Pakistan: The Enemy Within

[third eye]

Pakistan: The Enemy Within - 101 East - Al Jazeera English

In Pakistan's volatile South Waziristan the temporary peace was hard won. Previous battles have left villages ruined, and some are only now being rebuilt. Girls are even going to school - a rare sight in areas previously ruled by the Pakistani Taliban, also known as Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

The Pakistani army is keen to show how it has managed to kick out the Taliban and restore a more conventional order to the country's tribal areas.

But many villagers claim life was fine under the Taliban, and that the army's intervention was unnecessary and destructive.

"No one was afraid because they were all locals, and all were Pakistanis. Everything was open - the markets - everyone was roaming around as normal. Everything was normal," says a villager in a rebuilt market.

Even Ahmed Rashid, Pakistan's foremost expert on the Taliban groups in the region, agrees. He claims that the US military focus on Afghanistan and the Pakistan government's duplicity there, has radicalised and emboldened a local variant of the Taliban, now bent on overthrowing the government and installing Sharia law.

"There has been this double game that has gone on for many years, of Pakistan supporting the NATO presence in Afghanistan and at the same time allowing the Afghan Taliban to operate against the NATO forces. There is now a full-scale extremist movement in Pakistan that is trying to overthrow the state," explains Rashid.

In a major effort to regain the trust of the locals, the Pakistani army is rebuilding markets, houses, and even constructing a high school for girls.

But with western forces withdrawing from neighbouring Afghanistan, there is fear of more destruction and bloodshed if the Taliban try to reclaim their lands tucked alongside the Afghan border.

So when the western troops withdraw from the area, how long will the Pakistani army's hold last? Will the army's success be enduring or just a fleeting chapter in a long history of changing rule in an area that neighbours Afghanistan?

In an area off limits to most locals, let alone foreign film crews, 101 East gains rare access to Pakistan's war against the Pakistani Taliban in South Waziristan.

 

[Aamna14]

Thats trash honestly anybody who claims life was fine under taliban rule has to be a redarded psychopath the crimes they commited were too horrible to be even mentioned.

 

[Informant]

Thats trash honestly anybody who claims life was fine under taliban rule has to be a redarded psychopath the crimes they commited were too horrible to be even mentioned.

They dont know what happened to girls who were forcefully abducted by the talibans and were raped and everything. Then killed of had their been a quarrel between two of the talibans about the girl. This is just a mere glimpse of it, fucking illiterate assholes, and we strived for peace with them.

 

[cloud_9]

 

[kseeker]

They dont know what happened to girls who were forcefully abducted by the talibans and were raped and everything. Then killed of had their been a quarrel between two of the talibans about the girl. This is just a mere glimpse of it, fucking illiterate assholes, and we strived for peace with them.

Mulla omar became famous for punishing those who committed sins such as rape, molestation on women !

Talibani's are god fearing folks right ? Why would they abduct girls, women and rape them ?

 

[Informant]

Mulla omar became famous for punishing those who committed sins such as rape, molestation on women !

Talibani's are god fearing folks right ? Why would they abduct girls, women and rape them ?

When you have so many religious nutjobs fighting each other, you pick the one that suits you and support it. Imagine what would happen if we didnt support them, they wouldhave poured very easily over the borders. Crazies it was, so crazies it became. Picked an evil that suited us the best, but then again evil is always evil. God fearing and God like are two different philosophies, unfortunately for the illiterate they cant distinguish.

We picked a poison, had to deal with it sometime, sooner than later. trust me you guys are lucky you didnt have to border with such a ruthless nation.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Pakistan: The Enemy Within - 101 East - Al Jazeera English

In Pakistan's volatile South Waziristan the temporary peace was hard won. Previous battles have left villages ruined, and some are only now being rebuilt. Girls are even going to school - a rare sight in areas previously ruled by the Pakistani Taliban, also known as Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

The Pakistani army is keen to show how it has managed to kick out the Taliban and restore a more conventional order to the country's tribal areas.

But many villagers claim life was fine under the Taliban, and that the army's intervention was unnecessary and destructive.

"No one was afraid because they were all locals, and all were Pakistanis. Everything was open - the markets - everyone was roaming around as normal. Everything was normal," says a villager in a rebuilt market.

Even Ahmed Rashid, Pakistan's foremost expert on the Taliban groups in the region, agrees. He claims that the US military focus on Afghanistan and the Pakistan government's duplicity there, has radicalised and emboldened a local variant of the Taliban, now bent on overthrowing the government and installing Sharia law.

"There has been this double game that has gone on for many years, of Pakistan supporting the NATO presence in Afghanistan and at the same time allowing the Afghan Taliban to operate against the NATO forces. There is now a full-scale extremist movement in Pakistan that is trying to overthrow the state," explains Rashid.

In a major effort to regain the trust of the locals, the Pakistani army is rebuilding markets, houses, and even constructing a high school for girls.

But with western forces withdrawing from neighbouring Afghanistan, there is fear of more destruction and bloodshed if the Taliban try to reclaim their lands tucked alongside the Afghan border.

So when the western troops withdraw from the area, how long will the Pakistani army's hold last? Will the army's success be enduring or just a fleeting chapter in a long history of changing rule in an area that neighbours Afghanistan?

In an area off limits to most locals, let alone foreign film crews, 101 East gains rare access to Pakistan's war against the Pakistani Taliban in South Waziristan.

@third eye: the process has inevitably and inexorably reached the stage that it has. These Creatures were created and nurtured for the purposes of being used to create one like in Frankenstein for somebody else; but like Frankenstein, the Creature has turned upon its own Maker !

The Creators viz. Pakistan, USA and KSA notably thought that they were just making some "dogs of war" who would just do their bidding and then after all that, docilely come to heel and play dead when asked to. But after the upheaval in Afghanistan; the Taliban tasted Power and also Blood. Now; if any of its creators thinks that they can be reined in--------is just like living in some "cloud-cuckoo-land".
Amir Mir's book "Talibanisation of Pakistan" explains how it has happened very well. Or the MEI publication "The Islamization of Pakistan 1979-2009". There is much more literature available besides. But all of it makes for some depressing reading, with grim fore-bodings. But it was on expected lines; at least to any sober, thinking rational person.

101 East from Al-Jazeera has covered it well but is only just a part of the larger picture.

 

[OrionHunter]

101 East from Al-Jazeera has covered it well but is only just a part of the larger picture.

Here's more.....

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Here's more.....

Heres the link to the MEI publication: The Islamization of Pakistan, 1979-2009 | Middle East Institute
Download the PDF and read it.

 

[OrionHunter]

Heres the link to the MEI publication: The Islamization of Pakistan, 1979-2009 | Middle East Institute
Download the PDF and read it.

Thanks! This in a nutshell, says it all:

"The origins of many of Pakistan’s troubles today lie not just in the circumstances in which the state of Pakistan emerged, but in the manner in which various domestic political forces have defined and sought to advance their competing visions of the state since independence.

Over the years, successive national political leaders, the military, and other actors have appropriated the symbols, institutions, tools of statecraft, and even the rhetoric of Pakistan’s founding father, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in order to advance their own narrow agendas."

 

[SrNair]

The 65 years of paranoia: Is there anything to celebrate?


Some say that it was never the founder’s intention and consequently the entity when it materialized had no solid footings to begin. The political entity, which came into being on the fateful day of 1947 was born out of chaos, confusion and bloodshed. All of these constituted the birth environment of the country and resulted in a deep paranoia which has prevailed to this day. This environment was dominated by fear of a breakup and consequently the newly formed country lived its early years in constant insecurity. This insecurity was further enhanced due to lack of any powerful leadership and also due to virtual absence of institutional arrangements which are generally essential for keeping an ethnically diverse state cohesive.
Such institutional arrangements were not there for two reasons. First, Pakistan’s founding party Muslim League only became a mass party (that too is arguable whether it ever became one) at a very late stage and it did not have well entrenched roots in all the provinces of Pakistan. At least two provinces, namely NWFP (now Khyber Pukhtunkhawa ) and Baluchistan were less than eager to join the federation and in both Muslim League was relatively weak. The demand for Pakistan was not uniform and even Bengal and Sindh (the two provinces who had voted for it) had perhaps supported it as a means to greater provincial autonomy in the future. It is argued and with justification that one of the reasons as to why they voted for Pakistan was that they had assumed that they would be granted greater autonomy in Pakistan compared to India, as they shared at least the same religion with the other inhabitants.
Secondly and as mentioned earlier that Pakistan was not even what perhaps the founder himself had really wanted. A credible and a well-established narrative actually states that Pakistan had been thought of as a bargaining ploy to ensure a better representation for Muslims in a United India. However, the circumstances in the last days of British Raj did not shape up that way and the bargaining ploy instead materialized into a reality which perhaps no one was prepared for.
Pakistan thus came into being as a weak state characterized by constant fear of break up which due to its ethnical diversity was only going to worsen with time. In those early years, it was perhaps natural that country tried to over centralize and went for a very strong center with even stronger establishment institutions. But that was not all. In the absence of democratic traditions as well as mechanism (which Pakistan movement did not have), in order to resolve the issue of ethnical diversity in a rational way, the country also went for a host of supplementary measures to foster cohesion. Chief amongst those were stress on strengthening Islamic identity and whipping up fear of India.
Both these ideological tactics, political usage of Islam and fear/hatred of India, were used to “unite” a country that had come into this world virtually unprepared. These measures over the years were not gradually phased out but rather further enhanced.
Rather than try to build a nation through granting enough space to various ethnicities, we have just relied on centralization, political Islam and supplementing these two with fear and hatred of India. These tactics have not solved the issue of ethnic demands of greater autonomy but have created a bigoted schizophrenic mentality which hates minorities, fears diversity and looks for foreign conspiracies everywhere.
Centralization over the years has led to a state structure favoring Punjab and has deepened fissures in the polity. We are apparently united and in reality breaking apart. We created one unit to negate the population advantage of Bengalis, denied them their demand for greater autonomy and eventually conducted a bloody crackdown. We lost East Pakistan and instead of learning the lesson went back with a renewed vigor towards imposing more of “real” Islam.
Whipping up religion has made us bigoted and relegated us to nothing but a polity riddled with sectarian violence and mindless extremism. And yet we seek further solace in religion and get ourselves even more entangled. Today the world mistrusts us and the green passport has become a bane to its holders. Literally every major act of terrorism is traced back to Pakistan and yet we are unable to even recognize the linkage. Everything becomes either a grand conspiracy of our enemies or when the evidence is just too damning then a reaction to US atrocities.
The state cultivated fear of India though weakened in recent years (as the main enemy needed to “unite” Pakistan has been replaced by our friend of yesteryears, the United States) continues and we keep dreaming about Ghazwa Hind and feeding the big white elephant, the Pakistan army. As our neighbor zooms ahead in economic sphere, we lag behind still deeply engulfed in the paranoia that it wants to “conquer” Pakistan and undo partition. Frankly, now the fear is completely nonsensical and is actually an outcome of our misplaced image about ourselves. Who will like to takeover Pakistan with its so many social as well economic problems? Ironically today India’s interest is more likely to be a stable Pakistan not a weak Pakistan. And yet the threat is still needed to keep us together and to keep on feeding a large army.
Sixty five years have passed and today looking back, I ask frankly what is there to celebrate? In the failed state index of 2011 Pakistan ranked 12th.Only Afghanistan and Iraq rank higher among Asian countries. As a state we were placed in the category of “critical” and shared that category with completely war torn African and Asian countries. What we consider our achievements (such as nuclear arsenal), are actually the fears of the rest of the world. A recent Gallup survey revealed that nuclear arsenal is considered to be the most important achievement by most of the Pakistanis. Since insecurity has always been with us therefore even our perceived achievements are devices which can kill millions. The irony that actually it has not made us secure and we have ended up protecting the device, is totally lost on us. We have such misplaced priorities that sometimes I feel whether the entire nation has gone bonkers. We get agitated over drone attack which are supposed to kill the militants and yet silent when Hazara Shias are murdered by militants. As a nation, we do not have the basic morality to stand up for minorities. In fact we are not able to condemn monsters like Taliban even when they target the urban areas of Pakistan.
Our heroes are gutter minded scientists like Doctor Abdul Qadeer Khan who actually stole the technology from the other countries to build the bomb and subsequently sold the parts to rogue states of the world. And add to it his shameless bigoted views against minorities. And that person which ideally should have been hated even in “nationalist” and rightwing sense is a revered figure. And while we esteem a creep like him, the real hero, Pakistan’s only Nobel Laureate, Dr. Abdul Salam is virtually ignored just because of his Ahmedi faith.
Our Judiciary instead of delivering justice to ordinary man is more concerned about Katrina’s legs shown on the TV, once again showing the role of religion in almost every aspect of life. And yet despite so called anti vulgarity slogans, Pakistan continues to be the global leader in **** downloads!
We are not a nation but a joke and riddled with contradictions and will remain so unless we get rid of that paranoia which has existed from the inception of this country. We need to stop fearing diversity and plurality. The main source of all the problems is this fear that ethnic diversity if allowed to form political expression will break up Pakistan and to tackle this our establishment over the years has adopted measures.
Today on the eve of Pakistan’s 65th birthday, I do not want to say “Happy Birthday Pakistan” but rather advise “Think Pakistan”.



this is an article written by a pakistani

 

[niaz]

One of the biggest enemy of Pakistan State as envisaged by the Quaid & Allam Iqbal is Jamaat Islami under the leadership of the bigot Munawwar Hassan. The following article provides sufficient evidence for this:

Amir ZiaMonday, November 18, 2013
From Print Edition


101 14 75 1

When Syed Munawar Hasan, the Jamaat-e-Islami ameer, declared one of Pakistan’s most wanted terrorist kingpin a martyr and raised doubts about the sacrifices of our soldiers fighting such elements, he articulated what many radical Islamists had wanted to hear from a mainstream religious party leader for a long, long time.

The statement should be seen in the context of the centuries-old debate among Islamic scholars on whether fighting seemingly unjust and tyrannical Muslim rulers is justified. These theological differences are confined not just between Sunni-Shia scholars, but also among various Sunni schools of thought.

The bitter division over this issue, indeed, defines today’s conflict within many Muslim societies. In fact, these differences have become more explosive in Pakistan due to its proximity with war-ravaged Afghanistan, and the state’s past policy of arming and patronising various shades of Islamic militants as its proxies in the region. This policy backfired as many militants began to follow the Al-Qaeda-inspired pan-Islamist agenda and turned the guns on their former handlers when the state tried to set a new policy direction following the Sept 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the United States.

Pakistan’s efforts to stop the use of its territory for fomenting terrorism around the world resulted in a civil-war like situation, which has consumed thousands of lives since early 2002 and transformed this nuclear-armed Muslim nation as one of the most dangerous and unstable countries of the world.

With successive governments giving confused signals in this conflict – sometimes trying to wage a selective fight and at others to strike deals with militants – it should not come as a surprise that the extremists and militants have acquired an upper hand in dictating the narrative and setting the rules of engagement.

There are passionate arguments based on Islamic theology to justify jihad (holy war) by individuals or groups of individuals (read non-state actors) if rulers fail to act when Muslim territories or population get attacked by ‘infidel forces’. The entire narrative of Al-Qaeda and other Islamic militant groups is based on this hypothesis.

The proponents of this stance believe that those Muslim rulers – in our case they allege it’s the Pakistani state – who facilitate the invading forces remain a just target. This narrative also calls for fighting those Muslim rulers who do not adhere to Islamic teachings, and justifies the use of force for enforcement of Shariah.

The other set of Islamic scholars advocate moderation and oppose any action that brings anarchy and civil war in a Muslim state. They advocate tolerating even a tyrannical ruler to prevent discord among Muslims and aim to Islamise society through painstaking preaching and reforms. They consider it the government’s prerogative to declare holy war in a Muslim state like Pakistan. These scholars forbid attacking Pakistani security forces and killing civilians – be they Muslim or non-Muslim. They also consider acts of terrorism, including suicide bombings, against the spirit of jihad.

Against this backdrop, it is no wonder that the Jamaat-e-Islami ameer’s statement triggered such a heated debate and sharpened polarisation on the issue of religiously-motivated militancy in the country. And it is not just liberal parties, the government and the country’s mighty military establishment that have slammed the Jamaat leader. Many major religious groups also see Hasan’s statement, supporting the Al-Qaeda-linked militants, as highly offensive and against Islamic teachings.

But Hasan has many supporters as well. Foremost among them are the outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and similar militant and hard-line groups, which appear more effective in dictating narrative because of their single-minded efforts and uncompromising attitude. The Jamaat-e-Islami also appears to stand solidly behind its leader, underlining the fact that the ameer’s statement should neither be considered a slip of tongue nor mere rhetoric. It is a well thought-out position, though made public in such a blunt manner for the first time only now.

However, the Jamaat-e-Islami and its rank and file have been practically committed to this stance since Pakistan officially abandoned support to the Afghan Taliban in late 2001 and joined the US-led war against terrorism.

If the Jamaat-e-Islami leaders consistently opposed Pakistani security forces’ efforts against Al-Qaeda and its inspired local militants all these years, many members of this religio-political party sheltered foreign militants in their individual capacity. Several disgruntled former members of the Jamaat-e-Islami and its affiliate students’ wing, Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, even indulged in high-profile terrorist attacks.

From the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – one of the masterminds of the Sept 11, 2001 attacks on the US – at the house of a leading Jamaat-e-Islami’s women-wing member in March 2003 in Rawalpindi to those Al-Qaeda members apprehended in Karachi hiding at the residences of two other women members of this party, there is a long list of senior JI workers who facilitated and protected foreign militants across Pakistan.

Similarly, several former Jamaat-e-Islami members joined various extremist groups or formed their own for terrorism. One of the most prominent among them was Jandullah, which attacked the motorcade of Corps Commander Karachi in 2004. Its founder Atta-ur Rehman was a former member of the Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, while two other prominent members – Dr Arshad Wahed and Dr Akmal Waheed – were leading figures of the Jamaat-e-Islami’s affiliated doctors’ association.

On acquittal in this case, Arshad shifted to Wana where he was killed in a US drone attack in March 2008. His brother Akmal, who also was acquitted, was rearrested, but this time in Abu Dhabi for his alleged Al-Qaeda connections.

All these cases and many others like them have been widely reported in the press and documented in several books focusing on Al-Qaeda-linked militancy in Pakistan.

The radicalisation of many of its young members and their drift towards unbridled militancy pose a big ideological challenge for the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership, which despite opposing successive governments on the issue of their support to the US-led war on terror, has worked within the framework of the Pakistan constitution and by-and-large opted for a democratic course to advance its political agenda.

However, for a party that remained the ideological bulwark of Islamic forces in the region and served as a fighting arm of the military establishment for decades – be it in the former East Pakistan, Indian-occupied Kashmir or Afghanistan – keeping such internal strains, contradictions and ideological questions in check is easier said than done.

The Jamaat-e-Islami’s continued history of poor performance in electoral politics and the emergence of more radicalised, aggressive and militant Islamic groups on the scene have created an internal dilemma for the party, which considers itself the original face of modern-day political Islam and jihad.

Today, the choice for the Jamaat-e-Islami and all the other mainstream religious parties is either to stick to their old paradigm of constitutional politics or tread the path on which the more radicalised, pan-Islamist militant groups are trying to pull the overall movement for Islamic renaissance and revival.

This internal contradiction is a fundamental one within Islamists. How will the leadership of the mainstream religious parties, including the Jamaat, handle this question? Will the main body of constitutionalist Islamists drift toward militancy or succeed in pacifying the hothead radicals by finding a middle path? Will they be able to keep themselves relevant in the coming days if they continue to stick to the legal and constitutional methods of politics or become irrelevant, with hard-liners taking the charge of the movement?

These are grave and make-or-break choices for the Jamaat leadership. Syed Munawar Hasan has succeeded in igniting an intense debate, but will he be able to take it to his desired end?

It is also a moment of reckoning for the Pakistani establishment. How will it deal with its former allies and estranged friends? How will it resolve the internal contradictions of the state and restore normality and rule of law in a country caught in the vortex of lawlessness and religiously-motivated violence and terrorism. At the moment, all the major players appear devoid of solutions to these mega challenges.

The writer is editor The News, Karachi.Email: amir.zia@thenews.com.pk
Battle of narratives - Amir Zia

 

[Side-Winder]

I wish qazi hussain ahmed was alive...