Tag Archives: Pakistan

Kerry-Lugar Bill: What the reality?


These days debates are going on in various forums including the Parliament on  Kerry-Lugar Bill. On one side presidential desk defending it strongly by claiming that it is one of the biggest achievement of the present democratic government. They’re saying that public has misconception in this regard.

According to their understanding, first of all it is the legislation passed bye the US’s congress so we the Government of Pakistan hasn’t any sort of agreement or treaty with US, that’s why it isn’t binding on us. Secondly,they argue that the bill has two kind of assistance, first is civillian  assistance which is $ 1.5 billion upto 5 years which becomes $ 7.5 billion and the second one is military which is $ 3 billion over the same period and the conditionalities are only on military aid. Next argue is that whatever the conditions, these are in accordance with the policies of  Pakistan like nuclear proliferation, terrorism etc,  so it doesn’t matter for us. They also claim if we reject the foreign aid, we can’t survive more than two weeks. These are the main arguments in favor of the bill.

Now on the other hand, the segment which is opposing the bill includes opposition parties, army, media and public in large. One of the most considerable argument  is that we accept that Muridke and Quetta are the terrorist base operation in the region including India.  The bill also allows US to direct access to any Pakistani national on the issue of nuclear proliferation. It also allows US to intervene in Pak Army’s affairs.  Last but not the least argue in this regard is that this aid is ‘aatey mian namak k brabar’ as compare to losses which we’ve in the war of terror.

Conclusion :-

Firstly, the language which is used in the bill is insulting if one see as a Pakistani which in not acceptable at all. Secondly, if the Govt. of Pakistan is not a party in the bill then why they are defending it blindly. They should allow to all concern segments to give their point of view on the bill and then they should take a stance in the light of public opinion. Leaders are dealer in hopes but Pakistani leaders are dealer in begging so when there will come a full stop in this dirty job?  Now the bill is now ‘gallay ki haddi’ for both the presidential desk as well as Obama’s government.


Our Judiciary is Independent now!


It is a good news for a common Pakistani, at least there is a single institution to whom one can expect for the welfare of the public and better life style in Pakistan. The tasks which are supposed to be done by Parliment are being done by Supreme Court.

SC gives govt one week to reduce POL prices

A three-member bench of the Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday directed the government to reduce petroleum and gas prices to reasonable levels within a week and submit compliance report with the SC registrar.

Appearing on notice, Attorney General Sardar Latif Khosa assured the court that oil and gas prices would be reduced within a week and brought in line with international rates after consultations with the prime minister. The SC was hearing constitutional petitions against the hike in petroleum prices and overcharging by the government on petroleum products. Two petitions from politicians had also challenged the price-fixing mechanism of POL prices.

Source: Daily Times

Pakistan’s future


It’s reported in New York Times on 23rd November,2008. This report shows that where are we exactly today? How the world is thinking about us? How are we responding to this situation?



A redrawn map of South Asia has been making the rounds among Pakistani elites. It shows their country truncated, reduced to an elongated sliver of land with the big bulk of India to the east, and an enlarged Afghanistan to the west.

That the map was first circulated as a theoretical exercise in some American neoconservative circles matters little here. It has fueled a belief among Pakistanis, including members of the armed forces, that what the United States really wants is the breakup of Pakistan, the only Muslim country with nuclear arms.

“One of the biggest fears of the Pakistani military planners is the collaboration between India and Afghanistan to destroy Pakistan,” said a senior Pakistani government official involved in strategic planning, who insisted on anonymity as per diplomatic custom. “Some people feel the United States is colluding in this.”

That notion may strike Americans as strange coming from an ally of 50 years. But as the incoming Obama administration tries to coax greater cooperation from Pakistan in the fight against militancy, it can hardly be ignored.

This is a country where years of weak governance have left ample room for conspiracy theories of every kind. But like much such thinking anywhere, what is said frequently reveals the tender spots of a nation’s psyche. Educated Pakistanis sometimes say that they are paranoid, but add that they believe they have good reason.

Pakistan, a 61-year-old country marbled by ethnic fault lines, is a collection of just four provinces, which often seem to have little in common. Virtually every one of its borders, drawn almost arbitrarily in the last gasps of the British Empire, is disputed with its neighbors, not least Pakistan’s bitter and much larger rival, India.

These facts and the insecurities that flow from them inform many of Pakistan’s disagreements with the United States, including differences over the need to rein in militancy in the form of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

The new democratically elected president, Asif Ali Zardari, has visited the United States twice since assuming power three months ago. He has been generous in his praise of the Bush administration. But that stance is criticized at home as fawning and wins him little popularity among a steadfastly anti-American public.

So how will the promise by President-elect Barack Obama for a new start between the United States and Pakistan be received here? How can it be begun?

One possibility could be some effort to ease Pakistani anxieties, even as the United States demands more from Pakistan. That will probably mean a regional approach to what, it is increasingly apparent, are regional problems. There, Pakistani and American interests may coincide.

American military commanders, including Gen. David H. Petraeus, have started to argue forcefully that the solution to the conflict in Afghanistan, where the American war effort looks increasingly uncertain, must involve a wide array of neighbors.

Mr. Obama has said much the same. Several times in his campaign, he laid out the crux of his thinking. Reducing tensions between Pakistan and India would allow Pakistan to focus on the real threat — the Qaeda and Taliban militants who are tearing at the very fabric of the country.

“If Pakistan can look towards the east with confidence, it will be less likely to believe its interests are best advanced through cooperation with the Taliban,” Mr. Obama wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine last year.

But such an approach faces sizable obstacles, the biggest being the conflict over Kashmir. The Himalayan border area has been disputed since the partition of India and Pakistan in 1947, and remains divided between them.

Pakistan’s army and intelligence agencies have long fought a proxy war with India by sponsoring militant groups to terrorize the Indian-administered part of the territory.

After the 9/11 attacks, Pakistan reined in those militants for a time, but this year the militants have renewed their incursions. Talks between the sides made some progress in recent years but have petered out.

Pakistanis warn that the United States should not appear too eager to mediate. First, they caution, India has always regarded Kashmir as a bilateral question. India, they note, also faces a general election early next year, an inappropriate moment to push such an explosive issue.

Second, some Pakistanis are concerned about the reliability of the United States as a fair mediator. “Given the United States’ record on the Palestinian issue, where the Palestinians had to move 10 times backwards and the Israelis moved the goal posts, the same could happen here,” said Zubair Khan, a former commerce minister who has watched Kashmir closely.

It was discouraging, Mr. Khan said, that the United States ignored the importance of the huge nonviolent protests by Muslims in Kashmir against Indian rule this summer. “Anywhere else, and they would have been hailed as an Orange Revolution,” he said, referring to the wave of protests that led to a change in the Ukrainian government in 2004.

Exhibit A for the Pakistanis is India’s nuclear deal with the United States, which allows India to engage in nuclear trade even though it never joined the global Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Pakistan, with its recent history of spreading nuclear technology, received no comparable bargain.

The nuclear deal was devised in Washington to position India as a strategic counterbalance to China. That is how it is seen in Pakistan, too, but with no enthusiasm.

“The United States has changed the whole nuclear order by this deal, and in doing so is containing China, the only friend Pakistan has in the region,” said Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani Army general.

Further, Pakistan is upset about the advances India is making in Afghanistan, with no checks from the United States, Mr. Masood said.

India has recently made big investments in Afghanistan, where Pakistan has been competing for influence. These include a road to the Iranian border that will eventually give India access to the Iranian port of Chabahar, circumventing Pakistan.

India has offered training for Afghanistan’s military, given assistance for a new Parliament building in Kabul and has re-opened consulates along the border with Pakistan.

The consulates, the Pakistanis charge, are used by India as cover to lend support to a long-running separatist movement in Baluchistan Province. (Baluchistan was even made an independent state on the theoretical map, which accompanied an article by Ralph Peters titled “Blood Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look,” originally published in Armed Forces Journal.)

Both India and Pakistan in fact have a long and destructive history of, gently or not, putting in the knife. Exhibit A for the Indians is the bombing in July of its embassy in Afghanistan, which American and Indian officials say can be traced to groups linked to Pakistan’s spy agency.

If the Obama administration is indeed to convince Pakistanis that militancy, not the Indian Army, presents the gravest threat, it will not be easy.

The commander of American forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David D. McKiernan, got a taste of the challenge this month, when he visited Islamabad and sat down with a group of about 70 members of Pakistan’s Parliament at the residence of the United States ambassador, Anne W. Patterson. Their attitude showed an almost total incomprehension of the reasons for American behavior in the region after Sept. 11, 2001.

“A couple of the questions I got were, ‘Why did you Americans come to Afghanistan when it was so peaceful, before you got there?’ ” General McKiernan recalled during an appearance at the Atlantic Council in Washington last week.

“Another one,” he said, “was, ‘We understand that you’ve invited a thousand Indian soldiers to serve in Afghanistan by Christmas.’ ”

There was no truth to the claim, he told the Pakistanis. “We have a lot of work to do,” he told his audience in Washington.

Indeed, among ordinary Pakistanis, many still regard Al Qaeda more positively than the United States, polls find. Talk shows here often include arguments that the suicide bombings in Pakistan are payback for the Pakistani Army fighting an American war.

Some commentators suggest that the United States is actually financing the Taliban. The point is to tie down the Pakistani Army, they say, leaving the way open for the Americans to grab Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

Recently, in the officer’s mess in Bajaur, the northern tribal region where the Pakistani Army is tied down fighting the militants, one officer offered his own theory: Osama bin Laden did not exist, he told a visiting journalist.

Rather, he was a creation of the Americans, who needed an excuse to invade Afghanistan and encroach on Pakistan.

We are responsible


Aaj ham sab apny political leaders pey unglian utha rahey hian. Well! theek hai Musharraf aamir tha. Zardari awam kay jazbat ko kuchal raha hai. Sharif zati osuloun ki jang ler raha hai. Sab apnay apnay interest ko national iterest declare ker rahian hain. Her leader an’a ki jang ler raha hai. Aisay main ham ney un ko bura bhala kaha, moufad parast kaha, ghaddar kaha, lutera kaha, lota kaha, galian deen, aur bus ham ney apna qoumi farz pura ker lia.

Ab yahan kuch sawal paida hotay hain kia ham ney Pakistani quom kay aik fard honey ki haisia’t se apna farz pura kia? Kia ham ne kabhi apni graiban man jhank ker dekha? Kia unahin bura bhala kehney sey ham apnay farz se subbakdosh ho gain hain?

In sawalon ka jawab to aap apney aap se poochain. Lekin main jab khud se poochta hoon to pata chalta hia kay ham as a qoum corrupt hain, mulak main bijle nahin lekin ham aaj bhi bijle chori kertay hian, ham apnay leadron per jhot aur wahda khilafi ka ilzam lagatey hian mager ham b’hasia’t qoum jhotey aur wahda khilaf hain. Ham main bardasht nahin hai to leaders main bardhasht kaisay aye ge. Hamari zat main janabdari hai to leaders kaisay ghair janibdar hoon ge. Kia ham ne kabhi apni galli ki safai ka khayl rakha hai, nahin to ham apany shaher main gandgi ka rona kiun rotay hain!

Kaha tou abhi bohat kuch ja sakta hia per main aap ka ziada time nahin lun ga. Main sirf itna kehna chahoon ga keh hukmaran assal main awam ki tashbih (reflection) hotey hian. Tou jo khamian aap ya mujh mian hain wohi hamarey leaders main hoon ge bilkul aisay jaisay aap ko sheeshay main apna aap waisay he dikhta hia  jaisay aap hotay hain.

Ager aap apney hukmaranoun ko sudharney kay khawahishmand hain to apnay aap ko badlain because u are responsible for all this.

Ramadan ka mubarik month start ho gia hai is mian aik sachay aur mukhlis ‘watni’ kay taur pe khud ko dhalo. Apni khamian  highlight karain aur inhain theek karain phir daikhain hukmaran kaisay theek nahin hotay.



Hum siasat se muhabbat ka chalan mangtey hain

Shab-e-sehra se mager subha-e-chaman mangtey hain

Woh jo ubhra bhi to badal main lipat ker ubhra

Issi bichrey huway suraj se kiran mangtey hain

Kuch nahin mangtey ham long bajuz izn-e-kalam

Ham to insan ka besakhta pan mangtey hain

Aisay gunchay bhi to gul cheen ki qaba main hain aseer

Bat kernay ko jo apna he dehan mangtey hain

Ham ko matloob hai taqdeem qad-o-gaisu ki

Aap kehtey hain k ham dar-o-rassan mangtey hain

Lamha bher ko to lubha jatey hian nahrey lekin

Ham to ahl-e-watan dad-e-watan mangtey hain

Ahmed Nadeen Qasmi