Our Sindhi nationalists are simply not aware of the world trends. They have not idea how powerful and strong the social media has become in today’s world!

In contrast, the Baloch political activists are now quite alert and actively use it to propagate their message to the world through the use of the social media — blogs, social networks, microblogs, etc.

The proof that the world hears them speak is that BBC has now covered the political activists’efforts on Twitter and blogs. According to the reports, in the backdrop of the biased and selective (under-)reporting of the mainstream Pakistani media, it’s the blogs and micro-blogs (Twitter) which have been the source of information for the world on the brutality of the Pakistani state in Balochistan, that is, their kill-and-dump policy against the Baloch nationalists and freedom fighters.

بلوچستان کی حقیقت کون بتائے گا

امریکہ میں بلوچستان پر بحث، پاکستان کو تشویش

Twitter is quite a powerful tool in online activism right now- (who can forget the Arab Spring?) Thanks to Twitter that it’s now possible to ping United Nations (@UN), Barack Obama (@BarackObama), The White House (@whitehouse), Amnesty International (@amnesty), Human Rights Watch (@hrw) — you name it! They are the ones influencing the world affairs.. and they should be contacted frequently.

Or you can also ping Pentagon Press Secretary at @PentagonPresSec. You can even directly pass your comments to Congressman Brad Sherman (@BradSherman), who recently spoke in favor of the US speaking to the Sindhi and Baloch nations (Watch the video).

Although there are some Sindhi nationalists’accounts on Twitter (Like @jssfjsmm, @jssfmediacell, @JssfJsqm, Raja Dahir, Sindhi Xafar but their presence is not quite frequent; whereas, Twitter means continuous pinging the world about your and your issues.

Our Baloch activists have continuously been asking the Sindhi nationalists to be awake and alert on Twitter like them. And I receive tweets like the following frequently:

@AamirRaz Be known, we support you.

—
TheBaloch (@BalaachMarri) January 15, 2012

Amid military operations and sufferings, Baloch pay rich tribute to Saeen GM Syed, icon of Sindhudesh's independence identity.

—
TheBaloch (@BalaachMarri) January 16, 2012

@AamirRaz Bro our sindhi Brothers must be active like their Baloch brothers in their struggle for freedom in Balochistan, love&success 4us

—
Archen Baloch (@ArchenBaloch) February 10, 2012

@BradSherman is aiming 2 promote both d causes of Sindh, Balochistan. @AamirRaz wud b happy 2 hear that. There's a bipartisan support 2 B&S

—
Ratan (@Rattan888) February 08, 2012

@AamirRaz Adda Sindhi dostan kay twitter join karan laye motivate karo. @RajaDahir

—
فیض بلوچ (@FaizBaluch) January 10, 2012

@AamirRaz Ji koshish karo.Twitter asan laye naimat ka'n wadeek aye. @RajaDahir

—
فیض بلوچ (@FaizBaluch) January 10, 2012

However, this blog is not about teaching you how to use Twitter.. rather, it’s more for forcing you to start using it for your sociopolitical activism. It’s just to motivate the Sindhi nationalists to start using the power of the social media as an effective tool for lobbying in this age and time.

Keep tweeting — the world is listening!

[You can follow me on Twitter at @AamirRaz.]

Tagged: Arab Spring, Facebook, Nationalism, Social Activism, Twitter

http://www.facebook.com/nadeemmalik

NADEEM MALIK

Do You Think President Asif Zardari Should Enjoy Blanket Immunity?

A Gallup poll shows 38% Pakistanis do not know about the President’s immunity, 37% believe that the President enjoys NO immunity whereas 25% believe that the President enjoys immunity provided to him by the constitution.

NADEEM MALIK

وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر
میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد
عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھر وہ وزیراعظم نہیں رہ سکیں گے۔ احمد رضا قصوری

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT WITH NADEEM MALIK
nadeemmalik.wordpress.comوزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھ…

NADEEM MALIK

وزیراعظم نے بلا ضرورت اور بے وقت اپنی قربانی دی ہے۔ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر
میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد
عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھر وہ وزیراعظم نہیں رہ سکیں گے۔ احمد رضا قصوری
این …آر او بڑے لوگوں کو کی گئی چوری سے بچانے کے لئیے کیا گیا ہے۔ آج لوگوں کا سارے اداروں پر سے اعتماد اٹھ چکا ہے۔ ہر طرف کرپشن ہے اور لوگ مر رہے ہیں۔ بھاشا ڈیم پر دی جانے والی کمپینسیشن میں سے دو ارب روپے غائب ہیں۔ اعظم سواتی
عدالت صبر سے کام لے رہی ہے ورنہ حالات خراب ہو سکتے ہیں۔ لوگوں کا عدالت پر اعتماد ہے اور یہ عدالت کا بہت بڑا امتحان ہے۔ احمد رضا قصوریSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 2nd February 2012
www.awaztoday.comوزیراعظم نے بلا ضرورت اور بے وقت اپنی قربانی دی ہے۔ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہ…

NADEEM MALIK

Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:-
Guest: S.M. Zafar, Yaseen Azad, Ahmed Raza Kasuri, Azam Swati and Nayyar Bokhari on Contempt of the Court

Islamabad tonight – 2nd february 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: S.M. Zafar, Yaseen Azad, Ahmed Raza Kasuri, Azam Swati and Nayyar Bokhari on Contempt of the Court

NADEEM MALIK

تمام ادارے پارلیمنٹ کو جوابدہ ہیں، وزیراعظم

NADEEM MALIK

GILANI GUILTY OF CONTEMPT:
After the preliminary hearing, we are satisfied that prima facie there is a case for further proceeding into the matter. Adjourned for February 13, for framing charges. The Prime minister is required to remain present in the Supreme Court.

NADEEM MALIK

سپريم کورٹ نے وزير اعظم گيلاني پر توہين عدالت کيس ميں فرد جرم کرنے کے لئے انہيں 13فروري کو طلب کر ليا ہے.عدالت نے مختصر فيصلے ميں کہا کہ وزير اعظم توہين عدالت کے مرتکب ہوئے ہيں ، ان پر 13فروري کو فرد جرم عائد کي جائے گي.

NADEEM MALIK

سینٹ کے الیکشن کے بعد فوری طور پر ملک میں الیکشن کا اعلان کر دیا جائے گا۔ شیخ رشید
الیکشن کی پہلی دھاندلی آئندہ بجٹ ہو گا جو ایسا بنایا جائے گا کہ آئندہ آنے والا اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے۔مسلم لیگ ن ایک دفعہ پھر ٹریپ ہو گئی ہے۔ نواز اور شہباز شریف کی سوچ میں بڑا فرق ہے شہباز فرنٹ فٹ پر کھیلتے ہیں۔ مسلم لیگ ن شروع سے کوئی فیصلہ نہیں کر پائی ڈرتی رہی کہ کہیں فوج نہ آ جائے جبکہ فوج کے آنے کا کوئی امکان ن…ہیں-اسحق ڈار وزیر خزانہ ہوتے تو اتنی کرپشن نہیں ہوتی۔ میمو کے مسئلہ پر پیچھے ہٹنے سے فوج کی ساکھ پر اثر پڑا ہے۔ میرا خیال تھا کہ جنرل کیانی مدت ملازمت میں توسیع نہیں لیں گے لیکن انہوں نے لے لی۔ فوج کے نزدیک میمو ایک بہت سنجیدہ معاملہ تھا لیکن پھر پتہ نہیں کہ کیوں پیچھے ہٹ گئی۔
لوگ فوج عدلیہ اور سیاست سے بہت مایوس ہوئے ہیں اور تھک کر بیٹھ گئے ہیں۔ میں نہیں سمجھتا کہ فوج کسی سیاسی جماعت کو سپورٹ کر رہی ہے۔ بہت سے لوگ صرف اس لئیے عمران کے ساتھ چلے گئے ہیں کہ فوج اس کے ساتھ ہے۔ میں قوم کو بتاؤں گا کہ کہ چور کون ہے اور چوکیدار کون ہے۔ شیخ رشیدSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 1st February 2012
awaztoday.comسینٹ کے الیکشن کے بعد فوری طور پر ملک میں الیکشن کا اعلان کر دیا جائے گا۔ شیخ رشید الیکشن کی پہلی دھاندلی آئندہ بجٹ ہو گا جو ایسا بنایا جائے گا کہ آئندہ آنے والا اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے۔مسلم لیگ ن ایک دفعہ پھر ٹریپ ہو گئی ہے۔ نواز اور شہباز شریف کی سوچ میں بڑا فرق ہے شہباز فرنٹ فٹ پر کھیلتے ہیں۔ مسلم…

NADEEM MALIK

In a major development toward ending a decade of war in Afghanistan, US Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said on Wednesday that American forces would step back from a combat role there as early as mid-2013, more than a year before all American troops are scheduled to leave Afghanistan.

NADEEM MALIK

Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:-
Guest: Sheikh Rashid Ahmed

Islamabad tonight on aaj news – Shaikh rasheed interview – 1st febuary 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -: – Guest: Sheikh Rashid Ahmed

NADEEM MALIK

Efroze Chemical Industries confessed on Wednesday that the batch of IsoTab produced for Punjab Institute of Cardiology (PIC) was tainted with Pyrimethamine, an anti-malarial.

NADEEM MALIK

Anthrax Threat: A parcel containing anthrax was sent to the Prime Minister’s Secretariat in Islamabad during the month of January 2012.Police investigations are underway and a case has been registered against unknown people. The packet was sent from Jamshoro.

NADEEM MALIK

اعتزاز احسن صدر کا استثني ثابت کرديں تو عدالت مزيد کارروائي نہيں کرے گي,عذر گناہ، بدتر از گناہ ہوتا ہے-سپريم کورٹ
اعتزاز احسن نے کہاکہ وزيراعظم ايڈوائس ليتے ہيں،جو انہيں وزير قانون اور سيکريٹري قانون نے دي، وزيراعظم ديانت داري سے سمجھتے ہيں کہ صدر کو استثني حاصل ہے، جسٹس آصف سعيد کھوسہ نے کہاکہ وزيراعظم نے کہاکہ اس ايشو پر جيل جانا پڑا تو جاوں گا ،کيايہ کہنا کيا حکم عدولي نہيں ہے، جسٹس آصف کھوسہ نے کہاکہ سترہ ججوں نے بہت واضح حکم ديا، کيا آپ ايک اور حکم چاہتے ہيں. اعتزازاحسن نے کہاکہ سوئس حکام کو خط کے حکم پر ابھي عمل ممکن نہيں، وزيراعظم کا عدالت کے سامنے بيان، غير رسمي تھا- سپريم کورٹ نے اعتزاز احسن کو کل ابتدائي دلائل مکمل کرنے کي ہدايت کي

NADEEM MALIK

لندن کي ليبارٹري نے پنجاب ميں ہلاکتوں کا سبب بننے والي ايک اور دوا کو غير معياري قرار دے ديا. پنجاب انسٹي ٹيوٹ آف کارڈيا لوجي کي طرف سے لندن کي ليبارٹري ميں ٹيسٹ کيلئے بھيجي گئي دوا آئسو ٹيب کي رپورٹ موصول ہوگئي ہے. يہ دوا دل ميں خون کي گردش بڑھانے کيلئے استعمال کي جاتي ہے. آئسو ٹيب ميں انسداد مليريا کي دوا پيري ميتھا مائن PYRIMETHAMINE کي بہت زيادہ مقدار ميں آميزش پائي گئي

NADEEM MALIK

‎-NATO report alleges Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services

-Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption

Pakistan ‘backs Afghan Taliban’
www.bbc.co.uk‎-NATO report alleges Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services -Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption

NADEEM MALIK

Missing Pakistanis: After the Supreme Court Orders Two Missing Brothers Found in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit of the Lady Reading Hospital

Relatives allowed to see ‘missing’ brothers
www.dawn.comPESHAWAR, Jan 31: Five family members of two missing men, Abdul Basit and Syed Abdul Majid, were allowed to visit the plastic and reconstructive surgery unit of the Lady Reading Hospital and meet them for a few minutes

NADEEM MALIK

Leading lights in American Politics, Presidential candidates, have released their tax and asset details and Americans voters are asking questions from them about legality of sources of income and welath accumulation patterns. Do we know how much our President, Prime Minister or leading politicians pay taxes and what is their net worth?

NADEEM MALIK

Mitt Romney won the Florida primary, a victory expected to cement his status as the Republican front-runner. Voters picked Romney over former House speaker Newt Gingrich as the best positioned to take on President Obama in November.

NADEEM MALIK

PPP to support changes proposed by PML (N) in the 20th Constitutional Amendment: Qamar Zaman Kaira
Amendment to regularize 28 senators, MNAs, MPAs elected after 18th amendment as a one-time special case- Law to be amended for regularization of women reserved seats- Ishaq Dar
PPP Must also negotiate appoitment of Chief Election Commissioner and Caretaker setup for the next elections as agreed in the 18th amendment- Ishaq Dar
PPP should transfer control of Sheikh Zaid Hospital to Punjab government to get support of the provincial government for setting up Drug Regulatory Authority- Ishaq Dar
DRA issue should not be linked with Sheikh Zaid Hospital- Kaira

Islamabad tonight – 31st january 2012
www.zemtv.comPPP to support changes proposed by PML (N) in the 20th Constitutional Amendment: Qamar Zaman Kaira Amendment to regularize 28 senators, MNAs, MPAs elected after 18th amendment as a one-time special case- Law to be amended for regularization of women reserved seats- Ishaq Dar PPP Must also negotiate …

NADEEM MALIK

ہم فئیر اینڈ فری الیکشنز چاہتے ہیں تا کہ کوئی انگلی نہ اٹھے۔ بہتری کی خاطر آئین اور قانون میں کسی بھی ترمیم کے لئیے تیار ہیں۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
بیسویں ترمیم کے لئیے چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری اور عبوری حکومت کی تشکیل پر مزید مشاورت کی ضرورت ہے۔ اسحق ڈار
چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے لئیے پارلیمانی کمیٹی بن چکی ہے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
پارلیمانی کمیٹی کو چیف الیکشن کمشنر کےلئیےتین نام دئیے جایں گے جن میں سے ایک… پر اتفاق کیا جائے گا۔قمر زمان کائرہ
چیف الیکشن کمنشنر کے لئیے ایک ہی نام ایسا آنا چاہئیے کہ جس پر کسی کو کوئی اعتراض نہ ہو۔ اسحق ڈار
عبوری حکومت کے قیام کے معاملہ کا چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے ساتھ کوئی تعلق نہیں ہے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
شیخ زید ہسپتال پنجاب کو نہ دئیے جانے کی وجہ سے ڈرگ ریگولیشن اتھارٹی نہیں بن پا رہی۔ اسحق ڈار
شیخ زید ہسپتال مل جائے گا پنجاب ڈرگ ریگولیشن اتھارٹی بننے دے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
ایم کیو ایم غیر جانبدار چیف الیکشن کمشنر کی تقرری کی حمایت کرتی ہے۔ حیدر عباس رضویSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 31st January 2012
awaztoday.comہم فئیر اینڈ فری الیکشنز چاہتے ہیں تا کہ کوئی انگلی نہ اٹھے۔ بہتری کی خاطر آئین اور قانون میں کسی بھی ترمیم کے لئیے تیار ہیں۔ قمر زمان کائرہ بیسویں ترمیم کے لئیے چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری اور عبوری حکومت کی تشکیل پر مزید مشاورت کی ضرورت ہے۔ اسحق ڈار چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے لئیے پارلیمانی کمیٹی بن…

NADEEM MALIK

Subscribe @ http://www.facebook.com/nadeemmalik

Nadeem Malik

NADEEM MALIK

توہین عدالت کیس میں وزیراعظم سید یوسف رضا گیلانی کے وکیل اعتزاز احسن نے کہا ہے کہ سپریم کورٹ اگر واضح ہدایت دے تو سوئس حکام کو خط لکھ دیا جائے گا، توہین عدالت کیس کے حوالے سے عدالت میں کچھ دستاویزات جمع کرائی ہیں جن کے بارے میں وہ کچھ نہیں بتا سکتے۔

NADEEM MALIK Punjab Institute of Cardiology: 122 dead so far. No responsibility fixed yet. NADEEM MALIK YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/NadeemMalikLive Nadeem Malik : ندیم ملک www.youtube.comISLAMABAD TONIGHT: The programme gives independent news analysis of the key events shaping future of Pakistan. A fast paced, well rounded programme covers almost every aspect, which should be a core element of a current affairs programme. Discussion with the most influential personalities in the fed… NADEEM MALIK عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آج تک تحقیقات نہیں ہوئیں۔ جو بھی آئین توڑے عوام کو اس کے خلاف سڑکوں پر آ جانا چاہئیے۔ سٹیٹ کا کام ہے… کہ لوگوں کو عزت دے اور ان کا تحفظ کرے۔محمود اچکزئی وزیراعظم کی کوئی کریڈیبلٹی نہیں ہے ان کی کسی بات کا اعتبار نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں حکومت کے پنڈی والوں سے بھی معاملات طے ہو چکے ہیں۔ تمام ادارے زاتی مفاد کی خاطر امریکی مفاد کا تحفظ کر رہے ہیں۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ ن دونوں الیکشن پر متفق ہیں۔ محمود اچکزئیSee MoreIslamabad Tonight – 30th January 2012 www.awaztoday.com عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی… NADEEM MALIK امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني ابوظہبي روانہ ہوگئے. حسين حقاني کووزيراعظم ہاؤس سے اسلام آبادپوليس کي حفاظت ميں ايئرپورٹ پہنچايا گيا. امريکا نے کہا ہے کہ پاکستان کي سپريم کورٹ کي جانب سے سابق سفير حسين حقاني پر سفري پابندياں ختم ہونے کي خوشي ہے.امريکي محکمہ خارجہ کي ترجمان وکٹوريا نولينڈ نے بريفنگ ديتے ہوئے کہا کہ امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني اب آزاد ہيں اور جہاں چاہيں جاسکتے ہيں.10,775 People Reached · 199 People Talking About This

NADEEM MALIK

US President Barack Obama has confirmed that the US drones have struck Taliban and Al Qaeda targets within Pakistan – operations that until now had not been officially acknowledged.
A lot of these strikes have been in the FATA – Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas. This is a targeted focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists, who are trying to go in and harm Americans, hit American facilities, American bases, and so on. Barack Obama

7,646 People Reached · 79 People Talking About This

NADEEM MALIK

عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔
ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آج تک تحقیقات نہیں ہوئیں۔ جو بھی آئین توڑے عوام کو اس کے خلاف سڑکوں پر آ جانا چاہئیے۔ سٹیٹ کا کام ہے …کہ لوگوں کو عزت دے اور ان کا تحفظ کرے۔محمود اچکزئی
وزیراعظم کی کوئی کریڈیبلٹی نہیں ہے ان کی کسی بات کا اعتبار نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ خواجہ آصف
میرے خیال میں حکومت کے پنڈی والوں سے بھی معاملات طے ہو چکے ہیں۔ تمام ادارے زاتی مفاد کی خاطر امریکی مفاد کا تحفظ کر رہے ہیں۔ خواجہ آصف
میرے خیال میں پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ ن دونوں الیکشن پر متفق ہیں۔ محمود اچکزئیSee More

Islamabad tonight – Mehmood Khan Achakzai – 30th january 2012
www.zemtv.comعوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آ…

NADEEM MALIK Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N)Video Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik 30th January 2011 – Mehmood Khan Achakzai www.friendskorner.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N) NADEEM MALIK TWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik Twitter twitter.comTWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Tuesday acknowledged “tactical advantages” to US drone strikes on the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, but appeared to shrug off the unexpected confirmation by Washington of attacks on its soil. The remarks from Pakistan’s foreign ministry came as President Barack Obama confirmed for the first time that drone aircraft had targeted militants in Pakistan’s [...]

By Zaheerul Hassan U.S. President Barack Obama stated in Capitol at the annual address to Congress that about 23 thousand U.S. troops would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by the end of the summer of 2012, U.S. He said that ten thousand of our soldiers have already returned home. Another 23 000 troops will leave Afghanistan [...]

Related posts:

1. An Ending of Peeping Inside Al Qaeda or …?
2. From PNS Mehran To Upper Dir
3. U.S. Dubious Character in GWOT – OBL Killing
4. The Engineers Of Terrorism in Pakistan
5. Repercussions of Osama Bin Laden Killing

The next Republican Party candidate to challenge Barack Obama in the United States 2012 presidential elections became a little clearer in January, after Mitt Romney claimed a second victory by winning the New Hampshire primary and became a clear front-runner for the role. Romney had already won the Iowa caucuses in early January with 25 percent of the vote, but took New Hampshire by an impressive 39 percent, making him a clear favourite to challenge Obama in the November presidential elections.

Primaries and caucuses are party elections held in every US state, and the winner won’t be decided until August. However, if Romney wins, his attitude towards Pakistan may be cause for alarm, as he has a complete lack of experience on foreign affairs, besides a few months spent living in Europe and a few holidays and international cruises abroad.

Romney’s Views on Pakistan

With Barack Obama facing stiff criticism over the state of the United States’ economy, the winner of the Republican Party election could well become the next President of the United States. As the US President is the most powerful figure in world politics, Romney’s views of foreign affairs could well have a huge impact on Pakistan and future US activities in the region.

In a series of interviews on foreign policy, Romney has described Pakistan as like “dealing with a child,” a borderline “failed state,” and full of “radicals and extremists.” When asked how he would approach the relationship between the United States and Pakistan, Romney said:

“It’s more like dealing with an adolescent – I don’t mean to compare any nation to an adolescent, but just the fact that there’s no easy answer for how you bring a child to adolescence.” He added: “I don’t want to suggest that a country is like a child, but in the way that when you deal with another person we think of all these dimensions on which we try to influence them.”

He also suggested that he would counter those organisations within Pakistan that refused to cooperate with the United States. He said: “The right way to deal with- Pakistan is to recognize that Pakistan is not a country like other countries, with a strong political centre that you can go to and say, ‘Gee, can we come here? Will you take care of this problem?’ This is, instead, a nation, which is close to being a failed state. I hope it doesn’t reach that point, but it’s a very fragile nation … so we have to work with our friends in that country to get them to do some of the things we can’t do ourselves.”

He also said that he would continue to use drones in Pakistan, despite the tensions use of such military hardware causes. He said: “We have agreement with the people that we need to have agreement with to be able to use drones to strike at the people that represent a threat.”

Who is Mitt Romney

Romney is the son of the former Governor of Michigan, George Romney. He is a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints, and spent time in a Mormon Missionary in France during his youth. He first entered politics in 1994 as the Republican candidate for the 1994 Senate election in Massachusetts, but lost. He was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, but stepped down in 2006 after seeing through a series of austere spending cuts to eliminate the state’s $3 billion deficit. And while this economic experience may prove favourable with the American electorate, most of whom are tired of the failing economy, his views on Pakistan, could lead to increased destabilisation in the area, and result in further cooling between the two countries.

However, despite being frontrunner, Romney is far from being crowned the next president. First, he has to win the other caucuses and primaries, where he may face increased competition from the other Republican hopefuls: Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Perry. Texas Congressman Ron Paul, in particular, may prove a tough rival, and whoever wins the Republican Party’s nomination, still has to beat the more liberal Barack Obama, who, while flagging in the opinion polls, has nearly a year to win back the favour of the American people.

 

As Reported by Reuters

The death of a senior Al-Qaeda leader in a US drone strike in Pakistan’s tribal badlands, the first strike in almost two months, signaled that the US-Pakistan intelligence partnership is still in operation despite political tensions. The Jan 10 strike-and its follow-up two days later- were joint operations, a Pakistani security source based in the tribal areas told Reuters. They made use of Pakistani “spotters” on the ground and demonstrated a level of coordination that both sides have sought to downplay since tensions erupted in January 2011 with the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor in Lahore.

“Our working relationship is a bit different from our political relationship,” the source told Reuters, requesting anonymity. “It’s more productive.” US and Pakistani sources told Reuters that the target of the Jan 10 attack was Aslam Awan, a Pakistani national from Abbottabad, the town where Osama bin Laden was killed last May by a US commando team.

They said he was targeted in a strike by a US-operated drone directed at what news reports said was a compound near the town of Miranshah in the border province of North Waziristan. That strike broke an undeclared eight-week hiatus in attacks by the armed, unmanned drones that patrol the tribal areas and are a key weapon in US President Barack Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy.

The sources described Awan, also known by the nom-de-guerre Abdullah Khorasani, as a significant figure in the remaining core leadership of al Qaeda, which US officials say has been sharply reduced by the drone campaign. Most of the drone attacks are conducted as part of a clandestine CIA operation.

The Pakistani source, who helped target Awan, could not confirm that he was killed, but the US official said he was. European officials said Awan had spent time in London and had ties to British extremists before returning to Pakistan. The source, who says he runs a network of spotters primarily in North and South Waziristan, described for the first time how US-Pakistani cooperation on strikes works, with his Pakistani agents keeping close tabs on suspected militants and building a pattern of their movements and associations. “We run a network of human intelligence sources,” he said. “Separately, we monitor their cell and satellite phones. “Thirdly, we run joint monitoring operations with our US and UK friends,” he added, noting that cooperation with British intelligence was also extensive. Pakistani and US intelligence officers, using their own sources, hash out a joint “priority of targets lists” in regular face-to-face meetings, he said. “Al-Qaeda is our top priority,” he said. He declined to say where the meetings take place. Once a target is identified and “marked,” his network coordinates with drone operators on the US side. He said the United States bases drones outside Kabul, likely at Bagram airfield about 25 miles (40 km) north of the capital. From spotting to firing a missile “hardly takes about two to three hours”, he said.

It was impossible to verify the source’s claims and American experts, who decline to discuss the drone program, say the Pakistanis’ cooperation has been less helpful in the past. US officials have complained that when information on drone strikes was shared with the Pakistanis beforehand, the targets were often tipped off, allowing them to escape. Drone strikes have been a sore point with the public and Pakistani politicians, who describe them as violations of sovereignty that produce unacceptable civilian casualties. The last strike before January had been on Nov 16, 10 days before 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in what NATO says was an inadvertent cross-border attack on a Pakistani border post. That incident sent US-Pakistan relations into the deepest crisis since Islamabad joined the US-led war on militancy following the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. On Thursday, Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar said ties were “on hold” while Pakistan completes a review of the alliance.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, United States, US Army, US-Pakistan Relations Tagged: Afghanistan, al-Qaida, Aslam Awan, Drone Attacks, Hina Rabbani Khar, NATO, Pakistan, Pakistani Spotters, Taliban, US-Pakistan Intelligence Partnership

For those who have not yet read Andrew Sullivan’s Newsweek piece on Obama, published this past week, take note: it should be required reading for all U.S. voters as the country continues its journey toward the 2012 presidential election. Self-identified as a conservative-minded independent, Sullivan takes on the liberal, conservative, and moderate critiques of Obama’s term in office with dexterity — slashing some of the most pervasive arguments from both parties and all sides as fallacious, overblown, and often even factually or internally inconsistent — and maintains that the President’s character, record, and promise remain “grossly underappreciated.” But his main point is this: Obama has been pragmatic from the start, never focused on making short-term gains for which he can immediately and loudly take credit, but instead taking a long view strategy that entails slow, deliberate, unprovocative persistence and makes the changes he achieves more durable.

The point of Sullivan’s piece is not to deify Barack Obama. It is to ground an assessment of the President’s work in reality, which he does quite well. And it can remind Cuba watchers (myself included) of the character and nature of the man we’re considering when we discuss Cuba policy and Executive capabilities and actions.

First, it can help us to remember and recognize the sheer number of challenges the President faced when he took office. The economy was swirling lower into recession, with employment tumbling and our financial system threatening to pull the country into a true depression without swift and decisive action by the Executive and Congress. The U.S. global image was tarnished by our record on torture and by our bloated military presence and arrogant rhetoric. Yet still, not long into his time in office and even as he focused largely on addressing these and other pressing issues, President Obama fulfilled the only concrete campaign promise he made with respect to Cuba policy: he granted Americans unrestricted rights to send money to and visit family in Cuba. Even this small step was met with criticism, and attempts have been made in Congress to roll this policy back. But Obama has held his ground — quietly but firmly — threatening executive veto in order to make sure that his policy remains.

Second, we can recall the number of actors involved in affecting policy, which include, of course, not only the President and his administration but also the legislative branch and nongovernmental actors like lobbying groups, Cuban-American constituencies, think tanks, and others. The Executive seldom acts alone to change policy except, as we have seen, in situations deemed (correctly or not) particularly urgent and crucial to national security. Whatever the merits of changing U.S. policy toward Cuba, it simply does not fall into this category. And he does not yet have Congressional consensus on Cuba.

Third, we are reminded that Obama was not elected as a liberal crusader, but as a pragmatic, unifying reformist. Cuba policy may be ripe for change, but should the President unilaterally decree a set of changes called for by Cuba watchers, think tanks and other nongovernmental actors, he would have to willfully ignore a Congress that has been determined to avoid such changes. This is not his style. Ultimately, the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” came from the President working with top military and defense leaders, and they (including Admiral Mike Mullen) came forward and made the case for doing away with the policy. Had Obama acted unilaterally, the repeal would no doubt have taken more heat than it did, would have met with more resistance, and might not have been durable in the long run. We can expect to see the same with further change to U.S. policy toward Cuba, or any changes put in place will be at risk of immediate opposition, counter-attack, and retaliation or repeal. Remember: pragmatic, unifying reformist, not crusader.

And finally, we are reminded that for Washington, Cuba has always been a long game. The basic tenets of our current policy toward the island have been around for half a century without yielding any measurable “success”. Any movement in broad perception, understanding and opinions has been glacial, but we are, however slowly, moving as a population toward a different consensus than that under which current policy was designed. And as more Americans learn about and visit Cuba under the current people-to-people travel regulations, the consensus can be expected to grow.

All of this does not have to make us more patient about seeing additional changes in long-standing U.S. policy toward Cuba. But it could help us see the long view. And perhaps the President is on track.

It is the world’s largest Muslim country but remains for the most part secular. It is home to the eighteenth largest economy on the globe but more than sixteen percent of the population lives on less than $2 per day. Indonesia has long been considered the linchpin for Southeast Asia and, indeed, serves as a fascinating case study for which myriad domestic phenomena can be explored:  macroeconomic policy, the role of religion, and the nexus between political control and the military. In the seventh episode of the 2012 Great Decision series, produced by the Foreign Policy Association, Indonesia’s role in the region and the world, as well as its relationship with the United States, is examined in such frameworks. FPA readers can purchase a copy of the eight episode DVD and briefing book at the Great Decisions TV webpage.

The two panelists – Walter Lohman, the Director of The Heritage Foundation’s Asian Studies Center, and Sadanand Dhume, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal – start with an historical overview beginning in the Cold War era to properly contextualize Indonesia’s modern trajectory.

Fearful of a communist wave which threatened to sweep Southeast Asia into Moscow’s orbit, U.S. policymakers in the Richard Nixon administration were quick to align themselves with Suharto, a zealous anti-communist Major General who had helped to overthrow the country’s previous military ruler in 1967. As Lohman posits, Washington’s support for Suharto was the lesser of two evils.

Despite a lack of political and civil rights under Suharto, Dhume argues that the dictator showed a knack for organization and, as a result, Indonesia underwent a period of extraordinary economic growth (abetted by millions of dollars in aid from Washington) while also enjoying some measure of political stability. Dhume is quite cavalier, however, in his dismissal of Suharto’s human rights record, saying only that there were “abuses of course,” before moving on to another point.

After the overthrow of Sukarno, the country’s previous autocrat, Suharto went on a rampage against his political opponents, especially Communists, which resulted in a bloodbath that rivaled Stalin’s endeavors in terms of sheer brutality. In December 1975, Indonesia invaded and occupied East Timor, causing untold misery and close to 100,000 deaths over the course of the following quarter century. Moreover, the Suharto regime’s behavior in West Papua has been called genocide by the Yale Law School. Yes, there were abuses, of course.

Suharto’s downfall came against a backdrop of the Asian financial crisis in 1997. Indonesia’s population could tolerate Suharto’s corruption and nepotism as long as the economy continued to hum along. However, the financial collapse which hit the country was not only an economic calamity but also served as a social and political awakening as well.

The elections held in 1999 were, by all accounts, free and fair. Such a reality was met with surprise by most observers who have noted the chaotic nature of quick democratic transitions. One need only look to Egypt today to find an appropriate juxtaposition. With a litany of actors – opposition figures, military personnel, and remnants from the old regime — all clamoring for a voice at the table, one should expect a rocky road. In Indonesia, there were a fair share of bumps in that road, especially between 1998 and 2002, but the end product can be held up as a model to follow for other countries undergoing the trials and tribulations of democratization.

Indonesia’s transition from autocratic rule to democracy is almost as unique as the country itself. Consisting of more than 17,000 islands, the Great Decisions panel brings up the question as to how Indonesia has maintained its territorial integrity through the years. With the exceptions of East Timor, which gained independence in 2002, and the continued struggle by separatists in West Papua, Indonesia has retained sovereignty over its whole.

Part of that was due to the iron fisted rule of Suharto, but another part is due to the nation’s religious freedom. While 88 percent of the country is Muslim, there are major areas that are home to religious minorities. Bali, for example, is largely Hindu, while Sumatra is Christian. These groups have never been persecuted for their beliefs and that has gone a long way preventing the type of schisms that have popped up in other areas of the world which have divaricating degrees of religious tension. A good contemporary example in the news lately is Nigeria, where sectarian fighting in the country’s north threatens to tear the nation apart.

In terms of democratization and minority rights, Dhume suggests that Indonesia can be an example for countries involved in the Arab Spring. This is so not just because of the mutual connection to Islam, but because Indonesia has proven that such transitions can be successfully implemented.

The United States, for its part, has maintained a very close partnership with Jakarta, even after he Suharto years. The two countries participate in various military exercises together, and have cooperated fully in the apprehension of several well-known members of Jemaah Islamiyah, a militant Islamic organization operating in Southeast Asia.  Washington values its relationship with countries like Indonesia because of the non-political role of Islam and because of its ability, in the 21^stcentury at least, to curtail the influence of the military in the political process.

President Barack Obama has a personal connection to Indonesia, having spent four years of his childhood living there. He has also made two state trips to the country as President in only his first term. Ties between the two countries appear to be very strong at the moment – a reality which Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has boasted of on numerous occasions – and with Indonesia’s GDP having increased sevenfold just over the last fifteen years, Jakarta is poised to be a regional powerbroker and a significant international player in the years to come.

By Pramit Pal Chaudhri for The Hindustan Times

In Pakistan’s current crisis, why is its military is so reluctant to consider simply seizing power? One reason is that General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani cannot count on the US looking the other way. At a minimum, Washington would have to slap sanctions on an economically faltering country. At a maximum, it would be the last straw in a bilateral relationship at its lowest ebb since it was first woven in the 1950s.

Pakistan’s establishment claims it has been used and abused by the US, the most serious violation being that country’s stealth attack on Abbottabad that led to Osama bin Laden’s death. There has been the Raymond Davies affair, the endless drone attacks and the increasingly public accusation of double-dealing by senior US officials – the most notable being Admiral Mike Mullen’s linking of the Inter-Services Intelligence with terrorist groups.

There is some satisfaction for India in all this. It has been persistently claiming the existence of a military-terrorist nexus. Many in Washington agree. After Abbottabad, there is no one in Washington who doesn’t. The US-Pakistan relationship, says Daniel Twining of the German Marshall Fund, “was really at a historic high for the past decade but is diminishing.” But it might not matter as much to the US if relations fall apart, he says.

Other events are undermining the basis of the US-Pakistani bond. Islamabad had expected the US to totally retreat from Afghanistan, leaving Pakistan’s Taliban allies in charge. Instead, the US will leave a substantial force behind along with many drone bases. The US is talking with the Taliban, but only desultorily with groups that Islamabad patronises.

With the US Congress also pulling the plug on aid to Pakistan, what is left? The answer is nukes. “If Pakistan didn’t have nuclear weapons, with Al Qaeda almost gone, no one would care a fig about that country,” said one ex-US ambassador to the region. As they realise this, Islamabad is getting more paranoid about the security of its “strategic assets.” The more unstable they look, the more willing the US will be to try and do something risky to salvage Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

US officials are talking about a “new normal” in their Pakistan relations. This would cut ties to the bare bones: counterterrorism cooperation, limited military transit requirements, Afghan talks, narcotics and some humanitarian assistance. “We’ll have to work with the Pakistan military on a limited basis while negotiations with the Taliban proceed,” says John Schlosser, a former state department South Asia hand.

There seems to be no real understanding among Pakistanis that their leverage is dwindling or how much Abbottabad vapourised their credibility in the US. A parliamentary committee report on how to change the US relationship bizarrely demanded, for example, a civilian nuclear agreement.

It could get worse. “The relationship will fall further if the US finds [Al Qaeda chief] Zawahiri in Pakistan. Or there are terror strikes on India or the US,” says Bruce Riedel, former AfPak advisor to Barack Obama.

The worst thing is that Washington is decoupling just at a time when Pakistan, economically and otherwise, can least afford to lose their most generous international partner.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Democracy, India, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistanis, President Obama, Taliban, United States, US Army, US-Pakistan Relations Tagged: Afghanistan, Asif Ali Zardari, Husain Haqqani, India, Mansoor Ijaz, Memogate, Osama Bin Laden, Pakistan, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, President Obama, Taliban, United States, US Army, US Pakistan Relations

By David Horsey for The Los Angeles Times

Newt Gingrich is surging and the guy ahead of him, Mitt Romney, as well the guy behind him, Rick Santorum, are rattled.

Only days ago, Romney was sitting on a comfortable lead in South Carolina’s Republican primary race. Santorum was anticipating a positive bump in his numbers, thanks to the endorsement he received from top Christian evangelical leaders and the good chance that a final, official count of votes in the Iowa caucuses would show he actually beat Romney in that state.

Instead, with Saturday’s vote just two days away, the portly, aloof, intellectually promiscuous and thrice-married ex-speaker of the House seems to be winning the minds, if not the hearts, of more and more staunch conservatives in the Palmetto State.

In fact, Gingrich was even getting a bit of love, as well as respect, from a crowd of several hundred jammed into the banquet hall of Bobby’s Bar-BQ Buffet in Warrenville on Wednesday. Every seat was filled; those without seats stood along the walls and those that couldn’t get inside craned their necks to get a peek through the front door.

Gingrich spoke in front of a Model T Ford – a car only a little more ancient than a great many members of the audience. Clever lines that fell flat when Gingrich delivered them at the tea party convention Tuesday got big laughs with this much-less-grim crowd — like his somewhat-stale knee-slapper about letting Barack Obama use a teleprompter when the two debate.

They loved the parts of his stump speech that are well worn – our rights come from God and cannot be taken away by government – and a new attack on Obama spun off the day’s news – the president’s refusal to approve the Keystone oil pipeline is stupidly driving Canada into the arms of China. And they loved Callista, Newt’s exquisitely coiffed wife.

One audience “question” was this: “I think your wife would make a beautiful first lady, don’t you?”  In the receiving line after the event, a Callista fan said, “I’m anxious to see how you do Christmas in the White House.” There seemed to be a lot of warmth for the once-controversial Callista and for her candidate husband, though he is not all that good at exhibiting warmth himself.

In campaign mode, Gingrich is the polar opposite of Mitt Romney. Reportedly a bit shy, Romney, nevertheless, dives in, shakes every hand, signs every autograph, banters with everyone and smiles, smiles, smiles. It may be rehearsed and straight from some “How to Succeed in Politics” primer, but he’s as good at it as any TV game show host.

Mitt’s even good with babies. At a rally on the outskirts of Columbia on Wednesday night, he held a baby for the cameras and then pretended to walk off with her, delighting the crowd – even the child’s mother. And the baby never cried.

In contrast, Gingrich seems more like the queen of England. On Monday afternoon, at the end of his remarks at Rioz Brazilian Steakhouse in Myrtle Beach, Gingrich remained on the speaker’s platform while the crowd lined up like kids waiting to see a department store Santa. They were shuffled through rapidly; the candidate barely made eye contact, offered the tiniest of smiles and made the briefest request for support.

Is he merely reserved? Awkward? Overly formal? Or simply a man with a busy mind and a lot to get done; sort of like a college professor who resents wasting attention on the undergrads who mob him after class.

Of course, Gingrich actually is a former college professor, and his campaign speech is a lively academic ramble. He interprets history, dives into interesting new economic theories, wickedly picks apart the fallacious ideas of competing practitioners of the political arts and uses terminology that tells you he’s oh-so-much smarter than your typical governor of Texas or Massachusetts.

Gingrich drops names of the intellectual and political elite he has known and boldly lays claim to a major share of the legacy of two presidents, Reagan and Clinton. He brags that his candidacy is so historically significant and so utterly different from any other that it is nearly incomprehensible to the dullards in the media. In front of the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, after presenting a litany of intractable problems faced by the nation, he said of himself, “If you have a leader who knows what he is doing, we can turn this around in a year.”

Just one year? The guy seems so full of himself that it is surprising he has caught on with so many voters. He is not the cliche candidate Americans are supposed to prefer – somebody you’d want to have a beer with because he’s just like you. Yet, here he is, still very much in the race and on the verge of messing up smiling Mitt Romney’s big-money campaign.

Filed under: Democracy, Freedoms, President Obama, United States Tagged: American Elections, American politics, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Democrats, GOP, Mitt Romney, Myrtle Beach, Newt Gingrich, Nikki Haley, Republican Party, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Ronald Reagan, South Carolina, South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, Tea Party

On New Year’s Eve, President Barack Obama signed into law the post-9/11 practice of detaining terrorist suspects indefinitely without charge. Shock and awe waves rippled through the blogosphere in response to the move, not least because Obama had threatened to veto an earlier version of the bill. Other grumbles included its lack of temporal or geographic limitations, which signaled to some the potential for military detention of anyone, anywhere, anytime.

But despite congressional approval of the well-worn practice, most rights wonks don’t expect any significant change in the frequency or type of indefinite detentions going forward. They do, however, maintain that the practice breaches international humanitarian law and undermines counterterrorism efforts.

One such expert, Martin Sheinin, professor of international law and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism from 2005 to 2011, spoke with me about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and its potential to derail US counterterrorism efforts.

The War on Law

To put the controversy in context, Mr. Sheinin explained why Washington supports indefinite detention:

“The NDAA builds upon the well-established rule in international humanitarian law (law of armed conflict) that during an international armed conflict combatants, i.e. soldiers of one of the states involved in the war, can be detained as prisoners of war until the end of hostilities. When there is an international armed conflict and when someone is a combatant, then such detention does not amount to arbitrary detention that would violate international human rights law.”

When the “global war on terror” was waged following 9/11, he said, the possibility of indefinite detention was extended to terrorism, “far beyond genuine situations of international or even non-international armed conflict. And it extends indefinite detention to persons who are not combatants. For instance, persons who are held to have provided substantial support to terrorism would be subject to indefinite detention.”

Against that background, Mr. Sheinan suggested several ways in which violating human rights in the course of countering terrorism can “backfire.” Rights violations can “add to causes of terrorism,” he said, “both by perpetuating ‘root causes’ that involve the alienation of communities and by providing ‘triggering causes’ through which bitter individuals make the morally inexcusable decision to turn to methods of terrorism.”

Further, “these kinds of legal provisions are always open for bad faith copying by repressive governments that will use them for their own political purposes.” Though such copying was found to be less common than expected, “repressive governments may do so for their own political purposes.”

“It is hard to see any practical advantage gained through the NDAA. It is just another form of what I call symbolic legislation, enacted because the legislators want to be seen as being ‘tough’ or as ‘doing something.’ The law is written as just affirming existing powers and practices and hence not providing any meaningful new tools in the combat of terrorism,” he concluded.

With Washington simultaneously fostering democratic transitions across the Middle East and North Africa and gambling on military exits from Iraq and Afghanistan, such “backfires” may well hamper development of the rule of law and respect for human rights when they are needed most.

I’ve written a good number of times here about how I admire what the Obama Administration has achieved in the teeth of vigorous – some might say fanatical – opposition from Republicans on the Hill and elsewhere, as well as from Democrats too, mostly those beholden to the fossil fuel special interests.  (Here are some observations along the way:   Obama’s Team, The White House Keeps Driving to the Hoop, Money Where Your Mouth Is Department, Obama and Copenhagen, Cars and Greenhouse Gases, and Taking the Bull by the Horns.)  As sincerely as I respect Joe Romm, I did not and do not subscribe to his contention that Barack Obama will have a failed presidency without having effected comprehensive climate and energy legislation.  (See comment #83.)

Barack Obama has taken at least one well-deserved hit from the environmental community in the past year:  when he quashed EPA’s tightening of the ozone standard.  I don’t have much use for John Broder at the NY Times – I think he takes every opportunity to take a hatchet to Obama and, for that matter, to environmental concerns – but he did tell a compelling story here on how the ozone rule failed for political reasons, cloaked as economic concerns.  (Never mind that a Supreme Court ruling expressly forbids the consideration of economic costs in determining National Ambient Air Quality Standards as the White House maintained in its ruling.  Antonin Scalia, for pity’s sake, wrote the opinion that included this conclusion:  “The EPA may not consider implementation costs in setting primary and secondary NAAQS under §109(b) of the CAA.”)

But the architect of that odd and unwelcome decision by the White House, Bill Daley, has resigned “to spend more time with his family.”  That is, of course, the tried and true euphemism for being forced out.  Politico puts it this way:   Bill Daley resignation: Greens say ‘good riddance’.  So that’s a good signal.

Another plus is that the President has banned uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.  As PlanetArk reports “The Pew group, the League of Conservation Voters, the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, the Center for American Progress and other environmental and progressive groups applauded the decision as protecting the Colorado River watershed, which supplies drinking water for 25 million people.”  The right-wing Institute for Energy Research, funded by Koch Industries and ExxonMobil, among others, was outraged:  “This latest power-grab by federal regulators is another example of the Obama administration’s willingness to use ideologically driven energy policies as a means to control the U.S. economy.”  Oh dear!

I think you can so often gauge the quality of your decisions by who dislikes them.  This is true as well in the now-epic struggle over the Keystone XL project.  In the wake of the President’s decision in November to postpone a decision until 2013, the Republicans in the Congress held a gun to the nation’s head in pushing a rider to the payroll tax deal in December:  The President has until February 21^st to say yes or no to the pipeline.  The upshot, according to the White House?  “The House bill simply shortens the review process in a way that virtually guarantees that the pipeline will NOT be approved.”

Well, “The Hill” reports that business groups that environmentalists (like me) love to hate are lining up to try to intimidate the White House:  Business groups, Republicans launch onslaught on president over Keystone.  The ever-gracious Jack Gerard, head of the American Petroleum Institute, said Obama had to approve the pipeline or deal with “huge political consequences.”  There’s plenty of political cover available to the President, however, from venerable groups like the National Wildlife Federation:  “In our view, the national Chamber of Commerce’s support for the Keystone pipeline scam demonstrates once again that the Chamber is a pay-to-play operation that has been taken over by big oil companies.”  The Guardian goes farther in its reporting:  Oil lobby’s financial pressure on Obama over Keystone XL pipeline revealed.

Meanwhile, up in Canada, the Guardian also reports, a battle over another tar sands pipeline “turns ugly.”  The Canadian natural resources minister, Joe Oliver, has gone a bit bonkers it seems.  He “…let loose an extraordinary rant against opponents of a controversial project to pump tar sands crude to Pacific Coast ports on Monday, accusing campaigners of colluding with foreign ‘radicals’ and ‘jet-setting celebrities’ to hijack the government.”  Shades of Spiro Agnew.   What the worthy minister doesn’t wish to acknowledge is that there’s a broad-based, intense and growing opposition within Canada to the exploitation of the Alberta tar sands.  The First Nations, for example, are opposed.  See this from PlanetArk.

Joe Oliver accuses opponents of the Pacific pipeline and of the tar sands of  trying “…to undermine Canada’s national economic interest.”  How dare he make such an accusation is my reaction.  It is precisely the oil industry and their myrmidons in Ottawa that are undermining Canada’s national economic interest.  I wrote here in April of 2011 about an important series at The Vancouver Observer detailing how as “…Canadians dig deep to ease their carbon footprint, Alberta’s oil-sands pollution wipes out their sacrifice.”  Economic well being depends on diversity and sustainability, Mr. Oliver.  I guess you didn’t get the memo.

I believe the present administration in the White House did get it.           

By Nida Khan for The Huffington Post

While many Muslims (and people outside the faith for that matter) were heavily embedded in a debate over the controversy surrounding hardware store Lowe’s and its recent decision to remove ads from TLC’s reality show All American Muslim, a more detrimental attack against their future was all but finalized. Reversing an earlier decision to veto provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2012, President Obama made the disturbing announcement that he would sign this legislation into law and thereby solidify the ability of the military and other factions to indefinitely detain anyone they deem an enemy of the state. And on New Year’s Eve, the President unfortunately made good on this promise with the stroke of his pen. At a time when the United States is grossly engaged in both active combat and covert drone campaigns in a multitude of Muslim nations, and when loosely defined terms like ‘terrorist’ can be arbitrarily thrown about, Muslims specifically — and all of society generally — shouldn’t take this disturbing development lightly.

In post-9/11 America, many have sadly grown accustomed and tolerant to routine practices of racial profiling, bias and even attacks against Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim. But in addition to blatant violence, workplace discrimination and subliminal acts of racism, Muslims have also become aware of another nuance that other Americans may not even realize exists — hesitation to give to charity. Because of fear that any charitable Muslim organization or mosque could suddenly be called out for links to a lone extremist faction (whether it’s justified or not), many pulled their money and cut back on donations to the extent that long-established charities found it virtually impossible to survive. Usually without any valid reason, many stopped supporting Muslim aide groups for the simple notion that anyone, anywhere could at any moment single out that organization and in turn put all those who gave money out of goodwill at risk for associating with them. The victims in all this? The impoverished and destitute in many “third world” countries.

At the same time, tragically, other active Muslims who were entrenched in the community or worked in an organizing capacity (much like our president once did for the disenfranchised), ceased their activities over trepidation as to how their efforts towards equality could one day be misconstrued for something nefarious. The climate of society forced many followers of the Islamic faith to alter their involvement on a plethora of levels. Even today, as forces like the NYPD keep Muslims under intrusive surveillance and continued cases of FBI entrapment emerge, many have stopped attending mosques or interacting too much within the community out of sheer apprehension over unwarranted government action. It is an unfortunate reflection of how marginalized groups often times suffer under the radar without a representative voice in government and in the mainstream.

Throughout modern history, we’ve had other instances of outrageous fear mongering, bias and injustice against those whose patriotism we questioned. Though it is rarely covered in classrooms, the internment of hundreds of thousands of Japanese and those of Japanese ancestry during WWII is a perfect example. Literally rounded up and “excluded” from living in the cities and towns they resided in, these “suspicious” individuals were interned in camps because their allegiance to the country “could not be determined.”

In 1950, at the height of the great red scare, Congress passed the Internal Security Act which required the American Communist Party, affiliated organizations and all ‘subversives’ to get fingerprinted and officially register with the Attorney General. This draconian law was so outrageous that then-President Harry Truman even vetoed it (though Congress overruled his veto in the end). The truly tragic and troubling thing about today’s NDAA is that President Obama isn’t even attempting to veto it anymore; he is instead giving it his stamp of approval. Even though the president stated that he has “serious reservations” regarding the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists, and even though he emphasizes that his administration will not indefinitely militarily detain American citizens without trial, what happens after he is no longer in office? Future leaders of the free world, after all, have absolutely no obligation to honor Obama’s signing statement, nor follow in his footsteps.

Yes, our first African American president has changed much of the vitriolic language used when covering the topic of terrorism, and yes he has taken great caution to ensure that Muslims and terror itself are not juxtaposed together. For that, he should be commended. But by finalizing the ability of any president to deem persons — including U.S. citizens (if they so interpret this bill) — an enemy that could then be indefinitely detained without charge or without trial, he sets into motion a frightening precedent. As a former constitutional law professor, President Obama should be inherently aware of the impending ramifications.

During the struggle for civil rights, many journalists, activists and those vocal citizens working alongside Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X and other leaders suddenly found themselves targeted for their activities. Countless advocates became political prisoners and others saw their careers and lives ruined. Now at a time when we already have legislation like the Patriot Act renewed, and warrantless wiretapping is openly put into practice, this defense act not only indoctrinates AUMF (2001 Authorization for use of Military Force) and many activities that were previously in existence, but it also leaves open the possibility of silencing anyone on a level with which we never even imagined.

As American Muslims, we’re happy that some are starting to ease the negative imaging and stereotyping against us, and are instead open to learning more about what the Islamic faith truly stands for. As a routinely alienated group, we’re overly ecstatic when a program like All American Muslim actually portrays us in a light other than that of some extremist radical. But while we should embrace the boycott of Lowe’s for its open bigotry, and praise folks like Russell Simmons for stepping up to the plate to purchase ads for the program, we should put just as much focus into the potential of someone like a Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum taking over the White House and having full reign to detain whomever he pleases. Just remember the Bush-era verbiage of “you’re either with us or against us” and the atmosphere of intolerance that permeated under his presidency, and couple that with the ability of someone with his mentality being able to willfully determine any one of us a “traitor,” lock us up and throw away the key.

If Muslims scaled back their activities in the community and their charitable donations out of paranoia over the unrealistic possibility of being tied to something suspicious, just imagine the fear that will ensue if anyone can be instantly and militarily detained over accusations where the burden of proof won’t even be on the accuser. It is indeed an alarming scenario that can (and in all likelihood will) give new meaning to the term reality — no TV required.

Nida Khan is an independent journalist and producer working in print, radio and TV. As a news correspondent for WRKS 98.7 Kiss FM NY, she has covered everything from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign to protests for the defense of Sean Bell.

Filed under: American Muslims, Democracy, Freedoms, Islam, Muslims, President Obama, United States, US Commission on International Religious Freedom Tagged: All American Muslims, American Muslims, Civil Rights, George W. Bush, Islamophobia, Lowe’s, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr, Muslim Americans, Muslim Charities, National Defense Authorization Act, Newt Gingrich, NYPD, Patriot Act, President Obama, Racial Discrimination, Rick Santorum, TLC

The US military will become “leaner” while maintaining superiority as it switches focus to the Asia-Pacific, US President Barack Obama has announced. In a rare appearance at the Pentagon, he unveiled a far-reaching defence review under which thousands of troops are expected to be axed. The tide of war was receding and the US must renew its [...]