What's new

Acts of Terrorism in Pakistan

Treating Muslim countries as a block? What I was referring to was paying attention to ideas that are animating public opinion among muslim majorities:

What Muslims Think

Muslim umah is presently at lowest level almost dead,even they are in majority .
Only way to revive strength this great nation is through Dawah as our Prophet Muhammad PBUH and Sahabah shown ,they defeated persian empire and roman empire with 1/10 th or less army only with the strength of IMAN and help of God.

Allah help us muslim ummah attain certain level of IMAN and practice islam as per sunnah.

There is no other way for muslims to retain their honor and strength.
 
.
analysis: In a state of failure

Salman Tarik Kureshi
February 14, 2009

My last article in these pages described the region of Swat, along with various other parts of FATA and the NWFP, as effectively lost to the state of Pakistan. I suggested that this was an example of localised state failure. Over the derelict remnants of Swat’s former administration and judiciary, alienated as it was from the people by reasons of incompetence and corruption, a makeshift and semi-barbarous revolutionary regime has been erected.

Do the people of Swat ‘approve’ of this new regime? Would they vote for it if they could? It does not matter, since Maulana Raidwa (‘Radio’), as Maulvi Fazlullah is called, and his colleagues are clearly not interested in winning any beauty competitions, popularity contests or elections. Quite vocal about considering democracy to be anathema to Islam, they believe in brute force, in terror and in power.


Is it possible for a non-representative regime, one perhaps hated by its subjects, to endure? It would be nice to think that it could not. But consider only the fact that the longest-lasting Pakistani regime to date was the seemingly endless nightmare of the usurper Zia-ul Haq, which sowed the furrows that Maulvi Fazlullah and his ilk harvest today.

Moreover, it was no popular movement that eventually removed that satanic dictator, but the secretive conspiracy of a band of still unknown assassins. No, dear reader, unpopular dictators can and do continue in power and twist and warp the societies they rule, provided they are effective rulers. And, as I also suggested in my last article, the TNSM has indeed been effective in establishing its administration and courts, according to its own brutal ideology.

The painful processes of state collapse (such as have been permitted — indeed, fostered and encouraged — in Pakistan’s north-west) lead to the emergence of precisely such quasi-governmental set-ups. It is rule by the most ruthless and violent, to which the ordinary people are obliged to acquiesce in the absence of available alternatives.

Could the kind of state failure that we see in FATA and Swat spread through the breadth of the poverty-stricken, multiethnic country of Pakistan, with its violent history and its many fault lines? Could the horrors attendant on state failure afflict all of us?

Let us recall that, at the very beginning of our national existence, in what is now our largest province, the state did in fact fail for a time. There were three specific issues in Punjab in 1947, beyond those in the rest of the country.

First, there was the Radcliffe Award that irrationally sliced through the province. Second, in the hiatus following the resignation of the Unionist Party government of Khizar Hayat Tiwana and before the appointment of Iftikhar Hussain Mamdot of the Muslim League, all governance and law and order totally disintegrated under the Governor’s Rule of Sir Francis Mudie. Third, and too little examined, was the social tinder of more than three million recently demobilised soldiers, the Punjabi Muslim and Sikh soldiers who had fought World War II in North Africa, Italy, the Middle East and Burma.

The result was that independence brought to Punjab the very worst kind of communal violence and massacres and the largest forced migrations of refugees in human history. Is it far-fetched to regard the Punjab upheavals of 1947 as an example of state failure?

I believe not. That order was restored and a functioning state machinery became effective quite quickly speaks volumes for the political leadership and the indefatigable administrative services of those times.

Fast-forwarding to 1971, we see that the 'Islamic ideology' trumpeted by the state establishment proved a failure as a binding cement against the realities of ethnic and linguistic differences, geographic separation, denial of democratic and provincial rights, capped by naked exploitation, arrogance and discrimination.

Taking advantage of the political ferment engendered by the standoff between Mujibur Rahman and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the army staged its now infamous action in Dhaka on March 25, 1971, almost simultaneously with the Mukti Bahini's atrocities in Chittagong. The region of what had been East Pakistan descended into civil war and state collapse for a prolonged period. The trauma of the military defeat that terminated the Yahya regime in December 1971 threatened to cause anarchy in West Pakistan as well.

Again, it took political skills of a high order — those of Bhutto here (remember the “pieces, the very small pieces, from which we must rebuild”?) and of Mujib in Bangladesh — to permit the regeneration of organised states. (It is interesting that both these institution-building leaders were eventually assassinated by military putschists.)

As the examples of 1947 and 1971 show, state failure on a still larger scale than what has already occurred in Swat, Bajaur and FATA, is certainly a possibility in Pakistan. A failing state is defined by the Fund for Peace as having such qualitative attributes as loss of physical control of its territory or losing the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? It includes erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions; inability to provide reasonable public services. Look around you, dear reader.

How does the country in fact score on these counts?

Well, in 2008, the Failed States Index (FSI) of the Fund for Peace judged five countries — Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Chad and Iraq — as the most failing states, with an FSI of over 110. Next among the Top Ten, with an FSI of over 103, were the Democratic Republic of Congo, Afghanistan, the Ivory Coast, Pakistan and the Central African Republic. Pakistan had in fact ‘risen’ by three positions to attain this ranking as the ninth most failing state in the world. Where we will be adjudged to be in 2009, I do not know.

The FSI rankings are based on twelve indicators of state vulnerability — four social, two economic and six political. The social indicators are: (a) Demographic pressures, including high population density relative to food supply and other resources; (b) massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples, both within and between countries; (c) legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievances, including atrocities committed with impunity against communal groups and/or specific groups singled out by state authorities or dominant groups; and (d) chronic and sustained human flight, the ‘brain drain’ of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents and voluntary emigration of the middle class.

The economic indicators are: (a) Uneven economic development along group or regional lines, determined by group-based inequality in education, jobs, and economic status; and (b) sharp and/or severe economic decline, measured by a progressive economic decline of the society as a whole (using per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rates, poverty levels, business failures) and the growth of hidden economies, including the drug trade, smuggling and capital flight.

The six political indicators are: (a) criminalisation of the state, endemic corruption of ruling elites and resistance to transparency, accountability and political representation; (b) deterioration of public services, including failure to protect citizens from crime, terrorism and violence, and collapse of essential services like health, education, sanitation and public transportation; (c) disregard for and widespread violation of human rights, emergence of authoritarian, dictatorial or military rule in which constitutional and democratic processes are suspended or manipulated, public repression of political opponents, religious or cultural persecution; (d) security apparatus as a ‘state within a state’ that operates with impunity; (e) use of nationalistic political rhetoric by ruling elites in terms of communal irredentism or of communal solidarity, e.g. “defending the faith”; and (f) intervention of other states or external actors, military or paramilitary, in the internal affairs of the state.

These indicators are like milestones along, what we can sadly call, the Road to Swat. At a national level, we have crossed almost all of them. And this has not been the ‘achievement’ of one or the other party or government. All have made their contributions in bringing us to this pass. Worst of all has been the role of our supposedly educated elite that continues to place self before principle.

Does the shoe fit, dear reader? Then, what should we do about it, other than wave our Green Cards on the way to the airport?

The writer is a marketing consultant based in Karachi. He is also a poet
 
.
Pakistan is not a Failed State per se. Iceland probably is (external debt +600% of GDP)!.

Pakistan is nowhere near to a collapse, its informal economy with twice the size of its formal economy ensures its survival; no matter what happens to current account deficits or the KSE Index.

Taliban in FATA / Swat are in fact an NGO in makeup and structure, nothing really sinister.

Pakistani Government has lost its writ over great swaths of FATA, Balochistan and NWFP, because it lost its writ in Islamabad through surrendering sovereignty to the USA.

The day Pakistan Government decides to regain its sovereignty and behave like a normal independent state its writ will be restored everywhere.
 
.
Pakistan was created for implementation of sharia law ,It is first time writ of Pakistan established by SWATI people that is because GOP try to establish writ of USA in Pakistan , and if present government continue their WRONG policies for support of USA there is possiblity this writ of sharia will be established by general public in other part of country as well.

Pakistanis will prefer writ of islam rather then writ of USA.
 
.
Peace lovers should help army find Taliban: ISPR

February 15, 2009

LAHORE: Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) spokesman Major General Athar Abbas has urged the “peace loving people” of the Tribal Areas to help the Pakistan Army identify Taliban hideouts, a private TV channel reported on Saturday.

The ISPR spokesman said security forces had came to the troubled destinations to deal with the Taliban and help the locals. He regretted any inconvenience faced by the locals during military operations. Rejecting the perception that the security forces were not operating in several areas, he said that forces were operating in all troubled areas. daily times monitor
 
.
Both parties lost their trust on each other

Third party is required to make any deal with PA/GOP and local talaban.
 
.
Gunmen kill 3 at Pakistan check post
Sun, 15 Feb 2009 19:18:22 GMT
Insurgency has increased in Baluchistan, with more and more attacks by a tribal resistance movement as well as Taliban ambushes.

A militant attack in Pakistan's restive Baluchistan province has killed at least two security personnel and injured several others.

Unknown militants attacked a security check post in Naseer Abad area in Baluchistan province on Sunday, killing two security personnel and injuring several others, Police officials told Press TV.

Security forces immediately launched search operation and cordoned off the area, our correspondent reported.

Insurgency has increased in Baluchistan, which borders war-torn Afghanistan, following the 2001 US-led invasion that sent Taliban militants across the border into Pakistan.

The Baluchistan Republican Army, an ethnic tribal movement campaigning for autonomy and larger share of gas resources, has orchestrated several attacks in recent months, largely targeting the gas-rich region's pipelines.

Taliban militants have also claimed responsibility for some of the recent attacks in the insurgency-hit province.

Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, which borders Afghanistan and Pakistan, has also witnessed a rise in terrorist activities by arms smugglers and armed separatist militants, such as Jundullah.

Jundullah has carried out a number of attacks against Iranian civilians as well as high-profile government and security officials.

ZHD/MDhttp://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=85796&sectionid=351020401
 
.
Northeast Pakistan blast injures 13
Sun, 15 Feb 2009 19:29:12 GMT

Two bomb blasts have injured at least 13 people in a northwestern Pakistani province, one day after US drone attacks killed 32.

Local officials told Press TV on Sunday that two remote-controlled bombs exploded near a military convoy in Wana town, in Pakistan's South Waziristan Province near the border with Afghanistan.

According to police, the 3 Pakistani troops and 10 civilians, who were injured in the attack, were immediately transported to a local hospital.

The officials said two other vehicles had also been destroyed in the attack.

Local residents and officials told Press TV that a CIA-operated drone fired two missiles at a house in Ladha area on Saturday.

The house was suspected to be a base for Baitullah Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban leader. Reports said at least 32 people, mostly militants, were killed in the attack.

The fresh airstrike comes as the US military continues controversial cross-border attacks from bases in Afghanistan despite sharp criticisms from Islamabad.

In recent months, more than 500 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in the 30-odd drone attacks, widely seen as an imprecise tactic for targeting militants.
Press TV - ?Northeast Pakistan blast injures 13
 
.
Writ of the state

Editorial
February 15, 2009

THERE is no percentage in talking to people who despise the values one holds dearest and are committed to inflicting death and destruction aimed at overthrowing the state of Pakistan. There is no scope here for negotiation until — and that time is still distant — the Pakistan government and military can dictate terms and talk to the Taliban from a position of strength. The deals cut in the past in sheer desperation encouraged the militants. They sent a signal that the Tehrik-i-Taliban was in the ascendancy and could call the shots as it pleased. They allowed the militants to regroup and recruit more unemployed, brainwashed young men who have been led to believe that the West (all of it, without exception) is evil, that democracy is abhorrent and Pakistani political leaders who espouse secular values and enjoy popular support are worthy of death. Gen Musharraf did us no favours by playing a double-game: keeping the threat of militancy alive while claiming to tackle it. If it weren’t for me, he was telling the neocons in Washington, Pakistan would fall to the Taliban. Nothing could be further from the truth. He was part of the problem, not the solution. Gen Musharraf was interested only in his personal survival and the fate of the country was secondary.

Control of the army is now in abler hands that are not distracted by politics. The government and the security forces seem to be on the same page for the most part. Some gains have been made in parts of Fata and the militants there appear to be on the back foot for now. But the situation in Swat is still dire. President Zardari hit the nail on the head on Friday when he said that “the absence of options makes the choice abundantly clear”. There can be no let-up in military operations until the obscurantists have been routed, and dictated to in a manner supported by the majority of the nation. Friday’s security meeting, chaired by the president, also expressed satisfaction with the way operations are proceeding against militants. This is an optimistic view, to say the least. There have been gains, yes, but the situation in Swat is deteriorating by the day and the Taliban now control most of the valley.

Scores of policemen are deserting. Locals are demanding an end to a military operation that is killing more civilians than militants. The security agencies, wanting to avoid their own casualties perhaps, have been reluctant so far to put boots on the ground and take on the Taliban one-to-one. They have resorted to indiscriminate artillery shelling that results in ‘collateral damage’. These are civilians, human beings, who are dying, partly at the hands of the Pakistani state. The fight must go on but the tactics have to change.
 
.
What is writ of Pakistan ?

Pakistan is made in the name of islam not for to take dictation from US and his agents PPP jealas

Recently truce between GOP and Mujahdeen signed on basis of five points .

So members really worried about SWAT should be relaxed , these tribes/mujahdeen are partiotic pakistanis and remain.

let hope for the best.:cheers:
 
.
How sad! My heart goes out to the people of Swat and particularly the women and the little girls who suffered this hell for no fault of theirs. A paradise on earth, was Swat's motto, the valley was considered the Switzerland of Pakistan.

Undoubtedly, to a large extent this is the result of 9 years of dictatorship, flip-flops, double games and 9 years of inaction, allowing Taliban power to spread.



SECOND EDITORIAL: General Musharraf and Taliban

February 16, 2009

After President Asif Ali Zardari said on CBS News that “Pakistani forces are fighting the Taliban for the survival of Pakistan”, General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf kind of “gilded the lily” by stating in Islamabad that “support for the Taliban and Al Qaeda is increasing in Pakistan”. President Zardari conceded that the Taliban were “present on huge amounts of land” in Pakistan because of the past “policy of denial”. As a result, he said, “Our forces weren’t increased. We have weaknesses and they are taking advantage of those weaknesses”.

It is easy to say that the support for the Taliban has increased in Pakistan and presume that people will not connect it with the policies followed by Mr Musharraf when he was the sole operator of Pakistan’s military strategy. The Taliban are difficult to fight today because of the strategic choices made by him after 9/11. Far from preparing the Pakistan army to face up to the possible new challenges arising from the volte face performed by him in the doctrine of “strategic depth”, he allowed the Taliban to roam free in the Tribal Areas and establish outreach in the rest of the country through their madrassa networks. Most writers on the conflict in Afghanistan have come to the conclusion that he allowed “deniable” sanctuaries inside Pakistan after 2001 and then let the jihadis — originally meant for Kashmir — join up with the affiliates of Al Qaeda.

Support to the Taliban increased only after they were able to establish their power in parts of Pakistan then still being ruled by General Musharraf. After the warlords had made their appearance in Waziristan, he was unable to cope with them. In fact it was on his watch that a large number of military personnel were taken prisoner by Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan. It is only after the new chief of the army staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Kayani adopted a new strategy after taking over from General Musharraf that the people stopped despairing about ever facing up to the challenge of terrorism.
 
.
SECOND EDITORIAL: General Musharraf and Taliban

February 16, 2009

After President Asif Ali Zardari said on CBS News that “Pakistani forces are fighting the Taliban for the survival of Pakistan”, General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf kind of “gilded the lily” by stating in Islamabad that “support for the Taliban and Al Qaeda is increasing in Pakistan”. President Zardari conceded that the Taliban were “present on huge amounts of land” in Pakistan because of the past “policy of denial”. As a result, he said, “Our forces weren’t increased. We have weaknesses and they are taking advantage of those weaknesses”.

It is easy to say that the support for the Taliban has increased in Pakistan and presume that people will not connect it with the policies followed by Mr Musharraf when he was the sole operator of Pakistan’s military strategy. The Taliban are difficult to fight today because of the strategic choices made by him after 9/11. Far from preparing the Pakistan army to face up to the possible new challenges arising from the volte face performed by him in the doctrine of “strategic depth”, he allowed the Taliban to roam free in the Tribal Areas and establish outreach in the rest of the country through their madrassa networks. Most writers on the conflict in Afghanistan have come to the conclusion that he allowed “deniable” sanctuaries inside Pakistan after 2001 and then let the jihadis — originally meant for Kashmir — join up with the affiliates of Al Qaeda.

Support to the Taliban increased only after they were able to establish their power in parts of Pakistan then still being ruled by General Musharraf. After the warlords had made their appearance in Waziristan, he was unable to cope with them. In fact it was on his watch that a large number of military personnel were taken prisoner by Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan. It is only after the new chief of the army staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Kayani adopted a new strategy after taking over from General Musharraf that the people stopped despairing about ever facing up to the challenge of terrorism.

President or Musharaf or any body are not above the law of land.Shariah law terms accepted by government of Pakistan and signed.

So if any body speak against SWAT talaban or Shraiah considered Anti state .

Razban ,

please also try to accept ground realities and show good will gesture for SWAT talaban.:enjoy:
 
.
President or Musharaf or any body are not above the law of land.Shariah law terms accepted by government of Pakistan and signed.

So if any body speak against SWAT talaban or Shraiah considered Anti state .

Razban ,

please also try to accept ground realities and show good will gesture for SWAT talaban.:enjoy:
Sorry Waraich. Over my dead body! I will never accept Taliban for anything except a barbarian terrorist gang, who are hell-bent on destroying our country even further.
 
.
Sorry Waraich. Over my dead body! I will never accept Taliban for anything except a barbarian terrorist gang, who are hell-bent on destroying our country even further.

Why you love them when Afghan -Russian WAR was going on, they are trained by CIA /ISI now they are well trained and ready for jehad any where in the world.This is seperate issue.

But SWAT local public dont have permanant militants or talaban , if SWAT people wanted Shariah you dont dislike them it is their right to select Shariah or British Tazirati Hind.:enjoy:
 
.
if SWAT people wanted Shariah you dont dislike them it is their right to select Shariah or British Tazirati Hind.:enjoy:

If people anywhere want to change the system, then they need to do so through the ballot box.

As of now there is no means of determining what the people of Swat and Pakistan want. Only an election, in which some parties run on a platform of implementing Shariah, and others for continuing with the existing system, can determine what people want.

What is done in Swat is done, but the way it came about, with thugs and terrorists beheading people, blowing up schools and carrying out suicide bombings, is completely wrong, and you should have the decency to acknowledge that.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom