FATA Situation

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Maqsad,

Perhaps it is the way I phrased my response to you. I am not suggesting that the only way to combat extremists is to go in with the military and blow stuff up; my point is that we as a nation need to realize that these people have to be challenged, and we need to stop finding scapegoats in the "agencies" or the "US". As muse said "we need to fight this war smarter".

Now I think that I understand what you are saying, when you talk about arrests and trials for B Mehsud - it is an argument that Pakistanis refuse to buy the guilt of the militants because we have no fair constitutional process in place to enforce the writ of the government and to adjudicate guilt or innocence.

FATA continues to be governed by an obscurantist set of regulations, militant law, or military operations - none of which seem legitimate in the eyes of Pakistanis - but the militants are at least able to sell their version as being "Islamic", and the failures of the system that preceded them makes that argument an easy sell.

So if the issue is approached from that perspective, the lack of support from Pakistanis is not primarily because of some inherent sympathy (for whatever reasons) for the Taliban over all else, but because Pakistanis want to see their democratic institutions and the systems and processes that the constitution promises every Pakistani, be implemented and used to bring the perpetrators to justice.

 

[Interceptor]

Four soldiers of Chitral Scouts killed in Khyber

By Ibrahim Shinwari

LANDI KOTAL, July 8: Paramilitary forces suffered their first casualty during the Khyber Agency operation when militants killed four soldiers of Chitral Scouts in an ambush on Tuesday near a graveyard in Akakhel. Three soldiers were injured.

According to officials, the security personnel were going to Fort Meelwat from Fort Salope when they were attacked. One soldier was killed on the spot and six others were injured.

Three of them died in hospital. The assailants escaped to the adjacent Darra Adamkhel region.

Meanwhile, sources said that of outlawed Lashkar-i-Islam chief Mangal Bagh had refused to authorise a jirga to take any decision on his behalf or accept that its decision would be binding on him. Endorsing a jirga decision, or authorising jirga members to take decisions binding on all sides is the primary condition of the traditional mechanism for arbitration.

A tribal jirga returned on Tuesday after holding two rounds of talks with the extremist leader in Tirah Valley. Its members are expected to submit a report to the political authorities on Wednesday.

The sources said the Lashkar chief had verbally assured the jirga that his men would not resist the operation in the Khyber region, and had also guaranteed to cooperate with the administration in maintaining law and order.

The government had set three conditions for the Lashkar men to meet in exchange for halting the operation. The conditions are: renouncing militancy, accepting the government’s writ and surrendering of the 16-member Shura of the organisation.

The Lashkar had also presented its own conditions for holding talks with the jirga –withdrawal of forces from Bara, halting the operation and re-opening roads and bazaars.

JUI-F DELEGATION: A three-member delegation of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-F reached the Tirah Valley on Tuesday to broker a ceasefire between the Lashkar-i-Islam and Ansarul Islam.

The delegation is led by Mufti Mohammad Ejaz.

Scores of people have been killed in clashes between the two militant outfits over the past two weeks.

Maulana Shujaual Mulk of the JUI-F told journalists in Peshawar that his party would try to persuade the combatants to agree to a truce in Tirah.

He said that the JUI would organise a grand jirga in Hangu on July 13.

Four soldiers of Chitral Scouts killed in Khyber -DAWN - Top Stories; July 09, 2008

 

[maqsad]

Maqsad,

Perhaps it is the way I phrased my response to you. I am not suggesting that the only way to combat extremists is to go in with the military and blow stuff up; my point is that we as a nation need to realize that these people have to be challenged, and we need to stop finding scapegoats in the "agencies" or the "US". As muse said "we need to fight this war smarter".

Now I think that I understand what you are saying, when you talk about arrests and trials for B Mehsud - it is an argument that Pakistanis refuse to buy the guilt of the militants because we have no fair constitutional process in place to enforce the writ of the government and to adjudicate guilt or innocence.

In terms of fairness, justice and tactical advantage alone there are multiple arguments in favor of capturing everyone alive rather than dead. If Masud did indeed kill Benazir then how are you going to confirm it by interrogating a corpse? How will you convince the Pakistani public that Mushy is not covering up for her real assasins by offing the fall guy which is probably what a significant portion of Pakistanis assert including Zardari himself? It's common sense that criminals should not be blown up as in some childish video game if it can be avoided.

FATA continues to be governed by an obscurantist set of regulations, militant law, or military operations - none of which seem legitimate in the eyes of Pakistanis - but the militants are at least able to sell their version as being "Islamic", and the failures of the system that preceded them makes that argument an easy sell.

FATA people have also joined and fought in the pak army/FC for the interests and goals of the pakistani state for decades. FATA people have also migrated to industry hubs like Sialkot and set up vibrant businesses, contributing to the Pakistani economy(just learned that today on wikipedia accidentally). This makes me suspect that those people and their system is not inherently bad. It's just a patriarchal tribal system and I can't see it as a root of all evil, perhaps I am missing something? As long as they can be persuaded to keep to themselves I am OK with them living in their chosen system.

So if the issue is approached from that perspective, the lack of support from Pakistanis is not primarily because of some inherent sympathy (for whatever reasons) for the Taliban over all else, but because Pakistanis want to see their democratic institutions and the systems and processes that the constitution promises every Pakistani, be implemented and used to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Today I came across some fresh news, or actually non-news: The CIA fired a hellfire missile which injured a random woman in FATA and missed killing an entire tribal family because they just happened to be at the hospital.

TTP threatens to hit major cities

So the CIA could have also hit the wrong house, in fact probably did. But they could have also hit a girl's school next door or some other random house killing multple innocent and unaware civilians.

Now, I am not a big fan of Al-Qaida's(whoever on earth they really are) yappings about taking this and that over from secularity, I am not a pathan and nor am I a big fan of mullahs who at best irritate and annoy me and I am not a proponent of sharia caliphates but that news report totally disgusts and appalls me because the CIA has been given carte blanche to terrorize and bomb FATA thus alienating them and actually increasing terrorism. There is yet another reason for the lack of support for this ridiculous self-imposed civil war and it has to do with common sense not love of the Taliban. If people like me are starting to see Mushy/ISI/PA as a willing or unwilling(in different cases) tool of foreign powers to harm Pakistan then you can't just pin this on taliban sympathisers. The dissent against the wot status quo does certainly have other rational arguments and supporters not just the knee-jerk taliban-supporting mullahs that some people portray as being the biggest and only problem in Pakistani politics.

 

[muse]

Myths in Al Qaeda's 'home'
Policymakers need to grasp cultural realities in Pakistan's tribal area.
By Joshua Foust and Jeb Koogler
from the July 10, 2008 edition

With continuous cross-border attacks from Pakistan fueling a resilient insurgency, Afghan President Hamid Karzai finally snapped. If Islamabad did not move more forcefully against Islamic militants in the country's tribal region, he declared recently, Afghan forces would enter Pakistan and do it themselves.

While the remark shocked Pakistani authorities and sparked a brief diplomatic row, it is not just President Karzai who is concerned about militancy in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Policymakers in London, New Delhi, and Washington are also worried about a territory increasingly referred to as Al Qaeda's new home.

Given the growing reach of FATA-affiliated militants, it is becoming clear that developments in the tribal areas are central to NATO's success in Afghanistan, as well as an important factor in the stability of nuclear-armed Pakistan and the security of both Europe and the United States. Yet many Western policymakers and pundits misread current events, espousing views and prescribing policies that are based more on stereotypes than on a solid grasp of the region's history and culture.

Conventional wisdom suggests that the Pakistani Taliban pose a unique and insurmountable threat, that the Pashtuns are the problem, that the tribal areas are lawless and chaotic, and that the targeted assassinations are an effective deterrent against Islamic militancy. But none of these assertions are accurate.

Although the conventional thinking holds that the Pakistani Taliban and their leader Baitullah Mehsud are a formidable and unprecedented threat to the region, the movement is neither historically unique nor overwhelmingly powerful.

FATA's history shows many charismatic, Islamic fundamentalist tribal leaders waging war against foreign powers – and none of them successfully. In 1672, Khushal Khan Khattak led a rebellion against the Mughal emperor, but was undermined as his tribal alliance crumbled. In 1936, the Faqir of Ipi led an insurgency against the British; he was eventually marginalized through political attrition. As for Mr. Mehsud, reports indicate that he commands fewer than 1,000 fighters, even taking into account the other fractious tribes that have pledged support to his umbrella group.

Mainstream beliefs about the Pashtuns are also based on inaccuracies. While the Pashtuns, the dominant ethnic group in the FATA, are often portrayed as rebellious and violent, scant attention is paid to the overwhelming majority of them who live peacefully. As militants have swarmed tourist paradises such as the Swat Valley, the contrast between the small number of militants and the vastly larger number of nonmilitant Pashtuns who oppose them is striking.

Particularly in comparison to other ethnic groups, the Pashtuns can hardly be considered uniquely prone to militancy. In the Balochistan province, the Balochi have been waging a low-intensity resistance movement against Islamabad ever since they discovered vast deposits of natural gas. And the Sindhi have faced an urban insurgency in Karachi for many years as well. Moreover, the recent influx of foreigners – whether Arab, Uzbek, or Chechen – has further ratcheted up internal violence in Pakistan. Affixing the blame for militancy on Pashtuns alone oversimplifies the situation.

Contrary to another myth, the Pakistani tribal areas do have an established system of order. Historically, the FATA has been ruled either through bribery from a foreign power or by their own village elders. Many central governments have had productive relationships with local elders, albeit on local terms. Furthermore, although Pashtunwali – the unwritten code of conduct similar to medieval chivalry – receives much attention for being capricious and violent, it is nonetheless a stable method of self-rule that has long governed the area.

Most destructive of conventional thinking is the notion that targeted assassinations of militant leaders in the FATA is an effective counterterrorism tactic. In fact, this strategy has not deterred Islamic militancy.

In 2004, directly after the signing of the first peace accord in Waziristan, the prominent militant Nek Muhammed was killed by a US strike. But his successor-to-be, Mehsud, was not cowed, vowing to continue hostilities.

Other strikes, such as those against Abu Laith al-Libi and Ayman al-Zawahiri, have been similarly ineffective in undercutting Islamic militancy. The deaths of militant leaders rarely discourage additional violence; on the contrary, there is always a successor willing to step up. Just as NATO airstrikes in Afghanistan have bolstered popular support for the Taliban, targeted assassinations in Pakistan – with the inevitable deaths of civilians that result – lead to greater sympathy for radicalism and increase grass-roots support for violence.

Karzai's threat – to initiate cross-border operations against FATA-based militants – may be just talk. But international focus is increasingly looking at this small stretch of land as a formidable problem. As a result, a range of policy options – from the reactionary and simplistic to the thoughtful and nuanced – are being debated in Western capitals.

Moving beyond the myths, toward analysis based on historical and cultural realities, is a critical step in thinking pragmatically about the Pakistani tribal areas.

Joshua Foust is a defense consultant with TSI Executive Consulting. He blogs about Central Asia and US foreign policy at Registan.net. Jeb Koogler is a research associate at the New America Foundation, a think tank in Washington. He is also editor of the international affairs blog Foreign Policy Watch

Find this article at:
Myths in Al Qaeda's 'home' | csmonitor.com

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

In terms of fairness, justice and tactical advantage alone there are multiple arguments in favor of capturing everyone alive rather than dead. If Masud did indeed kill Benazir then how are you going to confirm it by interrogating a corpse? How will you convince the Pakistani public that Mushy is not covering up for her real assasins by offing the fall guy which is probably what a significant portion of Pakistanis assert including Zardari himself? It's common sense that criminals should not be blown up as in some childish video game if it can be avoided.


FATA people have also joined and fought in the pak army/FC for the interests and goals of the pakistani state for decades. FATA people have also migrated to industry hubs like Sialkot and set up vibrant businesses, contributing to the Pakistani economy(just learned that today on wikipedia accidentally). This makes me suspect that those people and their system is not inherently bad. It's just a patriarchal tribal system and I can't see it as a root of all evil, perhaps I am missing something? As long as they can be persuaded to keep to themselves I am OK with them living in their chosen system.

I don't disagree with you that the rule of law, the constitution of Pakistan and the institutions appointed for providing justice and maintaining law and order should take precedence over all else. But the constitution of Pakistan does not apply in the Tribal areas does it?

Ideally I would like the political parties to do what they promised - that is to extend the political parties act into FATA and integrate them into mainstream Pakistan. They should pay taxes, have development works funded and establish the same institutions that the rest of Pakistan has. Of course there is a separate, though no less important, debate that the rest of Pakistan hardly enjoys any constitutional rights or the rule of law.

Ideally I would like to see this in concert with the deletion of the concurrent list and delegation of more autonomy to the provinces, and perhaps even have the Tribal areas exist as a separate province, as their traditions and conservative culture mark them apart from other Pashtun in the settled areas.

What we do have is a most draconian FCR, with provisions of collective responsibility and punishment, that will only serve to isolate the people of FATA from the rest of the nation. And this system has failed, as close to three hundred Tribal elders have been slaughtered by larger and more heavily armed militant forces. They were holding sway over regions of FATA even before the Army went in, and continue to do so today.

So when the traditional system of government has failed, and violent groups hold sway that local law enforcement (levies, Scouts, FC etc.) cannot control, what else is left? Even if one were to argue that the "traditional system should be preserved", that system can only be preserved if the order in the TB is imposed and these militant groups prevented from going on a rampage.

And when local LEA's fail, the Army is the only institution left to enforce the writ of the government.

Now, I don't want the Army in there, I think Gen. Kiyani is correct in that decision. The paramilitary, drawn from the tribes, and the traditional enforcer of order, should be the one to maintain order. On a very basic and personal level it will be far easier for local forces to interact with the Tribesmen, being part of the culture and tribes. We need to therefore continue the capacity building of the FC to where the force can act on its own.

With respect to what should be done in the present - I am not certain that this is the best time to extend the political parties act to FATA - given the instability in the region and the propaganda of the Taliban/AQ or what have you. Such a move could be very easily twisted into a narrative of "destroying our culture and traditions" and alienate more people in FATA. Resorting to the traditional set up of Tribal elders and tribal enforcement, by getting the Tribes to sign on to agreements to not allow militant or AQ activity in their territory, and helping them structure Lashkars's etc. to enforce those agreements, with backing form the FC if needed, is I think the best short term solution.

This needs to be coupled with development. The decision to fund almost 9 billion in development funds in FATA is a belated and welcome one. If the FATA development plan gets passed in the US legislature, it allows us to multiply our development efforts, and in teh long run that is teh only way we will be able to integrate FATA into mainstream Pakistan, and stabilize the region.

Today I came across some fresh news, or actually non-news: The CIA fired a hellfire missile which injured a random woman in FATA and missed killing an entire tribal family because they just happened to be at the hospital.

TTP threatens to hit major cities

So the CIA could have also hit the wrong house, in fact probably did. But they could have also hit a girl's school next door or some other random house killing multple innocent and unaware civilians.

Now, I am not a big fan of Al-Qaida's(whoever on earth they really are) yappings about taking this and that over from secularity, I am not a pathan and nor am I a big fan of mullahs who at best irritate and annoy me and I am not a proponent of sharia caliphates but that news report totally disgusts and appalls me because the CIA has been given carte blanche to terrorize and bomb FATA thus alienating them and actually increasing terrorism. There is yet another reason for the lack of support for this ridiculous self-imposed civil war and it has to do with common sense not love of the Taliban. If people like me are starting to see Mushy/ISI/PA as a willing or unwilling(in different cases) tool of foreign powers to harm Pakistan then you can't just pin this on taliban sympathisers. The dissent against the wot status quo does certainly have other rational arguments and supporters not just the knee-jerk taliban-supporting mullahs that some people portray as being the biggest and only problem in Pakistani politics.

I would have to agree that unilateral strikes are not helping the situation, especially when collateral damage occurs. Muse posted an article on the main FATA thread that made the same argument. and very convincingly. The link is below if you haven't read it yet.

Myths in Al Qaeda's 'home' | csmonitor.com

However, how do we balance our needs for stabilizing FATA 'our way', with the reality of cross border attacks from FATA?

I mean do we tell NATO that they are just going to have to suck it up?

I think there is an argument to be made that cross border attacks are really only an issue because of a lack of forces in Afghanistan. This is not the type of terrain where the militants can run across the border, carry out an attack, and run back again. With adequate resources, NATO should have no problems interdicting these raiding parties.

Those attacks that do occur from Pakistani soil (such as rockets mortars etc. from our side of the border) are supposedly targeted by NATO forces in concert with Paksitani forces (‘Nato engaging militants in Pakistan’)

So is there a huge need for carrying out such air strikes?

What if the intel is about OBL or Zawahiri or other high ranking AQ officials? I suppose this is where a QRF to go in and capture the people needed would come in handy, but the potential for casualties and collateral damage would still be quite large.

 

[Neo]

More foreign fighters moving into Pakistan's tribal areas: report​

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US intelligence officials say there has been an increase in foreign fighters travelling to Pakistan to join up with Al-Qaeda-linked militants in the country's tribal areas, the New York Times reported Thursday.

US intelligence and military sources told the newspaper that dozens or more Uzbeks, North Africans and Arabs from Gulf states have moved into Pakistan in recent months, shoring up the Al-Qaeda forces which are backing the Taliban insurgency in neighboring Afghanistan.

A US military spokesman in Baghdad told the Times that there has been a corresponding drop in the number of foreign fighters entering Iraq, now less than 40 a month compared to up to 110 a month one year ago.

"The flow may reflect a change that is making Pakistan, not Iraq, the preferred destination for some Sunni extremists from the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia who are seeking to take up arms against the West," the Times wrote, citing the officials.

General David McKiernan, the new NATO commander in Afghanistan, said the situation in Pakistan's northwestern border areas, where Al-Qaeda and other Islamic insurgents are based, has worsened.

"The porous border has allowed insurgent militant groups a greater freedom of movement across that border, as well as a greater freedom to resupply, to allow leadership to sustain stronger sanctuaries, and to provide fighters across that border," McKiernan told the Times.

A US defense official told the Times that the flow of foreign fighters into Pakistan has increased "from a trickle to a steady stream," especially after Pakistan's government cut back tribal area operations in March and launched talks with local leaders in hopes of halting militant activities.

While the numbers of foreign fighters in Afghanistan is still relatively small, the increase adds to US worries about the revival of Al-Qaeda and the rise in Taliban attacks on US and NATO coalition forces in Afghanistan.

The concern was heightened Monday when a suicide bomber set off a blast at the Indian embassy in Kabul killing 41. No one has claimed responsibility for the attack. Taliban officials denied involvement and Pakistan rejected accusations by Afghan officials that its intelligence service was behind it.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday that he had seen no proof that foreign agents were involved.

But Afghan Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta told the UN Security Council Wednesday that a key factor behind the worsening security in his country was "the de facto truce" in neighboring Pakistan's tribal areas between the government and autonomous tribal groups.

"Terrorist sanctuaries and an elaborate system of financing, recruiting, arming and systematic training of suicide bombers are at work outside our borders, to keep the terrorist threat alive," Spanta noted.

The resurgence of militants and Al-Qaeda in the Pakistan tribal regions, and Islamabad's truce with area leaders, are posing a deep dilemma for US policy makers and the US military, US experts say.

"Seven years after 9/11, the United States is worse off in Pakistan than it was, American interests in the region were worse off than they were, and Pakistan is worse off than it was," said Robert Hathaway of the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Private US intelligence firm Stratfor predicted in a report this week that "it is only a matter of time before Washington escalates its unilateral military operations deeper into Pakistani territory" -- a move experts warned could worsen "collateral" damage and fuel anti-Americanism.

More foreign fighters moving into Pakistan's tribal areas: report - Yahoo! News

 

[dr.umer]

It was reported by Associated Press

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AP) — A police official says a militant ambush and subsequent shootout has killed at least six security forces and three insurgents in Pakistan's volatile northwest.

The clash underscores the shaky hold Pakistan has over parts of its northwest, where Taliban and al-Qaida linked militants are believed to have found safe havens.

Aslam Khan says militants ambushed a Frontier Constabulary convoy in the Zargari area on Saturday. The paramilitary forces returned fire.

Khan says several security forces have also been wounded. He says officials are still trying to get details but the area's remoteness has made it difficult.

 

[JK!]

BBC News

Militants in north-west Pakistan have killed at least eight soldiers, officials say.

At least 22 other troops were wounded in the attack on their convoy outside Hangu city, near the border with Afghanistan, they said.

Three militants were said to have been killed as the soldiers returned fire.

Hangu is in Pakistan's restive North West Frontier Province (NWFP), which has seen increased military activity from pro-Taleban militants.

Militants attacked the convoy as it approached a fort near the border with Afghanistan, firing rocket-propelled grenades and assault rifles, local police officer Shakirullah Jan told AFP news agency.

There have been a number of sectarian attacks in Hangu and other towns in north-west Pakistan bordering Afghanistan recently.

Attacks have also risen in the NWFP capital, Peshawar. The government has sent in 5,000 paramilitary troops to crush the insurgency.

The action by security forces apparently follows a growing Taleban presence there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7503591.stm

Seems they are now spreading out of FATA and into the "settled areas"

 

[Babagee57]

Does any one remember what was going on before the fall of Dahkka,
1. Indians amoung Bengalies fighting with Pak Army ( MUQTI BAHNI).
2. Pak Government depending on USA.
3. Civil unrest.
4. Two Major political parties refused to sit togather.

and .......................

 

[Neo]

40 al Qaeda commanders held in Pakistan​

July 26th, 2008
By Mohit Joshi

Islamabad, July 26 : Around 40 commanders of al Qaeda including Amjad and Rafi were arrested during the operations in Hangu and Bara, while 17 security personnel were killed, said Rehman Malik, Adviser to Pakistan Prime Minister.

The Daily Times quoted him as saying that suicide attacks had come to “zero level” in Punjab and Sindh, and that such attacks were down by 80 percent in the restive North West Frontier Province.

He also said the operation in the Hangu District had been carried out successfully and desired objectives had been achieved with the minimum use of force.

Rehman said the government had employed the “three-Ds” (dialogue, development and deterrence) and “three-Ps” (prevent, protect and pursue) policy to contain terrorism in the country.

He said the government would prefer negotiations to sort out problems of the Federally Administered Tribal Area, but warned that stern actions would be taken if the peace deals between the NWFP government and the tribal militants failed. (ANI)

40 al Qaeda commanders held in Pakistan | Top News

 

[muse]

For more than a year, politicians and technocracts have repeatedly suggested that FATA is no longer a utility, that these regions must be brought into the mainstream by granting full rights to these areas and their political integration.

However; we might also be mindful of some who seek to extend their reach in pursuit of their historic ambition




Fata’s growing disconnect
By Afrasiab Khattak


IT is hardly an exaggeration that the security of Pakistan, Afghanistan, the entire region and indeed that of the whole world will be defined by developments in Fata over the next few months. Different scenarios are being painted by military strategists and political experts.

Al Qaeda, after regrouping in the militant sanctuaries of the area, is acquiring the capacity to repeat attacks in North America or Europe similar to those carried out in 2001 in the US.

If reports about the exchanges between Pakistan and the US at the highest level are anything to go by it is pretty clear that the US will retaliate against Pakistan, probably even more severely than it did against the Taliban-dominated Afghanistan. Similarly the use of these militant sanctuaries for cross-border fighting is so large in scale (in fact all the six political agencies bordering Afghanistan are being used) that denial in this regard is no longer plausible.

The federal government has to either admit defeat or muster the political will to resolve the problem, or else justify the existence of militant sanctuaries by explaining their usefulness to the national interest. We have run out of time and this decision cannot be delayed any more as there are no takers of the denial line.

As if this were not enough, armed lashkars (armies) from militant sanctuaries in Fata are poised to penetrate/invade the contiguous settled districts. The events in Hangu some three weeks back are a case in point. The Hangu police arrested four Taliban commanders from a car that also contained weapons, explosive material and manuals for making bombs in a place called Doaba not far away from the Orakzai Agency border.

Hundreds of Taliban surrounded the Doaba police station and demanded the commanders’ release. They also blocked the Hangu-Kurram highway. During this confrontation the Frontier Constabulary was ambushed near Zargari village and 16 security personnel were killed. Subsequently the army was called in to launch a military operation in Hangu. This action was not just in retaliation for the murder of 16 FC men but also came in view of the threat of attack by four to five thousand Taliban from Orakzai and Kurram agencies.

By now the said military operation has been completed and the targets achieved to the extent that the Taliban have been chased out of Hangu. Nevertheless, they have fled to Orakzai Agency where they are regrouping and preparing for future attacks.

The NWFP (Pakhtunkhwa) government is in a quandary. It has to call in the army whenever armed lashkars threaten to overrun a district as the police force simply does not have the capacity to fight an ever-expanding insurgency.

After Swat the army has also been deployed in Hangu. In view of the militant sanctuaries situated nearby, the army cannot be withdrawn in the near future. Imagine if the story is repeated in other vulnerable districts. Will the army also have to be deployed in all these other districts? Will such measures not bring the existence of the civilian provincial government into question?

Is it not amazing that in spite of such high stakes the presidency that has a monopoly over governance in Fata seems to show no anxiety over the prevailing situation? It is continuing with the policy of keeping Fata a black hole where terrorist groups from across the globe run their bases. It is still a no-go area for the media and civil society, and so far there is no corrective measure or policy change in sight. So much so that we have failed to take even the most preliminary step of extending the Political Parties Act to Fata.

It is only natural that we are perturbed when attacks are launched from across the border. But should we not be equally sensitive to the loss of our sovereignty over Fata to militant groups? Strangely enough we do not seem to be bothered about the militants’ total control of Fata. When the international media carries reports about this situation we dismiss them as ‘enemy’ propaganda against Pakistan. We have failed to grasp the fact that in the post-cold war world there is a universal consensus about two things. One, that all assault weapons that can be used for launching a war cannot be allowed to be kept in private possession. Two, that no state will allow the use of its soil by non-state players against another state. The entire world is astounded by our fixation with the cold war mode. We have developed an incredible capacity to live in unreality. This is indeed dangerous for any state system but it can be catastrophic for a state dancing in a minefield.

Where does all this leave the people of Fata? They are victims and not perpetrators as some people would like us to believe. They are in fact in triple jeopardy. Firstly they are groaning under the draconian Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) of 1901. They have no access to the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan since they are not justiciable outside of the jurisdiction of the higher judiciary.

Secondly the tribal belt has almost been occupied by foreign and local militant organisations that are better equipped, better trained and better financed than the local population. More than 160 tribal leaders have been killed by terrorists in North and South Waziristan who operate with total impunity. Today’s Fata is not dissimilar to the Taliban and Al Qaeda controlled Afghanistan before 9/11.

Thirdly, the people of Fata get caught in the crossfire between militants and security forces from both sides of the Durand Line. The so-called collateral damage has seen a cancerous growth in Fata. The people of Fata have lost the support and protection of the state. They have no access to the media, courts and hospitals or to humanitarian assistance. The only intervention by state players takes place through their armies and air forces in which people of the tribal area are mostly on the receiving end.

For any informed and sensitive Pakistani, the situation in the tribal area is the top-most priority when it comes to policy formation and implementation. We must realise that the question of dismantling militant sanctuaries in Fata and taking short-term and long-term measures to open up the area and integrate it with the rest of the country needs urgent national attention if we are to avoid the impending catastrophe

 

[Neo]

Malik blames Afghanistan, India for Fata unrest​

WASHINGTON, July 30: India and Afghanistan are stirring troubles in Fata and Balochistan, Rehman Malik, adviser to the prime minister on interior, told journalists on Wednesday.

Mr Malik also blamed India for indulging in “baseless propaganda” against Pakistan although Pakistan itself was a victim of terrorism.

“The time has come for us to reveal the facts and tell the world how outside forces are creating troubles in Pakistan.”

When pressed to identify the outside forces, he named India, Afghanistan’s Northern Alliance, Chechens and Uzbeks who he said were using Pakistan to serve their vested interests.

“India,” he said, “wants to destabilise Fata. What India and (Afghan President) Mr Karzai are doing must stop. They must stop this. They must stop this.”

He also appealed to Pakistan’s western allies, including the United States, to stop India and Afghanistan.

Although Pakistan has always blamed foreign hands for stirring troubles in Balochistan and the NWFP, this is the first time since the Feb 18 election that a senior government official has directly blamed India.

Mr Malik said that India and Afghanistan had direct links to people like Barhamdagh Bugti and “one call from outside leads to the death of four people in Balochistan”.

Asked if his statement was on the record, he said: “Yes, I am not afraid of anyone.”

Malik blames Afghanistan, India for Fata unrest -DAWN - Top Stories; July 31, 2008

 

[blain2]

Finally what needed to be said publicly has been said. No need to beat around the bush. There has been considerable instigation by the two entities mentioned by the advisor to PM.

 

[Neo]

Why don't we invite UN to do investigation to prove our claim, I'm sure it will turn out to be a big embarasment for ceratin countries with vested interests in the region.

Asked if his statement was on the record, he said: “Yes, I am not afraid of anyone.”

Thats the spirit!

 

[IceCold]

For the first time i must agree that i finally liked the courage that is showed by Rehman Malik. However instead of beating the same bush again and again, we need to react her ourselves. Give Indians a taste of their own.