Desicritics Category: Politics: Pakistan

Tarbela Dam & Karkoram Highway Threatened in Pakistan

C N Anand — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 01:09:57 EST

In 1840, upstream of the Indus, in the Shyok tributary, an ice bridge collapsed to form a dam resulting in the creation of a lake 19 Kms long, 800 meters wide, and 120 meters deep. When the dam breached, a 20 meter high wall of water and mud barreled down the gorges of the Indus, and burst into the plains at Tarbela, and reached Attock in two days time. The massive flash flood of mud devastated the Sikh army camping on the banks of the Indus near Attock! History would have taken a different course if the Sikh army had not been devastated!

In 1858, a similar landslide on the Hunza river (tributary of the Indus) created a reservoir. This also burst. Cultivated land was scoured out and villages flattened. When the flood waters reached the confluence of the Kabul river and the Indus, a reverse flow up the Kabul river, up to 50 kms, was created.

Coming to very recent times, two months ago, on 04 January, 2010, a portion of a mountain gave way to block the Hunza river at Atabad, in the Gilgit-Baltistan area. After hitting the lowest portion of the valley, the land-slide climbed up the opposite hill side and damaged the Karakoram Highway (KKH). Trade with China on the KKH remains disrupted since then. Fortunately, the water flow in the river is low in January, but the flow picks up as temperature rises and snow starts melting. By 27 February, 43 days after the landslide, the longest Bridge over the Hunza, 11 Kms upstream of the landslide area, got submerged. The water level is expected to rise another 30 meters above the bridge. The Karkoram Highway hugs the banks of the Indus and Hunza, crossing over at regular intervals to the opposite bank and back on bridges. Upstream of Atabad, the KKH is now submerged for a length of 15 Kms.

The final size of the lake is expected to be bigger than the lakes formed in 1840 and 1858.

The block in the valley at Atabad is long but narrow like the cork of a champagne bottle. It is 3000 meters long along the valley, and 200 meters wide. On top of the block, earth moving equipment has been placed to doze down the height to meet the rising waters at the earliest. The narrowness of the block restricts the number of dozers that can be deployed. Snow melt and water seepage has made the top of the earth block slushy and boggy, hindering the functioning of the earth moving equipment. The water flow is increasing day by day as temperature rises, resulting in the water level rising faster. In the race against time, the Pakistani engineers seem to be loosing. When the water level reaches the top of the landslide and starts spilling over, erosion will occur. Hopefully, the dam will be washed out slowly and not burst.

The difference between the earlier two situations of 1841 and 1858 and now is that Pakistan has created a lot of assets in the form of the Karkoram Highway (KKH) with many bridges, and the world's largest earth and rock-fill dam, the Tarbela dam. If the dam at Atabad bursts, the wall of mud will rip the KKH along the entire length of the Hunza and the Indus, till Tarbela. Bridges will be devastated. If the Tarbela reservoir is at the dead level as it is now, the wall of mud will push the sand delta over to overwhelm the off take tunnels, and clog up the turbines. The Tarbela dam will have to be written off, which will spell economic disaster to Pakistan.

Pakistan is advised to stop letting out water at the Tarbela dam immediately, and store water to a height of 30 meters above the dead level. The cushion of water in the reservoir will absorb the wall of mud well upstream of the dam and not allow the existing delta to be nudged forward and spill. The catch is that the Rabi crop will have to be allowed to wither away. Unfortunately, Pakistan is facing a drought.

The question that should be boggling every Indian's mind is how can India help? In the impending chaos, what will happen to the nukes? How will China be effected? Will history take another wrenching turn?

India and Pakistan - Future Scenarios

Sandeep Bansal — Tue, 2 Mar 2010 07:46:17 EST

Sixty three years ago, the two countries started their journey, torn by bitter memories of partition. The relations between the two nations have been troubled right from the start. Two similar examples from around the world the come to mind - West Germany and East Germany, and the two Koreas.

There are some basic similarities. These countries too had to go through a bitter partition. They followed different political systems and were bitter rivals of each other. One essential difference is that they essentially were one country - i.e. both East and West Germany claimed that they represented the entire Germany. Same is true in case of North and South Korea. In case of India and Pakistan, their rivalry is essentially over Kashmir. Though India was earlier a united country, it is extremely unlikely that partition can be reversed.

The German Story

After the Second World War, both East and West Germany were essentially poor and devastated. But West Germany under the allied influence, introduced free market reforms. It also benefited by large scale aid by the US. By the 1960's and 70's, there was large and visible difference in conditions on the two sides of the border. People in East Germany wanted to move to the West in search of a better life. The Berlin Wall was constructed to stop this. The difference in living standards continued to increase. Perhaps it was the aid from Soviet Union that was keeping things just about together in East Germany. In late 80's, Soviet Union was badly battered in Afghanistan. As a result, it could not continue its aid to the East. The Berlin Wall collapsed.

The Korean conundrum

The story between North and South Korea is somewhat similar. Both countries have remained bitter rivals since the end of the Korean War in 1953. Both countries have contrasting political and economic systems. While North Korea is a totalitarian dictatorship with centralized economy, South Korea is a democratic country with free markets. North Korea implemented land reforms, introduced free health care and education. At one point of time, its HDI indicators were better. However, gradually South Korea's export led economy has moved way ahead. Today its HDI indicators are much better. Its per capita income is $20,000 as compared to a minuscule $1100 in North Korea.

Sung Yoon Lee in his article in ForegnPolicy says,

In contrast, beyond North Korea's southern border lies a free and affluent Korea, one that claims sovereignty over the entire peninsula and to which millions of Northerners would move if given the choice. By its mere existence, Seoul poses an omnipresent existential threat to Pyongyang.

In his article, Lee predicts that North Korea like East Germany cannot survive forever. It will collapse at some point of time. It must be noted that it currently receives aid from China (just like East Germany did from Soviet Union) and South Korea without which vast proportion of its population would die of hunger.

Comparing India and Pakistan

Can such an eventuality occur in the Indian Subcontinent? On one side we have India, a democracy (with its own flaws), an rapidly growing economy and rising living standards.But it is also the home the largest number of poor, there is growing rich-poor divide and a growing Naxal violence. On the other side of the spectrum is Pakistan, at best is a military controlled democracy, a country that is battling with an identity crisis, is a nuclear weapon state, is said to be source of terrorism worldwide.

Small signs of such a thing are present. Pakistanis today are worldwide seen with suspicion. They are lined up and frisked separately at airport. Many Pakistanis abroad claim themselves to be of Indian origin in order to escape this. Some Pakistanis artists like Musicians also want to get hold to an Indian Passport. Of course, these people are a small minority.

But is such a thing really possible. My answer to that will be for the moment, NO. The difference in prosperity in the two countries isn't that huge. India's rank according to HDI index is 134 while that of Pakistan is 141. As per Wiki, India's per capita income $1022 while that of Pakistan is $1017. Our Gini ratio is actually higher at 36.8 as compared to just 30 for Pakistan. Historian William Dalrymple too writes that there is little difference.

On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country's visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.

However, he goes on to point out some major differences - landholdings. democracy and education. Soon after independence, land reforms were introduced in India. This was promised the Congress. In fact, this is often referred as one of the reasons of creating Pakistan, (protecting the interests of Zamindars). In Pakistan, this feudal system still exists and as a result there is inequality and social tension. Pakistan has seldom enjoyed Democracy. However, often freedom is difficult to directly quantify when it comes to measuring prosperity. Regarding education in Pakistan, he writes

No problem in Pakistan casts such a long shadow over its future as the abject failure of the government to educate more than a fraction of its own people: at the moment, a mere 1.8% of Pakistan's GDP is spent on government schools. The statistics are dire: 15% of these government schools are without a proper building; 52% without a boundary wall; 71% without electricity.

This education gap is the most striking way in which Pakistan is lagging behind India: in India, 65% of the population is literate and the number rises every year: only last year, the Indian education system received a substantial boost of state funds.

But in Pakistan, the literacy figure is under half (it is currently 49%) and falling: instead of investing in education, Musharraf's military government is spending money on a cripplingly expensive fleet of American F-16s for its air force. As a result, out of 162 million Pakistanis, 83 million adults of 15 years and above are illiterate. Among women the problem is worse still: 65% of all female adults are illiterate. As the population rockets, the problem gets worse.

Currently, India's literacy rate is 65% and should increase to 80-85% by 2030. One obvious concern here is what is the quality of this education and are these people employable. And I am sure even in India, there are schools that don't have proper building or electricity(particularly in the Naxal belt).

Nevertheless, India is way ahead of Pakistan in terms of education. But another concern is that a large proportion of the population receives education through the outdated Madrassa system.The so-called secular forces are merely promising reservations for them, even though in 60 years, reservations haven't made enough impact on SC's and ST's. Reservations were supposed to be an instrument that removes the caste identity. Instead it has only strengthened it. A divide based on religion is even more dangerous. Ironically, it has been the so-called communal party that has talked about reforming the madrassas, something that has been looked with suspicion by the community.

Future Scenario:2030

Where will India and Pakistan be in 2030 economically, this is an important question. Will there be any difference in the level of Indian prosperity with respect to Pakistan change?

Over the last 20 years our economy has grown consistently. In the last five years, we have grown by nearly 8%. There are rumors that we are capable of achieving 9-10% growth rates. Let us assume that we will grow at an average of 7% over the next 10 years and at 5.5% in the subsequent 10 years. The growth rates will come down because of base-effect. Despite these highly conservative estimates, India's GDP would be at least 4.2 trillion dollars. Our rate of population growth has been coming down consistently and present it is roughly 1.55% (Source). Assuming an average growth rate of 1.45% over the next 10 years and an average of 1.35 over the subsequent 10 years, our per capita GDP should be roughly 2700$ in 2030.

What would the number be for Pakistan? Under Musharraf, from 2002 to 2007 Pakistan did post impressive growth of 6-7%. But such stability in the country is rare. In 2009, the growth rate was just 2%. Assuming an average growth rate of 4% over the next 10 years and 6% over the subsequent 10 years(highly optimistic considering the frequent bomb blasts and terror attacks), in 2030 Pakistan's GDP would just be $436 billion. Assuming its population grows at 2% and 1.8% as against present figure of 2.2%, its per capita income would in 2030 would only be around $1800.

These are highly conservative estimates and the real picture might actually to be much much better than this.For example, considering current education levels in Pakistan it is highly unlikely that they can sustain such growth rates of 6% over such long periods. Despite this conservatism, India's GDP would be 10 times that of Pakistan while per capita GDP would be 1.5 times. More likely figures are that our GDP will be 14-15 times that of Pakistan and per capita GDP will be around 2.5 times that of Pakistan.

Impact of this growth

India's GDP would be at least 10 times that of Pakistan. In another five years time, India's economy would overtake China as the fastest growing economy. This should translate into enormous leverage for us. Around 10-15 years ago, China's human rights record was severely criticized everywhere. But one hardly hears that today. China's influence was very much visible at Copenhagen.

India is bound to enjoy similar influence by 2030 or even before that. By 2030, India would have almost certainly hosted the Olympics. We are not even sure whether Pakistan could host even the Asian Games by then

I do not foresee a Germany like situation which led to the reunification of Germany. But I do expect that if there is appreciable difference in prosperity and if this grow is inclusive, domestic support for terror is should come down appreciably.

Another important thing is that if there is an appreciable and visible difference in prosperity, it shall become increasingly difficult for the Pakistani Military to continue with its astronomically high defense expenditure. Presently India spends around 2.5% of the GDP on defense while Pakistan spends around 3.5-4%. Hence, in 2030 our defense budget should be close to 100 billion dollars ( 2.5% of 4.2 trillions). This would be 25% of the Pakistan GDP in 2030. Naturally Pakistan would try and match India's defense expenditure by increasing its defense to atleast 8-10% of the GDP.

There would be increasing public pressure against this and unrest among the people would rise. This would result to much more Army control over the civilian Govt and military highhandedness. Thus most probably by 2030 Pakistan would under direct Military control.Furthermore, the increasing military asymmetry would force Pakistan to lower its nuclear doctrine. Thus the sub-continent would actually become a much dangerous place in 2030.

Limitations of this analysis

The methodology of this analysis is just too simple to cover everything. First, the GDP figures are based on nominal values rather that PPP. Using purchasing parity method, the comparative figures would actually improve significantly for India.

Secondly, India has been lucky to have stable Govts. at the centre since 1999 and increasingly governance is becoming the sole criteria that is used by the people while voting. What if there is a hung Parliament. India has previously witnessed this during the 1989-91 and 1996-98. During this period, the growth was minimal and reforms were stagnant.

Thirdly, merely achieving these growth rates are not sufficient. Whether this will translate in improve in prosperity. Whether this growth will be inclusive. Whether all communities including the Muslims who are currently lagging behind in all social indicator be a part of this growth. Will the Maoists be suppressed. Will the development reach the Naxal belt.

Finally, will there be any war either with Pakistan or with China. War could change the above numbers. Of course any resolution with either of the two will also improve the numbers vastly.

These are extremely difficult questions and only time tell. However, if India plays its cards well, great glory is awaiting us. For Pakistan, it is important to understand that India's rise is inevitable. It will be their choice whether they would like to be a part of this growth or not. It is therefore important for Pakistan to understand that going forward, they will not be able to compete whether militarily or economically.

The Changing Geopolitics of South Asia

jay — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:27:45 EST

Afghanistan has been relatively quiet on the surface for the past couple of months. It might lull any one who has not been paying attention, into thinking that the situation is getting better. The truth is quite to the contrary. A lot of strategic maneuvers have been taking place between the various players in the region since the announcement of America's intention of withdrawing from Afghanistan. There are all indications that the various players, Pakistan being the primary among them, are jostling for their domination over the region once the US withdraws. According to some interpretations it appears that they are willing to go to any lengths to secure a favourable outcome for themselves.

In my December 13 article I had described how the next two years are crucial for India and others in the region. Although the doomsday scenario I painted in there will take time to play out (I hope it does not happen!), there are enough indications that Pakistan has already taken the upper hand in getting control of the situation in Afghanistan and is positioning itself to be the holder of the remote control of Kabul. The recent conferences in Istanbul and London are a case in point. Pakistan ensured that India was kept out of the conference. In fact it would like India to have nothing to do with Afghanistan - not even humanitarian assistance.

Given the utter dependence of the Western world on Pakistan, Gen Ashfaq Kayani is having a great time lecturing them about who he will target and who he won't. He has already given enough indications of how he will be maneuvering the various terrorist networks such that they will be good tools for him to use, whether it would be against the Western forces or against India. The sad part is that the double game being played by Pakistan is very clear to all but there is a feeling of all-around helplessness. Pakistan appears to be acting like a suicide bomber. It is like they have bombs tied to their body and are saying, "let me go or I will blow the world apart". Right now the world is ready to let them go.

A brilliant analysis by the Indian Defence strategist Mr. K Subramaniam (Indian Express dated 17-02-10) sees the recent Pune bombing as an indicator of things to come. At the surface, that bombing seemed more amateur than what the sophisticated groups are capable of, but there could be more to it than what is on the surface. According to him, the bombing was done to raise the temperature in India to such a degree that the ever-gullible media and the politicians of Thackeray's ilk would call for an armed response against Pakistan. This would provide all the proof that Mr. Kayani requires, to cry about the Indian threat and move his troops from the western to the eastern border of Pakistan. The American forces' recent surge in the Helmand province has made it untenable for the Taliban to survive there and they need a safe passage into Pakistan. This movement of troops will provide that safe passage with no consequences. According to Mr. Subramaniam, the Parliament attack of December 2001 was precisely aimed to have India raise the saber by amassing its troops at the Pak border. India fell into the trap pretty neatly. This provided Gen Musharaff the reason to move all his troops from the Afghan border to the Indian border so as to provide Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar a safe passage into Pakistan as the operation by the Americans at the time was making it difficult for them to continue to stay in Afghanistan. So, it looks like Deja vu all over again. India has done well to see through the game this time and announced that they will go ahead with the secretary level talks. One must realize that India does not expect to achieve anything out of these talks. This is purely a strategic move on India's part, perhaps a concession to the Americans. So, if India is not moved by a small attack, perhaps a bigger attack is on its way in the next couple of weeks.

It is just not clear where all this is going to end. But, it is definitely clear that there is going to be turmoil in this part of the world for the next few years. India needs to stand as one people and see through this game. Can we do it? Given the divergent motivations we have and the lack of trust we have for each other, I have my doubts. Have we forgotten about that 400-year old strategy of "Divide and conquer" again?

Lawyers Refusing to be Lawyers

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:15:12 EST

The right to legal representation is a cornerstone of every civilised society. For a legal association to refuse to support an accused is nothing but a breakdown in that country’s civilisation and basic humanity. In other words, the country’s pretensions to be civilised and defend rights is frankly in the toilet. This was brought home to me when I read this story:

Islamabad (AsiaNews) - Because of the threats posed by the powerful Lahore Bar Association – an umbrella organization of city lawyers - no Christian or Muslim lawyer is ready to take on the defence in the murder of 12 year-old Shazia Bashir, it was reported yesterday by The Pakistani Christian association that deals with legal assistance.

The girl, of Christian faith, died on Jan. 23 as a result of violence - even sexual – at the hands of her employer, a wealthy and powerful Muslim lawyer in Lahore. The alleged culprit, Chaudhry Mohammad Naeem, is a former president of the Lahore High Court Bar Association. The girl, just 12 years old, had worked as a maid in the home of Naeem in the last six months.

Now you can draw what conclusions you may from this story. But here are some more examples before you do.

1. This was the legal representation situation with respect to trying Kasab, the sole surviving member of the Pakistani terrorist team which attacked Mumbai. I quote:

The news of providing state legal aid to Mohammed Ajmal Kasab, the sole surviving gunman in the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, has stirred profound consternation throughout India. Shiv Sena honcho Bal Thackeray thundered that no trial for Kasab is necessary, that the television news clippings are evidence enough, and that he should be hanged in full public view at the Gateway of India opposite the Taj Palace, which was one of the attack sites.

Thackeray found support from an unexpected quarter, with All-India Milli Council president Iqbal Mohiudeen invoking the shariah: “An eye for an eye, a limb for a limb, and a life for a life.”

The homes and properties belonging to three Mumbai-based lawyers who volunteered to appear for Kasab have been vandalized. A Parsi lawyer was even castigated collectively by his own community through the Bombay Parsi Panchayat.

2. There were terror blasts in Varanasi, Faziabad and Lucknow in the court premises. I quote:

After the terror blasts on 23rd November on court premises in Varanasi, Faizabad and Lucknow in which 15 people, four of them lawyers, were killed and over 80 injured, some bar associations had taken an unprecedented decision not to provide legal assistance to the accused in the blast cases.

The move was condemned as it was against natural justice.

It has to be pointed out that in both these cases in India, the lawyers have been appointed to defend the accused. But the fact that some are denying legal assistance to the accused is a shameful situation. This is directly going against the fundamental rights of all citizens of both countries. Despite the fact that the accused committed horrible crimes, they are presumed to be innocent till found guilty. So to exhibit some kind of weird protest against terrorism or religious participation is criminal. What next? Teachers refusing to teach because the pupil is from a different religion? Doctors refusing to treat patients because they are from another religion? Or how about architects refusing to build houses because the requester is from another religion?

These people are professionals and are supposed to uphold their professional standards. By refusing to do so, they are knuckling under total obscurantists and blithering idiots who are frankly uncivilised. Totally not cricket.

Why is India Still Talking to Pakistan

Sandeep Bansal — Sat, 6 Feb 2010 14:15:19 EST

This is a billion perhaps even a trillion dollar question and there are no clear answers. India suspended its talks with Pakistan after 26/11 attacks indefinitely asking Pakistan to stop terrorism from its soil and to punish the accused in the 26/11. Other than the arrest of Lakhvi, there is little to suggest that Pakistan has done anything on that front.

So why then have talks been restarted

I believe one of the major reasons for that are the recent developments at the Afghanistan Conference in London. With a struggling economy at home and lack of public support, Obama is in no mood to fight the War in Afghanistan indefinitely. At the London Conference, it has been decided that the moderate elements in the Taliban would offered a stake in Afghan Govt.

This is where Pakistan can play a major role. It can use its contacts in the Afghan Taliban to bring them to the negotiating table and thus ensure that the Americans can have an honorable exit. But this also means that Pakistan is going to bargain hard to keep India's role in the Afghan reconstruction to the bare minimum. There are some signs that show that the West has agree to it. Furthermore, there was a renewed International pressure on India to resume talks. Afraid of losing all the strategic gains made by India in Afghanistan by investing over $2 billion, it was thought that Indian interests could be best served by re-engaging with Pakistan.

Why are people opposing talks?

Several voices including those in the BJP are opposed to resumption of the composite dialogue process at this point of time. According to them Pakistan's Army continue to be India centric and have done little to contain the anti-India forces.

This is absolutely true and the Pakistan Army continues to view them as strategic assets. Recently LeT organized mass rallies at POK and Lahore. Infact the rally at Lahore was barely a few kms away from Punjab Assembly. The Prime Minister of Pakistan has publicly said that he cannot guarantee that there shall be no further attacks. But why can't he limit such anti-India forces. Is Pakistan really serious about peace?

The Pakistan argument to the above question is that Pakistan is fighting its own war on terrorism. It has already been said that the current operation would take atleast a year to defeat the TTP. At this point of time, the Army does not wants to open another front with the anti-India forces. The LeT, due to its anti-India stand enjoys massive support in Pakistan. LeT has limited global ambitions and is largely focused on India. It has not allied with Al-Quaida. It is because of these reasons that Pakistan isn't too keen on fighting them. There are merely arresting them for a while before releasing them again.

What to expect from talks

Personally, I don't have much hopes from the talks. Pakistan would not allow any progress to made unless Kashmir is discussed. It would raise ridiculous issues such as Balochistan and comparing it with terrorism in Kashmir. Balochistan and India do not share any border and the Baloch population is just 4% of the total population of Pakistan. Even if India ever wants, it cannot bleed Pakistan in the same way as Pakistan bleeds us. As far as the issue of Kashmir is concerned, it is highly unlikely that any solution that is acceptable to all the three parties can emerge anytime soon.

Secondly, I doubt whether Pakistan would really ever go after the likes of LeT or Jaish once its operations against TTP are complete. Once the American Guns in Afghanistan go silent and the US drones are withdrawn, I doubt if the US can exert sufficient pressure on Pakistan to act against the anti-India forces. Let us not forget that India tried to LeT banned by UN Security Council but it was always blocked by China (a Pakistan ally). I expect the Chinese to use their veto power to create more problems for India in the future.

So, if the situation demands that we talk to Pakistan then so let it be. But we should never trust this neighbor. India should build more dams in Kashmir, thereby creating a negotiating point for ourselves and make it difficult to them continue their proxy war. All major rivers in Pakistan pass through Kashmir this building dams can helps in driving our point through.

We must build up additional negotiating points. India has to be prepared to fight its war on its own. Aman Ki Asha can be done without Aman Ki Bhasha from your opponent. This is a game, and that the moment its our adversary who has the advantage.

Drones for Pakistan - a Potential Game Changer

jay — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 09:26:32 EST

Soon after the US Defense Secretary Robert Gates left India's shores last week for Pakistan, came the announcement that the US was considering offering UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles popularly called drones) to Pakistan. This was supposedly to appease Pakistan to get them to join the US' war against al-Qaeda (see the New York Times story here).

Although the drone technology being provided is meant to be used against al-Qaeda it does not require a long stretch of imagination to see where it will end up getting used eventually - against India. It is appalling how neither the Indian establishment nor the Indian press has made any noise about this particular handout from the US to Pakistan considering the immense game changing quality of this deal.

Drones are essentially unmanned aircrafts the latest of which can fly for more than 2000 miles, stay unobtrusively at an altitude of about 3 kilometers and stay put in its position for even up to 14 hours. The latest advanced versions are able to sense the heat of human beings on earth from that height and precisely destroy something as small as a car from that height using Hellfire missiles with much less collateral damage than an F-16 would. These are therefore highly preferred by the Obama administration to eliminate terrorists in Pakistan, the most high-profile recent casuality being Beitullah Masud. The drone program is considered to be so successful that Mr. Obama has authorized more predator killings in hist first ten months than what Bush did in 3 years.

What is all the more striking about this is that being unmanned, these are actually controlled by operators who could be sitting anywhere in the world. According to experts, more questions about what it means to be "at war" is being raised due to this program. The operators of these drones are very often suburban home dwellers who drive down to their office for an 8 hour war from an air conditioned office (much like a video game) and then go home for dinner to their family. It is not clear how the concept of "being at war" itself will change with this kind of technology.

Admittedly, the US is wary of providing this technology to any other country as it provides them a military superiority over anyone else in the world. What they are offering Pakistan is only the surveillance technology and not the firing capability. However, this first step itself is going to introduce an inequality between India and Pakistan. Pakistan will now gain the capability to intrude into Indian airspace without being detected. And its Air Force will gain knowledge of the technology which is just one step behind the Predator missile-enabled technology.

From the deafening silence with which this news is being greeted by the Indian establishment, it is clear that the Indians were probably told and their acquiescence sought by the US before this offer was made. Perhaps that was one of the items in the agenda of Mr. Gates' visit last week. If so, it is a shame that India has agreed to this deal without thinking through the consequences. This is like the old Arabian tale of the camel and the sheikh. We are letting the camel just enough room to get his head into the tent to make him more comfortable. It won't be long before he occupies the whole tent throwing the sheikh out.

For more details on the Predator program, robotic warfare in general, and its consequences, here is an excellent book by P.W. Singer: Wired for War.

Aman ki Asha: Now Why Didn't We Think of That!

mbjesq — Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:31:10 EST

Sometimes an idea just takes a while to germinate. Sometimes the big guys simply need to feel that the idea was all theirs before they'll really run with it. Whatever the reason, it seems that the time has finally come for a serious effort at an Indo-Pak peace initiative based on simple people-to-people interactions and cultural exchange.

The proponents of this undertaking are two of South Asia's largest media outlets, the Times of India and the Jang Group in Pakistan. In the garbled, half-literate language of the writers at the TOI: "Starting with a series of cross-border cultural interactions, business seminars, music & literary festivals and citizens meet that will give the bonds of humanity a chance to survive outside the battlefields of politics, terrorism and fundamentalism."

The project is being called "Aman ki Asha", Hope for Peace. Amitabh Bachchan, no less, is promoting the as-yet vaguely defined, bridge-building concerts.

If this sounds familiar, it is because it appears to be based on our lovely Friends Without Borders project and its not-quite-successful sequel, Dil se Dil, both the brainchild of service wizard John Silliphant.

Friends Without Borders was a four-month blitz through India in 2006 to collect friendship letters from tens of thousands of Indian school children and deliver them to kids in Pakistan. Major events were held in around the country, television commercials played on major networks for two solid months, and the project was lauded by the Prime Minister of India and featured in newspapers, magazines (here and here), online media, and television.

The Dil se Dil project was even more ambitious. On the night of 14-15 August 2007, we had planned a special celebration to celebrate the shared 60th anniversary of India and Pakistan and an unprecedented event designed to bring the people of these countries closer together: a concert of Indian and Pakistani superstars, right at the famous Attari/Wagah border. A coming-together of midnight's grandchildren, as it were.

At the heart of both projects was a belief that peaceful, productive coexistence is profoundly wished by ordinary people on both sides of the border, whereas intransigence, antagonism, and recrimination are the domain of politicians and a minority of hardliners. We found tremendous resonance with these ideas during both projects.

Our print-media partners for that undertaking were, of course, the Times of India and the Jang Group. If there is any doubt about the origin of the genesis of the projects, take a look at the TOI article that announced the program. The photo was taken by a TOI photographer at our Friends Without Borders event at Wankhede Stadium in Bombay on 6 February 2006. Even the Aman ki Asha logo looks a bit derivative of the Dil se Dil logo.

Of course, the FWB team is given no credit or kudos for the idea - but that's just fine. Our objective has always been to create positive change. We are open source. If you can take our ideas and do more with them than we can, more power to you! In fact, we'll be glad to assist you.

True, the appropriation of the concept, without attribution and for purposes that appear principally publicity-seeking and commercial, and only secondarily public-spirited, is a bit shady. But then, what do you expect from TOI, the most disreputable, sleazy, ethically challenged media outlet in a country not exactly famous for journalistic integrity?

Still, we are delighted to see these important ideas taken forward.

***

This revival of Dil se Dil prompts me to tell a more detailed story of the crushing disappointment surrounding the eleventh-hour cancellation of our border concert. There were a number of factors censoring my commentary during the course of the project. Chief among these were close monitoring by the Indian Home Ministry at a time when I was in the country on a tourist visa and the fact that our brilliant partners at the NGO Routes 2 Roots were heroically negotiating the permissions with two distrustful governments that did not want to see anything in the media before the deal was done. Even my online announcement of the cancellation was truncated by the judgment that details of the fiasco would only serve to antagonize, when our objective was to sooth.

The concert project had its grand opportunities and major challenges. A.R. Rahman had personally agreed to be our headliner; but his manager, Deepak Gattani, turned-out to be one of the most venal, corrupt, slimy human beings on the face of the earth. The border was a fabulous location; but we had to obtain permission from both governments (never before given) and work out security and logistics with both armies. The United Nations Millennium Campaign agreed to be a partner; but dealing with the UN-anything is an almost guaranteed fuck-up. Hundreds of thousands of people were expected to show-up; but we could only accommodate a few thousand within the secure area of the concert venue and there was no way to turn-back impromptu celebrants from the general area. Nokia signed-on as our major sponsor; but they had done so in such a soulless and shamelessly exploitative way as to completely miss the spirit of what we were attempting to achieve. We had a team of extremely creative, articulate American volunteers; but, fearing al Qaeda targeting of the event, the Home Ministry forbid any overt signs of American involvement, effectively handicapping our PR machinery.

Two weeks from show-time, our partner, the brilliant NGO Routes 2 Roots, was called before the Home Ministry to be advised that security threats from al Qaeda and other, non-disclosed antagonists were running extremely high. Border Security Forces and police from around Punjab, which would have been detailed to our event, would be reassigned to the protection of Delhi. The Government of India would not tell us not to have the concert - it would lose tremendous face in light of Pakistan's go-ahead, were it to do so - but the warning was clear.

Six days from the concert, the show had been scripted, the musical line-up of A.R. Rahman, Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, Ali Asmat, Shafqat Amanat Ali was ready to go, as were the MCs Shah Ruhk Khan, Julia Chawla, Wasim Akhram and Shaiyanne Malik. The show had been scripted and we were working with the fabulous CNN-IBN team on the taping of special content. The concert was to be broadcast through India and Pakistan by major networks, and beamed around the world to satellite affiliates. Television advertisements were already in the air and newspapers were beginning to print stories. The stages, lighting, and television installations were under construction at the border. And all hell broke loose.

It began with anonymous telephone threats to one of the directors of Routes 2 Roots, which the Indian Intelligence Bureau was able to trace to "an off-shore satellite source somewhere in the Indian Ocean." These call were followed with calls to the Routes 2 Roots office, traced to a pay-phone in Delhi. Routes 2 Roots were once again summoned to the Home Ministry and this time the message was clear: the Government of India would not be able to guaranty the safety of those attending the event and was considering withdrawing its No Objection Certificate - government-speak for the permission we had arduously obtained to be able to hold the concert. The Intelligence Bureau believed the threats were al Qaeda related.

We had no choice but to cancel the concert.

The extent of this fiasco apparently had repercussions well beyond our shattered volunteer team, collaborators, sponsors, and supporters. Although President Pervez Musharraf was up-to-his-ass in a constitutional crisis, thanks to ongoing conscientious protest in the judiciary, his office took the time to telephone Routes 2 Roots to insist that the show must go on. But we could not allow that to happen in the circumstances; and by then it was too late anyway.

The Aman ki Asha agenda is substantially less ambitious and backed by two media powerhouses. This bodes well for success. We wish it well.

Looking Back: Fokker Aircraft Hijack, 1971

Sandeep Bansal — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:11:22 EST

The year 2009 is coming to an end, and touchwood, we haven't had any major terrorist strike.Indian Home Minister recently admitted that luck played an important part in this - the Indian intelligence agencies need to be lucky every time, the terrorists need to be lucky just once.

So are Indian intelligence agencies who are often criticized and termed ineffective, really that bad? In this article, I am going to discuss a very old incident, Hijack of Fokker Aircraft, which happened just before the 1971 India-Pakistan war. Most Indians would be unaware of this incident.

Let me add a caveat before I continue with my article. This article contains my understanding of the incident and is based on my various reading I have done on this topic. This may or may not be the actual description of the events. India has never officially acknowledged its involvement for obvious reasons. It is unlikely to do the same ever, in pretty much the same way as Pakistan is unlikely to accept its support for terrorism.

Creation of Bangladesh was perhaps biggest ever success of RAW. The Fokker incident occurred before the start of the war but it proved to be an important event.

Background

India and Pakistan had been quarreling over Kashmir ever since independence. They had fought two wars in 1948 and 1965. By 1970, cracks began to appear between the West and East Pakistan - its two wings.

East and West Pakistan were separated by more than 1000 miles. Soon after independence, Urdu was proclaimed to be the national language of the wings even though Bengali was spoken by a majority of the Pakistanis. The Bureaucracy and Army was dominated by Punjabi's. There was considerable resentment among the East Pakistanis over dominance of the West.

President Yahya Khan held fair and free elections in December, 1970 in which Awami League of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman won a majority largely due to his Six-Point manifesto. National Assembly was to hold its first session in Dacca on 2nd March, 1971. It was, however, sabotaged by vested interests of West Pakistani establishment and some leading politicians, who were not willing to accept a Bengali-led government. (Source)

By March, Pakistani army resorted to use of force and decided to crush the political movement. Mujibur Rahman was arrested and sent to prison in West Pakistan. The use of force was excessive and large number of Bengalis were killed. A huge number of Bengali women (mostly Hindu) were raped by the Pakistani army. Survivors have compared it to the Nazi extermination of Jews. This led to a large number of Bengalis seeking refuge in India. India decided to extend all help to the refugees.

Strategies

India and Pakistan had two different strategies. Pakistan was aware that India could come to help the East Pakistanis. Therefore its plan was to devote more men and material for West Pakistan.

The Pakistanis would concentrate their forces in the West and thereby aim at capturing as much as Indian territory as possible. The Indians, on the other hand, would be fighting a war on two fronts (while at the same time keeping a fearful eye on the Chinese borders). Given this scenario, the Pakistanis felt that India at best would be able to capture some territory in East Pakistan and lose quite a bit in the West. In the end, the Pakistanis knew that the Western powers would intervene to stop the war and what would matter is who had the most of the other's territory. (Source)

They were hoping for a stalemate just as had happened during the 1965 War. Indian plan was essentially to liberate East Pakistan as quickly as possible. On its Western sector, it had essentially planned to defend with much smaller units and had much fewer offensive plans.

The Fokker incident

On January 30,1971, brothers Hashim and Ashraf Quereshi of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front, armed with a pistol and a hand grenade, hijacked Ganga, a Fokker Friendship aircraft of the Indian Airlines (IA), after it had taken off from Srinagar for Jammu and forced the pilot to take it to Lahore.

After the aircraft had landed, Zuklfiquar Ali Bhutto, then Foreign Minister under Yahya Khan, rushed to Lahore, fraternized with the hijackers and helped them get maximum international publicity for their cause. On February 1, he persuaded them to release the crew and passengers who were sent by road to Amritsar. (Source)

Was the hijack staged

Pakistan has consistently alleged that this hijack was staged by Indian intelligence agencies. Soon after the hijack, India banned all Pakistani flights over its airspace. This meant that the distance between West and East Pakistan became three times the orginal distance and thus made it more difficult for Pakistan to transfer resources from West to East. It may have played its part in the overall outcome of the war.

The aircraft was hijacked by two Kashmiris, Butt and Hashim Quereshi. One of them was a Border Security Force man. What made the affair curious was the fact that Ganga was one of the oldest aircraft in the Indian Airline fleet and was already withdrawn from service but was re-inducted days before the 'hijack'. Even more tellingly, a deputy inspector general of the BSF based in Jammu, bristling at the involvement of one of his men in hijack, had gone public to say that he had objected to the induction of Butt into the BSF but was overruled by a 'higher intelligence agency'. (Source)

Conclusion

From the prima facie, it does appears that the hijack was staged by Indian intelligence agencies. In hindsight it appears to be clever plan that worked perfectly. Though there are some unanswered questions. Like why was Quereshi arrested by Indians when he returned back to India.

This surely is gratifying for an ordinary Indian that its intelligence agencies are capable enough to do something like that. Indian agencies have consistently maintained a low profile as compared to other agencies like CIA or Mossad. There are rarely any publicity or movies made on RAW's operations.

The reasons are best known to the people in-charge. I only hope that they are still carrying on their good work.

Exchange Ajmal Kasab for Sarabjit Singh

Vinod Joseph — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 06:45:29 EST

Sarabjit Singh has been sentenced to death and his sentence has been upheld by Pakistan's Supreme Court. Sarabjit has been convicted for carrying out bomb attacks in Pakistan. According to the Pakistanis, Sarabjit is an Indian spy. Sarabjit, on the other hand, claims that he is just a villager who strayed across the border after having had one too many. In the world of espionage, if a diplomat is caught spying, s/he is expelled. Diplomatic immunity is something which non-diplomat spies have. If caught, they are usually disowned and left to their own fate.

There are exceptions of course. Jonathan Pollard was a Jewish man working as an analyst for the American Naval intelligence. Caught spying for Israel, he was sentenced for life and continues to be in prison in the United States. For many years, Israel denied all official ties to him, though Pollard managed to get Israeli citizenship while in prison. However, the High Court of Israel ordered the Israeli government to admit that Pollard was its agent. Ever since then, the Israeli government has been trying to free Pollard, but the US has refused to let him go. Israeli has always done more than most other countries in getting in nationals back home. At present it is bargaining with Hamas over a deal that will see the release of almost a thousand Hamas militants for a single Israeli soldier held by Hamas. Pollard is apparently not very happy with this, but then you can’t please everyone.

Even if India doesn’t concede that Kasab was spying for India, there is no denying that he is an Indian national and nothing prevents India from doing more to get him home. The traditional (and generally speaking, the only way) of obtaining the release of someone in Sarabjit’s position is to exchange him for someone else. India has a mixed record in exchanging prisoners for its people held in custody elsewhere. When Rubaiya Sayeed (daughter of Mufti Muhammad Sayeed, India’s first Muslim Home Minister in the V.P. Singh government) was kidnapped by the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, India released five militants to secure her release, despite the objections of Farooq Abdullah’s state government. Years later, a BJP led government released three top militants so that the hijackers of an Indian Airlines plane taken to Kandahar would let their hostages go. One of the militants released was Maulana Masood Azhar, the founder of Jaish-e-Mohammad. However, India hasn’t been able to secure the release of PoWs from the 1971 war who are reportedly still held in Pakistani jails.

I want to see Sarabjit released and sent home to India. I don’t know if he was a spy or just a villager who got drunk and lost his way. The Indian government has made various appeals for his release, but can’t it do more I wonder. Is there any Pakistani national in an Indian jail, one held to be a spy by India and renounced by Pakistan, who can be exchanged for Sarabjit? I don’t know. However, I know that India has custody of a Pakistani national who goes by the name Mohammed Ajmal Amīr Kasāb. Kasab is currently undergoing trial in India for having taken part in the November 2008 Mumbai attacks. Caught on CCTV, the case against Kasab appears to be an open and shut case and a death sentence seems to be very likely. After initial denials, the Pakistani government has conceded that Kasab is a Pakistani national, but it maintains that no Pakistani agency was involved in the planning or execution of the Mumbai attacks last year.

What would be the reaction if the Indian government offers to exchange Kasab for Sarabjit? The Pakistani government is likely to refuse. Sarabjit the official Indian spy has nothing to do with Kasab the Pakistani freelancer who fought for an Islamic militant organisation which is at war with Pakistan at the moment, Pakistan is likely to say. Kasab himself might not want to be exchanged for Sarabjit. However, just as there are many Indians who would like to see Sarabjit return home, there could be many Pakistanis who like the idea of exchanging Kasab for Sarabjit. Kasab was a pawn in a larger game. I don’t doubt for a moment that he is guilty as charged and deserves no leniency. However, if by giving him up, India could secure Sarabjit’s release, it should, in my opinion, do so immediately without wasting a moment.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Sarabjit is due to be executed soon. There are still a few good people working for his release. If you were to lend your support to his cause, he might still make it home.

Contempt of Court and the Pakistan Army

C N Anand — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:11:08 EST

While fighting a legal battle in a court, one has to tread carefully where arguments can be construed as contempt of court. In Pakistan there is an additional Damocles sword to contend with, which even the judges have to heed -- contempt of army. A hint of this was shown in the NRO (National Reconciliation Ordinance) hearings by the safety-in-numbers 17 bench court in Pakistan. The Attorney General of Pakistan claimed that GHQ (General Head Quarters) and the CIA pose a threat to the Government. Obviously, this blatant threat would not have been issued without a precedence of the courts coming to heel in the past. However, this time the 17-bench court, not to be cowed down came out roaring that an amnesty that had protected politicians, including President Asif Ali Zardari, from corruption and criminal charges, was unconstitutional. The NRO benefited 8000 Pakistanis.

General's Musharraf's National Reconciliation Order, in a country where many believe that even a petty thief's hand must be cut off in accordance with Sharia law, purported to let off many who swindled millions. Many non-Pakistanis are surprised as to how this outrageous ordinance was passed in the first place with the whole country watching mutely. To understand this, one must understand that the numbing of the Pakistani psyche started in 1954 when Governor General Ghulam Mohammad dissolved the first constitutional assembly and the government of Prime Minister Khawja Nazim Uddin. The president of the assembly, Moulvi Tamiz Uddin, challenged him in the Sindh High Court and won: the dissolution was held to be illegal and unconstitutional. On appeal to the Chief Court of Pakistan, which was later renamed the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Munir decided in favour of the governor general. The basis for his decision was the "doctrine of necessity": meaning that to preserve the country the constitution had to be abandoned.

The army then strode through the wide open door. In 1958, General Ayub Khan imposed martial law, dissolved both assemblies of parliament and abrogated the 1956 Constitution. His coup was challenged in the Supreme Court but the Supreme Court ruled that "doctrine of necessity" necessitated such actions.

History repeated itself in 1977, when General Zia-ul-Haq got away with dissolving of parliament and abrogating the constitution, which had been unanimously approved by all political parties in 1973.

In Musharraf's case, the full bench judgment was less monotonous. It not only upheld the coup but went so far as to give General Musharraf unlimited power to amend the constitution as he pleased. It is a popularly held belief in Pakistan's legal circles that this decision was written outside the court and handed to the judges to pronounce.

Against this background where the Pakistani courts have proved to be poodles, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry roared like a lion and felt that Musharraf has had enough fun with the constitution. However, in a country where every one including the top brass of the army and the opposition parties are tainted, a clean sweep will produce a vacuum at the top. The only party not involved in politicking is the Taliban who have a case in insisting that it is their turn to run Pakistan. The Taliban's interpretation of "doctrine of necessity" is that they are bound to arrive.

Considering that Pakistan is bristling with nukes, the Supreme Court could have trod warily and allowed the criminals (8000 in number) to get away and enjoy their ill gotten wealth and let bygones be bygones in the larger interest of the world. How should justice be defined in Pakistan is a polemic that should seize the world.