|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
1. The India-Pakistan Peace Process
May-June 2010
Dr. Shaheen Akhtar
Research Fellow
Sidra Tariq
Asst. Research Officer
A ground-breaking change in India-Pakistan peace process took place during the months of May and June. The long-awaited meetings between the foreign secretaries and home ministers of India and Pakistan were held in June. The meetings were the result of the recent commitment between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his Pakistan counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani in Bhutan’s capital Thimpu, where they met on the sidelines of the Saarc summit and decided to bridge the “trust deficit” between the two nations. The first meeting between the foreign secretaries was held on 24 June 2010, in Islamabad, prior to the Saarc home ministers’ meeting. The second meeting took place on 26 June between Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik and his counterpart, P. Chidambaram. These talks were also expected to set the agenda for a meeting between Foreign Ministers S.M. Krishna and Shah Mehmood Qureshi in Islamabad on 15 July.
While Pakistan and India are agreeing to move forward to a post-Mumbai negotiation process by developing a new framework for talks, the water dispute places an increasing burden on the leadership of the two countries. A joint meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission, aimed at discussing issues of river water-sharing and exchange of data related to flood-warning was held in Delhi from 29 May to 2 June 2010, wherein issues pertaining to the Baglihar dam were resolved.
The US yet again clearly defined its position on Kashmir and the Pakistan-India relationship. While recognizing that Kashmir was the main issue between the two countries, the US put forward the long-stated Indian demand that first Pakistan must take concrete measures to bring the 26/11 Mumbai attack culprits to justice. However, it also pushed India to resume the dialogue process.
Both Pakistani and Indian leadership indicated their commitment to resume the peace dialogue.
On 30 April, Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani said that Pakistan and India could not continue sticking to strained relations for a long time. He said that “the resumption of talks with India is a significant step but the two countries have to go a long way for finding peace that will ensure safe and secure future for the coming generations.”(1)
On 7 June, speaking at the Command and Staff College, Quetta, the prime minister said that all issues with India, “including Kashmir, terrorism and water, can be resolved through ‘composite dialogue’.” He reiterated that “Pakistan seeks negotiated and peaceful resolution of all disputes with India” and that the “Indian government had agreed to resume composite dialogue on all controversial issues.”(2)
On 7 June, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that India wanted to carry forward the dialogue process. He asserted that “meaningful talks with Pakistan could lead to resolution of ‘old issues’ and were in India’s interest.”(3)
On 30 April, commenting on the premier-level meeting between India and Pakistan on the sidelines of the Saarc Summit in Thimpu, Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that the spirit behind ‘composite dialogue’ was more important than its nomenclature. Responding to questions on whether the re-engagement would imply resumption of the ‘composite dialogue,’ Qureshi said: “Call it what you may, it is the spirit of dialogue that is important. Both countries agree that dialogue is the only sensible way forward.”(4)
On 30 April, Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao pointing to the emerging trends for future dialogue said: “We don’t have to get stuck to nomenclature as both sides have agreed to restore trust and build mutual confidence and that we should do.”(5)
On 7 May, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister said that all issues included in the composite dialogue would be discussed once the stalled peace talks resumed. He asserted: “There are eight segments of the composite dialogue and all of them will be discussed.” Furthermore, Qureshi sought to dispel New Delhi’s doubts that weapons being provided to Pakistan by the United States to augment its counter-terrorism potential would be employed against India. He assured the Indians that they “should not have any apprehensions. The military assistance we are getting from the US is meant for enhancing our capacity to counter terrorism and will not be used against India.”(6)
On 11 May, during a telephonic conversation, Shah Mehmood Qureshi extended an invitation to his Indian counterpart S.M. Krishna to Islamabad on 15 July. Qureshi said it was a “good conversation”. Nonetheless, he warned against false hopes and asserted that normalisation of relations between the two countries was not that simple. He stated: “I recognise difficulties; I recognise the trust deficit that exists. Don’t expect miracles overnight…We’ll have to resolve that we’ll not allow any act of terrorism to impede the process. It is a valuable process and we should build it to a level that it becomes irreversible.”(7) He also said that the talks would be conducted by the interior ministers and foreign secretaries of the two states and would involve “a wide range of issues.”
On 11 May, Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna said: “I am looking forward to these talks and let us hope that these talks will be helpful in bringing our two countries closer together and let’s hope that our efforts will be fruitful.”(8)
On 13 May, Krishna also said that he would invite Shah Mehmood Qureshi to India during his visit to Islamabad in July as part of efforts to lessen the “trust deficit” between the two neighbours. He stated: “I certainly would be extending an invitation to Pakistani Foreign Minister to visit India…. These high-level visits will only act as some kind of a panacea to reduce the trust deficit and we can talk to each other with more confidence and that certainly will create the right kind of atmosphere for very productive talks.”(9)
Nevertheless, on 19 May, India said that the foreign minister-level talks with Pakistan should not be interpreted as recommencement of the Composite Dialogue, as it was only an exercise to bridge the trust deficit between the two countries. Krishna said: “If you look at the Thimpu text there is nothing about the dialogue at all — the mandate for the foreign ministers and foreign secretaries is to bridge the trust deficit — that is going to be the main thrust of our discussions… that will be the starting point and if we can hit common ground then other substantial issues can be taken up.”(10)
On 12 May, the Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party strongly opposed resumption of any dialogue with Pakistan. BJP chief Nitin Gadkari said: “India should not hold any talks with Pakistan — our party is against it. The talks will have no relevance as Pakistan has done nothing to end cross-border terrorism. By resuming talks with Pakistan, the UPA government would be repeating a big mistake.”(11)
Foreign secretary level talks: Aimed at reducing the “trust deficit” between India and Pakistan, a set of meetings, beginning with the talks between the foreign secretaries on 24 June, and home ministers on 26 June, were held in Islamabad. The 24 June parleys were dominated by latest investigations into the Mumbai attacks and militancy.
On 24 June, Pakistan’s foreign secretary Salman Bashir and his counterpart Nirupama Rao in a joint press conference said: “Dialogue is the best way forward to resolve all pending issues… The destiny of our people is linked to each other.” Mrs. Rao further said: “We are seeking to put a new chapter in place… we are focused on the resumption of dialogue and confidence building…. Engagement is the key…. There is a constituency for peace in both countries, people are the life-blood of any relationship, and this vision of achieving (a breakthrough in our ties) is driven by that.”(12) From the Pakistani side, scrapping the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), release of prisoners and demilitarization, were the issues put forward.(13)
On 26 June, addressing a joint press conference, Interior Minister Rehman Malik and his Indian counterpart, P. Chidambaram, said that their countries would work together to clear the region of terrorism. Rehman Malik said that “Pakistan would support India to eliminate the menace of terrorism and to take the trial of the elements involved in the Mumbai attacks to a logical conclusion…. the FIA and Indian CBI would interact with each other regarding terrorism and Mumbai carnage… New Delhi has provided a new dossier and we are looking into evidence and Islamabad would act accordingly.”(14)
On 5 May, Pakistan’s foreign minister said that Pakistan was putting in sincere efforts with a clear strategy to wipe out terrorism. He stressed that India should understand that Pakistan was the biggest victim of terrorism and facing hard times. He reiterated the need for a joint anti-terror plan and said: “I think we should sit together and devise a joint strategy against terrorism. It is easy to criticise but difficult to act….I can point a finger to several things, but we want to maintain tempo and spirit to start the dialogue process and this atmosphere should be maintained.”(15)
On May 12, Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony favoured the dialogue with Pakistan but stressed that Pakistan still needed to demonstrate its sincerity in eliminating terrorism from its soil by closing down the terror camps working on its eastern borders. He said: “Still, more than 40 terror camps are working across the border. It is a matter of concern to us. On that, Pakistan should take action to dismantle the terrorist outfits. That apart, dialogue will continue.”(16)
On 28 June, during a meeting on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit in Toronto, Canada PM Singh conveyed to US President Obama that Pakistan should take action against terrorism allegedly emanating from its soil and directed towards India. On the issue of confessions made by 26/11 suspect David Coleman Headley, Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said: “We (India and the US) have a mutual interest that the information that is coming out of this interrogation is taken seriously by Pakistan, and with a view to controlling and eliminating terrorist elements on its territory, which affect the stability of the entire [South Asian] region.” She further added: “It is very important that Pakistan abides by its commitment not to allow its territory to be used by elements that engage in terrorism directed against India. And, if that commitment was abided by and was strengthened in the future, then the relations between India and Pakistan would greatly benefit.”(17)
Ajmal Kasab case: On 6 May, the Indian Special Sessions Court sentenced Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving gunman of the 26 November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, to death by hanging. He was given the death penalty on five counts: “murder, abetment to murder, waging war, criminal conspiracy and committing terrorist acts.”(18)
The same day, Union Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily said the verdict in the 26/11 case was a point for Pakistan to understand that it could not interfere in India’s affairs. He said: “Pakistan cannot meddle with the lives and properties of [our people] and if any terrorist is encouraged by them, he will meet the same fate as Kasab.”(19)
On 7 May, giving the first official response, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit asserted that Pakistan had strongly condemned the horrific Mumbai attack. He said: “It is important that culprits are brought to book.” Responding to the observations made by Indian officials that the verdict was “a message to Pakistan that it should not export terror,” Basit said: “It is important to avoid such far-fetched statements as both countries have agreed to resume dialogue.”(20)
The international community welcomed the progress made in India-Pakistan relations.
In this context, on 2 May, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Pakistan and India should involve in constructive dialogue to resolve all their outstanding issues. He said he had discussed this numerous times with “President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh”. He said that “the world had to accept that Pakistan and India were very important states and they should have very close and strong relations.”(21)
According to news sources, the United States is profoundly concerned at the state of affairs in Afghanistan and while its leaders are planning an early withdrawal from that country, they also want to ensure peace between India and Pakistan. According to the sources: “the US cannot afford animosity between Pakistan and India for it is directly impacting upon its performance in the region, therefore it wants a respite in hostilities between the neighbouring countries, at least as long as its objectives are not met.”(22)
On 4 May, the former US General Stanley McChrystal said that progress in Indo-Pakistan relations was beneficial for everyone including the US. He stated: “I think the better we can make India and Pakistan relations, the better it is for everyone, particularly a relatively weak nation like Afghanistan right now, because as those two significant nations have friction sometimes, it can affect Afghanistan in ways that are just huge.”(23)
On 1 June, United States said that it wanted to pursue close relations with both Pakistan and India. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns renewed the Obama administration’s support and approval for fresh measures by Islamabad and New Delhi towards resumption of the peace dialogue. He said: “Of course we have an interest in better relations between India and Pakistan.”(24)
On 9 June, State Department spokesman P J Crowley asserted that there was “no change” in US Kashmir policy with the hope that India and Pakistan would make progress on resolving the “important issue.” He said: “As the dialogue between India and Pakistan continues to expand, including at the leaders level, we would hope that India and Pakistan can make progress in understanding this issue and moving forward, just as they did a few years ago.”(25)
Pakistan held on to its support for the cause of the people of Kashmir and stressed the need for the resolution of the Kashmir issue on the basis of the UN resolution. On 17 May, Prime Minister Gilani said: “the resolution of the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people could help efforts for peace and economic prosperity in this part of the world… Pakistan will continue extending its political, moral and diplomatic support to the people of Kashmir and the whole nation is united on this issue.”(26)
On 18 May, Prime Minister Gilani, while talking to AJK PM Raja Muhammad Farooq Haider reiterated Pakistan’s principled stance on the Kashmir issue.
On 4 May, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s policies seriously harmed the Kashmir cause. Reiterating the Pakistani stance on the resolution of the Kashmir issue in agreement with the UN resolutions, he said: “Kashmir had been the keystone of Pakistan’s foreign policy and Pakistan would continue the diplomatic and moral support of the Kashmiri people for peaceful settlement of the issue… the Kashmiri people were a major party in this dispute and Pakistan could not support any solution of this long-standing issue without the involvement and acceptance of the Kashmiris.”(27)
On 8 June, in a talk with BBC, Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said the Hurriyat leadership of Kashmir had already made it clear that realistic actions by New Delhi to remove black laws such as Armed Forces’ Special Powers Act and Public Safety Act would mirror its earnestness in resolving the Kashmir dispute. He said: “it is a basic question whether India is serious in settling the Kashmir issue or is just pretending a change through visits by its political leadership to Srinagar.”(28)
On 12 May talking to the Head of Kashmir Centre, Brussels, Barrister Abdul Majeed Tarambo, Shah Mehmood Qureshi reiterated that Kashmir solution was imperative for ensuring peace in the entire South Asia and vowed to fully take up Kashmir issue in the upcoming talks with India in July. He held: “We hope to find a road map leading to solution of this burning issue in the upcoming talks. No solution without [meeting] the aspirations of million of people of Kashmir is acceptable.”(29)
On 2 May, Raja Farooq Haider, the prime minister of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), said that the Kashmir issue needed to be resolved through trilateral and not bilateral talks with a third-party mediation. He stated: “Kashmir issue could be settled with the inclusion of Kashmiri leadership in the talks between Pakistan and India, while a third-party guarantee was also necessary in this regard.”(30)
On 18 May, Barrister Sultan Mehmood Chaudhry, former AJK prime minister urged the European Parliament (EP) to press India for early resolution of the Kashmir issue, as it was not being honest in resolving the dispute. Highlighting the role of international community in the resolution of the issue, he said: “Despite the fact that various steps have so far been taken by both countries with regard to CBMs, there seems no positive signals from the Indian side for early solution of the Kashmir issue and international community must take strong notice of the negative Indian approach in this regard.”(31)
The meeting between Premiers Manmohan Singh and Yusuf Raza Gilani in the month of April on the sidelines of 16th Saarc Summit was greatly lauded by Kashmiri leaders, who believe that would prove to be a step ahead in resolving all issues, including Kashmir.
On 11 May, (Indian-held) Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said that the foreign secretary-level talks between Indian and Pakistan were a beginning of the solution of the Kashmir problem. He said: “The solution of the Kashmir issue begins with the Delhi-Islamabad dialogue and the Centre-State understanding over it.”(32)
On 2 May, India’s Union Minister for Renewable Energy and (Kashmir) National Conference president Farooq Abdullah while appreciating the talks said: “talks in Bhutan are a good omen for peace in the sub-continent. The key to peace in Jammu and Kashmir in particular lies in friendly relations between the two countries.”(33)
On 2 May, welcoming the thaw in India-Pakistan relations, Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front Chairman Mohammad Yaseen Malik said: “We want to impress upon the leadership of India and Pakistan that Jammu and Kashmir is not a border dispute between two countries but is the question of the life and freedom of over one crore Kashmiris.”(34)
On 9 May, Hurriyat Conference Chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani said he had no expectations from the foreign minister level talks to be held between India and Pakistan in July. He said: “We are not against talks but we do not expect anything from them too. In view of the result of the past 130 rounds of talks that have been held between India and Pakistan from time to time, we cannot be hopeful of anything good for Kashmir… The Indian government has to take the Kashmir issue seriously and understand that it is not a territorial issue but (an issue) about the birthright of lakhs of people of Kashmir.”(35)
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Jammu and Kashmir on 9-10 June where he extended an offer of talks with the freedom fighters on condition that they gave up violence and abided by the Indian constitution.
On 8 June, while commenting on PM Singh’s offer, Hurriyat (M) chairman, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said that unless India took concrete measures to amend ground realities, demonstrated readiness for tripartite talks and accepted Jammu and Kashmir as a dispute, any forward movement was not likely through talks. He said: “Once the parties to the dispute — India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir — sit together only then a permanent solution of the dispute is possible. Unfortunately, leaders of New Delhi believe in political speeches and statements and are least bothered about taking practical measures for making a result-oriented dialogue process.”(36) He also said: “The Prime Minister has repeatedly said he is keen to walk the extra mile with Pakistan, it is pertinent [to point out] he is not ready to do the same with Kashmiris. He sounds routine and unrealistic; he does not appear prepared to give us a chance.”(37)
The International Crisis Group (ICG), in its report on Pak-India relations in the context of Kashmir dispute that came out in June, observed that even if India and Pakistan showed willingness to permit more interaction across the Line of Control (LoC), any Kashmir-based dialogue will not succeed if the Kashmiris are denied their part in it.
The latest briefing from the International Crisis Group, titled, “Steps Towards Peace: Putting Kashmiris First,” outlines the key political, social and economic needs of Kashmiris that should be addressed on both sides of the divided state. The report stated: “The composite dialogue suspended by India after Mumbai attacks, and which led to a number of steps to normalise relations including Kashmir-specific confidence-building measures, is bound to fail without Kashmiri ownership of the CBMs and control in implementing them. And any gains will easily be reversed whenever India-Pakistan relations take a turn for the worse.”(38)
Water issues remained a constant source of irritation between India and Pakistan.
On 3 May, Pakistan decided to approach the International Court of Arbitration against building of the contentious Kishanganga hydropower project by India in alleged violation of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty by forming a team of legal experts to fight the case.(39)
On 28 May Pakistan appointed Bruno Simma, a judge of the International Court of Justice and Jan Paulsson, a legal consultant, as its arbitrators for the seven-member Court of Arbitration that was being set up in accordance with the treaty.(40) Wile on 16 June, India nominated Peter Tomka, vice president of the International Court of Justice, and Lucius Caflisch, a legal expert and member of the International Law Commission, to the arbitration court.(41)
On 7 May, Indian Minister of State for Power Shabir Ahmad Khan said India was in full swing with the construction of Kishanganga dam project. He held: “We are not going to halt the work. It will go at a full pace. We have not violated any provisions of the treaty.”(42)
In the end of May (29 May-2 June), the 105th joint meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission, aimed at discussing issues of river water-sharing and exchange of data related to flood-warning, convened in New Delhi. During the meeting, directed by the Indus commissioners, G Ranganathan from India and Syed Jamaat Ali Shah from Pakistan, India agreed to allow the Pakistani Commission to undertake two tour examinations to Leh and Kargil in the first week of August 2010. Both sides also agreed to meet again in July in Lahore. Furthermore, the Pakistani side withdrew its objection to the designs of the two power projects after the Indian side presented particulars about construction of Uri-II and Chutak hydel power projects in Jammu and Kashmir.(43)
Pakistan and India also resolved the question of “water flows in the Chenab River being affected during the early filling of the Baglihar Dam in 2008.” Pakistan decided not to raise the matter further during the meeting. However, “the differences on the design of the 45-MW Nimoo Bazgo hydel project on the Indus River in Leh district” remained there. Pakistan decided to discuss the matter at the next meeting scheduled for July.(44)
However, after his return to Pakistan, Jamaat Ali Shah said that he was “dissatisfied” since the Indian side did not supply the requisite details about “Kishenganga and other dams being built on the Chenab, Jhelum and Indus without taking into consideration Islamabad’s objections to the projects.”(45) Moreover, Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said that Pakistan had serious objections over India’s Kishanganga and Nimoo Bazgo power ventures in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK). He said that the country had “serious reservations vis-à-vis the Kishanganga and Nimoo Bazgo projects. As a responsible country, we will like all our differences and disputes to be resolved through the dispute–settlement mechanism as contained in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty. Rest assured, Pakistan will never compromise on its national interests.”(46)
On 18 June, after the Pak-US strategic dialogue on water and power issues, the Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power, Shahid Rafi, revealed that the United States had extended guarantee to take up Islamabad’s apprehensions on water issues with New Delhi. However, Ms Maria Otero, Undersecretary for Democracy and Global Affairs at the (US) Department of State, on the occasion cautiously confirmed that “US had agreed to mediate between the two nuclear states in this regard, but strictly being within the framework of Indus Waters Treaty of 1960.”(47)
On 30 April, Pakistan Rangers claimed that the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) opened unprovoked firing at the Sialkot working boundary, Shakargarh sector. In response to the BSF firing, the Chenab Rangers retaliated. A protest on the incident was lodged with the BSF at the wing commanders level meeting.(48)
On 9 June, Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan Sharat Sabharwal, while addressing the Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry urged the private sectors of both countries to step forward for expanding bilateral trade while rising above the disputes. He said that “the present trade volume between the two countries was $2 billion, which could be enhanced to $10 billion.” He said : “India was constructing a modern customs post at the Wagah border, which is going to complete in 2011… This will give a spur to mutual trade between two countries. If the Saarc countries join hands, this region could flourish tremendously on the international horizon”(49)
On 18 May, a two-day conference titled “Partners for Peace and Progress” was organised under the auspices of “Aman Ki Asha” to bring together top Pak-India businesspersons and corporate leaders. The conference was organised with the optimism that it will work as a catalyst to enhance trade and develop relations between India and Pakistan.(50)
At the inaugural session of the conference, Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee said that boosting trade and economic linkages between India and Pakistan was a must to maintain peace and stability in South Asia. He stressed: “Expansion of these relations can help significantly in reducing regional tensions and mutual mistrust.”(51)
On 5 May, Indian External Affairs Minister SM Krishna said that according to available sources, “54 prisoners of war (PoW) are believed to be languishing in Pakistani jails after 1971 while 20 defence personnel are missing.” He said that a “tri-service committee under the Defence Ministry” had been set up to investigate the matter.(52)
On 11 May, family members of the fourteen fishermen belonging to Dir Lower district said that their family men had been rotting “in an Indian prison in Gujarat for the last two years.” They requested the Indian and Pakistan governments and the human rights organisations to assist in their release on humanitarian grounds as they might have entered the Indian waters by error.(53)
On 23 June, Pakistan released 17 Indian prisoners through Wagah border.(54)
Notes and References
1. Muhammad Saleh Zaafir, “Pakistan, India can’t afford strained ties” The News, Islamabad/Rawalpindi, 1 May 2010.
2. Composite dialogue can resolve issues: Gilani,” Dawn, Islamabad, 8 June 2010.
3. “Good ties with Pakistan in India’s interests: Singh,” The News, 8 June 2010.
4. Anita Joshua, “No need for new architecture for engagement, says Qureshi,” The Hindu, New Delhi, 1 May 2010.
5. “After Thimpu talks, focus on format of India-Pakistan dialogue,” The Sentinel, Guwahati, 1 May 2010.
6. Nasir Jamal, “All issues to be discussed with India: Qureshi,” Dawn, 8 May 2010.
7. Baqir Sajjad Syed, “Pakistan and India break the ice”, Dawn, 12 May 2010.
8. Anita Joshua & Sandeep Dikshit, “Krishna-Qureshi talks in Islamabad on July 15,” The Hindu, 12 May 2010.
9. “Krishna to invite Qureshi to India,” The Nation, Islamabad, 14 May 2010.
10. “Indo-Pak talks only to bridge trust deficit: Krishna,” The Nation, 20 May 2010.
11. “India should not hold talks with Pak: BJP chief,” The Tribune, Chandigarh, 13 May 2010.
12. Ajay Banerjee, “India, Pakistan decide to move forward as foreign secys meet,” The Tribune, 25 June 2010.
13. Sankarshan Thakur, “Tango above thorns,” The Telegraph, 25 June 2010.
14. “FIA, CBI to probe Mumbai attacks jointly,” The Nation, 27 June 2010.
15. “Qureshi for joint Pak-India anti-terror mechanism,” The Nation, 6 May 2010.
16. “Antony: dialogue fine, but shut down terror camps,” The Hindu, 13 May 2010.
17. “Pakistan must act on terror: Singh,” The Nation, 29 June 2010.
18. Rahi Gaikwad, “Kasab sentenced to death,” The Hindu, 7 May 2010.
19. “Verdict a message to Pakistan and terrorists, says Moily,” The Hindu, 7 May 2010.
20. Anita Joshua, “Pakistan hopes talks will not be hit”, The Hindu, 7 May 2010.
21. Asif Dar, “Constructive Indo-Pak talks to resolve Kashmir issue: Brown,’ The News, 3 May 2010.
22. “The Post Exclusive | US pressures India to resolve IHK,” The Post, Islamabad, 29 June 2010.
23. Paul Beckett and Matthew Rosenberg, “Gen. McChrystal on India, Pakistan and ‘Gravitational Pull,’” <http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/05/04/gen-mcchrystal-on-india-pakistan-and-gravitational-pull/>.
24. “No one can afford Pak-India tensions: US,” The News, 2 June 2010.
25. “No change in Kashmir policy: US,” The Kashmir Times, Jammu, 10 June 2010.
26. “PM reiterates Pak stand on Kashmir issue, The News, 18 May 2010.
27. Asim Yasin, “Musharraf’s policies harmed Kashmir cause, says Qureshi,” The News, 5 May 2010.
28. “Pakistan wants withdrawal of AFSPA,” South Asian News Agency, <http://www.sananews.net/english/2010/06/11/pakistan-wants-withdrawal-of-afspa/>.
29. “Kashmir solution necessary: FM,” The Nation, 13 May 2010.
30. “AJK PM for trilateral talks to solve Kashmir,” The Nation, 3 May 2010.
31. “EP should press India for resolving Kashmir issue,” The News, 18 May 2010.
32. Jupinderjit Singh, “Talks with Pak beginning of Kashmir resolution: CM,” The Tribune, 12 May 2010.
33. Shujaat Bukhari, “Kashmiris welcome Indo-Pak dialogue,” The Hindu, 2 May 2010.
34. Ibid.
35. Sana Altaf, “Ahead of India, Pak FMs talks, separatists,” The Kashmir Times, 10 May 2010.
36. Syed Yasir, “Separatists reject fresh offer of dialogue by PM,” The Kashmir Times, 9 June 2010.
37. “Kashmir play for table space”, The Telegraph, Calcutta, 9 June 2010.
38. “Kashmiris' inclusion in future talks must: ICG,” The News, 10 June 2010.
39. Khaleeq Kiani, “Pakistan to move arbitration court on Kishanganga project,” Dawn, 3 May 2010.
40. “India names counsel for Kishenganga legal battle with Pakistan,” The Sentinel, 17 June 2010.
41. Ibid.
42. “Delhi ignores protest over Kishanganga,” The Nation, 7 May 2010.
43. “Pak withdraws objection to J-K power projects,” The Tribune, 31 May 2010.
44. Gargi Parsai, “India, Pakistan differ on Nimoo Bazgo hydel project,” The Hindu, 2 June 2010.
45. “Water team returns ‘dissatisfied’,” Dawn, 3 June 2010.
46. Iqbal Choudhry, “Differences remain over Kishanganga, Bazgo power projects” Daily Times, Lahore, 4 June 2010.
47. Khalid Mustafa, “US to mediate in Pak-India water row,” The News, 18 June 2010.
48. “BSF opens unprovoked firing at Sialkot border,” The News, 2 May 2010.
49. India expects bilateral trade to reach $10bn,” Dawn, 10 June 2010.
50. Amir Zia, “Pak, India business meet today,” The News, 18 May 2010.
51. “India calls for enhanced trade with Pakistan,” The Hindu, 19 May 2010.
52. “54 PoWs in Pak jails, says Centre,” The Tribune, 5 May 2010.
53. “14 Dir fishermen languishing in Indian jail,” The News, 12 May 2010.
54. “Pak to release 17 Indian prisoners today,” The News, 23 June 2010.
May-June 2010
Arshi Saleem Hashmi
Research Analyst
Humera Iqbal
Asst. Research Officer
An unexpected development occurred as a result of Gen. McChrystal’s comments in Rolling Stone article and he was asked to resign. President Obama replaced him with Gen. David Petraeus as commander of US and allied forces in Afghanistan. Gen Petraeus might review the strategy and tactics pursued by Gen. McChrystal so that desired results could be achieved quickly. Gen. Petraeus is expected to use the strategy followed in Iraq, particularly to reduce troop casualties. Lately June is being considered as the deadliest month for US troops. President Karzai convened a grand peace jirga where participants gave their consent to future peace talks with Taliban insurgents and approved Karzai’s plan in the process. The government is having talks with the Haqqani group with help from Pakistan. The Afghan Parliament approved the new cabinet nominated by Karzai to form a functioning government especially ahead of the Kabul International Conference. Marjah so far has not been successful as Taliban insurgents are returning back fiercely and expanding their influence. The Kandahar operation is still awaiting Afghan people’s approval.
Pakistan has been fighting in Orakzai Agency and any decision about launching an operation in North Waziristan would be taken later. Punjabi Taliban are striking in the most populous province of the country and other areas and inflicting as well as suffering casualties.
President Obama removed Gen. Stanley McChrystal as commander of US and allied forces in Afghanistan and nominated Gen. David Petraeus to the position. The dramatic shift came after the disapproving comments McChrystal made in his Rolling Stone article where he remarked about America’s civilian leadership and reignited the national debate on the war in Afghanistan, now in its eighth year with a June death toll for coalition forces that is close to becoming the highest of the war. President Obama said that removal of the general was the right thing for their national security, their mission in Afghanistan, for their military and country. Obama further said that the remarks in the article undermined the civilian authority over the military as their mission demanded unity of efforts among alliance and “across my national security team.”(1)
General David Petraeus after his nomination was faced with Republican criticism of the planned military withdrawal from Afghanistan by July 2011. He supported the timeline to ensure greater urgency to the campaign and at the same time said if his military assessment changed then he would not hesitate recommending another course next year. The pace of the expected drawdown is quickly becoming the most contentious partisan issue over the war. Gen. Petraeus also said he would review the rules of engagement pursued by his predecessor, which some soldiers on the front lines have criticized as overly restrictive. Gen. McChrystal ordered troops under his command to avoid civilian casualties, one of the most persistent complaints of the Karzai government, and limited the situations where allied troops were able to go after attacking insurgents.(2)
The US has launched a campaign of using Special Operations troops in Afghanistan that aims at killing or captures insurgent leaders. Senior US military officials said that the special operations troops had killed or captured 186 insurgent leaders and seized an additional 925 lower-level fighters. These operations are effective in and around the southern city of Kandahar and in eastern Afghanistan. So far President Obama has supported the use of special operation troops that use their small footprint and skill at tracking and killing the insurgents more effectively than the conventional forces. If it proves more successful then the US might think of shrinking their military presence during reexamining strategy. However, Gen. Petraeus argues that special operations are just one tool in fighting insurgency. It is expected that Gen. Petraeus might be using both special and conventional forces in combating militants as he did in Iraq.(3)
During the US visit of President Karzai, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged US support for Afghanistan and stressed that Afghan people would not be abandoned by the US. Ms. Clinton tried to repair relations with Karzai, badly strained due to damaging spats between Washington and the Afghan President. The red-carpet reception was given to President Karzai to ease tensions over planned US operation in Kandahar and realizing that President Obama has limited choice but to work with Karzai in fulfilling their combat troop missions in Afghanistan.(4)
A force of about 700 US and Afghan troops launched a major assault along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan to destroy insurgent safe havens. The troops, flown in on Black Hawk helicopters, seized the mountainous high ground in Kunar province's Marawara district in the pre-dawn hours and were attacked by a force of as many as 200 insurgents. The assault represented one of the largest in eastern Afghanistan and reflects growing concerns among US commanders and Afghan leaders about Taliban insurgents intensifying violence.(5)
An Afghan-international security force detained the Taliban's recently appointed chief of finance for Baghlan province, along with two other suspected insurgents, in the Helmand province of Afghanistan. The Taliban finance chief is also an IED (improvised explosive devices) expert and former district commander of at least three insurgent cells near Mangal village in Baghlan province. A separate Afghan-international security force detained two suspected foreign fighters in Kandahar province while pursuing the Dand district Taliban military commander 21 June night. The commander is linked to suicide attacks in Kandahar.(6)
The congressional investigators reported that the US military was funding a massive protection racket in Afghanistan, indirectly paying tens of millions of dollars to warlords, corrupt public officials and the Taliban to ensure safe passage for its supply convoys throughout the country. The security arrangements, part of a $2.16-billion transport contract, violate laws on the use of private contractors as well as Defense Department regulations, and undermines larger US goals of curtailing corruption and strengthening effective governance in Afghanistan. The findings of the 79-page report, titled “Warlord Inc: Extortion and Corruption Along the US Supply Chain in Afghanistan,” range from sobering to shocking, according to Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.).(7)
Despite early claims of success in Marjah by US Marines, the insurgents have regained momentum in recent weeks. This has raised alarm among top American commanders and doubts about changing the course of war in specified time. There has been continuous fighting between the insurgents and security forces on daily basis which has resulted in more Marine casualties. The slow and uneven progress is worrisome for senior military officials in Kabul and Washington who used Marjah as a test to prove that more troops and new war strategy can yield profound gains against Taliban. It is yet to be seen whether the situation in Marjah results in success before the preparation of year-end White House review report that would determine the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in July 2011.(8)
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke was attacked by Taliban gunmen during his visit to the key town of Marjah in Afghanistan. Holbrooke was visiting Marjah to assess the progress of new US counter-insurgency strategy. Taliban gunmen tried to shoot down Holbrooke's V22 Osprey as it approached for a landing, triggering a gun battle with the insurgents that lasted for about 10 minutes. And a trio of suicide bombers detonated themselves during an attack on the US base as Holbrooke was leaving. Marjah was taken from the Taliban during a February offensive spearheaded by US Marines, and is seen as an important test for the Obama administration's strategy.(9)
The US special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, arrived in Kandahar for talks with elders and officials on an Afghan-led operation to rid the southern province of the Taliban. Holbrooke joined US Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and NATO commanders in Kandahar for a meeting with military officials and civilians or tribal elders to discuss the Kandahar operation and listen to their concerns.(10)
The United Nations is reviewing the names of the Taliban figures on its sanctions list following the request made during the peace conference in Afghanistan. The top UN envoy said that UN Security Council Resolution 1267 had frozen the assets and limited travel of senior figures linked to Taliban and al-Qaeda. Though recently Afghan engagements with insurgents in diplomacy have raised doubts about the list. There are at least five names of former Taliban officials who serve now in parliament or privately mediate between the government and the insurgents. Staffan de Mistura, the UN Secretary General's special representative to Afghanistan, said a Security Council team had come in to discuss updating the 137-name list and was expected to submit recommendations to the council by the end of June.(11)
The air force general responsible for generating aircraft and crews for the war in South Asia said that the Canadian Air Force is planning withdrawing all its helicopters from Afghanistan within a few weeks of the end of Canada's combat mission next July. The helicopters would be used until early August 2011 to help transport troops and equipment back from forward bases after the combat mission ends, said Maj. Gen. Yvan Blondin, commander of 1 Air Division in Winnipeg.(12)
On 26 June 2010 the G-8 Group announced its decision of starting withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by 2015 rather than 2011, as announced earlier by the US and its allies. It is expected that by 2015 the Afghan troops would take responsibility of their country’s security. Therefore the European allies decided on staying until 2015.(13)
June 2010 has been the deadliest month for NATO in nine years of conflict in Afghanistan where a total of 100 foreign soldiers died. A spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said 81 international troops had been killed in combat so far in June. The upswing in casualty number had been caused by the military operations in areas where the Taliban militia has previously gone unchallenged. In these areas Taliban insurgents use homemade bombs or improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which are cheap and easy to make causing most of foreign troops deaths. The United Nations also reported that IED attacks had gone up by 94 per cent in the first four months of this year, compared to the same period in 2009.(14)
A key US House of Representatives Democrat, Nita Lowey, who heads the House appropriations subcommittee on foreign aid, refused to spend money on aid to Afghanistan until it is assured that the aid would not be misused. The Democrat responded to President Obama’s request of $3.9 billion for the accounts in the fiscal 2011 foreign aid appropriations bill before Lowey's committee. Lowey stated that only lifesaving humanitarian aid would be left in the bill for committee’s consideration. She reacted after the Wall Street Journal reported that more than $3 billion in cash had been flown from Kabul airport in the past three years to safe havens.(15)
Troops in Afghanistan captured a Taliban shadow governor of Baghlan province a day after killing his predecessor. The shadow governor was captured by NATO-led ISAF as he was preparing to go to Pakistan. According to McChrystal’s report, Taliban have shadow governors around Afghanistan who work at front in a de facto Taliban government network under the name of Islamist Emirate of Afghanistan.(16)
The White House welcomed the demise of al-Qaeda number three and Afghan operations chief Mustafa Abu al-Yazid. The US officials said he was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan in an American drone attack. Yazid, also known as Sheikh Said al-Masri, died along with his wife and three children according to Taliban/al-Qaeda websites as well quoting a statement from al-Qaeda.(17)
The Lower House of the Afghan Parliament approved five of the seven Karzai nominees for cabinet posts after failing twice earlier. The cabinet nominations allow Karzai to form up a relatively functioning government prior to the July 20 major International Conference hosted by Kabul where the Afghan ministers would present their proposals for reconstruction projects to international donors. President Karzai still has to fill seven more posts for his 25-member cabinet that has been delayed for more than half a year after wining elections.(18)
The long-awaited grand peace jirga of Afghanistan, held in Kabul, was attended by some 1,600 delegates including tribal elders, religious leaders and members of parliament from all over the country. Although, the opposition politicians and Taliban boycotted the gathering, Afghan elders endorsed President Karzai’s plan to seek peace with the Taliban. The peace jirga backed an amnesty and job or reintegration incentives programme for low-level Taliban who support the government in inducing militants to give up arms. The jirga asked the international community to provide safety for former Taliban members and release those being held in American and Afghan prisons. Karzai asked to remove the names of Taliban leaders from the UN blacklist. He suggested an offer of asylum to certain leaders in another Islamic country. Despite tight security arrangements Taliban militants struck during the opening of the meeting. Three rockets landed close to the jirga venue.(19)
The government of Afghanistan and Pakistan’s military and intelligence services are negotiating with senior Afghan insurgents. Senior Afghan officials met the head of the Pakistan Army and the Intelligence to talk about the Haqqani network and the Quetta Shura. Pakistan has become more willing to talk after the resignations of two Afghan officials. A Western official in Afghanistan believes that the Karzai government has lost faith in the West and is reaching out to Pakistan for peace talks. The official said it was due to the announcement made by British Prime Minister David Cameron that he wanted all British troops out of Afghanistan within five years. The focus is on having talks with Jalaluddin and Siraj Haqqani, who live in the Pakistani tribal areas and largely control a corridor from eastern Afghanistan all the way into Kabul.(20)
President Karzai accepted the resignations of Amrullah Saleh from the post of head of the National Directorate of Security and Hanif Atmar as Interior Minister. Saleh was highly regarded in the West. They both had a contentious meeting with Karzai during which he doubted their abilities to bring security to the country in view of the insurgent attack on peace jirga held in Kabul. Saleh holds the view that Karzai has lost confidence in the NATO’s ability to defeat Taliban. He privately told aides that Karzai’s approach is different from the Western strategy and expressed deep concerns over Karzai’s softer attitude towards Pakistan. Saleh said that instead of using western support for Afghanistan, President Karzai has a hearty attitude towards Pakistan and the Taliban.(21)
A new coalition initiative is undertaken to lure Afghan insurgents away from the battlefield to allow the Taliban and other militants to keep their weapons if they sign a peace plan with the government. Instead of disarming insurgents who agree to stop fighting the new programme would allow them to keep their weapons for personal security. Coalition officials said that the decree would also establish a High Council for Peace to begin a nationwide outreach effort on the matter. This council would set up local reintegration committees at the provincial level led by provincial governors. The reintegration programme would also offer incentives to individual insurgents and their communities for siding with the government.(22)
President Karzai along with Gen. McChrytal visited Kandahar and called upon community leaders to support NATO campaign in the province. Karzai told the assembled group that the operation would be led by Afghan forces with no heavy military offensive using tanks and aircraft that caused civilian killings. Karzai told them that the operation would start first inside Kandahar city and then at the district level. NATO has already begun an operation to ramp up security in the province and the campaign would start in coming months. Still half a million of Kandahar residents are sceptical of the operation, fearing it will lead to more bloodshed. Al Jazeera's James Bays said that the Pashtun people living in the south and east of Afghanistan and particularly the people around Kandahar are fiercely independent and very distrustful of the role of foreigners so there could still be some problems as the operation is launched.(23)
Acting Interior Minister Muhammad Munir Mangal said that only nine out of Afghanistan's 364 districts are considered safe with the rest under some degree of security threat. He also added that of the remaining 355, 114 faced a serious threat, 50 a medium threat and 191 the lowest threat from the Taliban insurgency. The interior and defense ministers were summoned by the Parliament to brief MPs about the security plans for parliamentary elections on 18 September. Out of 6,835 polling stations, 3,840 faced a high security threat. The remaining 2,000 faced a low to medium threat, he said. Mangal told the MPs that authorities had already worked out a security plan. Over 50,000 police would be deployed to maintain security at the polling stations in the run up to and on the day of voting, he said. As many as 2,600 aspirants have registered to stand for 249 seats in parliament.(24)
The governing council of a once peaceful province in southwestern Afghanistan, Nimroz, has fled to Kabul after the Taliban killed one of their members and have threatened others with death. They fear that US offensive operations have intimidated Taliban fighters out of neighboring Helmand province including Marjah to shift to Nimroz. Afghan provincial officials said that the approximately 2,000 US Marines and 1,000 Afghan soldiers operated primarily in the northeast, 130 miles from the provincial capital, Zaranj, and were not aware of other provinces conditions. Nimroz had generally been peaceful until 5 May last after nine suicide bombers disguised as police stormed the provincial council office in Zaranj, about 500 miles (800 km) southwest of Kabul, killed a woman council member, two policemen and a visitor. All the attackers were killed by the Security forces. Police said it was the worst attack in Nimroz in two years. The Taliban claimed responsibility and said the council was trying to turn Afghans against the militants. The remaining eight council members began receiving death threats after the assault through letters and phone calls and some by text messages.(25)
According to co-director Thomas Ruttig of Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN), Taliban militants are expanding their influence in other regions of Afghanistan where they don’t have power bases. Afghanistan’s Taliban insurgents are taking in non-Pashtun ethnic groups for their expansion such as Afghan Uzbek and Tajik commanders and it was obvious in the north-eastern province of Kunduz. Thomas Ruttig said that Taliban were no longer a tribal Pashtun movement but a political Islamist movement where ethnicity played no role. Taliban are trying to establish their presence in central Afghanistan.(26)
A US monitoring group said that the Afghan Taliban had denied a report that it received funding, training and protection from Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency. The comment came in response to a report for the London School of Economics based on interviews with nine Taliban field commanders in Afghanistan. The report claimed that ISI and militants had deeper relationships. However, according to SITE, the Afghan Taliban said that no sound mind would agree with this claim that Pakistan, an ally of US, would support jihad against the US presence in Afghanistan. The self-proclaimed Shura leadership in Afghanistan also alleged that the report was aimed at protecting American and British interests in the country.(27)
A terrorist, Faisal Shahzad, linked to al-Qaeda, faces life in prison after admitting trying to use a weapon of mass destruction to kill indiscriminately in the Times Square, New York. Faisal Shahzad remained defiant when he appeared before a court in Manhattan and warned that unless the US forces left Muslim lands he and other like-minded activists would be attacking the United States and he pleaded guilty. The Pakistani Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, claimed responsibility for the attempted bombing and the organization paid Shahzad $12,000 before the attack. Federal authorities believed that the money was channelled through an underground money transfer network (hawala) and three men in Massachusetts and Maine suspected of supplying money to the bomber have also been detained on immigration charges.(28)
US military leaders provided evidence to Pakistan’s army chief with information detailing the threatening role of the Haqqani network in a string of increasingly brazen bombings, including one in May targeting the main NATO air base at Bagram in Afghanistan.
One US official said some elements of Pakistani intelligence were still supporting the Haqqani group. While Gen. Petraeus acknowledged long-standing ties between Islamabad and what he called bad guys, suggesting the relationships were useful to gather intelligence on the groups.(29)
The United States released $288 million to Pakistan for some of the costs incurred last year in military operations against Taliban militants. The funds are part of the Coalition Support Fund (CSF), a US programme to reimburse countries that have incurred costs supporting counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations. This is in addition to the more than $1.2 billion in reimbursements already transferred to Pakistan this year by the US government under the Coalition Support Fund (CSF). The US released $656 million earlier this month.(30)
The ties between the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban have sharpened the Obama administration's need for retaliatory options. According to senior US military officials, the US military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan. They stressed US reprisal would be done under extreme circumstances such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient. At the same time the administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups. The United States and Pakistan have recently established a joint military intelligence centre on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and are in negotiations to set up another one near Quetta, the Pakistani city where the Afghan Taliban is based. The “fusion centers” are meant to bolster Pakistani military operations by providing direct access to US intelligence, including real-time video surveillance from drones controlled by the US Special Operations Command, the officials said.(31)
A United Nations official, Philip Alston who serves as the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, said in a report on targeted killings that the campaign of CIA drone strikes against suspected militants in Pakistan had made the United States "the most prolific user of targeted killings" in the world. He urged that responsibility for the programme be taken back from the spy agency and criticized the US for asserting “an ever-expanding entitlement for itself to target individuals across the globe” in its fight against al-Qaeda and other militant groups. He urged the US to be more open about the programme as there are concerns about the precedent set by the US programme. Many other countries were seeking drone technology and they might copy US tactics. Critics also contend that the attacks risk a backlash in Pakistan and other countries where they are carried out. So far the US does not officially acknowledge the CIA programme that focuses on Pakistan.(32)
Maj. Gen. Tariq Khan, Inspector General of the Frontier Scouts, said major operations would wind down within next two months which would only leave North Waziristan, a mountainous region that has drawn jihadi groups from across Pakistan, in the hands of militants. A regular Pakistan Army operation is expected in North Waziristan later this year once other operations come to an end. Gen. Khan said that 13,000 square miles in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas with large-scale fighting has been cleared. Gen Khan also said that the operation in Orakzai was about to conclude and then the Frontier Scouts area would more or less be cleared of militants to the extent that large-scale operations would be stopped though continuous policing operations would be there.(33)
Five Americans were sentenced to ten years in jail in Pakistan after being found guilty of terrorism charges. The five men, aged between 18 and 25, were convicted of conspiring to commit terrorist attacks on Pakistani soil and of funding banned militant groups. They were arrested in the north-eastern city of Sargodha in December last. The men have been identified as Ramy Zamzam, of Egyptian descent, Waqar Khan and Umar Farooq of Pakistani descent, and Aman Hassan Yemer and Ahmed Minni, who are of Ethiopian descent. They were planning to travel to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban, and were using e-mail and YouTube to contact an al-Qaeda operative called Sayfullah.(34)
Police arrested the key commander of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) Asmat Ullah Mehsud, during a raid in the SITE area of Karachi. He was involved in providing financial support to the TTP campaign and was providing safe hideouts and medical treatment to injured militants in the city.(35)
Pakistan’s security agencies have planned to shift their focus on breaking a ‘complicated and lethal’ nexus between al-Qaeda and various banned groups operating in Punjab instead of opening new fronts in tribal regions. Officials said that the new counter-terror plan envisages use of the carrot-and-stick policy to break this nexus. The policy has been framed following intelligence reports that militants affiliated with al-Qaeda and outlawed Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) are planning a fresh wave of attacks in the country’s most populous province. According to security officials, an early sign of success appeared when a militant group led by Hafiz Gul Bahadur, a commander based in the North Waziristan tribal region, forced the closure of a TTP office in the strategic Mir Ali town controlled by groups of Afghan commander Sirajuddin Haqqani and Hafiz Gul Bahadur.(36)
Security forces killed 44 Taliban and wounded another 11 in various areas of Upper Orakzai during fighting. The forces also killed 15 Taliban in Zakhtan and Balkhtan areas of Upper Orakzai while gaining complete control of the areas. They also engaged the Taliban at Ghalju, headquarters of Upper Orakzai, killing 20 terrorists. The troops destroyed seven Taliban vehicles as they targeted terrorist hideouts in Kasha and Tuti Maila areas, killing nine Taliban.(37)
One of the leading Taliban figures in Pakistan, Fazlullah, is believed to have been killed during a fight with the Afghan police. The police says that Fazlullah and his followers were trying to establish a new sanctuary in Afghanistan’s Nuristan Province. Fazlullah led a Taliban uprising in the Swat valley of Pakistan and a bounty of Rs. 50 million (about $600,000) was placed on his capture. Pakistani authorities believe Fazlullah first went to Bajaur in the tribal area bordering Afghanistan, and then escaped to Kunar, just south of Nuristan Province. There, they believe, he was given cover by the Afghan provincial authorities. He was associated with the umbrella organization of the Pakistani Taliban that is fighting the army in the tribal areas, but his influence was largely limited to Swat.(38)
Following successful talks between Hafiz Gul Bahadur and the Hakimullah Mahsud-led banned Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Mehsud militants along with some Punjabi Taliban have finally started leaving North Waziristan for the adjoining South Waziristan tribal region. The NWA headquarters, Miramshah, and Mir Ali, the second major town were vacated by them. Almost 98 per cent of the Mehsud militants along with some Punjabi Taliban have left North Waziristan. Before leaving, announcements were made from mosques loudspeakers in various villages by the Mehsud Taliban thanking the tribesmen of North Waziristan for their cooperation and assistance to the displaced Mehsud militants, said a source close to the North Waziristan Taliban leader, Hafiz Gul Bahadur.(39)
A grand jirga of Ahmedzai Wazir tribe in South Waziristan announced it would keep intact the peace agreement with the government signed in 2007. The jirga was attended by more than 1,500 tribesmen who pledged to cooperate with the government in all matters. They also demanded an immediate end to US drone strikes on the Ahmedzai Wazir tribe who they said were patriotic people. They said that the miscreants would not be tolerated in the area while the violators of the agreement would be treated as national culprits. They also asked the government to honour promises made regarding development projects.(40)
The so-called Punjabi Taliban attacked some 100 oil tankers and trucks meant for transporting supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan in the Tarnol area of Islamabad. The attack left 80 of the vehicles badly burnt while another 60 carriage trucks were also gutted. The damage was caused by firing by unknown gunmen that killed eight people and injured five.(41)
Two places of worship of the Ahmadiya community in Lahore came under attack during Friday prayers. The attack left more than 79 killed and 107 injured. A spokesman for the Jamaat-i-Ahmadiya Pakistan said that 95 people of the community had lost their lives in the strikes at Model Town and Garhi Shahu. Police obtained a 20-day physical remand of 17-year-old Abdullah alias Mohammad from an anti-terrorism court. The bomber was caught by worshippers and is in the custody of the Crimes Investigation Agency. Another bomber, 20-year-old Muaz from southern Punjab, who was being earlier identified as Ameer Moavia, was treated at Jinnah Hospital. Police arrested three suspects on information provided by Abdullah who told them that he and three others were sent on the two missions by Badar Mansoor, the head of the Punjabi Taliban group in Waziristan.(42)
Pakistan launched a process of resettling tens of thousands of tribesmen who were displaced during major operations in the former Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan last October. The government had set up two centres at Tank and Dera Ismail Khan for the registration of people who want to resume their normal lives. The returnees would be provided food and other essential needs in addition to cash assistance for their resettlement. More than 40,000 families or some 300,000 people had fled their homes during the offensive in the area.(43)
After two years of a successful army operation against Taliban insurgents in Bajaur Agency the area is again witnessing their reappearance. Taliban in the agency are threatening the Levies officials through letters to stop the offensive or be ready to face the consequences. The threats, written on Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) letterheads, were distributed in various areas of the agency’s Mamoond and Khar tehsils and said that the TTP would continue its fight in Bajaur against the US and its allies. Residents are worried over their safety.(44)
An intelligence report says that militants have been publicly raising funds in the Punjab province. The report says that at least 17 banned militant groups are operating under different names in the province. They organize religious gatherings, certificate-award ceremonies and social welfare meetings to collect donations. Pakistan officials have blamed the attacks against civil and military targets in Punjab on the ‘Punjabi Taliban’ who are affiliated with anti-Pakistan Taliban groups based in north-western tribal areas of the country. The report points out that the most active among these groups is the Ghazi Force, named after a top cleric of Islamabad’s Lal Masjid (red mosque) who was killed during a siege of the mosque by security forces in 2007. The report stresses the need for equipping the police properly to deal with the growing menace.(45)
Notes and References
1. “McChrystal relieved of command, Petraeus chosen to take over”, CNN News, 23 June 2010, http://edition.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/23/general.mcchrystal.obama.apology/index.html?hpt=T2&fbid=FYi_Q_Q9dYu
2. Peter Spiegel “Petraeus Backs Afghan Pullout Plan”, The Wall Street Journal, 29 June, 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704103904575337133877334748.html
3. David S. Cloud and Julian E. Barnes “U.S. strategy in Afghanistan may involve greater use of special operations forces”, Los Angeles Times, 29 June 2010, http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-fg-us-afghan-20100629,0,429024,print.story
4. Giles Whittell and Catherine Philp “US will not abandon Afghan people, Clinton tells Karzai”, The Times, 12 May 2010, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7123346.ece
5. Greg Jaffe, “U.S. and Afghan forces launch major assault in eastern province of Konar”, The Washington Post, 29 June 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062804376_pf.html
6. “Afghan-ISAF Operations in Southern, Northern Afghanistan”, NATO-OTAN – ISAF, 22 June 2010, http://www.isaf.nato.int/article/isaf-releases/june-22-afghan-isaf-operations-in-southern-northern-afghanistan.html
7. Karen DeYoung “U.S. indirectly paying Afghan warlords as part of security contract”, The Washington Post, 22 June 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ 2010/06/21/AR2010062104628.html?wprss=rss_world/mideast
8. Rajiv Chandrasekaran “'Still a long way to go' for U.S. operation in Marja, Afghanistan”, The Washington Post, 10 June 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ 2010/06/09/AR2010060906214.html
9. Miguel Marquez “Taliban Attack during Ambassador Holbrooke's Marja Visit”, ABC News, 21 June 2010, http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=10973713
10. Javed Hamim Kakar “US envoy Holbrooke in Kandahar”, Pajhwok Afghan News, 21 Jun 2010, http://www.pajhwok.com/viewstory.asp?lng=eng&id=96606
11. Dan Williams “U.N. reviewing Taliban blacklist after Afghan jirga”, http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65B0XZ20100612
12. Matthew Fisher “Air force choppers out of Afghanistan by August 2011: General”, Canwest News Service, 11 http://www.canada.com/force+choppers+Afghanistan+August+2011+General/3143024/story.html
13. Kaswar Klasra “G8 advocates no US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan till 2015”, The Nation, 30 June, 2010, http://www.asianewsnet.net/home/news.php?id=12843&sec=1
14. Lynne O'Donnell “Grim Afghan toll as 100 foreign troops die in June”, Google News, 28 June, 2010, http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jnwGmz4aBXLm9EseHY7dXl_8Cq9A
15. Susan Cornwell “Angry House lawmaker cuts aid to Afghanistan”, Reuters.com, 28 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2826718920100628
16. “Troops capture Taliban 'governor' after killing ex-gov”, CNN News, 2 June 2010, http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/02/troops-capture-taliban-governor-after-killing-ex-gov/
17. “US hails 'death' of al-Qaeda chief Mustafa Abu al-Yazid”, BBC News, 1 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10210580
18. Abaseen Zaheer, “MPs approve Karzai's five cabinet picks”, Pajhwok Afghan News, 28 June 2010, http://www.pajhwok.com/viewstory.asp?lng=eng&id=97170
19. “Afghan peace jirga backs Karzai Taliban talks proposal”, BBC News, 4 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10234823
20. Nick Schifrin “Afghan President Karzai steps up talks with Insurgents”, ABC News, 29 June, 2010, http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11042852
21. Jon Boone, “Afghan president has lost faith in US ability to defeat Taliban”, guardian.co.uk, 9 June 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/09/afghanistan-taliban-us-hamid-karzai
22. Maria Abi-Habib, “Taliban can keep weapons under New Peace Initiative”, The Wall Street Journal, 17 June 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703513604575310982874634608.html
23. “Karzai appeals for Kandahar support”, AlJazeera.net, 13 June 2010, http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/06/201061316924663545.html
24. Abaseen Zaheer, “Nine out of 364 districts considered safe: Mangal”, Pajhwok Afghan News, 16 June 2010, http://www.pajhwok.com/viewstory.asp?lng=eng&id=96341
25. Heidi Vogt, “Governing council flees Afghanistan’s Nimroz province, says insurgency growing in southwest”, BrandonSun.com, 11 June 2010, http://www.brandonsun.com/world/breaking-news/governing-council-flees-afghanistans-nimroz-province-says-insurgency-growing-in-southwest-96170024.html?viewAllComments=y
26. “Taliban extend sphere of influence, expert says”, The Earth Times, 29 June 2010, http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/332108,sphere-influence-expert-says.html
27. “Afghan Taliban deny link to Pakistan’s ISI”, Dawn News, 15 June 2010, http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/16-afghan+taliban+denies+link+to+pakistan+isi+report-hs-04
29. Adam Entous, “U.S. showed Pakistan evidence on militant faction” Yahoo News, 16 June 2010, http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100616/wl_nm/us_pakistan_usa_haqqani
30. “US gives Pakistan $288 million under security fund”, Dawn News, 27 May, 2010, http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/03-us-gives-pakistan-288-million-under-security-fund-ss-01
31. Greg Miller, “Options studied for a possible Pakistan strike”, The Washington Post, 29 May 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/28/AR2010052804854_pf.html
32. David S. Cloud, “U.N. report faults prolific use of drone strikes by U.S”, Los Angeles Times, 3 June 2010, http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-cia-drones-20100603,0,2216919, print.story
33. Rob Crilly, “Pakistan has driven militants from all but one region, says army”, Telegraph.co.uk, 8 June 2010, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7811111/Pakistan-has-driven-militants-from-all-but-one-region-says-army.html
34. “Five US men convicted of Pakistan 'terror plot'”, BBC News, 24 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10400972
35. “Key Taliban commander arrested from Karachi”, Dawn News, 21 June 2010, http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/metropolitan/16-key+taliban+commander+arrested+from+karachi-hs-05
36. Zia M Khan, “New plan to break jihadi-al Qaeda nexus”, The Express Tribune, 21 June 2010, http://tribune.com.pk/story/22720/new-plan-to-break-jihadi-al-qaeda-nexus/
37. “44 terrorists killed in Orakzai”, The Daily Times, 7 June 2010, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\06\07\story_7-6-2010_pg7_3
38. Rod Nordland and Jane Perlez, “Pakistani Taliban Commander Reported Killed”, The New York Times, 27 May 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/world/asia/28afghan.html?ref=world
39. Mushtaq Yusufzai, “Mehsud militants agree to leave North Waziristan Agency”, The News, 25 May 2010, http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=241101
40. “Wazir tribe to keep peace accord intact”, The Nation, 10 June 2010, http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/International/10-Jun-2010/Wazir-tribe-to-keep-peace-accord-intact
41. Umer Nangiana, “‘Punjabi Taliban’ claim responsibility”, The Express Tribune, 10 June 2010, http://tribune.com.pk/story/20175/%E2%80%98punjabi-taliban%E2%80%99-claim-responsibility/
42. Faisal Ali, “Ahmadis claim 95 killed in Lahore attack”, Dawn News, 30 May, 2010, http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/19-95-killed-in-lahore%2C-claim-ahmadis-050-hh-08
44. Habanullah Khan, “Taliban ‘reappear’ in Bajaur Agency”, The Daily Times, 16 June 2010, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\06\16\story_16-6-2010_pg1_6
45. Shehzad Malik,“Taliban 'openly raising funds' in Pakistani Punjab”, BBC News, 23 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10387670