Today, its just a poem written by Iftikhar Arif and best fits to the current situation. It has both misery and hope in it. Here it goes with Urdu & English translation.

Urdu Version ……..

Bikhar ja aingey hum kya jab tamsha khatm hoga

Meray ma’bud aakhir kab tamasha khatm hoga

Kahani a’ap uljhi hey keh uljhaee gaee hey

Yeh uqda tab khulayga jab tamasha khatm hoga

Nai kirdar a’atey ja rahai hain roshni main

Nahin ma’loom ab kis dhab tamasha khatm hoga

Chiraghey hujra’ai darwesh ki bujhti hui lau

Hawa sai keh gaee hai ab tamasha khatm hoga

Yeh sab kathputlian raqsaan rahaingi ra’at ki ra’at

Sehr sai pehlai pehlai sab tamasha khatm hoga

Tamasha karney walon ko khabar di ja chuki hai

Keh parda kab giray ga kab tamasha khatm hoga

Dil-i-na mutma’in aisa bhi kiya mayoos hona

Jo khalq utthi to sab kartab, tamasha khatm hoga

Now, the english translation …….

Will the show end only at our dispersion/when, when O’ Lord will it end

Has the plot thickened of itself or has been snarled/ the knot shall open at the show’s end

New actors are appearing in the spotlight /none knows the shape the end now assumes

The dying light of the sage’s lamp/has told the wind the end is near

The dance of the puppets shall last for the night/by dawn the show will end

The stage managers have been told/when the curtain falls and the show ends

Why be so hopeless o’ unsatisfied heart/all games will end when the people stand up!

Hope People shall Stand up before its too late ……………………..

I just can say that God Save this Divine Country from all these bullshits.

But here is the classic example of how things could be controlled if will is there Below is the draft of proposed regulation which include monitoring and recording of telecommunication traffic of general public,and its mandatory for all the service providers to install such system by their own cost. No this doesn’t limit only to SMS but any communication via cell phones, land line and even data services. This has been drafted by PTA and sent to all the stakeholders. This news has been broken by express news. Interesting to note that PM Gallani has refused any such attempt by Government in the case of previous SMS controversy.

This shows, how the affairs of state has been running, its multilayer authorities working out there, with no central control a facade  in whole system. I would urge both conventional and social media to raise the voice against such bulshits. This also goes with the concerned politicians to effectively take up the issue. Here comes the proposed draft and the image.

Draft Monitoring and Reconciliation of Telephony Traffic Regulations, 2009

here goes the news broken by express news paper.

Story of Brutality?

People might have appreciated the army’s role in combating terrorism but everybody knows its a mess that they created themselves, and, they were actually forced to kill this monster primarily due to international pressure and secondly because it had assumed a frankenstein-ian proportion. Army’s performance in handling terrorists starting from intelligence gathering to eliminating them has been at best marginal. International media/leaders raised serious questions about their ability to deal with a security crises.

Given that Chief Justice was removed by army (missing persons case being central issue) and then restored under public pressure against the army’s will. Army gave tacit approval because it:

i) wanted to shed Musharraf legacy
ii) had no choice

Chief Justice is of course fully cognizant of these dynamics and even if a law of this nature exists. Its good time to open the rationale of such a provision. Justice must be secured for All, offenders be taken to task with their careers getting hit which they deserve. And, alongside, even if offenders fabricate allegations of inefficiency or abusive language (which they almost certainly will), nothing would justify use of physical force and its a fit case to maximize public embarrassment for army and leverage for some steps towards fundamental change in the relationship between civil and military bureaucracy. We can’t behave as if democracy is a temporary interruption between a military system of governance for this country. Dictators in waiting have to be suitably discouraged, repeatedly reminded of their right place and kept on back foot at all times.

Mr.AlI Anan Qamar a 35th common DMG officer currently at the disposal of ERU and working as Camp Incharge Sheikh Yaseen IDP Camp, Mardan was vandalized, brutally beaten, physically and verbally abused by army officers and jawans, while performing his official duties yesterday 8th july 2009.

The ERU members are privy to the sequence of this shameful event. His report is as follows:

Today on 08-07-09, at about 11:00AM, I was sitting in my office at Skeikh Yasin Camp, when Lt Haider of 32 cavalry came to my office. Apparently he was in on angry mood and told me that Major Asad 32 cavalry was not happy with me. He mentioned as list of things which Major Asad wanted to be done through me. I responded and if he had any complaints against me, he better report it to the DCO and Commissioner Mardan.

He threatened me with dire consequences. I then proceeded to the Rub Hall, where an army JCO came and asked me to report about the tents which the army had provided to the camp. I responded that I will hand over a report to some officer like a captain or a major. The JCO misbehaved with me there, in front of many witnesses including two doctors for ERU who had brought in Atta for the IDPs. The JCO too accused me of abusing the army and refused to move, but later some civilians finally managed to take him away from the Rub Hall.

About half an hour later, while I was standing in a container along with Wajid of SRSP, that I saw army jawans fully armed beating up the IDPs. Then Major Asad and Lt Haider rushed towards one with 35/40 troops fully armed and Major Asad said, “Pick him up”.

The jawan of army led by Major Asad and Lt Haider started beating me up mercilessly with fists, shoes and butts of gun and abused me continuously. I was thrown on the ground and beaten. Then they picked me up from my hands and legs and dragged me towards the military vehicle parked outside.

The jawans beat me continuously under the directions of Major Asad and forced me to sit on the floor of the vehicle with my head down. I was then alternately asked to stand on the seat of the vehicle with my hands raised. The beating continued, the abuses continued. The IDPs were rounded up and made to look at my beating the message was given that this is your ACO, and we the army are throwing him out. We have taken over..

I was then thrown on the ground and then dragged on to as to the main Charsadda Road. There my shirt was ripped open and I was asked to lie on the road. Then amidst the continuous beating, Major Asad stopped a rickshaw and I was put in the rickshaw. Lt Haider come to me and said, now you know what the army is and beat me more.

In this whole ordeal I have sustained injuries on the chin and head, bruises on the face, which will be shown in the medicolegal certificate. Prior to the incident they raided my office and took away the record of the camp. Lt Haider took away my two mobiles telephones 1 Nokia communicator with Ufone Sim 0334-4119821 and 2 Sony Erricson 03004132534. The Lt Haider also took away my wallet with some cash in it and ID Cards, Aim Cards, Driving Lenience and Service Card. That cash amounted to R.S 3000-4000/-

I charge Major Asad and Lt Haider for physically assaulting me, causing injuries on my chin and other parts of the body and obstructing me form tha discharge of my official duty, snatching my purse and mobiles. I can also identify the other accused if they are produced before me.

The accused also gave beating to my gun man Qayyum, Mr. Wajid from SRSP and some others who were accompanying me at that time.

08-07-09

Signed by Ali Anan Qamar

[Source: http://pkpolitics.com/2009/07/11/vandalism-by-pak-army-officers/]

Dawn Report

What I Think!

This story scared my in many ways, not because the content of incident or anything. I know our police has many many more such examples by Police, Feudal and Bureaucracy. Things which make me fear with all this are;

Situation of People on Ground

It reminds me the situation of 1971, thought I have not been present in that era but still, I can imagine the situation on ground. It recalls me the shouts of General Niazi “I don’t want  the people, I want the LAND”. Then the general behavior of nation “Dog and Bengalis are not allowed!”. Going forward shouts of exploiters,”I can smell the Kenaf (Patsan ) from the roads of Islamabad”. But that time, people in power where the Military and then we witness the Historical operation against Majority Province which lead us to the disintegration of the Nation.

We again have a massive operation on ground, now apparently we have civilian setup, but we know who are the masters of these puppets. At least in the operation theaters army is under full command. After the mess created by Musharaf, and the level of defame Arm forces received, it was expected that they would have learned the lesson and there must be some positive change in the behavior. But with this example it shows hardly any improvement.

I am not in any intention to comment against the morale of army force in this war. But let me say that this all the mess has also been done by they same military establishment, first in the era of Zia-ul-Haq and then Mr. Musharaf. We are yet to know the real stories behind. Specially In the Era of Musharaf. Being a Pakistan, I must say that this war if could not avoided, but it could be kept away from our own soils through the correct political vision and strategy. But that dictator made our own people fighting with us and hence destroyed the social fabric of the society.

Coming to current operation specially Swat, it was the necessary to deal common people living there with utmost affection and care. We still don’t actually what happened on the ground how much “collateral damage” has been done. At least these IDP’s must have been handled with care, not repeating the old blunders. But horrified me, and took me to the 1971 operation. God knows how much operation this nation has to face more!

I Hope! I Pray!

I hope that this story is not having any substance, I hope that our Army Forces have learnt enough lessons. I pray that even it has happened it must not have been effected the any of single IDP.I hope and I pray that it wont be the repetition of 1971. I hope we can avoid God forbade, more disintegration. This country has been the miracle and gift of God, We have to guard This by all the mean we have and its people.

I would like to have follow up and real situation specifically to this camp and this incident, if someone has other version.

A country-wide campaign has been launched against emails and text messages containing offensive and fabricated stories against the civilian leadership.
Sources told Geo News, decision has been taken to initiate an immediate action against the banned outfits engaging propaganda against the security forces through Internet.
Directive has been issued to DG FIA for taking to task the elements involved in the crime under Cyber Crimes Act.
Interpol has also been formally requested to track such emails and web sites developed outside the country. Help will be sought from the international police for deportation of the people involved in the crime, sources said.
Those proved guilty of committing these crimes will be punished with 14 years imprisonment and/ or confiscation of the property. -  Source:-http://www.geo.tv/7-12-2009/45856.htm

Now this story has been linked to earlier version of cyber crime ordinance re-issued by Mr. Zardari which was originally created by Pervaiz Musharaf. Here it goes;

http://wethenation.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/cyber-crime-law-promulgated-by-president-zardari/

What I think?

I think its again the same tactics they are trying to use with new improved zeal and aggression to curb the agitation of intellectuals specially youth, which having increased impact on masses. This will eventually lead to the sanctions against Media.

Reverse Approach, Lesson learned!

Interesting point to be noted here, that unlike Musharaf regime, who started to curb media initially when justice movement, but as a reaction people shifted to other medium i.e. emails, sms, blogs social network sharing etc. I even amazed at that time many people having limited understanding of internet, got DSL installed just because they wanted to stream GEO and other Channels to be updated about current scenario.

I think, Zardari regime quite intelligently realised this fact, and they started with this approach. Seriousness regarding this can be guessed through in involvement of Interpol in this matter FORMALLY.  According to the story above, even the “culprit” resides outside the country, the will get him/her deported back by the help of international Law enforcement agencies.

Conflicting Priorities

Pakistan is passing through an important phase of history, where we have been fighting war with in country. Almost everyday we face bomb blasts, suicide attacks, targeted killing etc. Naturally, no matter how much incapable any home ministry could be, there main priority would be to focus on these issues, in all aspects.

But look here, what an irony of fate  this nation has,  our interior Ministry is fighting against the TERRORISTS spreading jokes against government mainly that means Mr. ZARDARI.

This Government has history from its start to open unecessary pandorox box against itself. Starting from the issue of judiciary, then 17th amendment, Governor Rule in Punjab, and now again confrontation with Judiciary on the matter of Carbon Tax or Fuel Taxes.

What We Need  To DO?

First priority must to be spread this news, as much possible as we can. We must express our concerns through any medium we could have done. We must write blogs, share and protest on social media every where to stop this before it gets full blossom. We already had Mr. Rehman Malik Quoting the possibility of BAN against SMS. They tried other tactics, like imposing tax on SMS to stop spreading the anti-government sentiments. That was by the grace of God reverted due to the strong repulsion from all the section of society.

Secondly, everyone should be taken on board specially media, politicians and civil society leaders. Specially electronic media should oppose this strongly, because this will lead to the sanctions against them as well in later stages. Someone among these must as well take up this to the corridors of justice, by mean of petition or suo moto action by higher judiciary.

Thirdly, Sense must be prevailed in some better people in power, that in this era of technology, flow of information can’t be stopped by any mean. This will not serve any purpose bus escalated the heat of agitation against them.

Finally, I myself fully oppose this decision. Its totally injustice.Its just reflection the criminal intentions of people in power. So on so, they have bracketed this with the terrorist sections i.e., propagating banned organizations’ material etc. But as a matter of fact, this is just another form of Dictatorship or we can say it as PARODY OF DEMOCRACY.

There must be straight forward declaration that any attempt of attack on our nuclear facilities from any side would be considered declaration of War from India and would be responded equally.

Anyhow, I will just post the story but before that lets have a brief introduction of Mr. Ahmed Qureshi, the source provider of this story.

Introduction to Mr. Ahmed Qureshi

Mr. Ahmed Quraishi is one of the youngest public policy commentators and broadcasters to have emerged in Pakistan since the country adopted a media liberalization policy in 2002. Until recently, he was hosting a talk show on state-run PTV that projected Pakistan’s foreign policy positions. His blog, AhmedQuraishi.com, is well known within the Pakistani media and Blogosphere communities, famous for informed and bold political commentary.

[Source: http://www.ahmedquraishi.com]

Story of India – Baitullah Mehsud – Israel Plan Under the cover of US

The Indians working with their allies in the Karzai government have designed a foolproof plan to attack Pakistani nuclear sites using hired terrorists. They think they can pull it off and permanently damage Pakistan’s standing internationally and hasten calls for denuclearizing Pakistan. Any attack on Pakistani nuclear sites in the coming days will be taken as a declaration of war by India and will be dealt with equal force. There should not be confusion on this.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—India has paid terrorist leader Baitullah Mehsud and his well armed and trained terrorist army around U.S. $ 25 million to mount a spectacular attack on a major Pakistani nuclear site. A special force of around 500 recruits has been assembled and trained to mount the operation that is supposed to shock the world. The purpose is to create an event that will create a global media scare and convince the world of the need for military intervention in Pakistan. Another objective is to neutralize voices of reason within the U.S. government that believe Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is secure.

The bulk of the terrorists in the special 500-strong force put together by Mehsud have been trained inside Afghanistan by trainers suspected of having links to the Indian intelligence. Although most of the recruits are expected to be Pakistanis from Mehsud’s tribe, an unknown number of Afghan and Indian elements with special operations training have been inserted in the Mehsud group in order to ensure the success of this high profile operation.

It is not clear when this plan was conceived and whether the 500-strong force divided into crack teams to carry out the attack(s) is ready. But Pakistani officials are taking no chances. The nation’s security setup is on high alert. As for the nuclear installations, the managers of Pakistan’s strategic arsenal maintain unrestricted universal operability to fulfill the arsenal’s role as a deterrent. For them, no day is a normal day.

But this latest disclosure of a plan to attack the nuclear sites has raised alarm bells, to say the least.

A rough sketch of the plan and how the attack(s) are expected to unfold goes as follows:

1. A team or several teams of terrorists attack one or more Pakistani nuclear sites and attempt to enter the facilities.

2. Within each crack team only a small core is supposed to be equipped with modern communications equipment, special operations gear, and modern weapons; highly trained to exact maximum damage.

3. Where possible, the terrorists plan to break in and hold the fort, a la Mumbai attacks, in order to generate maximum media coverage and embarrassment for the Pakistanis.

4. The international media, and especially the main American and British news outlets, turn this into a global crisis, comparable to the Bay of Pigs in 1962.

5. The event generates enough pressure to justify an ‘international demand’ to neutralize Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and force Pakistanis to accept ‘international’ supervision.

6. Depending on the aftermath, and after a few days or weeks, a small nuclear weapon is used somewhere, maybe against the US military or NATO bases in Afghanistan since it would be difficult to do it anywhere else, in order to confirm that the Afghan Taliban or generally the ‘Islamic extremists’ managed to steal a weapon from the earlier attack(s) on Pakistani sites.

This last point is critical. According to the available information, the mysterious disappearance of a senior Indian nuclear scientist and his subsequent death in May is linked to at least some parts of this plan. The scientist, Mr. Lokanathan Mahalingam, 47, had access to Indian’s sensitive nuclear information and worked at the prestigious Kaiga Atomic Power Station in the southern Indian state Karnataka, close to Project Seabird, a major Indian military base. His disappearance received limited coverage in the Indian media and there was almost a blackout on the circumstances surrounding how his dead body was found in a lake. The media in the U.S. and Britain also ignored the story. It is believed that Mr. Mahalingam was either involved in or had some knowledge about the planning for securing a small nuclear weapon that would leave no fingerprints, to put it this way, in order to execute the idea in paragraph 6 above.

The Indians have been working on this scenario for some time now.

On 16 May, the Israeli security website Debka under a story titled, ‘Singh warns Obama: Pakistan is lost,’ reported the following:

“India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has told President Obama that nuclear sites in Pakistan’s restive frontier province are “already partly” in the hands of Islamic extremists.”

The Times of India, reporting the story, complained about “Washington’s misplaced confidence in, and [careless] approach towards, Pakistan’s nuclear assets,” and grumbled that “Pakistan is ramping up its nuclear arsenal even as the rest of the world is scaling it down.”

The Indian interest is obvious. But so is the Israeli interest. It is quite revealing that the story was broken by a news outlet known in international circles for its links to the Israeli government.

Official circles in Washington, including the White House, the State Department, Pentagon and CIA are cognizant of a history of cooperation between India and Israel in security issues. India’s security establishment is largely focused on Pakistan and on controlling Kashmir where the population is fighting the Indian military. At least in one incident, during the limited Pakistan-India war in 1999, the Israelis directly intervened to help the battered Indian army overturn a tactical victory by Pakistani and Kashmiri fighters.

As recently as two days ago, Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst and an Obama adviser known for his strong anti-Pakistan views, wrote an article published at the Brookings Institute website that demonstrates how far the anti-Pakistan lobby is willing to go to prove that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is not safe.

In Mr. Riedel’s case, he went as far as lying.

He used a recent terrorist attack on a bus carrying employees of KRL, a Pakistani nuclear facility, to say that Pakistani nuclear sites are already under attack. What he conveniently ignored is that the said bus was in fact traveling through a densely populated part of the city and not anywhere near any nuclear site. The bus most probably became a target of opportunity because it carried a plate indicating it was a government vehicle.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s statement quoted by an Israeli source which was widely reported and never denied by the Indians, the Israelis or the Americans, was not the first to promote the alarmist and the unreal scenario of Pakistani nuclear weapons getting into the wrong hands. Mr. Singh came on record during an interview with CNN in 2005 to say this:

“I am worried about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets should President Pervez Musharraf be replaced, since there is always the danger of Islamic militants seizing power and taking control of the country’s nuclear assets.”

There is little question that influential parts of the Indian government are involved in exporting terrorism into Pakistan from bases inside Afghanistan. Attempts to incite ethnic unrest in Pakistan’s southwest were traced by investigators to Indians in Afghanistan. Pakistani investigators reached the same conclusion with some of the evidence found in northwest Pakistan where terrorists are killing Pakistanis. And now there are reports of an impending attack on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities using Baitullah Mehsud.

The Indians and those who are supporting them should be under no illusions. Any attack on Pakistani nuclear facilities in the coming days will be construed as a declaration of war by India against Pakistan. Knowing of Mehsud’s previous contacts with Indians and with Karzai’s people, any miscalculated attempt by his terrorists will not be seen as anything less than a direct Indian attack. In this case, Pakistan will consider itself in a state of war, and retaliate accordingly. There should not be any confusion on this.

[Source: http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/article_detail.php?id=735]

URDU version of the story

Urdu version of the story has been given by Mr. Afran Siddique. He is an eminent Columnist in Daily Jang. Here it goes!

[Source: http://jang-group.com/jang/jul2009-daily/11-07-2009/col1.htm]

Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa

An author of two books on defence decision-making and political-economy of military, Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa has 17 years work experience in research and writing, consulting and public sector management. Dr. Siddiqa did her graduation from Kinnaird College, Lahore, Masters from Punjab University and her doctorate in War Studies from King’s College, London. Her first book titled ‘Pakistan’s Arms Procurement and Military Buildup, 1979-99 In Search of a Policy’ (published by Palgrave Press, UK – 2001) is the first detailed analysis of defense decision-making in Pakistan. Her second book ‘Military Inc, Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy’ (Pluto Press, UK  April 2007) is the first book ever to be written on the subject. She is also a regular columnist for the English daily ‘Dawn’  She also contributes to international academic journals and was the correspondent for the prestigious ‘Jane’s Defence Weekly’ which is published from the UK and widely read by the armed forces and the strategic community all over the world. Dr. Siddiqa was also the first Pakistan Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC, USA and has been a Ford Fellow, and a research fellow at the Cooperative Monitoring Center, Sandia National Laboratories, USA. She was also the recipient of the esteemed Mehboobul Haq, Kodikara and Asia Foundation research awards. Besides her career in research and writing, she has also served as a civil servant (1988-01). During this period she also had the distinction of being the first women and civilian to serve as Director of Naval Research for Pakistan Navy.

[Source: http://ayeshasiddiqa.com/ ]

Article: How Defense deals work?

DECISION-making in the defense sector is generally a grey area because of the secrecy that surrounds the process. However, in decision-making environments where political and accountability systems are not strong, there is greater vagueness.

Two questionable deals in this country involve equipment for the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and the Pakistan Navy (PN). In the PAF’s case, former air chief Kaleem Saadat claimed that Gen Musharraf ruined a $1.2bn deal to acquire Swedish surveillance aircraft. The second instance concerns President Zardari’s alleged link to financial mismanagement in negotiating a deal for new submarines.

According to the current procedure, different directorates in the services headquarters are involved in evaluating weapons’ requirements and then coming up with staff requirements which are evaluated by the planning departments in their respective headquarters. The army’s system is more elaborate than that of the other two services. Once the service boards shortlist their requirements the latter are communicated to the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (JCSC) to prioritise the procurement of arms for the three services. This is then communicated to the government through the defence ministry.

The army chief has a lot of influence in the JCSC. This has especially been the case over the past decade because of changes in the system where the post of chairman is occupied by an army general. The position no longer goes to the other services. The contract is taken care of at the defence ministry where officials from their respective service headquarters and posted in the ministry assist the process.

In this system, the head of state, especially if he is also the army chief, plays a major role. As army chief, the president can influence the final selection. So Gen Musharraf was in a position to influence the contract and the final acquisition.

But what about Asif Zardari who was also accused of making money in the past from the acquisition of the French Agosta-90B submarines? It is worth noting that the Musharraf government could not get any real evidence of Benazir Bhutto’s and Asif Zardari’s involvement in the submarine deal despite pulling up former naval chief Admiral Mansoorul Haq. It is important to note that while the previous PPP government could be linked to questionable power-sector deals, it probably had less to do with defence purchases. In any case, the procurement process is longer than the average life of a political government for a single person to influence the decision.

This is not to say that the PPP is above board. This is simply the nature of the defence acquisition system. Any financial mismanagement in defence deals has to involve military personnel at the service HQs and the JCSC. According to the prevalent procurement system, the acquisition of weapons depends on staff requirements decided at the service headquarters. The ‘higher defence reorganisation’ planned under the Bhutto government during the 1970s had made the defence ministry responsible for all weapons-procurement administrative work such as calling for bids, floating tenders, writing contracts and negotiating with sellers.

Ideally speaking, staff requirements must reflect the needs of a service. These muse be based on tactical, operational and strategic intelligence. The defence ministry should be responsible for fine-tuning staff requirements and finding the right system to meet the service’s needs.

Currently, the selection of weapons is done at the services’ headquarters which means there is greater interaction between the divisions responsible for planning and potential sellers. Resultantly, staff requirements also reflect the bias of the procurement team for a specific seller. This is where money is to be made. It is after overt and covert deals have been taken care of that the case is passed on to the government.

Where the PN and PAF are concerned obtaining approval for a major acquisition depends on the interest shown by either the army or the head of the state, the final authority. The air force has been luckier than the navy due to the relevance of the service to the army-dominated military strategy.

With the largest service overly involved in politics, governance and now internal security, the PAF is considered vital to fighting a potential war with India, a concept that dominates our military strategy. On the other hand, the PN, which has less strategic significance, tries to attract top policymakers. There are fears that this could be done through offering them a share in the money. The top management influences the naval staff requirements and the final selection of weapons.

This has happened in the case of the acquisition of the P-3C Orions for which the PN has no naval staff requirement or NSR i.e. no real demand has been generated for the aircraft. Another case refers to negotiations with the Chinese for the F-22P frigates in which the service chief overrode the decision, despite issues raised about the technology by relevant quarters.

There are some that suggest that the appointment of a relatively junior District Management Group officer as ambassador to Paris is meant to facilitate a deal with the French. Such claims do not take into account two factors. First, an ambassador is too insignificant in the entire procurement process to influence a deal which the defence establishment including the ministry of defence manages. Second, the PN’s existing submarine fleet is of French origin.

Changing the source would mean adding to the cost as it would involve setting up newer maintenance and other facilities. Not to mention the fact that Islamabad acquired the Agosta-90B under a transfer-of-technology agreement which not only escalated the cost of the deal but also meant that the PN could make additional submarines. The capital investment in the acquisition of weapons represents about 12 to 15 per cent of the lifecycle cost of the equipment. In simple language, a larger array of weapons in terms of their source will add to the overall cost of equipment without increasing efficiency.

It is time we took another look at our military strategy and weapons-procurement planning which suffers from major flaws starting from the absence of a rational procurement planning loop. Weapons’ procurement suffers from the absence of a ‘system’ that actually qualifies as one. Unless one is introduced, we will keep losing money to corrupt bureaucrats and leaders.

Yvonne Ridley

British-born, award-winning journalist Yvonne Ridley is well known in the Muslim world for her outspoken views and defence of Islam. She endeared herself to the Muslim community in Britain when she reverted to Islam 30 months after making international headlines when she was captured by the Taleban on an undercover assignment in Afghanistan. She was a senior reporter of the Sunday Express at the time, having spent nearly 10 years in Fleet Street working for several prestige titles including The Sunday Times, The Observer, Daily Mirror and Independent on Sunday…

Sr Yvonne set out as a regional journalist nearly 30 years in her native North East. She has also worked on projects as a broadcaster, producer and presenter on programmes for BBC TV and radio, CNN, ITN and Carlton TV travelling to Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine. A founder member of Women in Journalism, she is also a promoter of women’s rights, and is also a founder member of the Stop The War Coaltion and the RESPECT political party.
In her spare time Sr Yvonne travels throughout the UK and across the globe promoting peace and the anti-war message. She has also delivered lectures on issues relating to Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Uzbekistan, Women in Islam, the War on Terror and journalism at Ivy League universities across the US, Australia, South Africa and the Middle East.
Sr Yvonne is a founder member of the Friends of Islam, an All Party Parliamentary Group. She is also a member of the National Union of Journalists, the International Federation of Journalists and the Society of Authors. She has written two books called In The Hands of the Taleban and Ticket to Paradise and is currently writing and researching for two other titles.
In The Hands of the Taleban has now been updated and is being published in both French and English for sale in leading bookshops soon.
She is a patron of the UK-based pressure groups Cage Prisoners and Hhugs which seek to help and highlight the plight of political prisoners around the world as well as the financial and emotional needs of their families. She also devotes much of her time to humanitarian work and supports several charities.
She also works as a political presenter and journalist for the global, english language, 24-hour news station Press TV as well as being a regular media commentator and writer on Muslim-related issues

Now, lets looks into the article she has posted on her site.

Sarkozy – The naked truth

POLITICAL opportunist Nicolas Sarkozy forgot three fundamental lessons when he decided to denounce the burka.

The first one is that men should stay well clear of becoming embroiled in expressing opinions on women’s clothes, unless of course you happen to be called Lacroix, Gaultier, Lagerfeld or Ghesquiere.

This was a lesson learned the hard way by former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw who was pilloried when he questioned the nikab after asking a female constituent to lift her veil so he could see her face.

Could you imagine him making the same request of any female members of the Saudi royal household during one of his galloping missions to the Middle East?

Foolishly Scotsmen Gordon Brown and John Reid, hailing from a country where men wear pleated skirts and paint their faces blue, then waded in with the grace of a couple of dancing bears.

Even the Bishop of Rochester – a man who wears a pointy hat and a purple dress – chipped in his dislike of the nikab, full face veil or burka.

Of course they were all despatched very quickly by Muslim women in Britain who proved themselves to be anything but oppressed, subjugated creatures. And just to show there’’s real solidarity across women of faith and no faith, quite a few western feminists expressed their disdain at Straw and co while standing shoulder to shoulder with their Muslim sisters.

The second lesson is try and be sincere if you are taking up a cause. Sarkozy feigned his utmost respect for women by saying he felt the burka represented the unacceptable symbol of women’’s  enslavement – today I can unveil him to be a purveyor of weasel words.

If he really cared about the subjugation of women he would seriously tackle the appalling levels of domestic violence French women suffer at the hands of French men – two million are victims of bullying, violent partners … a staggering 400 are murdered by their spouse.

So how many women in France actually wear the burka? The answer is a very tiny minority – so much so that when the BBC’’s Emma Jane Kirby went to interview a burka-wearing woman in Paris she couldn’t find a single one!

The former BBC’’s Europe correspondent went to the Muslim quarter in the capital but all she could find were lots of women of North African origin wearing hijabs. She was given blank expressions and shrugs of the shoulder when she asked if any of them knew women who wore burkas – and the local Islamic dress shops didn’t stock any.

So why would Sarkozy launch such an onslaught on the burka, describing Muslim women who wear it as ‘ “prisoners behind a grille, cut off from social life, deprived of their identity’?
As pointed out by one Islamic observer: ‘“The irony is that many Muslim women would say the current headscarf ban in France has created exactly this situation for them”’.

Well the real reason had nothing to do with the burka and everything to do with Sarkozy putting pressure on the Liberal Left, throwing a few cheap shots at the expense of Muslim women while trying to pick up a few votes at their expense as well.

Sarkozy, like many male politicians, is pretty gutless so in a pathetic attempt to disguise his real motivations in wanting to pick up votes, he invents a proposed ban of the burka as a defence of women’s rights. This, he knows will go down well with the French electorate who see veiled women as a threat to their liberal self esteem.

Using women to win votes is a common political ploy – I remember when Tony Blair and George W Bush claimed their invasion in Afghanistan was in defence of women’s rights and designed to liberate Afghan women.

Those two even used and pushed their own doting wives to stand in front of the world’’s media to justify their husband’’s invasion of the country – on a recent visit I can tell you there are few career women emerging from the rubble of Kabul.

So next time a politician tries to drive through any form of controversial measure or make a spectacular announcement, please don’t fall for the mealy-mouthed excuse that they’’re doing it for the liberation of women and/or ethnic minority groups.

Reading the weekend newspaper opinion pages and columnists, I was amazed at how many supposedly intelligent, feministas fell for the Sarkozy bull. But they did – hook, line and sinker exhibiting an astonishing shallowness in their writing.

I genuinely have a feeling Sarkozy is one of these weak-kneed, lily-livered men who trembles at the thought of empowered women. And I think the sight of a woman in a burka makes him=2 0feel inferior.

Could it be that because his wife – as beautiful as she is – has bared all for every man on the planet to ogle, that the very sight of a burka-clad female makes him feel insecure in his own relationship?

As any European schoolboy can testify from the pictures Blu-tacked to his ceiling, to the crumpled, sticky torn out, somewhat crusty pages of last year’’s GQ hidden under their bed, France’’s First Lady is the stuff of male fantasies.

I suppose there must be some men around who might get a kick out of the thought of pre-pubescent boys fumbling over pictures of their wife in the buff … or even dirty old, syphilitic men playing with themselves, but I wonder if the pocket-sized French Leader (a mere 5ft 5ins tall) is secure and confident in his marriage to a much younger woman?
Consider this, if a woman chooses to be veiled rather than show her face to a man, is she doing so to protect her husband’s feelings, in which case she could be seen as being compliant and servile, or – more importantly – is she doing so to protect her own face from the violation of a man’s eyes?

Could it be that some of these women, when peering out of their burkas at the French leader, feel so special that they do=2 0not want the likes of him staring at all of their features?

And this, I believe, is what disturbs Sarkozy because if burka-clad women don’t want to be peered or leered at by men like him then this would be seen not as a show of subjugation but a sense of female superiority.

Could it be that because every bloke on the planet who wants to, can study in detail every curve and crevice of his naked young wife, that the very sight of a burka-clad female makes him feel uncomfortable in his own relationship?

After all Mrs Sarkozy can be viewed in all her naked glory by anyone who can access the internet or a copy of last year’s GQ.

And then someone paid $91,000 for a naked portrait at a Christie’s auction in New York.

On top of that it appears someone stole hundreds of “highly intimate” images of France’s First Lady and an ex-lover a couple of months ago.

A 0Fascinating stuff, but let’s not dwell too long on this subject, I’’ve yet to raise the third lesson Sarkozy needs to learn and that is: People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

A quick scratch beneath the thin veneer of public office reveals the French leader to be a sauteur.

And the source of this information is non other than the long-suffering Cecilia Sarkozy, who had to put up with 18 years of being married to a man with behavioural problems including being mean, cold and a serial womaniser.

In the book Cecilia, published by Flammarion in January 2008, she said of her husband: “He has a ridiculous side. He is undignified. Nicolas doesn’t come over like a president. He has a real behaviour problem … He needs someone to point it out to him. I did it for 18 years and I can’t do it any more. I am the last person who can do it.”

These, and other, extracts incensed Sarkozy and his estranged wife’’s lawyers sought an injunction to prevent publication on the grounds that the book had invaded the former first lady’s privacy – not that it was inaccurate. The former French first lady Cécilia Sarkozy, divorced in October 2007, is quoted as criticising her ex-husband’s morals, his parenting skills and his fitness to be president.                                        

That must have been extremely crushing and hurtful for France’s little emperor’. But no more hurtful than attacking and scapegoating harmless Muslim women. I wonder if he feels as though they are judging him from behind their veils?                                             

Well we’’re all judging France’’s ‘Little Emperor’ now and the verdict isn’t a good one.

Source: http://yvonneridley.org

Shireen M. Mazari is a scholar and commentator on Strategic Studies and Political Science from Pakistan. She was Director General of Institute of Strategic Studies, a research think-tank based in Islamabad, Pakistan.
Mazari”s views are considered to be a form of Pakistani nationalism. She has been critical of Pakistan”s dealings with other countries, including India and the United States. Mazari formerly was an Associate Professor and then Chairperson of the Department of Defense and Strategic Studies at the Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad. She joined Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on 25 November, 2008. After a meeting with the Chairman of the party, Mr.Imran Khan

Shireen Mazari Harassed

Dr. Shireen Mazari is one of those very few researchers in Pakistan, who categorically and honestly voice their opinions against the hegemonic policies of United States within this region and outside. She has been remained a beacon of truth, audacity and courage and to top that off, she has been instrumental in converging the learned people from different walks of life at Institute of Strategic Studies.

As the new government of Pakistan People’s Party is kowtowing the line of United States one step further from the previous regime of PML-Q, they have written a new chapter in the history of Pakistan’s submission to US wishes by sacking and harrassing Dr. Mazari.

Though the tenure of Dr. Shireen Mazari remained as the DG of ISS, but she was sacked without any prior intimation and was replaced by US’s favorite Tanvir Ahmad Khan, on the recommendation of another US favorite Hussain Haqqani. After the insulting and unjustified sacking, Dr. Shireen was asked to leave within 15 minutes from the office.

All the Pakistanis are extremely outraged over this fawn and unctuous submission of foreign office to the masters in Washington.

This was the brief introduction I gathered about Mrs. Shireen. Here its goes her article, speaking about the Dirty US game & role of our establishment.

US Dirty Game?

By: Dr. Shireen Mazari

Pakistanis cannot be allowed to savor joy and success peacefully. Just when the nation was tumultuously enjoying the magical victory of our cricket team, the hard reality of our hostile environment post-9/11 clouded over us once again.

For anyone who thought the US was not targeting our nuclear assets, the screaming headlines from the Afghan-based Al Qaeda leadership’s interview to Al Jazeera brought the issue to the forefront once again with claims that Al Qaeda would use our nuclear assets against the US if they could. The absurdity of the statement notwithstanding, it can be explained only if seen as part of the campaign to legitimize a US/NATO takeover of our nuclear assets since our security prevents the US from taking them out physically.

We have also seen US weapons mysteriously land in the hands of militants in Pakistan – now we have the Al Qaeda leadership freely having access to the foreign media in Afghanistan. What is the US up to with Al Qaeda? Post-9/11 the world has had a memory lapse over the US-Al Qaeda connections – especially when Sudan offered Bin Laden to the US – but the latter allowed the Al Qaeda leader to move to Afghanistan!

While our military has become embroiled in a “war” that cannot be won by conventional military means, the US continues to play dangerous games with Pakistan – and at multiple levels. The drone attacks continue under Obama since the first one he ordered three days after his inauguration as US president – which killed 15 Pakistanis. In fact just as the present government has gone the extra mile in ceding ground to the US in Pakistan, the Obama administration has expanded the drone policy and according to Jeremy Scahill in the first 99 days of 2009 more than 150 Pakistanis have been killed in these attacks.

His estimate is that since 2006 and up to April 2009 drones have killed 687 Pakistanis – apart from the identifiable militants. That comes to about 38 civilian deaths a month just from these drone attacks.

Nor is this all. The New York Times gave an interesting account of US military operations within Pakistan including US Special Forces commando raids in FATA across the international Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Even more of a wakeup call of US intent should be the $.9 billion of the first year ‘largesse’ under the Kerry-Lugar Bill that has been earmarked for the construction of the new US embassy in Islamabad – a huge fortress right behind the presidency and the prime minister’s secretariat. If Iraq is anything to go by we may soon have US private security companies like the notorious Blackwater plus hundreds of other contractors. While US human intelligence will not gain in quality we will have a meddling US presence across our state institutions and civil society which will be damaging in the long term to our national wellbeing.

We are already hearing of the CIA chief visiting us followed by Obama’s special representative general James Jones. Both these officials will also be visiting India and the general thrust seems to be to push Pakistan into accepting an Indian military presence in Afghanistan. Interestingly General Jones also has strong ties to US business including Boeing and Chevron. Meanwhile there is no let down on focusing on our nuclear assets, which is why Prime Minister Gilani was compelled to finally, after a year of silent tolerance, demand that the US stop using a discriminatory approach towards Pakistan’s nuclear program, including the search for civilian nuclear power.

But there is discrimination and the new line of attack that has been opened is the Al Qaeda statement – following the numerous US official and media statements expressing “fear” of US nukes falling into militant hands! Surely just as the discovery of US/Israeli arms on militants in Pakistan raised serious questions as to the role/linkages of outside forces to militant outfits within Pakistan, so the new development is hardly without its linkage to an overall plan against our nuclear assets. Once again, the fact is that unless the Pakistan military is weakened from within, the assets cannot be accessed at all. Hence the need of the US to get the military bogged down in a conventional battle against unconventional foes in Swat and FATA – without any overarching political strategy visible from the government.

Ironically, while plots against our nuclear assets continue, it is developments in other countries that reveal the lack of strong security measures at nuclear installations in these places. On 22nd June, anti-nuclear activists managed to break through security at the German Unterweser nuclear power plant and actually scaled the dome of the plant. More disturbing has been the story, now surprisingly blocked out, about the Indian nuclear scientist Lokanathan Mahalingam, who disappeared or was abducted, and was later found dead from the Kali river. Mahalingam had also disappeared ten years earlier while he was working at another sensitive Indian nuclear location – the Kalpakkam nuclear complex.

India’s nuclear and missile security has revealed many shortcomings and in 2006 Dr. Tiwari involved in space research was also shot dead.

There have been stories of an underground network of Hindu extremists and Indian scientists involved in technology transfers to and from India and Israel. Indian scientists were also discovered at Iran’s Bushehr plant. So it is strange as to why the US and the IAEA continue to keep silent over India’s possible private proliferation rings as well as the weak safety of its nuclear and missile installations and sites? Equally puzzling is official Pakistani silence on these issues.

It is similar to the questionable manner in which our official institutions declare that there are Indians/US links to militant outfits in Pakistan, but then fail to give details or to take up these issues with the countries concerned. What is the Pakistani state playing at or fearful of? Is it not time the nation was told about the sources of funding and weapons for the militants in specific terms to give credibility to these allegations? Or will all the “militants” be “killed” before we can learn crucial facts about US double dealing and Indian destabilization of Pakistan. That is why arrest and trial of the militant leadership in anti-terror courts, rather than their killing, is essential for our nation and state’s long term security.

As for India, while Pakistan is also under pressure to resume the bilateral dialogue, our seeming haste seems to have sent the wrong signals to India. That is why we saw the sheer bad behavior on the part of India’s Manmohan Singh towards President Zardari in Russia. Too bad the latter was unable to respond in kind. But we can still send the correct message to the Indians by refusing to have a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the NAM conference in Egypt.

Dialogue is certainly desirable but only when the intent of the two sides is honest in terms of conflict resolution. So far the Indian intent is clearly not focused on this aspect. So perhaps it would be good to wait till India realises the need to move towards conflict resolution with Pakistan in a holistic fashion. It may take pleasure in our leadership’s refusal to bring up the K word but without any movement on Kashmir, the dialogue will eventually run aground as always. For Pakistan it is also essential to know its maximalist and minimalist positions in clear terms – both, of necessity, being premised on giving Kashmiris their right to self-determination.

Things are moving fast, and there is a crucial need for the Pakistani state to step back and look at the larger picture so that inclusive policies can be formulated to deal with the threat of extremism, militancy on a long term basis by denying them space in our society; and to protect our nation and its nuclear assets from US designs.

Finally, it is sad to see that while the Pakistani state has seemingly abandoned the Kashmiris in Occupied Kashmir, these brave people continue to rally round Pakistan in a most instinctive way. So it was with the T20 World Cup where the Kashmiris in Occupied Kashmir joined the Pakistani nation in celebrating the Pakistani victory. Did anyone else in our neighborhood do the same?

Courtesy: Rising The Mag (http://www.risethemag.com/)

[ Story From Express news 20th June 2009 Link Here ]

Same story has been published in Daily News as follows.

Claims denial of commission led to 11 engineers massacre; Balladur, Sarkozy reject charge
CHERBOURG, France: A probe into the 2002 killing of 11 French engineers in Pakistan is focusing on France’s failure to pay a commission for the sale of submarines to Pakistan, a lawyer for the victims’ families said on Thursday.
The lawyer, Olivier Morice, said former president Jacques Chirac and former prime minister Edouard Balladur had been mentioned in the decision to halt the payments.Morice spoke after two French anti-terrorist investigating magistrates had met with families of the engineers killed in the attack.
A car packed with explosives was driven into a minibus carrying the Frenchmen, all engineers working for a French state firm, DCN, which was building submarines for Pakistan. The 11 engineers and three Pakistanis were killed.
Investigators had been looking into an al-Qaeda link to the attack. But Morice told AFP: “The al-Qaeda track has been totally abandoned. The motive for the attack appears linked to the non-payment of commissions.”
He said the payments were stopped when Chirac became president in 1995 because he wanted to stop part of the money financing the campaign of Balladur, who was his political rival on the French right at the time.
Magali Drouet, the daughter of one of the men killed, quoted one of the anti-terrorist judges, Marc Trevidic, as telling the families that this theory was ‘cruelly logical’. She added according to this scenario, the attack was carried out because the special payments were not made by France to Asif Ali Zardari, who is now Pakistan’s president but was a minister at the time.
High-ranking politicians would likely be called in to testify, said Morice. Details of the payments emerged in 2008 as part of an investigation into French arms sales. Police seized documents from the French firm, now known as DCNS, which discussed the companies used to pay fees in connection with arms sales.
One unsigned document spoke of Pakistan intelligence services using Islamist militants. It claimed that the Karachi attack was carried out with complicity of rogue elements in the Pakistani law enforcement agencies.
The document, which has been added to the case file, said those who employed the Islamist group had financial aims. It involved obtaining the payment of unpaid commissions linked to the sale of French submarines to Pakistan in 1994, it said.
A French investigator, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that ‘new elements’ had been found in the inquiry, but declined to give details. Balladur, head of the French government before Chirac became president, said Thursday that he knew of nothing improper in the submarine deals. “There were indeed agreements made with the Pakistani government,” he told French television. “To my knowledge, all of it was perfectly regular. I have nothing else to add.”
Two alleged members of al-Qaeda-linked group Harkatul Mujahideen al-Aalmi were found guilty by an anti-terrorism court in Pakistan in 2003 over the Karachi attack. But the Sindh High Court last month acquitted the pair, saying in an order that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellants beyond any reasonable doubt.
President Nicolas Sarkozy was Balladur’s campaign manager in the ballot and was also budget minister when the lucrative sales contract for the French Agosta submarines was signed.
Sarkozy rejected the magistrates’ suspicions. “Listen, this is ridiculous,” he told reporters at a news conference after an EU summit in Brussels. “This is grotesque … We have to respect the grief of the families. Who would ever believe such a tale?” he added.

Source: Daily News 20th June 2009

My Opinion

Well I don’t know about the authenticity of this story, but what really concerns me here is the fact that the issue of this much importance had been put under carpet.

Adding insult to injury, The proposed culprits has been released by the court later due the lack and non-seriousness of facts against them.

Even if there is nothing in this story, still I wonder, how this incident could be happened, and went to the darks of history same as other cases.

We also need to keep the point in notice, that after this incident, Military has been directly involved in power, I wonder what made them incapable to bring those culprits  to the Justice? Are they just expert in just taking over their own country?

This story also named Asif Ali Zardari being one of the beneficiary in this deal. People will start pointed finger against him, but who will be punishing those who facilitated him to acquire the supreme post of the country through NRO etc?