The Ugly truth! by Rimofar

Why the Jordanian pilot was captured and killed?

The Ugly truth!

by Rimofar 

http://banoosh.com/jordanian-pilot-captivated-ugly-truth/#sthash.UXp68zk1.dpuf

According to an Arab military intelligence source, there are really shocking reasons behind the killing of the Jordanian pilot, Muath Al-Kaseasbeh, who was burnt alive by ISIS.

The killed pilot was said to be captured by ISIS militants while flying over the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa, Syria in one of the anti-ISIS air coalition’s strikes on ISIS.

According to the source, the Jordanian pilot noticed that the American aircrafts were dropping weapons to ISIS fighters in an organized way. That really struck the pilot, so he reported that to the air force intelligence’s management from his aircraft.

Minutes later, the pilot’s F-16AM was engaged by an American missile over an area controlled by ISIS, which made him jump out of his aircraft.

Soon later, U.S. Central Command, the body overseeing the coalition air war over Iraq and Syria, said: ‘Evidence clearly indicates that ISIL did not down the aircraft as the terrorist organization is claiming.

The statement did not give a cause for the ‘crash,’ in an attempt to raise doubts about the pilot and to imply that he dropped himself intentionally in coordination between him and ISIS.

It was a way to close the door over any attempts for investigations to know how the aircraft was down.

It was clear from the beginning that there were no attempts to rescue the pilot at that time. Instead, he was left to be taken as a hostage by ISIS. It was known that he would definitely be captivated and would be soon executed and that was the perfect way to silence him.

However, this was not the first time to be mentioned that American Planes Routinely Drops weapons to ISIS fighters.

Back in October it was reported that the United States was responsible for accidentally dropping weapons and supplies to ISIS in Syria. It was played as a mistake by the mainstream media. While the alternative media hinted that it was intentional.

Also, MP Majid al-Ghraoui, the member of the Security and Defense Committee in the Iraqi Parliament mentioned in Iraqi News that on the 3rd of last January, an American aircraft dropped a load of weapons and equipment into the hands of the ISIS group militants in southeast of Tikrit, located in Salahuddin province.

He said “The information that has reached us in the Security and Defense Committee indicates that an American aircraft dropped a load of weapons and equipment to the ISIS group militants at the area of al-Dour in the province of Salahuddin.”

He added: “The U.S. is trying to obtain more benefits and privileges from the government to set military bases in Iraq,”

Again it was reported on the 6th of February that an ‘unidentified’ aircraft had dropped boxes containing weapons and munitions to ISIS in Anbar desert near Al Ratba (320 km west of Ramadi).

An aircraft had dropped boxes containing weapons and munitions to ISIS in Anbar desert near Al Ratba

Who could do this other than US forces? Who has the power and ability to deliver those weapons? There can be no other answer than US.

U.S has a previous track record of funding terrorists to serve its benefits all over the world.

See more at:

image
Discover the ugly truth behind the killing of the Jordan…

According to a military intelligence source,there are shocking reasons behind the killing of the Jordanian pilot,who was burnt alive by ISIS.
Preview by Yahoo

POST 2014

by Ayaz Amir

Islamabad diary

The Soviet pullout from Afghanistan in 1989 was a triumph for our military establishment. The ISI and the Zia regime, while not solely responsible for that outcome, had helped bring it about. But the American pullout from Afghanistan, now underway and to be completed in about a year’s time, far from being any kind of triumph looks set to be a disaster…one for which we are wholly unprepared.

Afghanistan in 1989 was a simpler proposition, the highs and lows of it etched in black and white. Afghanistan in 2013 is a place infinitely more complicated and dangerous…not just for itself but for us as well.

This is because of one vital difference. Afghanistan then was a country contained within its borders. Afghanistan now, to our misfortune, is stretched across the Durand Line. Ask yourself two simple questions: (1) Are the Taliban based in Fata more loyal to Mullah Omar or to the state of Pakistan? (2) Is North Waziristan, in real terms, more a part of Pakistan or Afghanistan?
When the American pullout is complete these facts will become starker. Does anyone in his right mind think that in a year from now Amir Hakeemullah Mehsud – amir of the semi-independent Islamic Emirate of North Waziristan – will come down from the mountains and lay down his arms before the army command in Rawalpindi?

The Afghan ‘mujahideen’ in 1989 exulted over the circumstance that they had defeated one superpower. Now they can lay claim to a far bigger triumph. Forget about the Afghan Taliban. Does any fool think that when the Americans have drunk fully from their cup of humiliation, the Pakistani Taliban will be in a more penitent mood, ready to settle for modest or moderate terms with the hapless representatives of the Pakistani state? What world of fantasy and make-believe are we living in?

We can fit that old proverb to our circumstances: with friends like the United States who needs enemies? The Americans made life difficult for us by coming to Afghanistan in 2011. They will make life more difficult for us by leaving the job they came to do not just half-done but utterly undone. The Taliban before were just an Afghan phenomenon, a curiosity to be observed from afar. Thanks to our American friends they are now just as much a Pakistani phenomenon.

And we will have to deal with this phenomenon not in the remote future but in a year’s time. When President Obama first said that American troops would be out by 2014, it seemed such a distant date. Now it’s upon us and, far from being prepared, we are seeing to it that we bury our heads deeper into the sand, with sundry paladins saying we must talk peace with the Taliban without being at all clear what this would entail.

Forget for a moment the modalities of peace talks, whether in the mountains or Doha or wherever. Can the knights proposing talks with the Taliban just spell out the terms of a likely settlement? We need some clarity here, not woolly statements…specific outlines of a settlement that would be good for Pakistan. If capable of this clarity, they should not waste a minute. If not, then perhaps it would be best not to brandish olive branches which can only encourage the Taliban and confuse our own forces risking their lives in the killing fields of Fata.

There has been no greater apologist for the Taliban than Imran Khan. Yet when he wanted to march to North Waziristan the Taliban would not allow him. Maulana Fazlur Rehman is a self-appointed mediator for talks with the Taliban. Yet the Taliban, in so many words, have made it clear they want to have nothing to do with him.

Do we take the Taliban to be a bunch of kids? They have been fighting the Pakistan army and air force for the last so many years. Having held out for so long will they settle for any kind of lollipops when, across the Hindukush mountains, vindication is so close at hand for their brethren under Mullah Omar from whom they derive their inspiration? And from whom besides inspiration they will derive more physical strength once the Americans are out of Afghanistan.

Are we in a position to dictate terms or negotiate from a position of strength? Quite apart from the balance of military forces, is there any internal cohesion on our side? If there are elements in Pakistani society hostile to the Taliban, there is no shortage of elements sympathetic to them. The Taliban suffer from no such confusion. We need no videos from the Taliban spokesman, Ehsanullah Ehsan, to tell us that they are united in their aim: the recasting of the Pakistani state along lines prescribed by their own version of Islam.

What Swat was under Mullah Fazlullah, what North Waziristan is under Hakeemullah Mehsud, what the Taliban-controlled areas of Afghanistan will be under Mullah Omar, is what they would like the whole of Pakistan to be. And don’t forget that their support network in the form of friendly seminaries and friendly religious parties is now spread across Pakistan.

The MQM may have its own sins to answer for but it is not crying wolf when it says that spreading areas of Karachi are now Taliban-dominated, with their own jirgas to settle local disputes. Indeed, the Taliban are stepping into the shoes of the Awami National Party. And the MQM while not without its own power will, in times to come, be no match for these veterans of multiple jihads.

So the dynamics of the national situation are changing and we remain blissfully unaware. This is strategic depth in reverse; not Afghanistan our depth but Pakistan with its religious parties and Taliban sympathisers becoming, oh scary thought, an extension of Afghanistan. Does this sound too apocalyptic? But then could anyone have imagined in 2001 that in a few years’ time North Waziristan would become a no-go area where our military boots would fear to tread? Or that the spectre of Vietnam would come to haunt Afghanistan?

Afghanistan is only living up to its reputation of being the graveyard of empires. But who told us to play with fire there? Now it’s just not our fingers that are being burnt but much more.
Come to think of it, through our folly we are reversing 200 years of history. Once upon a time most of the territories now comprising Pakistan were part of the kingdom of Kabul. Then on these territories Maharajah Ranjit Singh established his kingdom and, as a measure of his power, wrested Peshawar from Afghan hands. With the Maharajah’s death his kingdom fell on evil days and it was not long before it was defeated and then annexed by the British.

Of this tangled skein we are the luckless inheritors, successors of course to the British but, at a remove, successors also to the kingdom of Maharajah Ranjit Singh. His was a secular kingdom but let’s not get into that minefield here. More to the point, he kept the Afghans at a distance. We have been less successful than him in our Afghan policy. Our military commanders talk strangely of training Afghan troops. Our own house in disorder, we have the hubris to offer free advice to others.

And as the Americans prepare to leave, forget all the hogwash about their continued interest in our affairs. A skeletal relationship will of course survive but we will be largely on our own, with the rupee in free-fall and the Taliban on the march, in spirit if not otherwise. This about sums up our predicament.

That is why 2013 is so crucial for us, for the governing arrangement that emerges from the coming elections will be the stewards of our discontent when the Americans are out and the Taliban are dreaming of duplicating in Pakistan their victory that side of the Durand Line.
And will we be prepared for all this?

Email: winlust@yahoo.com

Axis of Evil

TEHRAN (FNA)- Turkey’s national air carrier, Turkish Air, has been transiting Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants from North Waziristan in Pakistan to the Turkish borders with Syria, sources revealed on Saturday, mentioning that the last group were flown to Hatay on a Turkish Air Airbus flight No. 709 on September 10, 2012.

clip_image002

"The Turkish intelligence agency sent 93 Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists from Waziristan to Hatay province near the border with Syria on a Turkish Air Airbus flight No. 709 on September 10, 2012 and via the Karachi-Istanbul flight route," the source told FNA on Saturday, adding that the flight had a short stop in Istanbul. 
The 93 terrorists transited to the Turkish border with Syria included Al-Qaeda militants from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan and a group of Arabs residing in Waziristan, he added. 
The source, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of his information, further revealed that the Turkish intelligence agency is coordinating its measures with the CIA and the Saudi and Qatari secret services.

FNA dispatches from Pakistan said new al-Qaeda members were trained in North Waziristan until a few days ago and then sent to Syria, but now they are transferring their command center to the borders between Turkey and Syria as a first step to be followed by a last move directly into the restive parts of Syria on the other side of the border. 
The al-Qaeda, backed by Turkey, the US and its regional Arab allies, had set up a new camp in Northern Waziristan in Pakistan to train Salafi and Jihadi terrorists and dispatched them to Syria via Turkish borders. 

"A new Al-Qaeda has been created in the region through the financial and logistical backup of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and a number of western states, specially the US," a source told FNA earlier this month.

Ali Mahdian told FNA that the US and the British governments have been playing with the al-Qaeda through their Arab proxy regimes in the region in a bid to materialize their goals, specially in Syria. 
He said the Saudi and Qatari regimes serve as interlocutors to facilitate the CIA and MI6 plans in Syria through instigating terrorist operations by Salafi and Arab Jihadi groups, adding that the terrorists do not know that they actually exercise the US plans.

"Turkey has also been misusing extremist Salafis and Al-Qaeda terrorists to intensify the crisis in Syria and it has recently augmented its efforts in this regard by helping the new Al-Qaeda branch set up a camp in Northern Waziristan in Pakistan to train Al-Qaeda and Taliban members as well as Turkish Salafis and Arab Jihadis who are later sent to Syria for terrorist operations," said the source. 
He said the camp in Waziristan is not just a training center, but a command center for terrorist operations against Syria. 
Yet, the source said the US and Britain are looking at the new Al-Qaeda force as an instrument to attain their goals and do not intend to support them to ascend to power, "because if Salafi elements in Syria ascend to power, they will create many problems for the US, the Western states and Turkey in future".

"Thus, the US, Britain and Turkey are looking at the Al-Qaeda as a tactical instrument," he said, and warned of the regional and global repercussions of the US and Turkish aid to the Al-Qaeda and Salafi groups. 
"Unfortunately, these group of countries have just focused on the short-term benefits that the Salafis and the Al-Qaeda can provide for them and ignore the perils of this support in the long run," he said. 

"At present, the western countries, specially Britain which hosts and controls the Jihadi Salafi groups throughout the world are paving the ground for these extremists to leave their homes – mostly in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Untied Arab Emirates (UAE) as well as those who live in Europe and the US – for Waziristan," the source added. 
In relevant remarks, Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi last week blamed certain states, the Salafis and the Al-Qaeda for terrorist operations which have claimed the lives of thousands of people in his country, and said terrorist groups supported by certain foreign actors are misusing differences in his country to bring Syria into turmoil.

Addressing the 16th heads-of-state summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) here in Tehran on Thursday, the Syrian premier noted terrorist attacks on his nation, and said the "terrorists are backed up by certain foreign states". 
"Many countries allege to be supporting peaceful solutions in Syria, but they oppose Annan’s plan in practice," he said, and cautioned, "The responsibility for the failure of this plan lies on their shoulder as they strove to keep the Syrian crisis going and falsified events."

"The world should know that the Syrian crisis, in fact, rises from foreign meddling. Certain well-known countries from inside and outside the region are seeking instability of Syria," the Syrian prime minister complained. 
Elaborating on the recent developments in Syria, al-Halqi said, "It has been proved that foreign-backed terrorist groups have been misusing events and killing the innocent people."

"These terrorists include Salafis and Al-Qaeda Takfiri groups," he reiterated, and added, "Those states that support terrorism and oppose talks should be given moral and economic punishments as they are part of the problem in Syria." 
Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011 with organized attacks by well-armed gangs against Syrian police forces and border guards being reported across the country. 

In October, calm was eventually restored in the Arab state after President Assad started a reform initiative in the country, but Israel, the US and its Arab allies are seeking hard to bring the country into chaos through any possible means. Tel Aviv, Washington and some Arab capitals have been staging various plots in the hope of stirring unrests in Syria once again. 
The US and its western and regional allies have long sought to topple Bashar al-Assad and his ruling system. Media reports said that the Syrian rebels and terrorist groups have received significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, a crime paid for by the Persian Gulf Arab states and coordinated by the United States.

The US daily, Washington Post, reported in May that the Syrian rebels and terrorist groups battling the President Bashar al-Assad’s government have received significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, a crime paid for by the Persian Gulf Arab states and coordinated by the United States. 
The newspaper, quoting opposition activists and US and foreign officials, reported that Obama administration officials emphasized the administration has expanded contacts with opposition military forces to provide the Persian Gulf nations with assessments of rebel credibility and command-and-control infrastructure.

Opposition activists who several months ago said the rebels were running out of ammunition said in May that the flow of weapons – most bought on the black market in neighboring countries or from elements of the Syrian military in the past – has significantly increased after a decision by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Persian Gulf states to provide millions of dollars in funding each month.

Asif Zardari (AZ) Reveals CIA Plan for Pakistan

Asif Zardari (AZ) Reveals CIA Plan for Pakistan

by Usman Khalid, Rifah Party of Pakistan

AUGUST 7, 2012 

Press Release

Asif Zardari (AZ) Reveals CIA Plan for Pakistan

The secret weapon of Indo-Zionists is Imran Khan’s whose arrogance and campaign of slander against Nawaz Sharif (NS) splits the majority that is anti-AZ

London August 7, 2012. In a speech in Khairpur on 28 July, President Asif Zardari said he is the ‘spiritual son’ of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) and like ZAB and BB, he had his eyes on the forces of history in the region and the world and that he was confident of victory in all the provinces of Pakistan including the Punjab. The press dismissed his speech as “effort to resurrect the confidence of the demoralised but loyal constituency of the PPP”. That is true but the speech was much more than that. It gave an idea that he indeed has a ‘vision’ and how it fits into the plans of regional hegemon (India) and global hegemon (USA).

clip_image002

Asif Zardari being taken to prison in handcuffs – that may be repeated if he ‘succeeds’

To understand the politics of Asif Zardari, one has to keep in mind that:

1) he belongs to the Shia fraternity,

2) the Shia are a minority in Pakistan,

3) the only Shia state – Iran – is anti USA,

4) the leadership of the Karachi based MQM also belongs to the Shia fraternity. These are the four ‘given’ on which the CIA plan to ‘control’ Pakistan is based.

The USA and the World was surprised by the quick and easy ouster President Bin Ali of Tunisia.

The CIA has quickly evolved plans to impose pro-US leadership in every Muslim country albeit with ‘democratic’ credentials. In Egypt, Libya and Syria the Western objective has been to set up weak governments exploiting the dynamics of the Arab Spring i.e. yearning for democracy. In the rest of the Middle East, the same objective is being achieved by exploiting sectarian polarisation. The prime targets of the USA in the Middle East are non-Sunni states, Iran and Syria, which has driven the Sunni Arab rulers closer to the USA.

The failure to set up Iraq as a Shia majority pro-US ‘democratic’ state has been a big set back for the US. It has led to the US turning against the Shia after decades of considering them their ‘natural ally’ in the Muslim World. The fall of the Shanishah of Iran was considered to be a temporary set back; the US bent over backwards to cultivate the Ayatollahs of Iran but it did not work as the new leadership in Iran relied on hostility of the US to establish the Islamic Republic as the regional leader.

But India was successful in cultivating the Islamic Republic against ostensibly pro US Pakistan. The failure in Iran and stalemate in Syria calls for a new strategy. A new model is being evolved in Pakistan on the lines of “minority rule” like Zionist rule in the USA and high caste rule in India.

The MQM is the minority – protégés loyal to the USA and India – which are the likes of the Brahmin in India and the Zionists (majority of who are Christians) of the USA. Like the Zionists and Brahmins, they now seek to present a face of ‘super-patriots’.

Asif Zardari might believe that his politics is the same as that of ZAB and BB but that is not true. ZAB thought that the socialist camp was on the rise and it was time for Pakistan to dump the USA and embrace the Socialists in the Muslim as well as the wider world. He was right to the extent that China has risen far and fast and Pakistan was right in steadfastly maintaining close and warm relations with China. But he was wrong elsewhere. It was Saudi Arabia, not Egypt, which drew closer to Pakistan, which paid a heavy price for total dependence on the West in the Cold War.

The erstwhile Soviet Union gave overt support to the secession of East Pakistan and support for self-determination in Jammu and Kashmir eroded. BB judged that her father had invited the wrath of the USA by seeking nuclear parity with India. She bent over backwards to accommodate the US as well as Indian interests in the region but could not get the political support of Indo-US protégés – ANP and the MQM. But she earned the hostility of all patriotic elements – the military as well as the Mujahideen – in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Asif Zardari has succeeded where BB failed. He is committed to Indo-US interests and has been rewarded by loyal support of the ANP as well the MQM. This support has been partly delivered by his own credentials (his late father was the President of ANP in Sindh), and partly by working closely with the CIA and MI6 – directly and through Rehman Malik and Altaf Hussain. All his political moves have been carefully choreographed by the CIA.

Those who do not take his confidence to win the next elections with a thumping majority seriously are mistaken. As things stand today, the CIA is reading of the situation in Pakistan is fairly accurately. It thinks that the ruling coalition in Pakistan would stay solid while the TIP led by Imran Khan continues to prevent the consolidation of the patriotic right which still commands majority support in Pakistan. They believe that TIP would act as a US ally as the Jamaat i Islami did against ZAB and the Ikhwan of Egypt were used against the populist rule of President Nasser in Egypt. But the character of Imran Khan is more similar to that Saddam Hussain who was the ‘useful idiot’ whose every move served the US purpose.

He first embarked on a path of ‘secular socialism’ and alliance with USSR under the flag of Baath Party. Then he consolidated the Sunni minority to consolidate his hold on power. This was used by the CIA to get him to invade Islamic Republic of Iran. Then he fell into another trap and invaded Kuwait, which resulted in a crushing defeat for Saddam Hussain. A change in Government – formation of a national coalition government – could have saved Iraq but Saddam Hussain was more focussed on retaining hold on power. The CIA infiltrated Saddam’s armed forces and had links with Shia opposition also. The situation is Pakistan is similar but it is not the same.

The ruling coalition in Pakistan is an arrangement sponsored by the CIA but it is discredited and unpopular. But the imponderables are plentiful. The ANP and MQM will continue support to AZ endure as long as the PPP can retain its vote bank. The rebellion of Zulfiqar Mirza in protest against AZ alliance with the MQM and Mumtaz Bhutto joining the PML (N) has changed the political landscape in Sindh. In time, the loyalists of ZAB may abandon AZ and join Mumtaz Bhutto. Zulfiqar Mirza joining Mumtaz Bhutto can cause the political earthquake that the PPP and its foreign patrons fear most.

The constituency of TIP comprises patriots. Imran Khan is too arrogant to admit that he is dividing the patriotic constituency to give AZ the chance of victory he predicts. But stalwarts in Imran Khan’s TIP would have to force him change course. Imran is too arrogant to do that; he may choose to resign instead. The third patriotic group is represented by Defa i Pakistan (DOP) Council. This is not a political party as such but it has a huge constituency – opponents of regional hegemony of India. PML(N) and its allies could get two third majority in the next elections if the DOP gives it support and PML(N) embraces its one point agenda.

The CIA plan for Pakistan has been revealed by AZ. It wants AZ supported by ANP and MQM to retain power in Pakistan at the next elections. Pakistan is to be a new model in Muslim countries – ruled by ethnic minorities, chaos in the name of democracy, loot and plunder in the name of politics, and reviling the armed forces as threat to democracy. But the USA is not stopping drone attacks on Pakistan and India is not stopping the building of dams on our rivers in Kashmir.

The patriotic parties have to be particularly inept to lose the next elections. Imran Khan may continue to attack the PML(N) to split his own constituency and deliver victory as AZ hopes. But the CIA alone is the custodian of the complete narrative. In the event of victory by PML(N) and its allies, the defeated forces may invite intervention by the USA and/or India. That is not very likely. But it would become even less likely if we knew and prepared for the worst.

Noam Chomsky: Why America and Israel Are the Greatest Threats to Peace

 

Imagine if Iran — or any other country — did a fraction of what American and Israel do at will.

September 3, 2012  | 

clip_image002

It is not easy to escape from one’s skin, to see the world differently from the way it is presented to us day after day. But it is useful to try. Let’s take a few examples.

The war drums are beating ever more loudly over Iran. Imagine the situation to be reversed.

Iran is carrying out a murderous and destructive low-level war against Israel with great-power participation. Its leaders announce that negotiations are going nowhere. Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspections, as Iran has done. Israel continues to defy the overwhelming international call for a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region. Throughout, Iran enjoys the support of its superpower patron.

Iranian leaders are therefore announcing their intention to bomb Israel, and prominent Iranian military analysts report that the attack may happen before the U.S. elections.

Iran can use its powerful air force and new submarines sent by Germany, armed with nuclear missiles and stationed off the coast of Israel. Whatever the timetable, Iran is counting on its superpower backer to join if not lead the assault. U.S. defense secretary Leon Panetta says that while we do not favor such an attack, as a sovereign country Iran will act in its best interests.

All unimaginable, of course, though it is actually happening, with the cast of characters reversed. True, analogies are never exact, and this one is unfair – to Iran.

Like its patron, Israel resorts to violence at will. It persists in illegal settlement in occupied territory, some annexed, all in brazen defiance of international law and the U.N. Security Council. It has repeatedly carried out brutal attacks against Lebanon and the imprisoned people of Gaza, killing tens of thousands without credible pretext.

Thirty years ago Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, an act that has recently been praised, avoiding the strong evidence, even from U.S. intelligence, that the bombing did not end Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons program but rather initiated it. Bombing of Iran might have the same effect.

Iran too has carried out aggression – but during the past several hundred years, only under the U.S.-backed regime of the shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.

Iran engaged in nuclear development programs under the shah, with the strong support of official Washington. The Iranian government is brutal and repressive, as are Washington’s allies in the region. The most important ally, Saudi Arabia, is the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime, and spends enormous funds spreading its radical Wahhabist doctrines elsewhere. The gulf dictatorships, also favored U.S. allies, have harshly repressed any popular effort to join the Arab Spring.

The Nonaligned Movement – the governments of most of the world’s population – is now meeting in Teheran. The group has vigorously endorsed Iran’s right to enrich uranium, and some members – India, for example – adhere to the harsh U.S. sanctions program only partially and reluctantly.

The NAM delegates doubtless recognize the threat that dominates discussion in the West, lucidly articulated by Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the U.S. Strategic Command: “It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East,” one nation should arm itself with nuclear weapons, which “inspires other nations to do so.”

Butler is not referring to Iran, but to Israel, which is regarded in the Arab countries and in Europe as posing the greatest threat to peace In the Arab world, the United States is ranked second as a threat, while Iran, though disliked, is far less feared. Indeed in many polls majorities hold that the region would be more secure if Iran had nuclear weapons to balance the threats they perceive.

For a change, something to celebrate

 

by Ayaz Amir
Friday, March 09, 2012

Banana republic, client state, dictation from the US? This is not how puppet states are supposed to behave. Following the American attacks on two of our border outposts, leaving 26 of our soldiers dead, Pakistan has held off the United States and – would you believe it? – the heavens have not fallen.

The Nato supply route across Pakistan remains closed, not a container getting through, and it is the Americans who are sweating. US envoy Marc Grossman wanted to visit Pakistan for a damage-repair operation but he was told the time was not opportune.

Time was when the sound of clicking heels was a regular feature of life in Islamabad. The new reserve is something vastly different. It comes as a result of the realization dawning in the corridors of national security early last year that instead of any appreciation coming Pakistan’s way for what it was doing to help the US in Afghanistan, in support of a mission seen increasingly as running into the sand, American behaviour was cocky and arrogant.

The Americans may put a brave face on the suspension of Nato supplies but it doesn’t take much to figure out that it would be a serious problem. Pakistan, however, is playing it cool, having made it known that a parliamentary committee is reviewing relations and whatever emerges from the exercise will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Seldom in Pakistan’s history have the Americans so eagerly awaited a joint session of our parliament.

As everyone understands, parliamentary oversight is a bit of a fig-leaf. Government and GHQ will decide and parliament will go through the motions. In any event, the one-phone-call relationship is a thing of the past – although, to be fair to Pakistan, even that was greatly exaggerated. Whenever Pakistan has wanted to stand its ground it has been able to do so. When it has jumped into America’s lap it has done so on its own.

No one had to force or convert Gen Zia into backing the so-called mujahideen. It was his own decision. Gen Musharraf did not have to be threatened to fall into line post-Sep 11. In the wake of that occurrence Pakistan’s newly-discovered importance spelled the end of Musharraf’s international isolation. So he welcomed it.
Another issue on which Pakistan is sticking to an independent position is Iran.

Hillary Clinton did not so much warn Pakistan as state what she thought was the obvious: that the Iran gas pipeline would entail financial and economic consequences for Pakistan as per US law. But the riposte from Pakistan was quick, Foreign Minister Hina Khar – a lot smarter than her famous uncle, the once-upon-a-time Loin (sic) of Punjab, Malik Ghulam Mustafa Khar – saying that Pakistan would take a decision in its own interests.

The important thing remains that even as war-talk relating to Iran from Israel and the US is on the rise, Israel desperate for a US strike on Iran’s nuclear installations, Pakistan is not backing off from the Iran deal.

To say that Pakistan is breaking out on its own would be another exaggeration. But it is fair to say that the Americans are learning the limits of their influence in Islamabad. This is a good thing. Even close friends should not be taken lightly and the feeling had grown in Pakistan that the Americans were taking us for granted.
But here’s a remarkable thing. When official Pakistan was supposed to be in America’s pocket, or dancing to America’s tune, anti-Americanism at the level of public sentiment was strong and virulent. But with the relationship going a bit cold, the psychological necessity for overt and loud displays of anti-Americanism has diminished. On the banner of Pakistani patriotism America-bashing has slipped several notches. Pakistan seems a more relaxed place as a result. Long may it remain this way.

Pakistan must think long and hard before allowing a resumption of the Nato supply line although the best thing would be for it to remain closed.
Notice one thing more. Imran Khan’s rhetoric has gone a bit flat, the fizz having gone out of it. This is not because other parties have suddenly hit the comeback trail but because the American relationship has been downgraded. Some of the wind has been taken out of his sails.

In order to reignite popular anti-Americanism two conditions have to be met: more drone strikes and more American visitors descending on Islamabad and Rawalpindi.
Who’s really standing up to the Americans? Popular folklore would have it that it is the army which is calling the shots. But this is too black-and-white an explanation. The government and army are on the same page on this. On each and every matter – Raymond Davis, May 2, Salala, etc – if the army has taken a position, President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani have unequivocally backed it.

On Afghanistan, and on what happens next there, Zardari, Gilani and Kayani are one. Indeed, Zardari started cultivating President Karzai of Afghanistan when it was bad form in Pakistan to do so. And on Iran at the height of Memogate Zardari said something, this in Naudero, which wouldn’t have gone down too well with the Americans: that Pakistan would not be drawn into unwanted conflicts. He did not name Iran but the meaning was clear.

No one has been dealing separately with the Americans, which is one reason why General Headquarters, for all its Memogate fulminations, really has no charge against the political government. It also says something for the unwitting sophistication of the present diffusion of power – with no single power centre able to have its way in all things – that despite the friction between GHQ on one side and the political government on the other caused by the memo caper, the two sides are back to a working relationship.

Solitary dictators, under no compulsion to look around, have been the death of Pakistan. The present model of government suits Pakistan best – a decentralized system putting a premium on negotiation and consulting. But working this model requires flexibility and exceptional political skills. To the growing surprise and dismay of their detractors, Zardari and Gilani possess both in sufficient measure.
But not to put too fine a point on it, Pakistan is also being well served by its army leadership. How stereotypes crumble. Kayani was supposed to be an American creature.

Yet here it is him and Gen Shuja Pusha as the head of the ISI who have stood up to the Americans. Imagine the kind of pressure – congressional hearings, senatorial warnings, etc – they have had to face. But they have stuck to their guns…and, it should be noted, without undue horn-blowing or flag-waving.

Memogate was an exercise in folly but then the best men make mistakes. Zardari and Gilani seem clever today. But the imposition of governor’s rule in Punjab back in 2009 was their Memogate. The only thing to be said in their favour in that context is that they quickly recovered. Kayani and Pasha too will recover from their governor’s rule, if they haven’t done so already.

ISI chief is one of the key posts in our security hierarchy, one especially important in view of the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. We have had sinister figures and not a few outright dunces standing at the gates but, the memo intervention apart, Gen Pasha has been a clever head of the organization.

Let’s not be blinded by bias or prejudice. This is the freest democracy in our history, not because of any Abraham Lincoln but because of circumstances conspiring to bring about a diffusion of power and authority. Let us keep it this way, hoping all the while, and trusting to our good fairies, that the coming elections lead to a smooth democratic transition…this at a time when the Americans are cutting and running from Afghanistan.

The torch of government and democracy safely handed over…this will be a first in our history. If there is an occasion for some champagne that will be it.

Explain yourself!

Daily NATION