http://www.awaztoday.com/playshow/20202/Islamabad-Tonight-23rd-February-2012.aspx
http://www.zemtv.com/2012/02/23/islamabad-tonight-on-aaj-news-23rd-febuary-2012/
http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f247/video-islamabad-tonight-nadeem-malik-23rd-february-2012-a-265475/
http://www.pakistanherald.com/Program/Islamabad-Tonight-February-23-2012-Nadeem-Malik-9798

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT

WITH NADEEM MALIK

23-02-2012

TOPIC- BALOCHISTAN PROBLEM

GUESTS- HARBYAR MAREE, BARAHAMDAGH BUGTI, NISAR KHORRO, JAVED HASHMI

HARBYAR MAREE A BALOCH NATIONALIST LEADER said that he has no contact with the government of Pakistan. He said that he is trying to be in touch with every country of the world on Balochistan problem. He said that he has no relationship with Asif Ali Zardari. He said that he was hopeful that Balochistan problem will be resolved in the Peoples Party government but it is proven to be worst than military era. He said that Baloch used to be killed in ambush in the past but in the Peoples Party government they are being killed openly. He said that an action was taken against Baloch when ZA Bhutto was in the government and it is being repeated again. He said that the first condition to talk to Pakistani government is that they confess that they have taken over Balochistan by force. He said that the second condition is that they must leave Balochistan.

BARAHAMDAGH BUGTI A BALOCH NATIONALIST LEADER said that he does not like to have contact with non serious people (Rehman Malik). He said that he is not in contact with Pakistan government. He said that he will only talk to Pakistan government in the presence of America and NATO. He said that his elders talked to the Pakistan government but what was the result?

NISAR KHORRO OF PPPP said that the Balochistan problem is not new it is continuing from previous governments. He said that during Musharaf government Baloch problem went to the extreme. He said that Musharaf said that he will hit Baloch from where they can not even imagine. He said that Baloch leaders were part of the government during Peoples Party and PML-n governments in the past. He said that Baloch leaders made mistake by not participating in the elections of 2008. He said that Benazir Bhutto tried to take along all deprived sections but she did not survive. He said that the PPPP government has taken some positive steps by apologizing Baloch people and giving the provincial autonomy. He said that the situation is not improving because of mutilated corpses of Baloch people found every day. He said that up to some years ago Baloch were the part of the government but Musharaf turned it around. He said that it is easy to voice for separation but it is very difficult to actually achieve it. He said that the top leadership in the government should come forward and give message to Baloch people that we can get along together. He said that if the government and Baloch leaders will sit together the ways to move forward will be found.

JAVED HASHMI OF PTI said that the way we have treated Baloch people how they can trust us after that. He said that we made Baloch people realize that they are small unit and we can keep them suppressed. He said that the Baloch Sardars are talking the truth and we should face the reality. He said that America after defeat in Afghanistan is trying to ignite our region by giving statement of Balochistan problem. He said that Peoples Party is responsible for the wrong doings of Bhutto era and PML-N is responsible for its wrong doings. He said that the gas is found in Balochistan but they got it in 1985 as compare to Karachi and Lahore in 1953. He said that living with in Pakistan the rights of Baloch people have to be given.

–

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

By Abdul Majeed Abid

History tells us that relations between Pakistan and United States started on the right note, as demonstrated by aforementioned speech of Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan. It was followed by the decade of co-operation between the two countries in matters of trade and military training. As we can see, the seeds of perceived animosity were laid during the 1965-71 period during which United States stopped the military aid to both Pakistan and India in the wake of the 1965 war. The people responsible for arousing these sentiments were the dexterous politicians of Pakistan and to some extent the religio-political parties and they did that just to mask their own shortcomings.

A similar attitude was shown by Mr. Bhutto when he blamed the alarming political situation upon the machinations of United States that wanted to “stop him from forming a Muslim-bloc”. In his book ‘Political Dynamics of Sindh 1947-1977’ Tanvir Ahmed Tahir suggests that the post-1971 anti-Americanism in Pakistan was more an occupation of progressive and leftist groups. This is confirmed in Hassan Abbas’ book, ‘Pakistan’s drift into extremism: Allah, the Army and America’s War on Terror’.

According to Lubna Rafique’s 1994 paper, ‘Benazir & British Press, ( Rafiue, Lubna. Benazir and British Press. 1986-1994, Gautam Publishers, Lahore, Pakistan, 1994) it was only in the last year of Z.A. Bhutto’s regime (1977), that he started to allude to moving out of the ‘American camp,’ calling the US a ‘white elephant.’ He also went on to accuse the Jimmy Carter administration for financing the religious parties’ agitation against him in 1977.
After the ousting of Mr. Bhutto came the martial law decade(1977-88) orchestrated by General Zia ul Haq. The setup that came to power because of unrest created by parties that were essentially anti-American in outlook ended up becoming a pawn in the hands of the same Americans. Zia-ul-Haq milked the opportunities when neighbor Afghanistan was attacked by USSR and a communist government was installed there. The flow of dollars towards the coffers of Pakistan continued until 1986. In 1985, Section 620E(e) (the Pressler amendment) was added to the Foreign Assistance Act, requiring the President to certify to Congress that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear explosive device during the fiscal year for which aid is to be provided. With the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, Pakistan’s nuclear activities again came under intensive U.S. scrutiny and, in 1990, President Bush again suspended aid to Pakistan. Under the provisions of the Pressler amendment, most bilateral economic and all military aid ended and deliveries of major military equipment ceased.  In 1992, Congress partially relaxed the scope of the aid cutoff to allow for food assistance and continuing support for nongovernmental organizations (Congressional Research Service Issue Brief for Congress on Pakistan-U.S Relations, Feb 2006).
It was followed by the dwindling relations between the two countries in the 90s culminating in an ebb in the relation during 1998 following the Nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan. Interestingly, when the Pakistan Army was caught with its pants down in Kargil, it was the United States that acted as the peace-ensurer following an ugly fight.
The Musharraf era (1999-2008) witnessed the ascent of Pakistan-U.S relation to an altogether different level of co-operation following 9/11 attacks. Despite the fact that not a single Pakistani was involved in the horrendous attacks on World Trade Center, Pakistanis were targeted by and large by the American media and hate-crimes surfaced against Pakistanis living in the United States. The U.S attack on Afghanistan did not help regarding the negative feelings harbored by Pakistanis towards U.S since the 70s and then the 90s. This anti-U.S sentiment was cashed by the alliance of religio-political parties in NWFP(now Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa), one of  Pakistan’s provinces bordering Afghanistan and for the first time in the history of Pakistan, religious parties won a landslide victory in 2002 elections. On the official front, Pakistan was awarded the non-NATO ally status while the leaders of various parties kept blaming America for all the ills in the country. The top command of Al Qaeda and Taliban sought refuge in the treacherous terrain of semi-autonomous tribal agencies that form Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. This led to unmanned drone strikes by the U.S to eliminate threats to its personnel in Afghanistan and its own security. The drone strikes not only killed the insurgents but also the innocent people present around that area creating strong grievances against the mighty America and its army. This issue was used to create furor by religious parties and right-wing politicians including a certain Imran Khan. Massive sit-ins were held at various places in the country and media fuelled the emotion even further by inflammatory programs. In the last one year, several major developments happened vis-à-vis relations with the United States that have made the relation more unstable than it already was. Raymond Davis, a security contractor, killed 3 people at a busy thoroughfare in Lahore, a U.S SEAL team raided a house in Abbotabad killing Osama Bin Laden and 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in a gunfight with NATO forces at the Afghan Border.
(continued)

By Stephen Magagnini for The Sacremento Bee

KARACHI, Pakistan — On a moonlit Thursday night in February, a television network executive hosted an elegant affair for journalists and diplomats at his villa above the Arabian Sea.

Karachi’s privileged dined on lamb, shrimp, chicken, mutton and fettuccine in mushroom sauce, and were surprised by a quartet of wandering minstrels, soulful Sufi poets who serenade for their supper, uncorking ballads about love.

On the south side of this city of 18 million, a group of Afghan refugees, who scrape out a living collecting cardboard and other recyclables in a slum straddling a swamp of open sewage, were mopping up gravy with roti – Pakistani bread.

About 900 Afghans live in this fetid slum, down the street from poor Pakistanis and water buffalo. They earn about $60 a month and survive on bottled water, chewing tobacco and roti.

“We’re happy in Pakistan,” said 33-year-old Shaezhad, leader of a cardboard collection station. “We get food and respect.”

At the party across town, talk-show hosts and other Pakistani elites blew cigarette smoke into the faces of U.S. journalists, criticizing U.S. foreign policy and the toll the war in Afghanistan has taken on their country.

Many Pakistanis resent American aggression in the region and want more respect from U.S. policymakers, but they don’t hold individual Americans responsible. Yet everywhere we went, we were held to answer for U.S. wars and Americans’ deep misunderstanding of Pakistan.

“You are arrogant, playing video games with our lives,” Abdul Moiz Jaferii, political analyst for CNBC Pakistan, said over lunch one day in Karachi. He was referring to U.S. drone attacks that have killed Pakistani and Afghan civilians.

“And we hate America because the U.S. has always been the biggest, closest ally of the military dictators. You have done nothing to help democracy.”

The impact of the war in Afghanistan has permeated nearly every pore of this country of 180 million. More than 2 million Afghan refugees have fled to Pakistan, and some have brought a culture of violence. Since 9/11, 35,000 Pakistanis have been killed in terrorist attacks by suicide bombers and other war-related violence, according to Pakistan’s intelligence agency. The victims include 6,000 soldiers and 29,000 civilians.

The unpredictable violence and the kidnapping of foreign workers have created a climate of fear in this country. We weren’t allowed to visit villages outside urban areas, where 40 percent of Pakistanis live. Two shotgun-wielding security guards protected our buses in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi. We entered our hotels through metal detectors and were rarely allowed to interact with average citizens in public places.

Pakistan – strategically located between Afghanistan, India, China and Iran and influenced by Saudi Arabia – remains an enigma to many Americans, who aren’t sure whether it’s friend or foe, democracy or military dictatorship.

Pakistan has provided critical support to NATO troops in the Afghan war – drones are launched from here, NATO supplies are sent through this country, and Pakistani troops have helped recapture terrorist strongholds along the volatile Afghan border.

But distrust of the United States in the wake of deadly drone attacks and the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a cross-border battle in November is such that rather than calling for more U.S. aid to build needed power plants, schools and hospitals, a growing number of Pakistanis want nothing to do with the United States. The government of Punjab – Pakistan’s most powerful state with about 90 million people – has decided to reject U.S. aid.

The killing of Osama bin Laden by U.S. Navy SEALs in Abbottabad in the heart of this country embarrassed and angered the Pakistan military and made Americans question why bin Laden was allowed to live in essentially a resort town. Some U.S. politicians have called for an end to the $18 billion in financial aid pledged since 9/11.

An Islamic republic?

Some of the world’s largest, most beautiful mosques are here, and to celebrate the Prophet Muhammad’s birthday on Feb. 4, 10,000 people named Muhammad gathered in prayer in Karachi.

We saw few women wearing hijabs, or head coverings, except those at Islamabad’s Faisal Mosque, which can hold 10,000 people for Juma, or Friday prayer.

Professional women drive cars, dress like their counterparts in U.S. cities and run government ministries, clinics and newsrooms. Women, who constitute 52 percent of the population, are increasingly getting advanced degrees. There’s a Pakistani proverb: “Every girl who goes to university gets a husband.”

Despite Islam’s ban on liquor, at a party in Islamabad guests of both sexes repaired to a speakeasy in the basement to drink wine or Johnny Walker Black and smoke cigars.

Though most marriages are still arranged, as many as 20 percent are “love marriages,” said Samina Parvez, director general of the government’s external publicity agency. “The divorce rate is also increasing – it’s about 10 or 15 percent,” Parvez said. “The majority of us are not practicing Muslims.”

Kamoran Sani, sales and marketing director for the Sheraton Hotel in Karachi, declared, “What you’ve heard about the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s a big farce. There are orgies, voyeurs’ lounges, raves.”

A diverse nation

Pakistan didn’t become a nation until the British sliced India into Muslim and Hindu majority states in 1947. Pakistan – an Urdu acronym for Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh province and Baluchistan (“stan” means nation) – varies wildly from region to region.

“There is no such thing as Pakistan,” Jaferii said. “First comes your family, then your clan, third your region, fourth your province – the nation comes a distant fifth.”

Much of rural Pakistan is a feudal society dating back to the 13th century. Mullahs, or religious leaders, still invoke blasphemy laws exacting punishment against those accused of insulting Islam. Last year, the governor of Punjab was killed by his bodyguard for criticizing the law as he sought a pardon for a Christian woman sentenced to death.

But Pakistan has tremendous religious and ethnic diversity. Muslims include Sunnis, Shiites, Ismaelis, Ahmadis and Sufis – each practicing their own brand of Islam. At Lahore University of Management Sciences, I chatted with Muslims, Hindus and Christians who were all friends.

From the Sufi love poems to Pashtun folk songs about social justice, music plays a key role in Pakistani identity.

In the center of Karachi there’s a Catholic church – St. Patrick’s Cathedral, built by the Jesuits in 1931. There’s a Jewish cemetery. Sikhs worship throughout Pakistan. The ancient city of Taxila was occupied by Alexander the Great and reflects Persian, Moghul, Buddhist and Christian traditions.

Pakistan’s future

Sixty percent of Pakistan’s population is under age 30; half is under age 20. Half the kids haven’t been to school, and fifth-grade students are reading at a second-grade level, said Nadeem ul-Haq, deputy chairman of the government’s planning commission.

“We have 2 million kids a year entering the labor force. What are these kids going to do?” ul-Haq said. There is no building boom to provide jobs, and foreign investments have been scared away by terrorism.

“Entrepreneurship is the key thing we need to focus on,” he said. “Overseas Pakistanis have been very entrepreneurial, sending back $13 billion a year to their poorer relatives.”

From 7-Elevens to Silicon Valley firms and venture capital funds, ex-pat Pakistanis are thriving in the United States. The 500,000 Pakistanis in the United States, including 100,000 in California, send $100 million a year to charities in Pakistan, said Ahson Rabbani, CEO of I-Care, which connects donors with 30 nonprofits.

In Northern California, Pakistanis raised more than $100,000 for Pakistani flood relief efforts spearheaded by cricket star Imran Khan, who may lead the country if his party wins the next election. Khan has gained credibility by building a cancer hospital for the poor in honor of his late mother. His party includes a women’s wing that has direct access to him.

Philanthropy is playing a growing role in Pakistan, financing schools in poor villages and slums. The Citizens Foundation is educating 100,000 students.

“I mentored six girls,” said Karachi journalist Samia Saleem. “One was 13 and said she didn’t want to get married – she wants to be a teacher.”

Ali Shah Haider, 17, wants to be a commercial pilot. “I sleep from 2 p.m. until 4:30 p.m., then go to work at the textile factory from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. to support my family – there are 12 of us. I do my homework between shifts.”

A nation’s dreams

Though life seems cheap in Pakistan, the people are upbeat survivors who often describe life as bo hat acha, which means “great!” in Urdu, their main language.

Last year 1,575 people were killed in Karachi, where 2 million weapons are in circulation, said Francisco Quinones of Arcis International Security. A doctor was killed in Karachi the day before we landed. Violence has been blamed on the Taliban, rival political gangs, Sunni and Shia militants, rogue security forces, and Afghan refugees.

Some refugees have been recruited by the Taliban. Others like Shaezhad, who collects recyclables in the slums of Karachi, are glad to be alive under the green and white crescent flag of this country.

Still, he wants to go home to Afghanistan. “We want our land back, we want to live with respect and we want employment.”

Azhar Abbas, the managing director of Geo TV news who hosted the party in Karachi, said that “democracy is taking hold” in his Pakistan despite the violence many here believe followed the U.S. war on terror.

The business editor of daily newspaper the News, Amir Zia, said the United States can still play a positive role in Pakistan. “If Americans pull out without getting the job done, the Islamic extremists will say it’s a victory and will become much more organized.”

But at the National Defense University, business and technology expert Bilal Munshi called Pakistan “a psychologically scarred nation suffering from a mass form of PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder).”

If the 4 million young people entering the workforce each year get jobs, “we will be a power … but if they don’t see a future they’re going to pick up the gun, and you’re going to be in real trouble.”

The U.S. can help develop Pakistani schools, Bilal said, “but don’t interfere in our internal affairs – let us do things our way.”

Filed under: Afghanistan, American Muslims, Democracy, England, India, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistan Cricket, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, President Obama, Saudi Arabia, Taliban, Tehrik-i-Taliban, terrorism, US Army, US-Pakistan Relations Tagged: Afghan Refugees, Afghanistan, Alexander the Great, Citizens Foundation, Geo Tv, Imran Khan, Karachi, Moghul, NATO, Overseas Pakistanis, Pakistan, Pakistani Americans, Pakistanis, Pashtun, Persian, Punjab, Sikhs, St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Taliban, Taxila, United States, Urdu, US-Pakistani relations

http://www.awaztoday.com/playshow/20110/Islamabad-Tonight-20th-February-2012.aspx
http://www.zemtv.com/2012/02/20/islamabad-tonight-with-nadim-malik-20th-february-2012-latest/
http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f247/video-islamabad-tonight-nadeem-malik-20th-february-2012-a-265075/
http://www.pakistanherald.com/Program/Islamabad-Tonight-February-20-2012-Nadeem-Malik-9755

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT

WITH NADEEM MALIK

20-02-2012

TOPIC- RESOLUTION ON BALOCHISTAN IN AMERICA

GUESTS- KHURSHID MAHMOOD QASOORI, SHEHZAD CHODHRY, SHERRY REHMAN, RIAZ KHOKHAR, TALAL BUGTI

KHURSHID MAHMOOD QASOORI OF PTI said that a strong reaction has come forward from Pakistan on resolution on Balochistan in America and it is correct. He said that American government has kept distance from the resolution on Balochistan. He said that America wants to make Pakistan scapegoat on its defeat in Afghanistan. He said that armed operations were conducted in Balochistan during ZA Bhutto and Musharaf era. He said that America is trying to link Balochistan problem with Iran policy. He said that there were some doubts between Iran and Pakistan on the issue of Abdul Malik Rigi which were cleared on his arrest. He said that Israel is trying to put maximum pressure on Iran through America. He said that Pakistan needs to introduce a tax system in the country in order to have an independent foreign policy.

AIRMARTIAL (r) SHEHZAD CHOUDHRY said that America made a mistake by attacking on Salala check post and it widened the distance between the two countries. He said that resolution on Balochistan has been presented in America in response with the distance Pakistan has taken after Salala check post attack. He said that no one is violating human rights in the world more than CIA. He said that the government, establishment and Baloch Sardars should sit together to understand each others point of view. He said that in few days Sherry Rehman along with Hina Rabbani Khar will meet Hilary Clinton in London. He said that it is possible that Hillary might offer apology on Salala check post attack. He said that Baloch people are being killed in the fight between BLA, BRA and security agencies. He said that there should be an immediate ceasefire in the Balochistan province by taking Baloch elders on aboard. He said that military should also admit its mistakes in Balochistan it will send a good message to Baloch people.

SHERRY REHMAN PAKISTAN AMBASSADOR IN AMERICA said that the resolution on Balochistan by Senator Dana Rohrabacher has been presented in the American congress and not in the senate. She said that she conveyed the message to American administration that resolution on Balochistan will send a wrong message to Pakistan. She said that she made it clear to Americans that the problem of Balochistan is Pakistan’s internal affair. She said that America is willing to improve its diplomatic ties with Pakistan. She said that she told American administration that Pakistan should be treated equally and seriously. She said that it is an election year in America and they are focusing on their internal problems and criticizing Pakistan.

RIAZ KHOKHAR FORMER AMBASSADOR TO AMERICA said that we need to take steps of appeasement which could be acceptable for Baloch people. He said that when there will be problem in our country it will invite foreign intervention. He said that we should take such steps that Balochistan issue could resolve of its own.

TALAL BAGTI OF JWP said that military officials responsible for giving mutilated corpses of Baloch people. He said that Punjabi’s are being murdered on the orders of retired military commandos in Balochistan. He said that if Baloch people are responsible for the murder of Punjabis why no body is arrested so far. He said that India is involved in Balochistan situation because Pakistan is interfering in Indian held Kashmir.

–

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

In light of attacks on NATO troops carried out by Aghan soldiers, the defense ministry of Afghanistan has begun ordering soldiers who have families in Pakistan to move them to Afghanistan in a bid to rid the army of Taliban infiltrators. It is the lovely news, now we can enjoy less Pakhtuns and properly rolled [...]

Afghan government to depopulate Pakistan is a post from: PakMediaBlog All Rights Reserved.

By Yaroslav Trofimov, Tom Wright and Adam Entous for The Wall Street Journal

Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Thursday met with Pakistan’s leaders, trying to gain Islamabad’s support for his peace outreach to the Taliban, as U.S. officials worked to keep expectations in check about the strategy’s prospects for yielding direct peace talks with the Islamic militant group.

The Taliban, meanwhile, denied Mr. Karzai’s claim that they have been negotiating with the Afghan government.On the first day of his three-day visit to Pakistan, Mr. Karzai met with Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who promised Pakistani cooperation in investigating the September assassination of the chief Afghan peace negotiator and voiced support for an Afghan-led peace process. Pakistan’s Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, who wields considerable influence over the country’s foreign policy, also took part in the talks.

In Islamabad, Mr. Karzai reiterated that respect for the Afghan constitution and for women’s rights remain his “crucial conditions” for any future deal with the Taliban.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who has been skeptical of reconciliation efforts in the past, at a Thursday news conference lauded Mr. Karzai’s remarks—made in a Wall Street Journal interview—about Kabul’s willingness to engage with the Taliban.

“What President Karzai’s statement confirmed is that Afghanistan is very much involved in the process of reconciliation and that is extremely helpful and important to determining whether or not we are ultimately going to be able to succeed with reconciliation or not,” Mr. Panetta said. “The news that Afghanistan has joined those reconciliation discussions is important.”

Mr. Panetta said he didn’t know whether additional three-way sessions between the U.S., the Afghan government and the Taliban have been planned.

Another senior Obama administration official remained cautious about whether such confidence-building contacts would translate into direct peace talks, calling the process “complicated and precarious.”

A day after Mr. Karzai told the Journal that Afghan government representatives have had contacts with U.S. and Taliban officials in an attempt to end the 10-year war, the Taliban said they had no intention of negotiating with “the powerless Kabul administration.”

“If someone met the Karzai administration representing the Islamic Emirate, he is an impostor,” said a statement by the Taliban leadership, which calls itself the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The Taliban in the past denied reports of peace talks with the U.S., only to confirm them in recent months.

U.S. officials have confirmed Mr. Karzai’s remarks, saying at least one three-way negotiating session occurred in recent weeks.

Admitting negotiations with Kabul would be fraught will political risks for the insurgent leadership, possibly undermining the morale of Taliban fighters, and weakening the militants’ resolve amid coalition offensives.

The intensity of the conflict already declined dramatically in recent months, Afghan and coalition officials say, though it is unclear whether this drop is due to the spreading news about peace talks, unusually harsh winter weather, or a strategic decision by the Taliban to hold their fire as foreign forces withdraw.

Pakistan, which U.S. officials say provides shelter and support to the Taliban leadership, plays a crucial role in Afghanistan’s peace outreach.

Mr. Karzai’s relations with Pakistan neared a rupture point after the September assassination of former President Burhanuddin Rabbani, the peace negotiator, by purported Taliban peace emissaries. At the time, Afghan officials blamed the killing on Pakistan, something that Pakistani officials denied. Two suspects have since been arrested in Pakistan.

The White House wants to show progress on the reconciliation track before a May summit of North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders in Chicago. There, NATO leaders are expected to announce plans to shift to a train-and-assist mission in Afghanistan in 2013, giving Mr. Karzai’s security forces the lead role in combat operations before most U.S. and NATO troops pull out at the end of 2014.

Where Pakistan fits into tentative peace talks with the Taliban remains unclear. The U.S. has not kept Islamabad informed about developments in the peace process, Pakistan civilian and military leaders claim.

U.S. and Afghan officials say they are concerned Pakistan might try to undermine peace talks. In January 2010, Pakistan detained a senior Taliban leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. Afghan and U.S. officials claim Pakistan arrested him for contacting the U.S. and Mr. Karzai’s government without Pakistan’s knowledge, a claim denied by Pakistan.

Afghanistan has asked for Pakistan to transfer Mr. Baradar to Kabul, but this hasn’t happened so far. Pakistani officials deny they back the Taliban.

Pakistan will stay on the sidelines in the tentative peace process as long as the U.S. remains distrustful of Islamabad, said Imtiaz Gul, director of the Islamabad-based Center for Research and Security Studies.

“We’re not sure to what extent the U.S. wants Pakistan to play a role,” Mr. Gul said. “The Pakistani role at this moment seems very limited.”

Pakistan’s ability to play a meaningful part in talks has further been hampered by a deterioration in relations with U.S. after an American helicopter strike in November mistakenly killed 26 Pakistani soldiers along the Afghan border.

U.S. officials say they are still trying to hammer out an agreement with Taliban representatives on a sequence of confidence-building measures aimed at laying the ground for any future direct negotiations on ending the war.

In addition to the establishment of a political office for the Taliban in Qatar, the U.S. wants the Taliban to issue a statement distancing itself from international terrorism and to agree to stop fighting in certain areas of the country.

The U.S., in turn, would transfer of up to five Taliban militants held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Qatar. Key U.S. lawmakers have raised objections to the prospective prisoner transfers.

Officials have identified the five Guantanamo detainees who may be transferred to Qatar as Muhammad Fazl, a former senior Taliban defense official; two former local governors, Khairullah Khairkhwa and Noorullah Nori; former Taliban intelligence official Abdul Haq Wasiq; and top Taliban financier Muhammad Nabi.

Messrs. Haq Wasiq, Fazl and Nori were among the first 20 detainees who arrived at Guantanamo Bay 10 years ago, when the prison was opened on Jan. 11, 2002.

The U.S. has received assurances from Qatar that the five militants, if transferred, won’t be released by the government or handed over to the Taliban. But officials said the men could be freed later as part of a future Afghan-Taliban peace deal.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Democracy, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, Peace, President Obama, Taliban, Tehrik-i-Taliban, terrorism, United States, US Army Tagged: Afghan-Taliban Peace, Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, Islamabad, Kabul, Leon Panetta, NATO, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Pakistan, Qatar, Taliban, United States, Washington DC

http://www.awaztoday.com/playshow/19991/Islamabad-Tonight-16th-February-2012.aspx
http://www.zemtv.com/2012/02/16/islamabad-tonight-by-nadeem-malik-16th-feb-2012/
http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f247/video-islamabad-tonight-nadeem-malik-16th-february-2012-a-264546/

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT

WITH NADEEM MALIK

16-02-2012

TOPIC- PAKISTAN, IRAN & AFGHANISTAN HEAD OF STATES MEETING

GUESTS- KHAWAJA MOHAMMAD ASIF, SHAMSHAD AHMED KHAN

KHAWAJA MOHAMMAD ASIF OF PML-N said that Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan should think about their sovereignty and peace in the region. He said that all three countries have centuries old religious, cultural and geographic relationship. He said that Afghan situation has put serious effects on Pakistan. He said that Pakistan should play pivotal role for peace in Afghanistan. He said that America is having talks with Taliban after fighting a costly war in Afghanistan. He said that the gas pipe line from Iran is very important for Pakistan. He said that Pakistan is desperate for gas from Iran and America has nothing to do with it. He said that Pakistan has reached a point where it should fight the war of its own interest. He said that if America is furious with Pakistan on the issue of gas pipe line from Iran let it be. He said that Iran gas pipe line is important for Pakistan interest and we should not care about American anger. He said that Pakistan should improve its relationship with its regional countries. He said that Pakistan has pass across foreign and military policies so far. He said that how long Pakistan will take care of American interest now it should watch its own. He said that no regional countries have such a weak economic relationship as ours. He said that agencies are taking all the decision on the situation of Balochistan. He said that all the elected members of Balochistan assembly are either speaker or ministers of the province. He said that Balochistan produces gas but its people are deprived from it.

SHAMSHAD AHMED KHAN FORMER FOREIGN SECRETARY said that if Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan heads have meeting on their own interest then it is a very good gesture. He said that our rulers always supported America for their personal interest. He said that in his opinion the meeting between the three head of states is going to be nothing but a photo session in front of the cameras. He said that all three countries are under American pressure for different reasons. He said that Pakistan relationship with Iran have been decayed because of Afghanistan. He said that when ever a head of state takes care of its country’s interest the world supports him. He said that America threatened us at the time of testing nuclear devices but later on supported our stand. He said that the most important thing is this that what we do for our interest instead of others. He said that the situation of our country is no good but we are doing nothing to correct it. He said that the Balochistan problem is because of the Sardars but our government is giving billions of rupees to them to fix it.

–

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

By Palash R Ghosh for International Business Times

I am as excited and thrilled with the sudden meteoric climb of New York Knicks point guard Jeremy Lin as anyone else. I am completely immersed in ‘Linsanity’ and hope he becomes a dominant superstar in the NBA over a nice long career.

Jeremy Lin is the greatest sports story I’ve seen in years, perhaps decades. As an Asian-American, Lin’s brilliant play has special meaning and significance to me.

However, I must admit, since I am neither Chinese nor Taiwanese, my appreciation of Lin is somewhat as an “outsider.” That is, I can’t quite reach the same level of excitement about No. 17 as my Chinese and Taiwanese friends have.

I have waited many years for an Indian boy in the United States to become a professional sports superstar. Thus far, such a thing hasn’t happened, and, sadly, I doubt it will in my lifetime.

The term “Asian-American” is impossibly vague, broad and diverse, encompassing everyone who claims descent from the Philippines to Afghanistan. Indeed, it’s a rather meaningless phrase, but, for the sake of simplicity, it really means Americans whose parents or ancestors immigrated from a handful of major Asian nations.

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, there were 17.3-million Americans of “Asian” descent, representing about 5.6 percent of the total population.

I found a breakdown of that population for 2008, which indicated that the Chinese formed the largest group among Asian-Americans at 3.6 million, followed by Filipinos (3.1 million), East Indians (2.7 million), Vietnamese (1.7 million), Koreans (1.6 million) and Japanese (1.3 million).

In the popular vernacular, Indians are sometimes not even considered “Asian” since they are sometimes more associated with Middle Eastern peoples, especially since 9-11.

No matter, I consider the people of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Afghanistan as “Asians.”

So, with these large numbers, why are there no Indian star athletes in the United States?

To the best of my knowledge, no Indian lad has ever reached the NBA or Major League Baseball.

Sanjay Beach had a brief career as a wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers and the Green Bay Packers; Brandon Chillar (whose father is Indian) played linebacker for the Green Bay Packers; and Manny Malhotra (an Indo-Canadian), plays for the Vancouver Canucks in NHL.

And that’s it — and none of them are exactly ‘household names’ or superstars.

Part of the problem is that Indian parents pressure their children to succeed in academics and to shun ‘frivolous’ pursuits like sports, arts and music. Hence, the large number of Indian-American doctors, engineers, accountants, mathematicians, scientists, corporate executives, and, uh, underpaid journalists.

Indeed, Indians (like Chinese and Koreans) are among the highest-earning, best-educated people in the U.S. The residue of being a dreaded “model minority.”

This is all fine and dandy… but, frankly, I’m rather tired of Indians in America being pigeonholed into dull, safe careers. I would be much happier if an Indian boy could pitch a 95-mile-an-hour fast-ball, or slam dunk a basketball or throw a football with pinpoint accuracy for 60 yards.

Realistically, an Indian reaching the NBA and NFL is probably beyond the realm of reality. But what about America’s grand old pastime, baseball?

After all, Indians have excelled at cricket – a sport that requires skills similar to baseball.

If Sachin Tendulkar had grown up in California, perhaps he would now be the starting centerfielder for the Los Angeles Dodgers. If Muttiah Muralitharan were raised in New Jersey, maybe he’d be a 20-game winning pitcher for the Philadelphia Phillies. They certainly have the ability to excel in baseball.

What about U.S. football? Indians are pretty good at soccer — surely some NFL club could find place for an Indian placekicker or punter, no? NFL teams have, over the years, employed a number of former European soccer players for such humble (non-violent) duties.

Will we see an Indian-American athletic superstar in my lifetime (I probably have about 30 years left on this earth)? My guess is no.

Most Indian parents compel their children to study subjects in school that will lead to good, solid, stable high-paying jobs. Sports are fine as long as they don’t become an obsession or, worse, a career goal.

Indian parents likely tell their children that becoming a professional athlete is the longest of long shots (even if one has great talent) — and indeed, they are right. Consider that in the NBA there are 30 teams with a roster of 12 players each.

That’s just 360 players.

Thus, for every NBA player, there are about 850,000 people in the United States.

It makes no logical sense to pursue a career in sports – unless your name is Jeremy Lin, of course.

And let me add that if a young Indian man rose to the top of any American sports leagues, he would likely become the number one celebrity on the planet, especially if he is telegenic.

He would not only enjoy the fame and wealth that is bestowed upon those lucky few that reach the zenith of pro sports in the western world, but he would also have about one-billion people on the Indian subcontinent as rabid, devoted followers. He would be like a combination of Michael Jordan, Tom Brady, Joe DiMaggio, Elvis Presley, John Wayne and Salman Khan.

It would be utterly incredible… but highly unlikely.

Filed under: cricket, Desi, India, Pakistan, SAARC, Sri Lanka, United States Tagged: Afghanistan, Asian-American, Bangladesh, Baseball, Brandon Chillar, Chinese, Desi, Desi Americans, East Indian, Elvis Presley, Filipinos, India, Japanese, Jeremy Lin, Joe DiMaggio, John Wayne, Koreans, Major League Baseball, Manny Malhotra, Michael Jordan, Muttiah Muralitharan, NBA, Nepal, New York, New York Knicks, Pakistan, Persons of Indian Origin, Philadelphia Phillies, Philippines, Sachin Tendulkar, Salman Khan, Sanjay Beach, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Tom Brady, Vietnamese

“Religion is the opiate of the masses.” That’s what Karl Marx said, and in a recent final exam, that’s what my political science professor asked us to analyze. Needless to say, one’s opinion of this quote ties directly into one’s religious beliefs, or lacking those, one’s ideas about religion in general. Throughout human history, wars … Continue reading »

Karachi Literature Festival 2012 was fortunately organized at a time when I had no clash with anything except one extra class on Sunday morning. Having missed the first event on account of being out of city visiting my sister and getting stuck there due to PIA strike, I was looking forward to attend interesting sessions. I was not disappointed and the two days had gave me a lot to think on.

Here are some of the sessions that I attended.

Manto and Partition

The first session that I attended was on Manto by historian Ayesha Jalal and it was moderated by M.R.Kazimi. After introductions, Mr. Kazimi spoke at length that made me yawn but I tried to keep up as much as possible. When Ayesha Jalal herself took the podium, the real fun began. I never read Manto but heard a lot about it and hearing about his life from AJ was a treat. Some of the cheeky statements made me laugh, such as:

“Manto was a heavy drinker, he became alcoholic after coming to Pakistan”

“Manto never fell for Ismat Chughtai, his wife did”

The perspective was new and gave a lot of insight into Manto’s life before and after partition.

Pen as Sword: Expressing the New Pakistani Narrative through Fiction

This sesssion was moderated by Khaled Ahmad and the real star in it was Ahmed Rashid. Although not a fan, I was looking forward to listen to the acclaimed expert on Afghanistan. I never read any of his books but read a lot about Ahmed Rashid’s views in articles. Khaled Ahmed made a sound beginning and compared the title “Pen as Sword” with the Urdu idiom. The session was designed to be conversational and once Ahmed Rashid finished his speech, the question and answer session proved enlightening.

To cut the story short, Ahmed Rashid stressed the importance of a sound political front with regards to Afghanistan and use English to greater level to bring awareness. Everyone, including the audience, lamented the fact that Urdu language was slowly dying due to its delegation to level of propagation language for the country and supporting only establishment and right-wing viewpoint. Fresh ideas are not encouraged in Urdu and neither is any narrative contrary to the army’s, making it difficult to bring any worthwhile addition to Urdu language and literature. Not much is being done except for some poetry which has lost its quality as well one compares it with the likes of Urdu poets from pre-partition days. Ignoring regional languages has also played a big role in restricting the level of education in the country and have stagnated their growth. Only Sindhi survives as Sindhi writers are still generating content for local consumption.

At one point, towards the end of the session, well known writer Zulfikar Haliphoto stood up and brought everyone’s attention to the matter that mainstream is only limited to English and Urdu, with the former reserved for the elites who attend such festivals and latter for those who don’t bother knowing what is happening in the rest of the country. He said that there are plenty of modern, secular and effective Sindhi writers raising their voice and on Salman Taseer’s murder, over 200 articles were written in Sindhi newspapers and magazines. One only has to pick them up and read but alas most of the country think the only worthwhile content to read is written either in English or Urdu which is a mistake committed by most, particularly those who live in the Urban areas.

A Conversation With Anatol Lieven

This session had a lot of promise but proved rather disappointing. Anatol Lieven, who wrote the popular book of 2011 “Pakistan: A Hard Country”, was the main star of the show with Ayesha Siddiqa, Mohsin Hamid and Ghazi Salauddin as the moderators. Anatol gave a short summary of the book that focused on Pakistan as a society that was resilient and was against extremism as a whole due to its blood relations and bonds … but the same structure prevented it from progress and held it back.

When the time came for questions and answers, Ayesha Siddiqa fired some direct and pointed questions that forced Anatol to say something about the lack of criticism on army in his book. Anatol however remained evasive and never answered her properly, forcing Ayesha to ask harder questions. At one point I really believed that she will simply grab his collar, shake him and threaten to sit on him if he didn’t answer properly. Thankfully the turn moved on towards Mohsin Hamid and Ghazi Salauddin who remained a lot more receptive and polite, their questions a lot more relaxed.

I felt that Anatol, despite his brilliant writing, was not made for stage. He seemed flustered and it was difficult to follow his chain of thought as he attempted to answer questions. It could be stage fright or the mere fact that he sat with Ayesha Siddiqa on the stage was terrorizing him (there was a tweet circulating that Anatol had requested more moderators as Ayesha Siddiqa would eat him alive at one-to-one session). Except for one question towards the end, Anatol simply beat around the bush while answering and that kind of made the session disappointing.

Today’s Pakistan: An Economic and Political Perspective

I came late to this session and didn’t get the chance to hear much. The session included Asad Sayeed, Ishrat Hussain, Anatol Lieven and Maleeha Lodhi with Ghazi Salauddin as the moderator. I remember some parts of Ishrat Hussain’s talk where we told how some of the technocratic solutions for Pakistan’s economy, as they had prepared and hoped to work during Musharraf’s time as the sole leader of the country, failed due to the fact that they were simple but flawed. The solutions to Pakistan’s economic woes should have been dynamic in nature and take into account various factors that would have made a better impact on the country.

Anatol also shared his views by talking about the complexities of Pakistan’s political system and how it affects the economy (and he slowly gained strength in his voice since the crowd was smaller and the sight of tea got him excited).

Pakistani Zabanon Ka Adab/Pakistani Languages

I came late to this session on Sunday owing to an extra class that had quiz as well. The session was curated by Mohammed Hanif and the poets were Amar Sindhu, Ahmad Fouad and Nukhbah Langah. At the time of my entry it was Nukhbah Langah’s turn and she started to read the Seraiki poem “Meda Ishq” for the audience. Her voice had clarity and a hint of haunting melody, creating a peaceful listening environment which was made lively by Hanif Mohammed at intervals.

At one point when Nukhbah apologized to the audience regarding speaking in English despite the session being about Pakistani languages, Mohammed Hanif chirped

“Koi masla nahi, aakhir English bhi to Pakistan ki ilaqai zaban hai”

(No worries, English is also Pakistan’s native language)

Education In Pakistan With A Focus On Textbooks

This proved to be a enlightening session. Although I had a thorough understanding of the topic, it was still great to listen to the expert. The panel included Rubina Saigol, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Tariq Rahman, Faisal Bari and Baela Jamil. The moderator was Ameena Saiyid. I didn’t listen much to Rubina but Faisal Bari presented a good case regarding state of education. His points were referred by others when their turn came.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, in his great style, stressed the importance of proper education at lower levels. He gave the example of surface tension, a concept in Physics, which was poorly explained in Pakistani textbooks while even the lower quality textbooks around the world explained it better. He said the culture of handing down information and root-learning it without explanation and understanding is hurting students growth and has been a major factor in making them run away from science and maths. The lack of trained teachers and large number of ghost schools in the provinces is a major obstacle in Pakistan’s progress.

Tariq Rahman was as enlightening as ever as he stressed the importance of education from linguistic point of view. He explained about Pakistan’s languages that are used in the country and how they contribute to early education. He shed light on how the students were misguided in history regarding languages and attempt to bring them under the official narrative by painting a “Hindu India” and its “Hindu Languages” that have nothing to do with Pakistan and Pakistani languages (namely Urdu). He also traced the origins of Urdu and how it is being used as brainwashing medium for students throughout the country.

Baela Jamil was last to speak but she spoke well. She told about the state of textbooks and how attempts were made to improve them. She said that Urdu writers that have been writing Urdu textbooks for decades are stuck in the same mindset and despite repeated attempts they still haven’t seen reason. Urdu books look more like Islamic Studies books as they start from “Hamd” and “Sana” (respecting Allah and his last Prophet) and following up with lessons in morality, good living, Jihad etc. She also gave example of a research that was conducted in 85 districts of the country and students were interviewed. As per the result, about 45% of the students couldn’t read Urdu despite it being compulsory subject and most complained about the subject being too Islamic, full of repetitive lessons across different classes and little in the way of learning.

The Mother-Tongue As A Medium of Instruction

This session could have been much better. The panel included (Retd) Justice Wajiuddin, Zubeida Mustafa, Abbas Rashid and Ray Brown. The moderator was Arfa Sayeda Zehra. Everyone, including the moderator, spoke in favor of having Mother Tongue as the early education language except for Justice Wajiuddin. He said he suffered a lot due to his early education in Urdu and when he came to college, he couldn’t understand a single thing for first 6 months and through sheer hard work managed to learn English. He stressed on the fact that all the hard work done to prepare knowledge in English should not be thrown away by attempting to use native languages as medium of instruction, otherwise great institutions like KGS, Aitchison College etc will wither away.

Both the audience and the moderator of the session took on the retired judge on this and reminded him that it wasn’t about discarding everything but only about using mother-tongue for early education and then introducing other languages. Ray Brown gave a great example of an African country where British Council not just attempted to develop written script of their spoken languages but also saw the remarkable results on children that were educated in the mother-tongue in the initial school years before introducing them to English.

The Silent Minority: A Voice for the Voiceless

This proved to be disappointing session. The hall was barely 30% full and the panel included Khaled Ahmed, Tariq Rahman and Stefan Weidner with Haris Ghazdar as the moderator. Haris spoke well and gave the podium to Khaled Ahmed who spoke about ethnic minorities (Shias mostly). He stressed on the fact that how killings take place with impunity and anyone can get killed for speaking against, just like in the case of Salman Taseer; therefor there is a great need for effort to give minorities such as Shias and non-Muslims greater share of voice in the country.

Tariq Rahmen spoke about linguistic minorities as there are about 62 languages in Pakistan that make around 4.5% of the country’s population and are in danger of going extinct. The reasons he stated was the power rested with languages like Urdu (which was made national language by Jinnah on the ill-advice of his companions) as well as overwhelming population of other popular native languages.

Stefan Weidner simply said he is no expert and was placed in the wrong session as a panelist, thus his part concluded fastest compared to any speaker I heard in this festival.

Click to view slideshow.

Filed under: Current Affairs Tagged: Anatol Lieven, Karachi Literature Festival 2012, klf 2012, Tariq Rahman

By: Shaukat Masood Zafar Food is a basic human need and it’s the government who has to ensure a dependable food security system for the nation. For a country like Pakistan, this is crucial, since now a large part of the income of the population has to be spent to procure food. High grain prices [...]

Related posts:

1. Wastelands development – A best way to overcome food crisis
2. Defending Food Security requires instant reinventing of ZTBL
3. Pakistan Budget 2011-12: An Overview
4. Connivance of Plutocrats of PPP & PML(N) is increasing Wheat Prices in Pakistan
5. Afghanistan a threat to Pakistan’s Security

Pakistan’s leading militants have called on fighters to honor an agreement not to attack the Pakistani military in the most important sanctuary for the Taliban and al-Qaida along the Afghan border.
Militants have long used the North Waziristan tribal area as a base to attack U.S.-led forces in neighboring Afghanistan. American officials have accused Pakistan of supporting some militants