By Chris Brummitt for The Associated Press

Inside a high-security air force complex that builds jet fighters and weapons systems, Pakistan’s military is working on the latest addition to its sprawling commercial empire: a homegrown version of the iPad.

It’s a venture that bundles together Pakistani engineering and Chinese hardware, and shines a light on the military’s controversial foothold in the consumer market. Supporters say it will boost the economy as well as a troubled nation’s self-esteem. It all comes together at an air force base in Kamra in northern Pakistan, where avionics engineers — when they’re not working on defense projects — assemble the PACPAD 1.

“The original is the iPad, the copy is the PACPAD,” said Mohammad Imran, who stocks the product at his small computer and cell phone shop in a mall in Rawalpindi, a city not far from Kamra and the home of the Pakistani army.

The device runs on Android 2.3, an operating system made by Google and given away for free. At around $200, it’s less than half the price of Apple or Samsung devices and cheaper than other low-end Chinese tablets on the market, with the bonus of a local, one-year guarantee.

The PAC in the name stands for the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex, where it is made. The PAC also makes an e-reader and small laptop.
Such endeavors are still at the pilot stage and represent just a sliver of the military’s business portfolio, which encompasses massive land holdings, flour and sugar mills, hotels, travel agents, even a brand of breakfast cereal.

The military is powerful, its businesses are rarely subject to civilian scrutiny, and it has staged three coups since Pakistan became a state in 1947. Many Pakistanis find its economic activities corrupting and say it should focus on entirely on defense.

“I just can’t figure it out,” said Jehan Ara, head of Pakistan’s Software Houses Association, said of the PACPAD. “Even if they could sell a billion units, I can’t see the point. The air force is supposed to be protecting the air space and borders of the country.”

Supporters say the foray into information technology is a boost to national pride for a country vastly overshadowed by archrival India in the high-tech field. Tech websites in the country have shown curiosity or cautious enthusiasm, but say it’s too early to predict how the device will perform. Skeptics claim it’s a vanity project that will never see mass production.

Only a few hundred of each products has been made so far, though a new batch will be completed in the next three months. “The defense industry is trying to justify its presence by doing more than just produce weapons,” said Ayesha Siddiqa, author of Military Inc., a critical study of military businesses. “Some smart aleck must have thought we can make some money here.”

PAC’s website at http://www.cpmc.pk says the goal is “strengthening the national economy through commercialization” and lauds the collaboration with China — something that likely resonates among nationalists.

China is regarded as a firm ally by Pakistan’s security establishment, whereas the U.S., despite pouring billions of dollars in aid into the country, is seen as fickle and increasingly as an enemy.

These perceptions have heightened as the U.S. intensifies drone attacks on militants based in the Pakistani borderlands. But the military is also a target of those militants. In 2007 the base at Kamra, home to 12,000 workers and their families, nine people died when a cyclist blew himself up at the entrance.

PAC officials suggested the program that produces the PACPAD was modeled in part on the Chinese military’s entry into commercial industry, which lasted two decades until it was ordered to cut back lest it become corrupted and lose sight of its core mission.

The tablet and other devices are made in a low-slung facility, daubed in camouflage paint, near, a factory that produces J-17 Thunder fighter jets with Chinese help.

“It’s about using spare capacity. There are 24 hours in a day, do we waste them or use them to make something?” said Sohail Kalim, PAC’s sales director. “The profits go to the welfare of the people here. There are lots of auditors. They don’t let us do any hanky-panky here.”

PAC builds the PACPAD with a company called Innavtek in a Hong Kong-registered partnership that also builds high-tech parts for the warplanes.
But basic questions go unanswered. Maqsood Arshad, a retired air force officer who is one of the directors, couldn’t say how much money had been invested, how many units the venture hoped to sell and what the profit from each sale was likely to be.

The market for low-cost Android tablets is expanding quickly around the world, with factories in China filling most of the demand. Last year, an Indian company produced the “Aakash” tablet, priced at $50, and sold largely to schoolchildren and students.

Arshad said a second-generation PACPAD would be launched in the next three months, able to connect to the Internet via cell phone networks and other improved features. He said the Kamra facility could produce up to 1,000 devices a day.

During a brief test, The tablet with its 7-inch screen appeared to run well and the screen responsiveness was sharp. “It seems good, but operation-wise I have to look into it,” said Mohammad Akmal, who had come to the store in Rawalpindi to check the product out. “Within a month or so, we will know.”

Filed under: China, India, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistanis, United States Tagged: Apple, China, Chinese, iPad, PAC, PACPAD, Pakistan Aeronautical Complex, Pakistan Air Force, Pakistan Army, Pakistan’s Software Houses Association, Samsung

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

Chitral -
Services of 101 Engineering Battalion of Pakistan Army was highly
appreciated by social and political cicle of Chitral according to Ground Report.
Lawari top is the only land route connecting Chitral to other parts of
the country which was remaining close for all type of vehicular traffic
for weeks during winter season after snowfall.
But after handing over

February 13^th, 2012. Islamabad. For those of us still following the game of thrones taking place at the center, it appears that Prime Minister Gilani is running out of road. He’s taking a long walk off a short pier. Insert your own cliché here. The debate has overtaken the Prime Minister, the discussion is now focused on what Pakistan must do, post-Gilani. To write the letter or not? Will Senate elections go ahead or not? Will the PPP spin this ungraceful end to a five year term as a victory, will Gilani go back to Multan a living shaheed? Pity the constituency whose only claim to a fruitful five year term is a representative with a knack for getting stabbed in the stomach and making it look like he meant to fall on his sword. Gilani will end up being a sacrifice for an utterly worthless cause – twenty-eight million US dollars that will never be returned to the people of Pakistan. Ever.

The statute of limitations on the Swiss cases are rumored to be anywhere between April and August 2012. The time for reopening old cases is diminishing fast. Yet we insist that the court charade of the last few months was necessary – it’s not about the money, it’s about setting an institutional precedent.

It has been nearly two decades since our President and his late wife stole a mind-bubbling sum of money and squirreled it away into Swiss banks, mansions in Surrey, bank accounts in Dubai and trendy flats in London. Reading the famous 1998 New York Times article reinforces the idea that when politicians from very poor countries amass vast amounts of wealth, they are not likely to let go of it that easily. So forget fantasies of liquidating the Bhutto assets and paying off Pakistan’s international loans. The Pakistani Supreme Court can humiliate the Prime Minister, but it can’t overturn decades of sophisticated white collar crime, much of which takes place outside its judicial territory.

And surely impotence of this intensity is severely humiliating for Chief Justice Chaudhry himself. Having become the defacto arbitrator of every aggrieved party in Pakistan, he suddenly finds himself without any implementation power whatsoever. He is the supreme commander of a court system that is rotten at the foundation, fighting the country’s largest and most public corruption scandal while his own lower court clerks accept petty bribes to tie up litigation for years. His own middle-class biases against the landed elite of the PPP notwithstanding, Chaudhary now faces the task of living up to the dubious honor of being the sole institution in this country deemed impartial and uncorrupt. Which means that if he isn’t seen going after egregious acts of corruption, he will be immediately deemed implicit.

In the face of such impotence, charging and convicting a seated Prime Minister of contempt is a sufficiently bold task to secure Chaudhary’s tripod of potency: judicial independence, of having real power (as opposed to simply striking down the NRO and not being able to do a damn thing to implement it for a full two years), and of being a guardian of the people. Gilani’s removal, whenever it happens, will be sufficiently large to distract from the fact that the PM never stole the twenty-eight million. He never decided to write the letter, or not to write it, for that matter – any more than he decided to become Prime Minister. It will serve to silence those who suggest that post-reinstatement, the CJ has been “bought out” by the PPP, to outcry those who notice that investigations into sugar cartels, NILC, Hajj, Abbotabad,  and Karachi came to naught. It is eye candy for the myopic, a desperate sideshow to distract from a flaming circus of budget malfunctions, energy scams and policy fubars.

But lets not beat ourselves up too much. John Burns pointed out in 1998 that multilateral organizations such as the World Bank regularly support teetering Third World economies “bled dry” by corruption in exchange for weak promises of institutional reform. The last five years have been immensely lucrative for friends of the regime, for those individuals and institutions capable of buying out or bullying Mr. Hundered Percent. At last count, this included everyone from ARY Gold to the Pakistan Army, from AKD to NLC to the men who bring you fantastically overpriced imported cars at huge markups. Zardari did not invent corruption, but he’s a fine example (an institutional precedent, as it were) of just how successful some men and women become in countries with broken democratic systems. Where the Army can quietly wring the neck of anyone attempting to infringe on its economic and political territory. Where an entire Parliament – incumbent, opposition and all – routes all decision-making through the Supreme Court. Where a judge is deeply contemptuous of men who take advantage of their office for personal aggrandizement – and then goes and does exactly the same.

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

As Reported by CNN

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani of Pakistan is due to appear Monday before the country’s Supreme Court, which plans to charge him with contempt in relation to a long-running struggle over old corruption cases.

Gilani is locked in a standoff with the Supreme Court justices, who are demanding that he ask the Swiss authorities to revive corruption charges from the previous decade against President Asif Ali Zardari and others.

Gilani has refused the court’s demands and could be jailed for six months if the justices find him in contempt. The court on Friday rejected an appeal by Gilani’s lawyers against the summons to face the contempt charge.

The lawyers have argued that the prime minister has not followed the court’s order because Zardari enjoys immunity in Pakistan and abroad as a president in office.

Gilani said in an interview over the weekend with the satellite news network Al Jazeera that he had an “extremely capable” lawyer and didn’t believe the court would jail him on the contempt charges.

If found guilty of contempt, the prime minister could be forced from office. But his lawyers have said he would keep his position unless electoral officials disqualified him.

Gilani served more than five years in prison between 2001 and 2006 on corruption charges brought by the previous military regime of Gen. Pervez Musharraf — counts he said were also politically motivated.

The corruption cases that the Supreme Court now wants reopened stem from money-laundering charges against Zardari and his late wife, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. A Swiss court convicted them in absentia in 2003 of laundering millions of dollars.

After Musharraf granted a controversial amnesty in 2007 to Zardari, Bhutto, and thousands of other politicians and bureaucrats, Pakistan asked the Swiss authorities to drop the case. In 2009, the Pakistani Supreme Court ruled the amnesty was unconstitutional and called on the government to take steps to have the cases reopened.

The government has not done so, and the court apparently lost patience. Since Gilani is the head of the government, the court justices view him as responsible.

Filed under: Democracy, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistanis Tagged: Benazir Bhutto, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, Pakistan, Pakistan Supreme Court, Pervez Musharraf, President Asif Ali Zardari, Swiss Court, Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani

Pakistan Army movie is the highest budget movie of Pakistan. The budget was reported in 2011 to be PKR: 170 million. The first official trailer of the film was launched on December 31, 2011. 

Waar movie is based on true events of War on Terror by Pakistan Army. It’s running time is 2 hours and 20 minutes.  

Waar movie expected to be released on Feb 15, 2012. 

For more details archive back

Since 1990, planned and organized secessionist-terrorism has brutalized Kashmir, the valley of peace and exquisite beauty. Systematic efforts have been made to destroy its syncretic culture, traditions, and heritage, by an orgy of mindless violence fueled by religious fanaticism and extremism, aided and abetted from across India’s borders.
Terrorism has taken the lives of more than 2000 innocent

By Nancy Birdall for Foreign Policy

In the January/February 2012 issue of Foreign Affairs, Stanford political scientist Stephen Krasner claims that “current U.S. policy toward Pakistan has failed” and recommends that the United States take a radically different approach: credibly threaten to sever all forms of cooperation, including all U.S. aid – military and civilian – to force Pakistan into cooperating with the United States on security matters. Center for Global Development President Nancy Birdsall responds.

Stephen Krasner (“Talk Tough to Pakistan: How to End Islamabad’s Defiance,” Jan/Feb 2012) wants to change the Pakistani government’s behavior. He argues that its failure to cooperate with the United States on Afghanistan and on terrorism is not due to its weakness as a state. Instead, it is a rational response of Pakistan’s military leadership, whose priority is to defend itself against India – with a nuclear deterrent and support for terrorists and the Afghan Taliban. Therefore, the only way the United States can win cooperation from Pakistan is to threaten “malign neglect”- cut off military and civilian assistance, sever intelligence cooperation, maintain and possibly escalate drone strikes and initiate unilateral cross-border raids. If that isn’t enough, then the U.S. could move on to “active isolation” — declare Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, making it a pariah, and impose sanctions.

If only it were this easy. Krasner fails to mention that the U.S. has tried this approach before. In the 1990s it cut off military and civilian assistance to Pakistan and imposed sanctions in an effort to dissuade Pakistan from developing a nuclear capability. We all know how that story ended. But let’s suppose this time the threats or the follow-through worked and brought the military and intelligence establishment to heel in Pakistan. Let’s suppose the United States got what it wanted on the security front – helping assure a timely U.S and NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan. Would that solve the problem Pakistan poses for America’s security in the long run? No.

What Krasner doesn’t say is that the U.S. wants something more than compliance from Pakistan’s military and intelligence communities with its immediate security needs. The U.S. wants a capable and stable civilian government that plays by the rules of the international community. It wants a democratic state that would not abuse and misuse its nuclear capability and that would find its way to peaceful relations with India.

In other words the U.S. has a long-run vision for Pakistan, very much in its own interests, as well as a set of short-term demands. In the 2009 Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act (known as Kerry-Lugar Berman, or KLB) Congress recognized the resulting need for a two-track approach. That legislation made U.S. security assistance (not actually authorized in the legislation) conditional on Pakistani cooperation on security matters. But its fundamental purpose, and the money it authorized for civilian aid, was the rebuilding of a serious partnership with the civilian government and the people of Pakistan. With KLB as the framework, since 2009 the Obama Administration has engaged fully with the civilian government and with civil society and private sector leaders in Pakistan on a range of issues — energy, water, agriculture, macroeconomic issues, private investment and trade.

In short, the purpose of U.S. civilian aid to Pakistan is to help build a better state. It is not to bribe or reward the “government” (neither the military nor the civilian leadership). Withholding military aid would likely not punish the military anyway. It would, however, reduce the resources available to the civilian government, since the evidence is that the military can get what it wants from the government’s overall available resources. And withholding civilian aid obviously would not punish the military. It would, however, take away a modest tool of America – investing to educate kids, create jobs, and strengthen civil society and representative institutions and thus give Pakistan a better shot at becoming a stable, prosperous and democratic country in the long term.

There are of course real questions about the effectiveness of U.S engagement with the civilian government – with aid and dialogue – given the prevailing suspicion there of U.S. motives, the inherent difficulties of operating in a complex and insecure environment, and the bureaucratic shortcomings of the U.S. aid system itself. But then those are reasons to put relatively more emphasis on other forms of engagement: trade, investment, and encouraging the normalization of relations with India. They do not warrant bullying the weak civilian government that the U.S. wants to strengthen.

Krasner begins and ends his article by invoking the testimony of former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen during his last appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Krasner is right in pointing out that Mullen was critical of Pakistan’s role in supporting extremist organizations and the need to get tough with Pakistan. Yet, Krasner fails to mention the conclusion Mullen reached in his statement. Mullen recognized that the U.S. has a variety of objectives in Pakistan and the region, and that by focusing too intensely on short term interests, the U.S. will end up short-changing itself over the long haul: “We must also move beyond counter-terrorism to address long-term foundations of Pakistan’s success – to help the Pakistanis find realistic and productive ways to achieve their aspirations of prosperity and security.” Mullen concludes, “Isolating the people of Pakistan from the world right now would be counter-productive.”

Nancy Birdsall is the founding president of the Center for Global Development, a Washington, DC based think tank.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistanis, Taliban, terrorism, United States, US Army, US-Pakistan Relations Tagged: Afghanistan, Islamabad, Kerry-Lugar Berman, NATO, Pakistan, Pakistanis, Senate Armed Services Committee, Taliban, United States, Washington

Kashmir Solidarity Day has been observed on 5 February each year since 1990 in Pakistan as a day of protest against Indian control of part of Kashmir.[1] It is a national holiday in Pakistan.[2] Kashmir Day was first appealed by Qazi Hussain Ahmed of the Ameer-e-Jammat-e-Islami party in Pakistan in 1990. Since then on 5Feb it is a national holiday in Pakistan.[citation needed]. Pakistan

A Pakistan Army contingent left for United Nations Mission at Darfur Sudan. The contingent which comprised of 245 soldiers, was seen off by Brigadier Amal Zada Khan. He wished them success while performing their duties and maintaining peace and stability at Darfur.
It may be recalled that Pakistan has always endeavoured to provide maximum possible support to maintain peace and stability around

Recruitment / Selection

Relaxations for induction as Soldiers from Balochistan
Education induction as soldiers from 8th instead of Matric in all arms / services except Technical arms
Height 5’- 4” instead of 5’- 6” and chest 74-79 cm instead of 78-83 cm except trades in which height and chest is required more than 5’- 6” and 78-83 cm
Age 26 years instead of 23 yearsFA / FSc grade ‘D’ instead

As Reported by The BBC

The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services, according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC.
The leaked report, derived from thousands of interrogations, claims the Taliban remain defiant and have wide support among the Afghan people. It alleges that Pakistan knows the locations of senior Taliban leaders.

A BBC correspondent says the report is painful reading for international forces and the Afghan government. Pakistan has strenuously denied any links with the Taliban on previous occasions.

“We have long been concerned about ties between elements of the ISI and some extremist networks,” said US Pentagon spokesman Captain John Kirby, adding that the US Defence Department had not seen the report.

The BBC’s Quentin Sommerville in Kabul says the report – on the state of the Taliban – fully exposes for the first time the relationship between the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI) and the Taliban.

The report is based on material from 27,000 interrogations with more than 4,000 captured Taliban, al-Qaeda and other foreign fighters and civilians.
It notes: “Pakistan’s manipulation of the Taliban senior leadership continues unabatedly”. It says that Pakistan is aware of the locations of senior Taliban leaders.

The report states: “As this document is derived directly from insurgents it should be considered informational and not necessarily analytical.”
Despite Nato’s strategy to secure the country with Afghan forces, the secret document details widespread collaboration between the insurgents and Afghan police and military.

Lt Col Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for Nato’s International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan, said the document was “a classified internal document that is not meant to be released to the public”.

“It is a matter of policy that documents that are classified are not discussed under any circumstances,” he said.
The report also depicts the depth of continuing support among the Afghan population for the Taliban, our correspondent says.
It paints a picture of al-Qaeda’s influence diminishing but the Taliban’s influence increasing, he adds.

In a damning conclusion, the document says that in the last year there has been unprecedented interest, even from members of the Afghan government, in joining the Taliban cause. It adds: “Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption.”

The report has evidence that the Taliban are purposely hastening Nato’s withdrawal by deliberately reducing their attacks in some areas and then initiating a comprehensive hearts-and-minds campaign.

It says that in areas where Isaf has withdrawn, Taliban influence has increased, often with little or no resistance from government security forces. And in many cases, with the active help of the Afghan police and army.

When foreign soldiers leave, Afghan security forces are expected to take control. However according to the report, rifles, pistols and heavy weapons have been sold by Afghan security forces in bazaars in Pakistan.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, Taliban Tagged: Afghanistan, BBC, Hamid Karzai, Islamabad, Kabul, NATO, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Taliban

By Ali Arqam:

Zulfiqar Mirza’s theatrics, Altaf Hussain’s histrionics, rabble-rouser Qureshi’s anti climax (of Nuclear Arsenal under threat episode), Munawwar Hasan’s  ‘No one loves me’ rants, Fazlur Rehman’s alarm bells of Islam in danger, the new theatrical production is a rally by JuD for “Difa-e-Pakistan”. Welcome to Karachi fairgrounds.

First swearing Mirza damned MQM for posing threat to Pakistan’s integrity, then Altaf Hussain waved the map of so called balkanization of Pakistan. Thereafter, Imran came with a life line for Pakistan (he will only share the details when he will come to power) then Munawwar Hasan called on the bearded and hijabis to save Pakistan. Most recently Fazlur Rehman brandished a red flag and now Hafiz Saeed of JuD,  Ahmad Ludhianvi of ASWJ and others have jumped on the bandwagon to defend state of Pakistan.

This new religio-political alliance ‘Difa-e-Pakistan’ has been founded amid rising tensions between Pakistan with United states over negotiations for a role in post-US withdrawal Afghanistan; and in the aftermath of NATO Air strikes killing Pakistan Army soldiers. It aims to keep Pakistan clear of US and her allies’ footprint. Pakistani nationalists’ narrative keeps the anti-US indignation alive assuming that this will lead to Pakistan’s central place in Afghanistan negotiations. To keep the momentum, it also fights on its favourite terrain by declaring again and again that India is an existential threat.

That is why, the patron in chief of Difa-e-Pakistan council, Jamatud Dawaa (JuD) and its pouplar anti-India slogans like “India ka Jo yaar hei ghaddar hei”, “Bharat ko Pasandida mulk kehne walo, apne pasandida mulk chaley jao”  etc  are writings on the walls of Karachi,almost in every locality. The turf wars between various political and religious groups can be traced through the walls, buildings and electric poles, which have slogans and flags of that particular group in control of the territory sprayed and hoisted over all of them. But it seems JuD is an exception. MQM strongholds in Baldia, Orangi Town as well as People’s  Aman committee home territory, Lyari, and also ANP influenced areas have JuD slogans on the white washed walls for their propaganda. Thus reaffirming how divided and intolerant we are to each other; and yet unified against the eternal foes.

The deep state’s orchestrated “perceived threat narrative” has its pluggers in political and religious parties and media, who on the domestic and international front, have adequate stuff to disseminate and regurgitate. The right wing religious allies’ need an internal adversary as well to highlight ”perceived threat narrative” at domestic front. On political front, JUD targets the secular political parties, while on the religious front, it targets lesser Muslims such as Shias and Ahmedis, and less “pure” Pakistanis i.e the Christians and the Hindus.

JuD has chose Satellite town in Rawalpindi to hold an anti-Ahmedi demonstration and its counterpart ASWJ or the banned Sipah-e-Sahaba has heightened its activites by killing people from Shia sect in Karachi on daily basis.

But persecution of minority sects whether Shias or Ahmedis by these forces goes unheeded. The proponents of Difa-e-Pakistan take no issue of killings of less “patriotic” elements by the national security institutions in Balochistan, Swat and FATA, the same way their criminal actions against internal adversaries too are ignored.

It is feared that the forthcoming show by difa-e-Pakistan council in Karachi fairground along with the brags and blusters of the infuriated mullahs will bring worst for the already besieged Shia community.

Reporting from Karachi, exclusively for Pak Tea House.