Comment: ICJ hearing — Pakistan could succeed; India may suffer knockout

TAIMUR MALIK | MUHAMMAD BILAL RAMZAN

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has initiated proceedings to determine whether ICJ has jurisdiction to adjudicate a matter referred to it by India relating to the death sentence given to an Indian national, Kulbhushan Jadhav, in Pakistan.

India claims that by disallowing consular access to Jadhav, Pakistan has committed a violation of its commitments as enshrined in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR).

Pakistan needs to put up effective legal arguments before the ICJ which will initially involve challenging the jurisdiction of the ICJ to adjudicate upon India’s application. The first hearing will be held on Monday, May 15, at the ICJ in The Hague, Netherlands.

This article will, therefore, primarily deal with the question of ICJ’s jurisdiction and before we delve into an analysis of ICJ’s jurisdiction in the instant matter, it is important to understand that ICJ’s jurisdiction to adjudicate upon contentious matters is consensual and can be based on: a special agreement containing the assent of the parties recognising the jurisdiction of the ICJ to decide the dispute between them; recognition of ICJ’s jurisdiction particularly in respect of “matters specially provided for in the Charter of the United Nations or in treaties and conventions in force” or optional clause declaration under Article 36 (2) of ICJ’s Statute which allows states to “recognise as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court”.

Hence, ICJ can only proceed to decide an application on merits provided its jurisdiction stands established on the basis of any one of the foregoing conditions.

In the instant matter, India has contended that the jurisdiction rests with the ICJ in terms of Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (OP) to VCCR which provides that, “Disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention shall lie within the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice” and since both, Pakistan and India, are parties to the OP, ICJ can, therefore, proceed to decide India’s application on merits.

On an initial review, it may appear to one that Pakistan may not be in a position to raise any strong objections to the jurisdiction of ICJ. However, careful perusal of the available record and the Indian application to the ICJ reveals that the two countries signed an ‘Agreement on Consular Access’ (Agreement) dated 21 May 2008 which not only modifies the obligations that the two countries have towards each other in respect of allowing consular access but also nullifies the applicability of VCCR to the extent of such access.

More importantly, the Agreement, unlike the OP to VCCR, does not provide for any dispute resolution mechanism that the two sides have agreed upon.

Therefore, any dispute arising in respect of the Agreement requires specific assent of both the parties for it to be adjudicated upon by the ICJ. Furthermore, the Agreement in clause (vi) provides that in the case of arrest or detention on grounds of security, each side (Pakistan and India) may examine the case on its merits, and does not contain any obligation to either inform the other party or allow consular access.

What follows as a necessary corollary is that Pakistan was well within its right to examine Jadhav’s case on its merits for he had been detained pursuant to his involvement in subversive activities.

The foregoing argument stems from Article 30 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) which is the document enshrining rules of interpretation pertaining to treaties. Article 30 (3) of VCLT provides in explicit terms that:

“When all the parties to the earlier treaty are parties also to the later treaty but the earlier treaty is not terminated or suspended in operation under article 59, the earlier treaty applies to the extent that its provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty.”

Article 30 (3) is further supplemented by Article 30 (4) (a) which provides that:

“When the parties to the later treaty do not include all the parties to the earlier one” but “two parties, each of which is a party to both treaties, the same rule applies as in paragraph 3 (Article 30 (3))”.

Accordingly, considering that the instant case is built around arguments related to consular access, it is evident, in terms of Article 30 (3) of VCLT, that VCCR remains applicable between Pakistan and India to the exclusion of Article 36 of VCCR, meaning that there is no express obligation on Pakistan to grant consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav and that this case can be decided by Pakistan on its merits.

Furthermore, the Agreement does not contain any clause which may hint that the Agreement is operative subject to VCCR. Therefore, it can be argued that the Optional Protocol to VCCR thereby becomes inapplicable in the instant matter barring ICJ from assuming jurisdiction in this case.

One potential resistance against the foregoing argument would branch out from Article 102 of the UN Charter which requires member states to register treaties and international agreements entered into by them with the UN Secretariat – the consequence of non-registration being that the non-registered treaty, in this case the Agreement, may not be invoked before any UN organ. India would, therefore, contest any argument based on the Agreement coming from the Pakistani side.

But any resistance based on Article 102 of the Charter can be effectively countered based on the fact that Article 102 does not completely bar a member state from relying on an unregistered agreement since the term used in Article 102 is ‘may’ and not ‘shall’.

In Qatar versus Bahrain, ICJ held that, “Non-registration or late registration, on the other hand, does not have any consequence for the actual validity of the agreement, which remains no less binding upon the parties.”

The observation is further supplemented by Article 26 of the VCLT which requires parties to a treaty to uphold and perform its provisions in good faith. ICJ observed in Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case that the intention of the parties in concluding a treaty should prevail. Non-registration of the Agreement would, therefore, not affect the applicability of the Agreement in the present case.

Moreover, India has not denied the Agreement and it is quite possible that two states have acted under the Agreement several times which increases the prospects of its application in the instant matter.

The foregoing is an analysis of what is likely to happen in the first few hearings with Pakistan objecting to the jurisdiction of the ICJ in the hearing that will take place on 15th May 2017.

It is probable that Pakistan would succeed in the very first round and India will suffer a technical knockout resulting from ICJ’s lack of jurisdiction to decide the instant matter.

US must do ‘something different’ in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon’s intelligence chief has said that the work of American and NATO forces to stabilise Afghanistan is at risk of being squandered.

Lt-Gen Vincent Stewart, the Defence Intelligence Agency’s director, told a Senate panel on Thursday that the US must do “something very different” in Afghanistan or else the Taliban will make new advances on the battlefield. He maintained that the current stalemate in fighting could then tip in the Taliban’s favour.

Stewart said he visited Afghanistan six weeks ago to see the situation for himself. His grim assessment comes as the Trump administration considers sending a few thousand more troops to Afghanistan, mainly to boost training and advising of Afghan forces.

In the same hearing, the head of US intelligence agencies also offered a pessimistic assessment of the security situation in Afghanistan. “The political and security situation in Afghanistan will also almost certainly deteriorate through 2018, even with a modest increase in the military assistance by the US and its partners,” Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said at the hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“Afghanistan will struggle to curb its dependence on external support until it contains the insurgency or reaches a peace agreement with the Taliban,” Coats told lawmakers in presenting an annual assessment of threats to US national security.

US-led forces have been fighting in Afghanistan for 16 years, making it America’s longest war, yet the situation there remains a stalemate.

The Taliban, which first emerged in the mid-1990s in southern Afghanistan, managed to conquer most of the country before its 2001 ouster with the help of a range of foreign jihadists, including Pakistanis, Saudis and Chechens.

But it has been on the rebound, Coates said, and continues to gain strength. “The Taliban are likely to continue to make gains, especially in rural areas,” said the US spy chief, adding that efforts to bolster local military have been less fruitful than hoped.

“Afghan security forces’ performance will probably worsen due to a combination of Taliban operations, combat casualties, desertions, poor logistics support and weak leadership,” he said.

“Afghanistan will struggle to curb its dependence on external support until it contains the insurgency or reaches a peace agreement with the Taliban.”

“Although the Taliban were unsuccessful in seizing a provincial capital in 2016, they effectively navigated their second leadership transition in two years following the death of their former chief, Mullah Mansoor, and is likely to make gains in 2017,” Coats said.

“The overall situation in Afghanistan will very likely continue to deteriorate, even if international support is sustained,” he said.

“Kabul’s political dysfunction and ineffectiveness will almost certainly be the greatest vulnerability to stability in 2017,” Coats said.

Coats said the fighting will also continue to threaten US personnel, allies, and partners, particularly in Kabul and urban population centres.

America has about 8,400 troops in Afghanistan. Most belong to a 13,300-strong NATO mission to train and advise Afghan partner forces fighting the Taliban.

Last month, the United States dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb ever deployed in combat in Afghanistan, targeting an Islamic State complex.

President Donald Trump is reportedly weighing whether to send as many as 5,000 more troops to Afghanistan. The US currently has about 8,400 troops stationed in the country.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump has asked military advisers “to relook at the entire strategy” in Afghanistan. Trump is expected to make a decision on the plan sometime in the coming days.

America’s Endless Afghan War

by William J. Astore,

News this week that 300 Marines have returned to Helmand Province in Afghanistan recalls the failed surge of 2009-10, when roughly 20,000 Marines beat back the Taliban in the region, only to see those “fragile” gains quickly turn to “reversible” ones (to cite the infamous terms of General David Petraeus, architect of that surge).

While fragility and reversibility characterize American progress, the Taliban continues to make real progress. According to today’s report at FP: Foreign Policy, “the Taliban controls or contests about 40 percent of the districts in the country, 16 years after the U.S. war there began.” Meanwhile, in January and February more than 800 Afghan troops were killed fighting the Taliban, notes Foreign Policy, citing a report by the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction. That’s a high figure given that fighting abates during the winter.

Besides committing fresh US Marines to more Afghan security forces “training,” the US military has responded with PR spin. For example, when friendly Afghan forces abandoned a district and police headquarters, a US spokesman claimed it had been “repositioned.” According to FP: Foreign Policy, “US forces helped in ferrying [Afghan] government troops and workers out, and American jets came back to destroy the rest of the buildings and vehicles left behind.” Literally, the old district center and its resources had to be destroyed, and a new one created, for the Afghan position to be “saved.”

Destroying things to “save” them: Where have we heard that before? The Vietnam War, of course, a lesson not lost on Aaron O’Connell, a US Marine who edited the book Our Latest Longest War: Losing Hearts and Minds in Afghanistan. O’Connell’s recent interview with NPR cites the Vietnam example as he explains the one step forward, two steps back, nature of America’s Afghan War. In his words:

So we’ve spent billions building roads in Afghanistan, but we then turned the roads over to the Afghans in 2013. We trained up a maintenance unit so that it could provide for road maintenance, and nothing has happened since then. Now, today, more than half of the roads are deemed unfit for heavy traffic. And as one taxi driver put it in 2014 – things have gotten so much worse, now if we drive too fast, everyone in the car dies.

So it’s – really, we have to think about the things that are sustainable.

Americans have spent an enormous amount of money in Afghanistan without thinking about how to sustain the improvements we’ve funded. Meanwhile, as O’Connell notes, the security situation (as in lack of security) in Afghanistan undermines those infrastructure efforts.

With respect to US efforts to create a viable Afghan Army, O’Connell doesn’t mince words about its failings:

[T]he massive assembly-line attempt to produce capable, professional national security forces has not worked well, and it’s been at tremendous cost. And for all those who say we should just keep doing what we’re doing in Afghanistan, let me explain why that’s not sustainable. Every year, between a quarter and a third of the Afghan army and the police desert. Now, these are people that we have armed and trained. We’ve given weapons to them. We’ve given them basic military training. And every year, a third of them disappear [with their guns].

Here’s the grim reality: US military efforts to take charge and win the war, as in “winning hearts and minds” (known as WHAM) in 2009-10, proved unsustainable. Follow-on efforts to turn the war over to the Afghan government (analogous to LBJ and Nixon’s “Vietnamization” policy in the waning years of the Vietnam War) are also failing. Yet America’s newest commanding general in Afghanistan wants yet more troops for yet more “training,” effectively doubling down on a losing hand.

The logical conclusion – that’s it’s high-time US forces simply left Afghanistan – is never contemplated in Washington. This is why Douglas Wissing’s book, Hopeless But Optimistic: Journeying through America’s Endless War in Afghanistan, is so immensely valuable. Wissing is a journalist who embedded with US forces in Afghanistan in 2013. His book consists of short chapters of sharply drawn vignettes focusing on the street and grunt level. Its collective lesson: Afghanistan, for Americans, doesn’t really exist as a country and a people. It exists only as a wasteful, winless, and endless war.

What is Afghanistan to Americans? It’s an opportunity for profit and exploitation for contractors. It’s a job as well as a personal proving ground for US troops. It’s a chance to test theories and to earn points (and decorations) for promotion for many officers. It’s hardly ever about working closely with the Afghan people to find solutions that will work for them over the long haul.

A telling example Wissing cites is wells. Americans came with lots of money to drill deep water wells for Afghan villagers and farmers (as opposed to relying on traditional Afghan irrigation systems featuring underground channels that carry mountain water to the fields with minimal evaporation). Instead of revolutionizing Afghan agriculture, the wells drove down water tables and exhausted aquifers. As the well-digging frenzy (Wissing’s word) disrupted Afghanistan’s fragile, semiarid ecosystem, powerful Afghans fought to control the new wells, creating new tensions among tribes. The American “solution,” in sum, is exacerbating conflict while exhausting the one resource the Afghan people can’t do without: water.

Then there’s the “poo pond,” a human sewage lagoon at Kandahar Air Field that was to be used as a source for organic fertilizer. I’ll let Wissing take the tale from here:

But instead of enriching Afghan soil, the U.S.-led coalition forces decided to burn the mountains of fertilizer with astronomically expensive imported gasoline. The [US air force] officer reminded me that the Taliban got $1500 in protection money for each US fuel tanker they let through, so in the process the jihadists were also able to skim the American shit [from the poo pond].

Walking back, I spot a green metal dumpster stenciled with a large sign that reads, “General Waste Only.” At that moment, it seems to sum up the whole war.

Wissing’s hard-edged insights demonstrate that America is never going to win in Afghanistan, unless “winning” is measured by money wasted. Again, Americans simply see Afghanistan too narrowly, as a “war” to won, as a problem to be managed, as an environment to be controlled.

Indeed, the longstanding failure of our “answers” is consistent with the military’s idea we’re fighting a generational or “long” war. We may be failing, but that’s OK, since we have a “long” time to get things right.

After sixteen years and a trillion dollars, the answer in Afghanistan is not another sixteen years and another trillion dollars. Yet that’s exactly what America seems prepared to do in the endless war that to us defines Afghanistan.

The Unapologetic Indian Muslim: Sabiha Farhat

BY SHUDDHABRATA SENGUPTA

These are tough times for muslims in India.  But now that I look back and shed my ‘liberal’ prejudices – muslims were never acceptable as ‘who they were’ in Indian society.  I had always blamed my mother for not giving me proper lunch box to carry to school.  But the truth is that even in class 5, no student ate from my tiffin and gradually I started going to the play field in recess rather than enjoying a meal under the big Peepal tree.  After that I took tiffin only when I prepared it myself, that was class 11 & 12.  But even then the girls would hardly eat from my lunch box.  We did sit together but no one touched my food.  Was I the Untouchable?

The deeper I dig into my childhood the more I find such instances.  Our neighbours often commended my mother on keeping the house ‘so clean despite being a Muslim’. Now I remember how much effort went into scrubbing the floors.  My mother scrubbed them in the morning and she made me, her eldest child, scrub them in the evening. None of my girlfriends nor their mothers cleaned their floors in evening, cleaning was a morning chore except in our house.  Now I know why – it was all an effort to prove that we were just as clean as any of the Hindu families around us.  We were always trying to please our Hindu neighbours but they kept on demanding more and more.  The entire effort went to waste when our neighbours visited but refused to recognize a ‘clean muslim home’.  All they would say was, “but you are not like Muslims”.  Imagine, they were ‘seeing’ our house every day but they refused to accept it as ‘reality’, they continued to believe in the stereotype of a ‘dirty muslim household’.  The reality, the truth that they “saw” would just not register over their belief! Why? Because they wanted to believe in their “narrative” of supremacy.

When I was in class 6 or 7, that famous India-Pakistan cricket match happened, in which Javed Miandad hit a six on the last ball.  There we were, glued to the television waiting to applaud for India and in my heart, for my secret crush – Ravi Shastri too.  But Javed Miandad spoiled it all for us, I remember my brother cried when we lost that match.  The next day in school when everyone was discussing cricket, I was shut up by simply being told – “oh, you must have celebrated yesterday, after all, your side won.”  I was stunned into silence. Everyone had presumed that ‘my’ side was the ‘Pakistani side’.  Where did all this come from?  From my class mates who were my age, 12 or 13, with similar middle class backgrounds or were they mouthing their parents’ presumptions?  I had forgotten these incidents and moved on but now, the aggressive Hindu has forced me to look back – I realise how desperately I had wanted to ‘belong’ to my friends but I was denied entry into the club that somehow had more claim to India and Indian-ness than me. The message that I took home that day was – ‘I was different so I did not  belong’.  This is the same ‘difference’ which a Dalit, a Scheduled caste or any person from a minority community feels. As a person of minority, one has to struggle to be recognized as ‘equal citizens’ of India.  This recognition has been particularly denied to Muslims in India.  The message is not just that we do not ‘belong’, we are also assumed to be ‘traitors and allies of Pakistan’ thus making us ‘unpatriotic’.  One is alienated from the mainstream, her self-worth as an ‘individual’ is denied, it instills in the minority the order of second grade citizenship. All this happens at a very early age, an impressionable age. It made me more vulnerable and was perhaps my first experience of being told about my second grade status in my own country, a country, which the school text book reminds us is the biggest democracy in the world.  I was alienated in a shared space – ‘my’ school.  I was assumed to be ‘unpatriotic’ at the age of 12 or 13.

And so I did the next best thing, I tried to merge and be like everyone else. I started rebelling from my own religious background.  I studied translations of quran and found flaws with respect to women’s status in it, slowly I developed a “sort of” feminist narrative on Islam. In it, I found elements of Patriarchy, Misogyny, Gender Inequality and all other flaws of an organized religion.  I did not realize that I was still following the ‘Hindu’ narrative about a muslim.  I argued with my father, when all he wanted was that I pray to God, once a day.  I gave up my religion by the age of 17 when girls around me were still fasting for Santoshi mata or Guruwaar or Shani dev or some other diety.  At 17 you only understand ‘liberal’ in a skin-deep sense. So I became liberal in the way I dressed, ate and lived my college life, completely aligning myself with upper caste Hindus.  I should have been shocked at my “religious hindu girl friends” but I was not.  I was a ‘subject’ of the Hindu Brahminical narrative.  So strong was the grip of this majoritarian narrative that I, a rebel-muslim, failed to question my friends.  But a questioning mind cannot be dulled. Sooner than later I discovered the flaws in Hinduism, it too had misogyny, gender in-equality and patriarchy.  I realised that a ‘liberal Hindu’ mindset is just a disguise for a ‘Brahminical’ mindset.  If liberalism does not allow you to break the barriers of race and caste, if it does not filter out hatred for minorities than how can you call yourself a liberal?

During my college days, I lived in my jeans and tees, much like any other urban girl.  At every introduction, at every mention of my name – I was told, “oh! But you do not look like a muslim.” What does a muslim woman look like? Again, I was not acceptable as a non-hijab wearing modern muslim woman!  They saw me every day yet denied my modern identity.  I was ‘invisible’ to them.  They wanted to stick to notions of a ‘hijab wearing muslim woman’ and when I did not conform to their narrative, they called me an exception!  Just like our ‘clean home’ was an exception, my ‘patriotism’ was an exception, my ‘modern identity’ too was an exception! But why? Because stereotypes create Islamophobia and Islamophobia simply helps to establish Hindu Supremacy.

So well disguised was this denial of my identity that initially I was pleased at my ‘liberal identity’ but slowly I began to feel some anger as these remarks were thrown at me often. Things changed drastically when I went to study Film & Television at Jamia Millia Islamia University.  Now that I look back, I feel I got into the prestigious institute because in my interview, I was able to present to the panel, a positive review of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, it was a ‘liberal’ panel of interviewers.  The book was banned in India but my father had managed to bring a copy home which he kept hidden from us.  I read it secretly at night.  Maybe my approach to Satanic verses helped me. Once I joined the course, my mind opened up to new experiences, this is where I began to understand the concepts of ‘othering’, ‘us & them’.  But by now I was so used to following the Hindu narrative about Muslims that I constantly judged Muslim students outside my center as conservative, hard-core fundamentalists.  Anyone who had a beard was a fundamentalist and I did not want to associate myself with him.  So strong is the grip of this narrative on me that even today I want to tell Muslim men to be ‘more normal’, to be like anyone else and merge in the mainstream.  Why should they have beards? Why should the women wear burqa? Why do they look different? Why don’t we give (hindus) the Ram mandir?  Why don’t we change our profession from being butchers to some other? When it came to matters of identity I was calling ourselves – ‘them’.   The penny dropped.  When did I start subscribing to the majoritarian narrative and criticizing people for the way they dressed, ate, earned their living? Why was I pleased at being a liberal Muslim? Were my neighbours and colleagues friendly because I did not look like a Muslim? What if I wore a hijab and was a practicing muslim?  Recently a ‘muslim senior citizen’ was denied a seat in a delhi metro! Isn’t it alienation in a shared public space?  What then happens in other such spaces – schools, colleges and offices – is anybody’s guess.

The deeper I dug, the more I realized how convoluted were my own thoughts about myself.  Infact my entire family scrutinizes and criticizes conservative Muslims ruthlessly while singing classical Bhajans at friend’s ‘Pujas’.  Is it an attempt to appease them? We celebrate Holi and Diwali like all Hindus.  My daughter lights up the house with lights and diyas on Diwali and our neighbours appreciate it.  But on Eid, ours is the only house that is lit up, no neighbor has accepted Eid as their own festival.  Clearly the majority has never wanted to please its minority but is very loud and vocal on ‘appeasement of minorities’.   Ironically, a narrative of ‘Hindu victimhood’ has been at play since 1980s, it has led to several riots in which more muslims have been killed than hindus.  Every riot sets back the minority community by at least a generation.  It takes away the home that was built over a period of 20 years, it takes away savings, security, livelihood, not to mention lives of loved ones. I will not even touch on rapes and arrests of innocent muslims.  But the Hindu goes on believing in his ‘victimhood’ and in his acts of faith.  To the muslim, he repeats the same questions why do Muslims live in ghettos? Remember what happened to Akhlaq who did not live in a ghetto? Why does the muslim community not help their women? Muslim women need as much help as Hindu women.  Why are they so conservative? Why are there separate laws for muslims? Are there?!!!! Why don’t the muslims want uniform civil code?  Really!!!??? All muslims may not be terrorists but all terrorists are muslims??!!! Only as much as all rioters are Hindus.  Are the gau-rakshaks not bhakshaks? Clearly these Hindus have not known any muslim, nor do they know their own faith.

Muslims in India face a double-edged sword of Economic and Cultural alienation.  They are pushed to live in ghettos, they have spent past 70 years in fear of riots. Only those who are willing to give up their religion (like me) and merge with Brahminical narrative can hope to rise economically and socially.  They are Psychologically crushed by attacks on their cultural practices, eating habits, dressing style and professions.  They are easy targets for the police and the mob.  They can be lynched, beaten up, killed in encounter or be in jail for 23 years before being declared innocent.  They can’t rent a house, get their child admitted to a good school or a house help to work for them.

Who will take the blame for this narrative of ‘othering’ the Indian Muslim?  An average liberal hindu is upset when people like me refuse to follow his narrative.  He is horrified that I have decided to ‘De-subjectify’ myself and assert my equal status, my first-grade citizenship in India.  My ‘liberal Hindu’ friend expects people like me to not raise my voice – for he alone has the right to criticise ‘his PM’, ‘his government’, ‘his army’ and ‘his motherland’?!!! He does not want me to react to communal killings or state atrocities, not even state policies. He simply does not want me to have an opinion forget criticizing political ideologies. He is also not willing to look at facts, figures, documents, history.  He is the one who eats eggs, fish, chicken, mutton and pork, he drinks scotch, he is well dressed, he is educated and has a white collar job. Infact he even relishes my Biryani.  He is the one whose daughter can choose to marry anyone except a muslim man…

And lastly he expects me to be grateful to him for allowing me to live in India, imagine what my life would be in Pakistan?!!!

Let us make it clear that I or the Indian muslims have nothing to be grateful for, to the hindus in India.  That we refuse to play your game in the name of ‘liberal forces’.  You are not liberal if you have deep seated hatred for minorities.  India, world’s biggest democracy is a farce, it is a mis-recognition of the system of democracy.  True democracy in India can only be established through its minorities  – a solidarity of  religious, caste and indigenous minorities.

P.S. By any chance, if you feel threatened by burqa or a skull cap and beard – so be it! I’m not going to change till I want to. Deal with it.

Situation in Kashmir never scarier: RAW’s former chief

NEW DELHI: A former head of India’s external spy agency RAW believes that the situation in India-held Kashmir was never scarier, not even in the 1990s when armed resistance was at its peak, the Indian Express reported on Wednesday.

Asked in an interview by the paper if the ongoing unarmed uprising was going from bad to worse under the current government, former Research and Analysis Wing chief A.S. Dulat said yes.

“Yes, the situation is turning worse. Is it worse than in 1990? My answer is yes and no. It is worse in terms of atmospherics. Because of alienation and the anger of youth, young Kashmiri minds have gone out of control.

“There is a sense of hopelessness. They aren’t afraid to die. Villagers, students and even girls are coming out on the streets. This has never happened in the past,” he said.

A.S. Dulat says today they [Kashmiris] are proud of being stone-pelters

Mr Dulat served in Srinagar in the 1980s as a special director of the Intelligence Bureau when he supervised the intelligence network there, the paper said. In the PM’s Office during the Vajpayee government, he was adviser on Kashmir, work that formed the basis of his book “Kashmir: The Vajpayee Years”.

Mr Dulat said the armed militancy and the intensity of violence witnessed in 1990 was not there now. “There were more guns then… Actual militancy was more then but today the situation is scarier. When stone-pelting is done by youths, and girls, it’s abnormal… Today, they are proud of being stone-pelters. They are no longer hiding. Schoolgirls and women are coming out to throw stones. The Kashmir situation has never been so bad,” Mr Dulat said.

What does the future hold for Kashmir in the short term?

“It doesn’t look good…. The sad part, frightening part and really scary part of Kashmir is that these boys and girls with stones in their hands don’t seem to care what their parents feel. There is so much distrust in Kashmiri families that a father doesn’t know what his son is doing and the son doesn’t care anymore what his father thinks.”

Mr Dulat said it was a puzzle why India was hesitant to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan.

“I have never understood why India is afraid to talk about Kashmir with Pakistan? They have more explaining to do. I agree (Prime Minister Narendra) Modiji started well. He surprised all of us by going to Pakistan. The snag here is what happened after it. The crux of the whole thing is that Pakistan is not an easy state to engage with.”

India’s present stance that talk and terror can’t go together was also meaningless vis-à-vis Pakistan. “Here things happen at many layers. We have to talk, disregarding incidents here and there. Surely, we need explanations for Uri, Gurdaspur and Pathankot. But I am told the NSAs of both sides are talking even now… Dialogue must happen between the foreign secretaries and PMs. Modiji is a master of theatre, so he can make it happen. Nawaz Sharif is also a karigar. In a sense, it’s an even scale… I am sorry to say but it’s easier to talk to Pakistan than to Kashmiris.”

The uprising after the killing of Burhan Wani surprised Pakistan. “They returned with a vengeance…In the last five years, Pakistan tried its best to unite all factions of Hurriyat. They failed but now they have got together because this Indian government doesn’t even look at them.”

The Indian government failed to anticipate the consequences from the killing of Wani. “Yes, absolutely. Let me say that we have invited Pakistan back into the Valley. By October things had climbed down. Kashmiris hibernate in winter wearing firan and with their kangadsi. That’s the best time to engage Kashmiris. We didn’t.”

Last winter we didn’t exploit the relative calm. Now children are out on the streets. Modiji had an edge when he came to power. But talks didn’t happen.”

Published in Dawn, May 4th, 2017

Ivanka publishes self-help book, cites Pakistani entrepreneur as inspiration

NEW YORK: US First Daughter Ivanka Trump revived ethics concerns Tuesday by publishing a self-help book for working women, which was immediately criticised for offering little help to millions of Americans living outside the moneyed elite.

"Women Who Work: Rewriting the Rules for Success" was released simultaneously in hardback, ebook, 497-minute audio download and CD, Donald Trump´s favorite child sitting on the cover in a dark frock.

The purpose of the book, she writes, is to empower others with skills she has learned in matters as diverse as starting companies, negotiating, maximizing your influence at work and "helping change the system to make it better for women."

The text is peppered with quotations from the likes of Mahatma Gandhi, business leaders Jeff Bezos and Sheryl Sandberg, even former secretary of state Colin Powell.

Among the women she cities as her inspirations is Pakistani-origin entrepreneur Umber Ahmad, who left Wall Street to open her own bakery.

Umber, the child of Pakistani immigrants who came to the States right before she was born, graduated from MIT and the University of Pennsylvania. She rose through the ranks at Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, working in investment banking and private equity, before leaving the Street to pursue her passion for baking.

The name of her pastry shop ‘Mah-Ze-Dahr’ is derived from the Urdu word ‘mazedar’ meaning ‘delicious’ in English. Umber began selling her bakery items online, before eventually expanding to a physical shop in Manhattan in 2016.

´Completely out of touch´

Ivanka Trump, the millionaire mother of three, assistant to the president and wife of White House advisor Jared Kushner, says she wrote the tome, published by Penguin business imprint Portfolio, before her father´s shock election.

She took leave from the family real estate business and her eponymous clothing line in January. She is now an unpaid federal employee, with an office in the West Wing, who fulfills duties traditionally carried out by a first lady.

Yet the book spotlights the gulf between the gilded world of a 35-year-old woman thought -- with her husband -- to still hold investments worth up to $740 million and the struggles facing middle- or working-class working women.

She makes only fleeting reference to a nanny as she details an exhausting schedule for managing her companies, her household and date nights with her husband.

At extremely busy times, such as her father´s presidential campaign, she admits: "I wasn´t treating myself to a massage or making much time for self-care."

She references her joy at spending weekends "at our country home in New Jersey," her love of transcendental meditation and shares tips on treating your children to a "spa bath:" run the shower for steam, play rain forest music and lower the lights.

Fatima Goss Graves, incoming president of the National Women´s Law Center that promotes equality for women and families, wrote in US News that the book was "completely out of touch with the obstacles working women face."

"Millions of women are in no position to follow any of this advice."

The New York Times, a newspaper repeatedly criticized by the Republican president, called it "not really offensive so much as witlessly derivative." The "why of her book becomes easy to discern. She´s extending the Trump brand."

Online booksellers Amazon listed the book with an average of three out of five stars, an instant bestseller in the category of "job hunting and careers."

Alongside glowing reviews extolling her as a role model with practical advice, irrate comments criticised her as a woman of privilege who never had to work.

Likely galling to many a hard-up student will be the revelation that Anna Wintour, the legendary editor of Vogue, called her in person to offer her a job while she was yet to graduate -- a position which she "graciously declined."

Ivanka, who uses social media to showcase a carefully curated image, reveals that she shared the first picture of her daughter only after being ambushed by paparazzi.

She justified sharing a photograph of herself digging in the garden with "messy" hair and "dirt on my cheek" thinking it might help "debunk the superwoman myth."

Ivanka was pre-paid an advance for the book, but has tried to fend off concerns that she is profiting from public office by promising to donate further profits to charity and announcing that she would not go on a promotional tour.

"In light of government ethics rules, I want to be clear that this book is a personal project. I wrote it at a different time in my life," she wrote on Facebook.

The book closes with her often-stated desire for the United States to enshrine paid leave and affordable high-quality childcare, but offers no concrete blueprint on how that might be achieved.

ٹی ٹی پی کا زوا ل اور "را"،"این ڈی ایس " کے ساتھ گٹھ جو ڑ بے نقا ب : احسا ن اللہ احسا ن کے تہلکہ خیز انکشافات

(سید ثاقب علی شاہ)

بدنا م زما نہ دہشت گرد تنظیم تحریک طا لبان پاکستان (ٹی ٹی پی) اور جماعت الا حرا ر کا سا بقہ ترجما ن احسان اللہ احسان جو ملا لہ یو سفزئی ، شجا ع خا نزا دہ ، نا نگا پر بت میں غیر ملکی سیا حوں  اور با چا خان ائیر پو رٹ جیسے متعدد سفاکا نہ حملوں میں ملو ث رہا اب پا ک فوج کی حراست میں ہے ۔ احسان  اللہ احسان نے خود کو پا ک فو ج کے حوالے کرنے کے بعد تہلکہ خیز انکشافات کیے جس میں سر فہر ست بھا رتی خفیہ ایجنسی "را" کی پاکستان میں دہشت گرد انہ اور تحزیبی کا روائیوں  کے لیے کالعدم دہشت گر د تنظیموں کی سر پر ستی اور مالی معاونت جیسے جر ائم کا پردہ فا ش کر نا ہے ۔ ایک اعتر افی وڈیو بیا ن میں احسان اللہ احسان جس کا اصل نا م لیاقت ہے،  نے واضح کیا کہ وزیر ستان آپر یشن کے بعد یہ دہشت گر د بھا گ کر افغانستا ن چلے گئے جہاں اُس نے دیکھا کہ طا لبا ن کے سر براہو ں ، " این ڈی ایس " اور "را" کے تعلقات کو فر وغ حاصل ہو رہا ہے۔ یہ خفیہ ایجنسیا ں طا لبان کی مالی معا ونت کر کے انہیں پا کستان میں دہشت گردی کے لیے اہداف سو نپتی اور بعد ازاں ہر ایک دہشت گر دانہ کا روائی کے عوض انعام بھی دیتی۔ طالبان کے سر بر اہ اپنے جنگجوؤں کو مید ان جنگ میں پاکستان آرمی کے خلا ف لڑنے کے لیے چھو ڑ کر خو د خفیہ ٹھکا نو ں میں رُوپو ش ہو جا تے ۔ پاکستان آرمی کے افغانستان کی سر زمین میں جما عت الاحرار کے خلا ف حالیہ آپریشن میں جہاں متعدد جنگجوؤں کے مرنے کےساتھ ساتھ انکے کیمپ بھی تبا ہ ہوئے  وہاں دوسری طر ف زند ہ بچنے والے جنگجوو ٔں کی اعلی قیا دت ، "را" اور" این ڈی ایس " کے چھکے بھی چھُوٹ گئے ۔ احسان اللہ احسان نے ان جنگجو ؤں کو جو طالبان کے ُچنگل سے  آزاد ہونا چاہتےہیں انہیں امن کا راستہ اختیا ر کر کے واپس پُر امن  زند گی گزارنے کا پیغام دیا ۔

 احسان اللہ احسان کے اعترافی بیان اور ہتھیا ر ڈالنے کی بنیا دی اہمیت یہ ہے کہ تحریک طالبان کے گر وہ انتہائی کمزور ہو رہے ہیں اور یہ بات خوش آئند ہے کہ رواں آپریشن ردالفساد میں پاکستان آرمی نتیجہ خیز کامیابی حا صل کر  رہی ہے ۔ مو جو د ہ فو جی حکمت عملی، پاکستان سے بھا گ کر افغانستان کی سر زمین میں روپو ش ہونے والے دہشت گر دوں کو پا رہ پارہ کر نے اور جڑسے اکھا ڑ نے میں معا ون ثابت ہو رہی ہے۔مو جو دہ آپر یشن نے تحر یک طالبان کو بے انتہا نقصانا ت پہنچا ئے جس کے بعد میڈیا پر کو ریج نہ ملنے کی وجہ سے انہوں نے سوشل میڈیاپر  نو جو انوں کو گمُر اہ کر نا شروع کیا ۔ اپنے اعترافی بیان میں احسان نے کہا کہ وہ اسلا م کی غلط تشر یح کر کے پر وپیگنڈا بیا نا ت  شا ئع کرتے تاکہ نو جو انو ں کےجذبات اُبھار کر انھیں اُکسایا جا سکے ۔ اس نے نوجو انوں کو بھی یہ پیغام دیا کہ یہ لو گ اپنے ذاتی مقا صد اور پاکستان دشمن بیر ونی قوتو ں کی ایما ء پر پا کستان کے خلا ف لڑ رہے ہیں ۔

۳  اپریل کو جب پا کستان آرمی کے میڈیا ونگ (آئی ایس پی آر ) نے جما عت الاحرار  کے آٹھ کما نڈروں کے ہتھیا ر ڈالنے کی خبر سنا ئی تو صرف تین نا م  اکبر ، گل ، اور سر اج کو واضح کیا جبکہ احسا ن اللہ احسان کی خبر کو بعد ازاں  ۱۷ اپر یل کو منظر عام پر لایاگیا  ۔ احسان کی رضاکارانہ حوالگی کی ایک بڑی وجہ تحریک طالبا ن کی قیا دت کا غیر ملکی عنا صر کی ایما ء پر  پا کستا ن کے خلا ف ہتھیا ر اٹھا نا ہے ۔ احسا ن نے یہ بھی انکشاف کیا کہ ان دہشت گرد تنظیمو ں نے افغا نستان میں کمیٹیاں بنا ئی ہیں جن کے ذریعے یہ "را" اور "این ڈی ایس" سے رابطے برقرار رکھتے ہیں۔ ان دونو ں خفیہ ایجنسیوں نے دہشتگر دوں کو خصوصی ویزے جا ری کیے  ہیں تاکہ وہ  افغانستا ن کی سر زمین میں آسانی سے سفر کر سکیں اور یہ ویزے افغانستان میں پا کستانی شنا ختی کا رڈ کی طر ح کا م کر تے ہیں ۔ سکیو رٹی کی  صورتحا ل کے پیش نظر افغانستان میں کہیں بھی سفر سے قبل یہ دہشتگرد افغا نستان اور بھارتی سیکورٹی فورسزسے  رابطے میں رہتے ہیں ۔ یہ ایجنسیاں ان دہشتگردوں کو راستہ فرا ہم کر تی ہیں  اور ان کی پاکستا ن کی سر زمین میں دراندازی کی کو ششوں میں رہنما ئی کر تی ہیں ۔ ایسی صورتحال میں اگر افغا ن فوجی اسٹیبلشمنٹ پاکستان کے ساتھ مخلصا نہ انٹیلی جنس شیر نگ کرے، جس سے وہ ہمیشہ گریزاں رہے ہیں تو ان دہشتگردوں پر مزید دبا ؤڈال کر ان کا قلع قمع کیا جا سکتا ہے ۔

جما عت الا حرار تحریک طالبان کا علیحد ہ ہو نےوالا خطر نا ک ترین گروہ ہے جو متعدد سفاکا نہ حملوں میں ملو ث رہا ہے۔ تین سال قبل وجود میں آنے کے بعد اس گروہ نے ۱۲۰ سے زائد دہشتگر دانہ حملے کیے ۔ ایک مو قع پر یہ گر وہ داعش کےساتھ بھی منسوب رہا مگر دوبارہ تحریک طالبان کے ساتھ شامل ہو ا لیکن اس نےاپنے  آزاد انہ تشخص کو بر قرار رکھا ۔ فروری کے مہینے میں اس  گر وہ نے نا م نہا د " آپر یشن غا زی " کا  بھی آغاز کیا جس کے تحت دہشتگر د انہ حملو ں کی نئی لہر شروع کی گئی ۔ احسان اللہ احسان کے حراست میں آنے سے پاکستانی سکیورٹی ایجنسیو ں کو جما عت الا حرار کے نیٹ ورکس اور  آپریشنز کے متعلق بے پنا ہ معلوما ت مل سکتی ہیں جو انکے سد ِباب کے لیے انتہا ئی معاون ثابت ہو ں گی ۔

بھارتی ایجنسی "را" کا تحریک طالبا ن کی قیا دت کو مددفراہم کرنے کے انکشا فات نے تحریک طالبان کے نظریا تی اساس کو معد وم کر دیا ہے ۔ احسان  اللہ احسا ن نے ٹی ٹی پی کما نڈر عمر خا لد خُراسا نی سے کہا کے ہم کا فر و ں سے مد د لے کر ان کے لیے اپنے ملک میں ہی مسلما نو ں کو قتل کر  رہے ہیں جو سر اسر غلط ہے تو خرا سانی نے جو اب دیا کہ " اگر اسرائیل بھی پاکستان میں دہشتگر د ی کے لیے میر ی معاونت کر ے تو میں اس کی مدد لینے سے بھی گر یز نہیں کر وں گا " ۔ اس مو قع پر احسان نے اس بات کا احاطہ کر لیا کہ تحریک طالبان کی قیا دت اپنے ذاتی مفا د اور ایجنڈے کے لیے کا م کر رہی ہے اور جہا د کی آڑمیں لگا یا گیا  گمر اہ کُن نعر ہ کبھی  بھی ان کا حقیقی مقصدنہیں رہا۔تحریک طالبان کی قیادت پر ان کے قلیل امیروں کا قبضہ ہے جو معصو م لو گو ں کے قتل ، اغو ا اور ان سے بھتہ لینے کا کا م کر واتےہیں۔ یہ امیر معصوم لو گو ں کو عوامی مقا مات ، سکو لو ں ، کا لجو ں اور یو نیورسٹیو ں میں دھما کے کر نے کے لیےبھی  استعما ل کر تے ہیں ۔ اسلا م ہمیں  امن سے رہنے کی تلقین کر تا ہے اورایسے تما م اقداما ت اسلامی تعلیما ت کے سراسر خلا ف ہیں ۔

قبائلی علا قوں میں پا ک فوج کے آپریشن کے آغا ز کے بعد تحریک طالبان کی صفوں میں اندرونی تنا زعات اور قیا دت کے حصول کے لیے جھگڑوں میں اضا فہ ہو ا ۔ حکیم اللہ محسود کی ہلا کت کے فو راً بعد جا نشینی کی جنگ میں عمر خا لد خُر اسانی ، خا ن سید سجنا اور فضل اللہ ایک دوسرے کے آمنے سامنے آ گئے اور قیا دت حا صل کر نے کی یہ  لڑا ئی وزیرستان آپریشن  کے  بعد مزید شدت اختیار کر گئی ۔ جب تنظیم میں ہر  ایک قیا دت کے حصول لے لیے لڑنا شرو ع ہو گیا تو شو رٰی نے قرعہ اندا زی کر نے کا فیصلہ کیاجس کے نتیجے میں فضل اللہ نیا سر براہ  مقرر ہوا۔ ایسی تنظیم سے کیا توقع کی جا سکتی ہے جس کے سربراہ  کا تعین قر عہ اند ازی سے ہو ا اور اس کا سربراہ )فضل اللہ( اپنے ہی استاد کی بیٹی کو اٹھا کر زبردستی شادی کر کے برے کردار کا مظاہرہ کرے۔ ایسے لوگ اسلام کی تعلیمات سے نالاں ہیں بلکہ یہ اسلام کی بدنامی کا بھی باعث ہیں۔

موجودہ صورتحال میں پاکستان دہشتگردوں کے خلاف انتہائی مضبوط مقام پر کھڑا ہےاور آنے والے دنوں میں مزید مضبوط ہوتا نظر آرہا ہے۔ پاکستان کی نئی فوجی قیادت کی آپریشن ردُالفساد میں نئی حکمت عملی انتہائی موثرثابت ہو رہی ہے جو ایک طرف تمام دہشتگردوں اور تخریب کاروں کے خلاف بلاامتیاز بھرپور طاقت کا استعمال کر رہی ہے وہیں دوسری طرف مفاہمت کا راستہ بھی اپنائے ہوئے ہے۔ وہ لوگ جنہوں نے ریاست پاکستان کے خلاف ہتھیار اٹھائے ہیں ان کا منہ توڑ جواب دیا جائے گا جبکہ وہ لوگ جو  اپنے گمراہ کن نظریات کو ترک کر کےقانون نافذ کرنے والے اداروں سے دہشتگردوں کے خلاف معاونت کریں گے ان کے خلاف مقدمات میں رعایت کی جائے گی۔ احسان اللہ احسان کے مطابق ہزاروں کی تعداد میں دہشتگرد پاک فوج کے سامنے ہتھیار ڈالنا چاہتے ہیں۔ کا ینیٹک آپریشن کے ساتھ ساتھ اس بات کی بھی ضرورت ہے کہ جودہشتگرد ہتھیار ڈالنے کا ارادہ رکھتے ہیں ان  کی حوصلہ افزائی کی جائے ۔ بلوچستان کے عسکریت پسندوں کی طرح ان لوگوں کو بھی خودکو  سیکیورٹی فورسز کےحوالے کرنے کا موقع دینا چاہیےتاکہ وہ مزید گمراہی اور درندگی سے بچ سکیں۔

پاکستانی ریاست ، اداروں اور قوم نے ملک میں سیکیورٹی صورتحال بہتر کرنے کے لیے قابل ستائش پیش قدمی کی ہے۔ آپریشن ردُالفساد میں ہم نے اس حد تک پیش رفت کی ہے کہ سرحد پار بیٹھے  پاکستان کے خلاف دہشتگرد حملوں کی منصوبہ بندی کرنے والے اب بدلتی صورتحال سے دل شکستہ ہیں۔ ریاست پاکستان کی رٹ پورے ملک میں بحال ہے اور یہ بات واضح رہنی چاہیے کہ جب ریاست غیرضروری عناصر کو ختم کرنے کی ٹھان لے توان عناصر کا خاتمہ ان کا مقدر بن جاتا ہے۔ پاکستان  کے لیے اس سے بڑی کوئی کامیابی نہیں ہو سکتی کہ ہمارے بڑے دشمنوں کوگمراہ کن راستوں کے انتخاب کی غلطی کا احساس ہو رہا ہے اور وہ ان راستوں کو ترک کر رہے ہیں۔ احسان اللہ احسان نے سب کے سامنے یہ راز بھی افشاء کر دیا کہ پاکستان میں گزشتہ کئی برس سے جاری دہشتگردی کے پیچھے  کس کے ناپاک ہاتھ ہیں۔پاکستانی خفیہ اداروں کے لیے کلبھوشن کے بعد احسان اللہ احسان ہندوستان کے خلاف بڑی کامیابی ہے۔پاکستان اپنے دشمنوں اور دہشت گردوں کا بھر پور مقابلہ کر کے صفایا کر رہا ہے اوریہی وجہ ہے کہ شکست خوردہ  تحریک طالبان کے کارندے اپنی وفاداریاں بدل کر ہتھیار ڈالنے پر مجبور ہیں ۔