion” which in turn “influences the objectives and actions.” In fact, fault cannot be laid on the general masses, a majority of whom are swayed by emotions, stereotypes and prejudices created by the political leaders who keep on manipulating any crisis for their own self-interests with the sole aim of getting their sympathies to increase their vote bank. There are equal strong pressures from religious and nationalist forces in wake of global war on terror which is dividing the world on religious lines.

We can conclude that like previous terror attacks in the US and Europe, state actors like America and Israel are also behind Munich shooting. And responsibility is also fixed on Germany whose intelligence and law-enforcing agencies failed in this respect, despite warnings and recent terror attacks in Europe.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic_pak@hotmail.com

Courtesy Veterans Today


Friday, 22 July 2016

Kashmir Quandary: Injustice to the children of a lesser god – I



By Sohail Parwaz
The same prejudiced West that shows concern for Arab Spring and lost sleep for people’s rights in Libya and Syria is ironically seen indifferent to the Kashmir dilemma. It’s a point of great concern that due to the atrocities by Indian security forces from January 1989 till mid June 2014, around 94,038 innocent Kashmiris have been killed and that excludes custodian killing which comes around 7,023. During this period approximately 126,209 arrests have been made while 22,778 women have been widowed and 107,469 children have been orphaned. The most heinous crime is of gang-raping which the inhuman Indian soldiers, shamelessly committed, thus raped and molested 10,120 women.
Dr. Subramanian Swami of BJP, a year ago, said in a television interview that the only solution to the Kashmir problem is a decisive war against Pakistan and latter must be nuked if India is interested in a peaceful Subcontinent. It reflects the mindset of Indian leadership and their interest for the peace but still if someone is interested in presenting the other cheek to the Indian hardliners then he is certainly living in a fools’ paradise. Ironically, despite a lapse of 66 years, Kashmiris are still struggling and sacrificing to achieve their alienable right under UN resolutions for the plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. What the world needs to understand is that the global village will always remain restive if the flashpoint Kashmir remains unresolved and is not handled seriously.
The peace custodians of the world better worry for the speedily approaching Asian Autumn that may 21turn world into a barren globe. According to a systematic and deliberate planning the Kashmir issue is being shoved in the dusty draws. The basic issue was the freedom and Kashmiris’ right of self-determination, which was molded with the passage of time as an unfinished business of partition. The deliberate efforts were made to minimize its gravity as some ‘internal matter’ or some bilateral matter, while the history suggests that the issue existed even before India and Pakistan were founded as independent and separate nations.
The Kautiliya Arthashastra is considered to be the oldest and most exhaustive treatise on the governance and administration of a state. Kautiliya in this Arthashastra inscribes: “The Raja longing for victories and invasions should place himself at the center of the axis while all the principalities and states situated in the neighbourhood should be declared adversaries and whenever these neighbours are found bogged in internal or outer hitches and glitches, should be invaded and annexed forthwith. If these neighbouring countries are found feeble and fragile or having no support at all, then either they should be kept under stress and strain or purged from tip to toe.” Kautiliya’s advice to the Raja was to remember that the neighbours of his neighbours were not only Raja’s friends but his natural allies as well.
The Brahman’s yearning for hegemony never depleted. In the latter half of the past century the most apt case in point is the occupation of Kashmir, subduing Bhutan, suppressing Bangladesh and irritating Nepal. No mention of Hyderabad Deccan, Goa and Junagadh, those were silently and criminally invaded and occupied soon after the Partition despite the fact that principalities never desired to live under Indian Dominion. The Kashmir issue was created by Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru not because he had any special attachment for Kashmir as the “land of his ancestors” as he commonly used to mention it. His primary aim was to weaken Pakistan, which had come into existence as a sovereign State in 1947 against the wishes of the leaders of the Hindu Congress, aka the Indian National Congress. If Nehru’s point is honoured that he accessed Kashmir due to great attachment for latter, as it was the land of his ancestors, then why on earth, did his forces invade Junagadh, Hyderabad and Goa? After all these three states were by no way the lands of his ancestors? The fact is that the point of Kashmir being the land of his ancestors was invented by Nehru and his henchmen only to camouflage the evil and imperialistic designs of India on Kashmir.
It was the historic day of July 19, 1947 when at the residence of Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan in Abi Guzar, Srinagar during an emergency convention, All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference adopted the ‘Resolution for Accession to Pakistan’. In the presence of Abdul Rahim Wani with 59 other prominent leaders in attendance the resolution was presented by Khawaja Ghulam uddin Wani. It was presided over by Chaudhry Hamid Ullah Khan. The genuine representatives of majority of Kashmiris passed this resolution of Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan and it reflected the ambitions of the majority of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, hence was unanimously adopted on the basis that existing religious, geographical, cultural and economic ties and the aspirations of millions of Kashmiri Muslims warranted accession of State with Pakistan. It was a historic movement since it gave the liberation movement a clear objective and goal.
The discovery publishing house New Delhi published a 15 volume book under the title ‘Documents on2 Kashmir Problem’ in 1991. It’s a culling and compilation of original historic documents i.e. letters, telegrams, treaties and resolutions etc. Its first volume contains some dates and chronology of a number of documents those reveal the intentions and aim of the then Indian government. It clearly exposes the Maharaja Hari Singh’s and the Indian government’s nefarious nexus. It shows that the stage was set for the Indian forces landing in the valley. The plan was made immediately after the passing of the resolution by the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference about accession of the State with Pakistan, while the correspondence with the Pakistan government and the authorities was merely a cover up.
It has to be seen that, were the circumstances such that forced the Indians to intrude or it was planned drama which was staged to occupy a Muslim majority state forcibly, despite the majority’s decision in favour of accession to Pakistan? What wrath fell in 100 days that compelled the Indians to criminally push their forces into the Valley on 27 October 1947 and by force occupy Jammu and Kashmir in utter violation of the partition plan and against the wishes of the Kashmiri people? Amazingly in August 1947, an exchange of telegrams between the Kashmir government and the Pakistani authorities shows that both were interested and agreeing upon a Standstill Agreement on all matters.
As mentioned earlier that something had already started cooking up in the ‘Kashmir Kitchen’, certainly under the supervision of the ‘Indian Chefs’ and it was soon after the passing of the resolution regarding accession to Pakistan, by the Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Conference. The astonishing fact is that the events were trending rapidly. Merely in 100 days, the Indian forces had their boots in the Valley. Obviously it was not possible in such a short time unless preliminaries had already not been tied up.