Another round of Pakistan–India talks in the offing

Another round of Pakistan–India talks in the offing

By Khalid Iqbal
   

In a follow-up action to his recent visit to India, President Obama’s half an hour phone call to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has set the stage for resumption of Pakistan-India dialogue. New Indian Foreign Secretary is likely to visit Pakistan to resume the process from the point his predecessor had disrupted. However, at the same time, worrisome estimates are pouring in from divergent sources that during coming weeks, India is likely to conduct a premeditated false flag operation leading to an eye-catching act of terrorism in Indian occupied Kashmir. Such incident would be promptly blamed on Pakistan. By doing so India would achieve multiple objectives: offset international (read American) pressure to resume dialogue with Pakistan; divert public attention from BJPs horrible defeat in Delhi elections; gain time for further political wheeling dealing in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IoK); and to disrupt evolving regional consensus for Afghanistan end game. In run up to this false flag operation, Indian leadership is orchestrating media hype using beaten tracks—infiltration, weapon supply etc.

India is purposefully sustaining tense situation over the Line of Control (LoC) and the Working Boundary (WB). Unprovoked and indiscriminate firing and shelling alongside threats of disproportionate use of force point towards India’s dangerous desire to create a space for war. Pakistan appreciates US interest in South Asia and expects it to play a constructive role for strategic stability and balance in the region, by encouraging a focus on the objectives of economic development and poverty reduction; and, as a corollary, reduce the possibility of a reinvigorated arms race in the sub-continent. For the last couple of years, India has been the biggest importer of sophisticated weapon systems,—including from the United States. Notwithstanding, Pakistan expects the US to continue playing a balancing role in bringing strategic stability to South Asia. In the meanwhile, Pakistan is also working with other countries to press India for talks, as uninterrupted dialogue is necessary for regional peace, stability and development.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has articulated peace for development as the defining principle of Pakistan’s foreign policy. talks 2Building a peaceful neighbourhood and a rebalancing between geo-strategic and geo-economic priorities constitute the main pillars of this policy. The government has embarked on resolute efforts to create a peaceful external and internal environment, so that core national objective of economic development is robustly advanced. For this, Pakistan has called for a regional consensus among the ‘external actors’ to agree on non-interference in the internal matters of Afghanistan, fearing that the war-torn country may be used for ‘proxy war’ in the post-US withdrawal period. “The external actors would have to agree on a regional consensus on non-interference,” said Prime Minister’s Advisor on National Security and Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz in a policy statement on February 11. Since the formation of new Afghan government, Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan are on an “upward trajectory” and a new phase has begun in relations with the two countries. However, situation in Afghanistan is so precarious that White House is contemplating to further delay the pull-out of its residual troops.

Pakistan is increasingly concerned that growing influence of India inside Afghanistan could be detrimental to its interests in the region. In his statement, Sartaj Aziz has urged the international community for not repeating the mistake of the past. “We believe this precious moment of hope and optimism in Afghanistan must be defended, by not repeating the mistakes of the past. International community’s continuous engagement is a major imperative…The new Afghan government must be provided continuous economic and financial support for economic revival and for delivering on its reform agenda… All Afghan stakeholders must be convinced that their country would emerge stronger only if they worked with each other, not against each other…”

A peaceful neighbourhood for Pakistan cannot be realised without a qualitative transformation in Pakistan’s relationships with Afghanistan, India and Iran. While relationship with Iran and Afghanistan are on a better trajectory, the Modi government in India is not forthcoming to Pakistan’s overtures. In line with its track record, India has not reciprocated Pakistan’s robust peace initiatives. Cancellation of foreign secretary-level talks by India on the pretext of Pakistani High Commissioner’s meeting with Kashmiri leaders was found unconvincing worldwide, as such preparatory meetings have been a norm since AB Vajpayee’s time. Moreover, Modi has an elaborate plan to unilaterally alter the status of IoK. Any such efforts by India would further obfuscate the already complicated situation.

Asia’s importance has been growing through centuries and the region has been home to the greatest civilizations and empires of all times. As the United States and western powers look towards the east, it is important for the Asian continent to realise its strength, identify political trajectory through a show of independent stance in global politics. Key to this approach lies in peaceful South Asia. To realize this objective, Pakistan wants meaningful and result-oriented dialogue with India for resolution of all outstanding issues. And such dialogue with India must include the Kashmir issue, otherwise it would be futile.

There are reports that US President Barack Obama, during his recent visit to India, tried to persuade India to resume dialogue with Pakistan. Reportedly India initially resisted such persuasions, but later agreed to do so. However, negative propaganda about the Line of Control is indicative of Indian intransigence; by doing so, it wants to keep a handle on the negotiations, and retain essential leverage for calling off the talks, which it is resuming under American pressure.

Due to America’s misplaced desire to employ India as cheap deterrence against China, its leverage over India is on downslide, especially since 2005. Moreover, American support for India’s claim for a permanent seat in the UNSC and entry into strategic trade cartels has added to Indian hubris. Unless America rationalizes its China policy, this trend is likely to continue. Prime Minister Nawaz has done well by telling Obama that India is a violator of UN resolutions—especially on Kashmir— and as such it does not qualify for a permanent UNSC seat. Moreover, Pakistan does not subscribe to adding new centres of power in the UN. Moreover he has also informed the US President that Pakistan also wishes to join Nuclear Suppliers Group.

Pakistan should continue to hold its ground on vital issues. Pakistan has sent a correct signal to India that it is contemplating to approach the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for arbitration regarding violation of provisions of Indus Water Treaty (ITW) with regard to construction of Kishanganga Dam on River Jhelum and four other dams on the Chenab. In addition to Kishanganga, Pakistan had raised technical objections over the designs of 850MW Ratle, 1,000MW Pakal Dul, 120MW Miyar and 48MW Lower Kalnai hydropower projects at River Chenab in IoK. India is actively supporting anti-dam movements in Pakistan, so that it could project it to the international community that Pakistan is unable to utilize its water resources efficiently; this mantra is expected to create a favourable international lobby to support Indian bid for construction of dams on Eastern rivers—Indus, Chenab and Jhelum. Financial trails of some of anti-dam movements originate from India.

Malice underlying Pakistan-India relations has a much broader canvass and much larger depth than what is generally perceived. India had taken a policy decision long time ago that it will continue to make all-out effort to squeeze Pakistan on all counts at bilateral, regional and global levels. Pakistan should be cautious in dealing with India and should not dole out concessions without securing proportionate quid pro quo.

Natural Allies: Turkey-Pakistan-Afghanistan

By Khalid Iqbal

During the recent Pakistan-Turkey summit, both sides explored options to assist Afghanistan in reaching a peace agreement with the Taliban. Turkish premier Ahmet Davutoglu had an extensive agenda, including looking beyond bilateral cooperation and playing a role in stabilising Afghanistan.

Due to Turkic demographic belt running from West Asia to East Asia through Afghanistan, Turkey has an abiding interest in peace and stability in Afghanistan. Turkey has been playing an active role to keep the Afghan crisis manageable; it hosts a whole range of events viz Istanbul, Ankara, and Heart of Asia processes to keep the diplomacy in motion. Moreover, during Karzai era, whenever Afghanistan and Pakistan fell apart, Turkey took upon itself to bridge the gap. Turkey would have been the most suitable venue to host political office of Taliban, but the forces that be thought that such office should be located to a place where Pakistan’s influence over the Afghan events could be lesser—an absurd idea. Nevertheless, no matter where talks take place between the Taliban and the Unites States as well as the Taliban and the Afghan government, Turkey shall always be remembered as a pioneer of these peace process—from conceptual through operational stages. Turkey has expressed its satisfaction with the new phase of relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Turkish Prime Minister said that there is a trilateral connection between Turkey-Pakistan-Afghanistan and that he was glad to see such a high level of collaboration between Afghani and Pakistani leaders. Now the Afghan government is in contact with the Taliban to explore options for a possible peace deal. It is too early to extrapolate the profile of such parleys, however, simultaneous contacts between the US and Taliban in Doha indicate that the initiative has taken off, and matters could be at a fairly advanced stage. Nevertheless, this is a very difficult path—filled with numerous landmines. Pakistan has finally managed to bring these parties to negotiating tables. President Ghani has welcomed Pakistan’s initiative to help in the reconciliation process.

In retrospect, it is now evident that Americans and the Taliban have maintained contacts since the setting up of the Taliban’s political office in Doha, though this office was formally declared ‘closed down’ after the then Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, objected to a plaque identifying the building as the office of ‘Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Thence after, ice breaking direct contact between President Ghani’s administration and the Taliban became possible after months of behind-the-scene efforts by Pakistan as well as China. Earlier the US had tried to broker peace between the Taliban and the Ghani administration, but the Taliban were not amenable to American mediation. Pakistan played a positive and constructive role in bringing the two sides to the negotiating table.

So far Islamabad’s role was strictly confined to facilitation, and it is doing whatever it could; now it is up to the Taliban and the Afghan government to reach an appropriate agreement. The two sides are exploring options, including the venue for formal talks. Beijing; Dubai and Islamabad are under consideration for this purpose. China has offered to host the talks between the Taliban and Afghan government. Taliban have already warmed up to the Chinese offer and a two-member Taliban delegation has already paid an unannounced visit to Beijing in November 2014.

Pakistan is ready to support in all sincerity the Afghan reconciliation process; however, the process has to be transparent, Afghan-led and Afghan-owned. Pakistan has all along been of the view that it is for the Afghan government to lead efforts for reconciliation. Afghan foreign minister Salahuddin Rabbani is expected to visit Islamabad soon, to coordinate efforts for restoring and speeding-up the peace processes in Afghanistan. Salahuddin has the advantage that he also heads the Afghan High Peace Council; and thus what he says abroad, he will be able to sell it at home as well.

Pakistani and Afghan leadership has reached a conclusion to start joint efforts to counter militancy. Especially, the attacks on the Army Public School and Paktika’s Yahya Khel area have strengthened commitment in both countries to jointly fight against terrorism and extremism. “The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan respects Pakistan’s recent efforts to pave the way for peace and reconciliation,” the Presidential Palace said in a statement. The statement also welcomed Army Chief General Raheel Sharif’s remarks that Pakistan considers “Afghanistan’s enemy as its own enemy”. The statement added that Afghanistan, Pakistan, and international allies are committed to sincerely cooperate with each other to achieve peace. “Like Pakistan, Afghan government also believes that certain elements could try to derail the peace process”, said Ghani’s office; and it warned that opponents to the peace efforts could mislead the people through disinformation.

On another peace track, to earn the Chinese good will, Afghan security personnel have arrested and handed over several Uighur separatist militants from China’s restive Xinjiang region in an effort to persuade Beijing to use its influence with Pakistan to help start negotiations with the Taliban. “We offered our hand in cooperation with China and in return we asked them to pressure Pakistan to stop supporting the Taliban or at least bring them to the negotiating table,” said one Afghan security official. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who recently visited Islamabad, indicated his country’s willingness to help the reconciliation process in Afghanistan. China’s entry into Afghan peace process was long overdue; this will help the sustainability of the peace process, because China is perceived as an honest peace broker by all.

As the peace move is likely to pick up in the coming weeks, Afghan president has stepped up consultations with stakeholders in his country to evolve consensus. President Ghani has told the members of High Peace Council that establishment of peace in Afghanistan is his priority. And reportedly, the peace council has thrown its weight behind Ghani’s reconciliation move.

“Establishment of peace in our country is very difficult after a long war and mistrust…The peace route is not a short route. But I am confident to prove all international experiences wrong and bring peace to our country as soon as possible,” said President Ghani.

Prime Minster Ahmet lauded Pakistan’s efforts to establish peace and stability in Afghanistan as peace and stability in Afghanistan means peace and stability in Turkey and Pakistan. He also said that there is a trilateral connection between Turkey-Pakistan-Afghanistan and that he was glad to see such a high level of collaboration between Afghani and Pakistani leaders. While speaking at a joint press conference along with Prime Minister Nawaz, he announced an assistance of 20 million dollars for the temporarily displaced persons, as a result of military operation—Zarb-e-Azb— in North Waziristan. turkey1702Feeling the pain of the displaced people and taking concrete steps by Turkish Prime Minister to mitigate their hardship is reflective of the depth of people to people empathy between the two countries. Over one million people were uprooted after the security forces launched a major offensive against the Taliban and other militant groups in the region. Situation leading to such massive human displacement is created by the spill over of Afghan conflict into Pakistan.

The government has planned to start phased repatriation of these temporarily displaced persons (TDPs) within a month. This process will take one year to complete. Around 1.4 billion dollars will be needed for the repatriation and rehabilitation of the TDPs. During his meeting with the Army Chief, Turkish Prime Minister appreciated the role played by Pakistan Army in making the ongoing operation Zarb-e-Azb a success. Turkish Prime Minister’s first visit to Pakistan was a resounding success not only in the bilateral context but also for regional stability. Pakistan appreciates Turkey’s effort for bringing enduring peace in Afghanistan, and hopes that it will continue to play its constructive role.

Pure Pak-Afghan Relations: The Need of the Day

Posted by Fahim Balharvi on February 26, 2015 

The scenario of post-general elections of 2014 is witnessing a widely accepted and internationally recognized government that has been established in Afghanistan. Although the existing ethnic groups of Afghanistan are now the real stakeholders in the governance of country including taking the responsibility for early repatriation and rehabilitation of all those ARs who are still languishing in Pakistan, however, the Afghan refugees’ issue is still a point of great concern for everyone and especially for Pakistan who is sustaining an unbearable burden since last more or less 35 years. The refugees’ continued stay in Pakistan is a sprain in the host’s frail economic Achilles’ heel. Pakistan, as always is much interested in the returning of the Afghan Refugees back to their home. Of course, the UN and EU should take effective and immediate steps to facilitate the early return of the refugees to their homes. The responsibility for timely repatriation and rehabilitation of all Afghan refugees still crumbling in Pakistan rests with the Afghan government, which must take due interest to resolve the issue of Afghan refugees as a priority policy matter to honour its citizens. Though on the other hand the US/NATO and Afghan government have already entered into a strategic treaty through signing of Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA), nevertheless, in this environment it should have also been a binding on both parties to resolve the issue of millions of Afghan Refugees who are an immense burden on Pakistan, on the priority basis.

Afghanistan has signed long-delayed security pacts with the United States and NATO to authorize deployment of a small international military force in the country after the end of the year. The Taliban have their own reasons for rejecting these pacts calling them as “shameful and shocking.” However, according to the Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, Afghanistan obtained its complete national sovereignty because until the signing of BSA the right to use military force in Afghanistan was authorized by a United Nations Security Council resolution but after the agreements are signed it will not only end the civilian casualties but will end the detentions of Afghans by foreign forces also which are two major Afghan concerns.

The positive sign is that President Ghani tried to alleviate the fears of neighboring countries. Its known to all and sundries that these are signed for the stability and prosperity of Afghanistan and to defend it against terrorist networks and not against the neighbours. Certainly his indication was towards Pakistan categorically and Iran and Russia generally, as no other country has common borders with Afghanistan. The Indians made their utmost attempts to stick their nose in Afghan affairs however, at the end of the day they had to dejectedly wrap up in Afghanistan. The Afghan leadership strongly believes that by the time the security deal expires in 2024, the goal is for his country’s economy to be strong enough to reduce the level of international support for its military. Negotiations between Kabul and Washington over the text of the Bilateral Security Agreement were completed a year ago but Ghani’s predecessor, Hamid Karzai, refused to sign it, citing anger over civilian deaths and an alleged lack of U.S. interest in helping his government negotiate peace with the Taliban. One cannot rule out Afghan Taliban’s concern altogether as their lost sleep is confirmed by RAND Corporation South Asia analyst Arturo Munoz also who said that one of the difficult issues is the role the force would have in future combat operations and according to him the solution is to embed the U.S./NATO forces with Afghan security forces, who would take the lead in any such operation.

With Afghanistan, being hostage to the radical elements, chances are high of ISIS making inroads there. In such a region wrecked by terrorism and insecurity, friendly relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan would reap far greater dividends than just economic or military. Afghanistan has seen that political and security situation of the country was deteriorating with every coming day as long as India was meddling in Afghan affairs by this way or that way. The Indians had their own strategic designs and the vested interests. The Indian government chipped in, their every asset, starting from road construction to deploying the Tibetan commandoes but the natural and geographical realities were ruthlessly against them. In fact the Indians’ excitement and overplaying rang the bells and the international powers had to cut the Indians to the size. It was during that period that violence and terrorism in Afghanistan touched the peak. The Afghan people never wanted the Indians on their soil, especially when their notorious intelligence agency RAW was making every effort to spoil their relations with their next door neighbour Pakistan. There were reports that with the help of Israeli agency MOSAD, RAW had a plan to pave the way for ISIS in Afghanistan. If Pakistan and Afghanistan works diligently together then both can eliminate the chances of ISIS’s landing in Afghanistan and Pakistan, come, what may.

The Sino-Af-Pak focus is on the main and alarming issues; terrorism, extremism and separatism, which pose a major threat to the security and solidity of the three countries and the region. Unfortunately, the trio has suffered at the hands of terrorists and a combined effort will go a long way in stamping out the bane of terrorism. China being the senior partner of the trio intends building an outline of action, in the next round of proceedings. China has expressed that it will invite five delegations of senators, media, diplomats, friends and think-tanks from Afghanistan and Pakistan to visit China in 2015.

The world has seen that Pakistan has shown more concern than others for the existence of a peaceful Pakistan. We all know that a peaceful Afghanistan is in the best interest of Pakistan. Pakistan’s policy is not to interfere in internal affairs of Afghan; we believe that peaceful Afghanistan is a guarantee for regional peace and stability and the recent visits of COAS General Raheel and DG ISI to Afghanistan were a undeniable proof to the stance. Pakistan, on its part, has made numerous efforts to strengthen ties with Afghanistan. The visits to Afghanistan by Army Chief General Raheel Sharif and the Director General (DG) Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) with the idea to speed up efforts on the war against terror shows genuineness of purpose by Pakistan. Similarly, the army chief’s visits to the US, UK and China, and sharing with their leaderships details of his interaction with Afghan commanders, depict a renewed acknowledgement of Pakistan’s pivotal role for the future of Afghanistan. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s visit to Pakistan and China, in the same vein, brought in a whiff of fresh air.

This trilateral coordination and unity is likely to do wonder provided the sincerity, hard work and mutual trust prevails. Seeing the current level of cooperation, one can safely claim that the future of the region is certainly peaceful, prosperous and blooming.

India’s Water Aggression against Pakistan

                                        

                                                             By Sajjad Shaukat

In the modern world, there are various forms of bloodless wars like economic wars which amount to aggression. In these terms, besides supporting subversive acts including cross-bordering shelling, India has also stared water aggression against Pakistan.

In March, 2011, while speaking in diplomatic language, Indus Water Commissioner of India G. Ranganathan had refused by stating, “Indian decision to build dams on rivers has led to water shortage in Pakistan.” While rejecting Islamabad’s concerns regarding water-theft by New Delhi including violation of the Indus Water Treaty, he assured his counterpart, Indus Water Commissioner of Pakistan, Syed Jamaat Ali Shah that all issues, relating to water between Pakistan and India would be resolved through dialogue.

In international politics of today, these are deeds, not words which matter, so ground realties are quite different as to what G. Ranganathan indicated in his statement. In fact, India has been continuing water aggression against Pakistan.

Besides other permanent issues and especially the thorny dispute of Kashmir which has always been used by India to malign and pressurize Pakistan, water of rivers has become a matter of life and death for every Pakistani, as New Delhi has been employing it as a tool of terrorism to blackmail Pakistan.

In this regard, Indian decision to construct two hydro-electric projects on River Neelam which is called Krishanganga in Indian dialect is a new violation of the Indus Basin Water Treaty of 1960. The World Bank, itself, is the mediator and signatory for the treaty. After the partition, owing to war-like situation, New Delhi deliberately stopped the flow of Pakistan’s rivers which originate from the Indian-held Kashmir. Even at that time, Indian rulers had used water as a tool of aggression against Pakistan. However, due to Indian illogical stand, Islamabad sought the help of international arbitration. The Indus Basin Treaty allocates waters of three western rivers of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab to Pakistan, while India has rights over eastern rivers of Ravi, Sutlej and Beas.

Since the settlement of the dispute, India has always violated the treaty intermittently to create economic crisis in Pakistan. In 1984 a controversy arose between the two neighbouring states after India began construction of the Wullar Barrage on river Jhelum in the occupied Kashmir in violation of the Indus Basin Water Treaty.

In the past, the issue of Wullar Barrage has also been discussed in various rounds of talks, being held under composite dialogue process between the two rivals, but Indian intransigence has continued. In the mid 1990s India started another violation by constructing the Baglihar dam on the Chenab river.

In 2005, Pakistan had again sought the World Bank’s help to stop construction of the Baglihar dam. Although WB allowed India to go ahead with the project after a few modifications, yet it did not permit the interruption of the agreed quota of water flow to Pakistan.

In 2008, India suddenly reduced water flow of the Chenab river to give a greater setback to our autumnal crops. Islamabad on September 17, 2008 threatened to seek the World Bank’s intervention on the plea that New Delhi had not responded to its repeated complaints on the issue appropriately. Pakistan’s Commissioner to the treaty, Syed Jamaat Ali Shah had also remarked that the shortage of water in the Chenab river, occurred due to filling up the Baglihar dam. Despite repeated pleas from Islamabad, India did nothing to address the problem.

Nevertheless, apart from intermittent violations of the Indus Water Treaty, New Delhi, in fact, has been using water as an instrument to pressurize Islamabad with a view to getting leverage in the Pak-India dialogue especially regarding Indian-held Kashmir where a new phase of protests against the Indian illegitimate occupation has accelerated. In this respect, the then Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, while talking in connection with the revival of Pak-India dialogue, had said on February 8, 2010 that Pakistan’s case on Kashmir and water was based on truth, and the government would fight it with full strength.

Indian shrewd diplomacy of water war could also be judged from some other development. Online reports suggest that New Delhi has secretly offered technical assistance to the Afghan government in order to construct a dam over Kabul River which is a main water contributor to Indus River.

By applying such diplomacy against Pakistan, New Delhi intends to fulfill a number of nefarious designs. India wants to keep its control on Kashmir which is located in the Indus River basin area, and which contributes to the flow of all the major rivers, entering Pakistan. It is determined to bring about political, economic and social problems of grave nature in Pakistan.

In this context, China Daily News Group wrote in 2005: “Another added complication is that in building a dam upstream of Pakistan, India will possess the ability to flood or starve Pakistan at will. This ability was witnessed in July of 2004 when India, without warning, released water into the Chenab river, flooding large portions of Pakistan. The history of conflict between these two nations makes it possible for New Delhi to use nature as a real weapon against Islamabad.”

According to an estimate, unlike India, Pakistan is highly dependent on agriculture, which in turn is dependent on water. Of the 79.6 million hectares of land that makeup Pakistan, 20 million are available for agriculture. Of those 20 million hectares, 16 million are dependent on irrigation. So, almost 80% of Pakistan’s agriculture is dependent on irrigation.

It is notable that many of Pakistan’s industries are agro-based such as the textiles industry. Besides, 80% of Pakistan’s food needs are fulfilled domestically. Thus an interruption of water supply would have broad-ranging effects. For example, when the country suffered a drought from 1998 to 2001, there were violent riots in Karachi.

It is mentionable that half of Pakistan’s energy comes from hydroelectricity, and at present, our country has been facing a severe crisis of loadshedding which is the result of power-shortage in the country. During the recent past summers, people in a number of cities like Karachi, Lahore, Multan, Faisalabad etc. lodged violent protests against the loadshedding, culminating into loss of property and life.

It is of particular attention that Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Water and Power Khawaja Asif warned on February 10, 2015 that although the electricity shortage in the country would be overcome within two to three years, the scarcity of water is another issue looming in the country.

While, Pakistan has already been facing multiple challenges of grave nature coupled with a perennial phenomenon of terrorism like suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targetted killings etc., committed by the militants who are being backed by Indian secret agency, RAW, New Delhi also uses water as a tool by increasing its scarcity, making life too often miserable for Pakistanis with the ultimate aim of creating poverty which could produce more terrorism in turn. And, India is likely to deepen differences among Pakistan’s provinces over various issues which are directly or indirectly related to water.

So, still by employing water as an instrument of aggression, Indians continue to intensify political unrest, economic instability and social strife in Pakistan.

Surprisingly, in 2010, India started resumption of talks with Pakistan paying a greater attention on terrorism instead of equally addressing all the issues of the composite dialogue.

Nonetheless, Islamabad must include water as a major focus of agenda in the future dialogue; otherwise India is likely to continue its water aggression against Pakistan.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Gurkha Battle-Cry “Ayo Gorkhali”: Not for Indian Army Anymore?

Aasef Chauhdry

The discrimination by the Indian Army vis-à-vis Gurkha soldiers has ultimately forced the Nepal government to ask Indians from not recruiting the Gurkhas. It’s not only at the government level but at the public level too that protests are being made against the recruiting the Gurkhas in the Indian army. Not only that it has sparked a huge row within the Indian army, but has also gave birth to a great controversy across Nepal where general people came out with immense anti-India sentiments, forcing government of Nepal to strongly consider a move to bring an end to any further recruitment of any Nepali in Indian army. It has now forced the Indian defense establishment to watch the Nepali government’s reaction with a great concern and move to eventually halt the recruitment of Gurkhas in Indian army in a fresh bid in line with the earlier recommendations of its parliament’s report “Nepal’s Foreign policy in the Changed Context, 2012″.

The Indian government has to face a pressure on many fronts. On one hand if the Nepal government’s stance is posing a threat to the Indian military organizational routines then on the other hand, a number of social circles, human rights organizations and media bodies including Nepal Journalists Association (NJA) and Human Rights Journalists Association ( HURJA),Nepal have paid rich tributes to the chivalry and bravery of the Gurkha soldiers in Indian army and elsewhere and have strongly condemned the discrimination of Gurkha soldiers by anyone, anywhere under any circumstances. So much so that the President of Nepal Journalists Association Dr. Manju Ratna Sakya, while talking to media said that Gurkhas were symbol of chivalry and pride for the entire Nepali nation and their historic contributions of chivalry in the battlefields were globally acknowledged and recognized and any discrimination and insult of any Gurkha soldier was deemed to be the insult and discrimination of the entire Nepali nation.

Raj Bahadur, a veteran journalist and senior member of NJA; the neutral and highly active med body of Nepali journalists, looks at the issue from a different angle and believes that this is not the case of Gurkha soldiers only. It’s a case of the fate of Nepal as well. While a large part of Nepal is under occupation from India, voices are now gaining momentum which call for breaking the shackles of Indian hegemony in Nepal. According to the authenticated reports over 25,000 Nepalese are currently serving in the Indian Army’s seven Gurkha Rifles (1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th and 11th), each of which has five to six battalions (800 to 1,000 soldiers each), drawing basically from Rais and Limbus of Eastern Nepal and Gurungs and Magars from the West. That makes up almost 70% of the Gurkha Regiment, while “Indian domiciled Gurkhas” from places like Dehradun, Darjeeling and Dharamshala constitute the rest. There are roughly another 20,000 Gurkhas in Indian paramilitary and police forces like Assam Rifles while India is supposed to look after over 80,000 ex-servicemen, 17,000 retired Assam Rifles personnel and 11,000 widows in Nepal. The irony is that no welfare plan has ever been introduced in this direction by successive Indian governments and military leaderships, other than routine pensions and the Gurkhas are treated by every government and the military command not more than a tissue paper and that’s what is causing alarming restlessness within the ranks. Even within the Indian army there are two groups; one who are against according extra privileges to the Gurkha soldiers – of course in majority – and an insignificant group of military seniors from the West Bengal who support the Gurkhas demands and rights but are not paid any heed to.

Instead of responding to the grievances of the Nepal government generally and the Gurkhas categorically, the serving and retired Indian military top brass has started threatening the latter, directly and indirectly. One of the former Chiefs of the Indian army Gen. Ved Prakash Malik recently said, “Nepali Gurkhas have been part of the Indian Army for a very long time. If they are stopped from joining the army then the association between the armies and also the countries will be affected. Besides the large number of Nepali Gurkha soldiers, we also have a large number of pensioners in the country. We have opened hospitals and other facilities at Kathmandu and other parts of Nepal,” Malik told The Daily Mail to a query in this direction. “In some villages in eastern Nepal, about half of the families have one or more pensioners from the Indian Army”, he added. However Malik had no convincing or satisfactory reply to the issue of the plight of 11000 widows of Gurkha soldiers back in Nepal and to the issues like the Ran Bahadur Gurung episode.

However, currently the recruitment of Nepalese Gurkhas into the Indian and British Armies (which started with the Britain-India-Nepal Tripartite Agreement of 1947) is under a cloud. Based on the recommendation issued by a Parliamentary Committee on International Relations and Human Rights on 26 December 2011, Nepal has directed the ministries concerned to halt the recruitment of Gurkhas by foreign armies. This demand had first come up as a part of the 50-point agenda the Maoists submitted to the government when they went underground in 1996.A couple of years back, taking exceptional notice of discrimination of Gurkha soldiers in Indian army, Nepal’s Maoist Chief, Prachanda had very strongly objected to further recruitment of Gurkhas in Indian army and called for a comprehensive ban by Kathmandu in this direction. He told reporters that Nepali Gurkhas should not be allowed to join Indian defense forces.

Amrita Thapa of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (M) says, “Nowhere in the world do you see a system like this. Times have changed from the Empire days. The Gurkhas are taken from Nepal as raw material and used by another country to meet their purposes in exchange for money; there is no value addition. They may be given medals and honours, but it is a form of modern-day slavery that questions the sovereignty of Nepal,” says. The most alarming and dangerous thing is when surprisingly, this move finds support from the Indian Gurkhas, who have always felt sidelined. “Being Indian citizens, they feel they should be given preference over Nepalese Gurkhas,” says a senior officer in the Indian Army.

Gurkhaland is a proposed state in India demanded by the people of Darjeeling Hills and the people of Gurkha ethnic origin in Dooars in northern West Bengal on the basis of ethno-linguistic rights. The movement for Gurkhaland has gained momentum in the line of ethno-linguistic-cultural sentiment of the people who desire to identify themselves as Indian Gurkhas. Two mass movements for Gurkhaland have taken place under the GNLF (Gurkha National Liberation Front -1986–1988) and Gurkha Janmukti Morcha (2007–till date). The movement for a separate state of Gurkhaland gained serious momentum during the 1980s, when a violent agitation was carried out by Gurkha National Liberation Front (GNLF) led by Subhash Gaisingh. The agitation ultimately led to the establishment of a semiautonomous body in 1988 called the Darjeeling Gurkha Hill Council (DGHC) to govern certain areas of Darjeeling district. However, in 2007, a new party called the Gurkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM) raised the demand for a separate state of Gurkhaland once again.

It’s becoming difficult for the Indian government to handle this double edged issue; satisfying the Nepali and Indian Gurkhas as far as their demands are concerned and ensuring that out of desperation the deprived Gurkhas, serving as well as retired ones do not play into the hands of Gurkhaland movement activists. In case if it happens so then the Indian authorities are seeing a worst nightmare of their history, especially when the West Bengal belt is already a troublesome zone for India. Whatever the case may be but one thing is for sure that it can easily be read on the horizon that very soon there is no more Gurkha Battle-Cry “Ayo Gorkhali for Indian Army.

‘Solidarity Day’ Keeps the Kashmir Issue Alive

By Sajjad Shaukat
                                                                                           

Since 1990, the 5th of February is being celebrated by Pakistanis and Kashmiris as ‘Kashmir Solidarity Day’ to pay homage to Kahsmiri martyrs and to show solidarity with the freedom fighters who are demanding their legitimate right of self-determination as recognized by the UN resolutions.

On partition of India in 1947, the ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Hari Singh, in connivance with Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor-General Lord Mountbatten, had decided to join India, quite contrary to the wishes of the majority of Kashmiris.

When a contention arose between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute in1948, India took the issue to the United Nations Security Council and offered to hold a plebiscite in the held Kashmir under UN supervision. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its promise. Instead, in March 1965, the Indian Parliament passed a bill, declaring Kashmir a province of India.

While passing through various phases, the struggle of Kashmiris which has become an interaction between the Indian state terrorism led by the Indian security forces and war of liberation by the freedom fighters, keeps on going unabated.

Despite the employment of various forms of state terrorism by the Indian security forces, war of liberation intensified since 1989.

A recent report on human rights violations by Indian Army and its paramilitary forces in Indian Occupied Kashmir disclosed that since 1989, there have been deaths of 93,274 innocent Kashmiris, 6,969 custodial killings, 117,345 arrests and 105,861 destructions of houses. Indian brutal security forces have orphaned over 107, 351 children, widowed 22,728 women and gang raped 9,920 women.

Besides Human Rights Watch, in its various reports, Amnesty International has also pointed out grave human rights violations in the Indian controlled Kashmir, indicating, “The Muslim majority population in the Kashmir Valley suffers from the repressive tactics of the security forces. Under the Jammu and Kashmir Disturbed Areas Act, and the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and Public Safety Act, security forces personnel have extraordinary powers to shoot suspected persons.”

In this respect, European Union passed a resolution on May 11, 2011 about human rights abuses committed by Indian forces in the Indian held Kashmir.

Particularly in 2008, a rights group reported unmarked graves in 55 villages across the Indian occupied Kashmir. In this context, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves. Notably, foreign sources and human rights organizations including Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) have pointed out that unnamed graves include thousands of innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and paramilitary troops in the fake encounters including those who were tortured to death.

On the other side, by showing a sense of great optimism for peace of the region, Pakistan agreed with Indian old demand to strengthen the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) in order to resolve the outstanding issues, especially main dispute of Kashmir. In this respect, during the visit of India’s External Affairs Minister S M Krishna to Pakistan on September 9, 2012, Islamabad and New Delhi also signed agreements of liberalized visa regime and a memorandum of understanding on cultural exchanges in addition to agreeing on new cross-Line of Control (LoC) Confidence Building Measures related to trade and travel.

But, as part of delaying tactics for the settlement of the Kashmir dispute, Indian rulers availed various crises to suspend the process of Pak-India talks. For example, in 2002, under the pretension of terrorist attack on the Indian parliament, New Delhi postponed the process of dialogue. Again, in 2008, India suspended the ‘composite dialogue’ under the pretext of Mumbai terror attacks.

And, as part of anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan approach, leader of the BJP and Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi who is giving impetus to Hindu chauvinism not only accelerated unprovoked firing at the LoC in Kashmir including Working Boundary in Sialkot, but also cancelled the Secretary level talks with Islamabad. Now, he is raising baseless issue like Mumbai mayhem and terrorism as pre-conditions to advance the Pak-Indian dialogue. But, he ignored the fact that on July 19, 2013, Indian ex-investigating officer Satish Verma disclosed that terror-attacks in Mumbai in November 26, 2008 and assault on Indian Parliament in January 12, 2001 were carried out by the Indian government to strengthen anti-terrorism laws. Besides, Modi regime hurriedly decided to forcibly annex disputed territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), uncovering its intentions to wrap up the article 370 of the Indian constitution which ensures a special status to J&K.

In fact, India is determined to keep its hold on Kashmir. It also wants to blackmail Pakistan by stopping the flow of rivers’ water towards Pakistan as major rivers of our country take origin from the occupied Kashmir. Now, by playing double game, Indian rulers are only fulfilling the formality by showing to the US-led western countries that they are willing to settle Kashmir dispute.

Nevertheless, Indian authorities are not willing to talk with Kashmiri people on political grounds, as they have decided that only bullet is the right way of dealing with them. But, despite the employment of various patterns of military terrorism, the war of liberation by the Kashmiri people will continue untill they get their legitimate right of self-determination. If New Delhi could not suppress the movement in the past, it could also not do so in present and future.

Nonetheless, Pakistan will continue moral, diplomatic and political support of Kashmiri brethren. Hence, 5th of February is being celebrated as the ‘Kashmir Solidarity Day’ by Kashmiris, living both sides of the LoC. Besides, Pakistanis and Kashmiris across the world express solidarity with the freedom fighters of Kashmiris as a protest against Indian illegal occupation of Kashmir. It is due to their joint efforts that now, the Kashmir issue has been internationalized, and remains alive in wake of Indian delaying tactics.  

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

MQM Needs Reorganization

By Sajjad Shaukat

In the past few years, gang warfare, criminal activities and target killings have taken the lives of thousands of persons including the personnel of the Rangers and Police in Karachi. A rise of sectarian violence has also resulted into several casualties.

The present operation against terrorists, target killers, kidnappers, land mafia and “Batha khaur” (Illegal money obtainers) continues unabated, while the Rangers and Police have arrested several criminals besides capturing huge catches of arms and weapons.

The Present Government led by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif launched the targeted operation after obtaining consensus of all stakeholders like political parties, business community and members of civil society who wanted peace in Karachi. In this regard, Karachi had been handed over to the Rangers with power to take action against the culprits without any discrimination.

In this context, Chief Minister of Sindh Syed Qaim Ali shah said on September 15, 2013 that the targeted operation initiated without any discrimination and the Rangers and Sindh Police had been directed that even not to spare any person belonging to ruling party, if involved in crime.

On the other side, last year, leader of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and Governor Sindh Ishratul Ibad Khan had submitted his resignation, as MQM dubbed the operation with the pretext that it is against its office bearers. While, this party had itself supported the operation, and even demanded to hand over Karachi to Army. It was illogical reaction of the MQM which has dominating position in Karachi, and wanted to blackmail the federal government by creating hurdles in the operation.

In fact, MPA of MQM, Nadeem Hashmi was arrested on September 10, 2013 owing to firing at a police mobile in the Haideri area of the city in which the two policemen were killed. In the same month, some MQM workers were arrested, who were found involved in criminal activities, while the founder and leader of MQM Altaf Hussain had condemned the raid on MQM’s offices.

Recently, the paramilitary force proved that the MQM was behind the Baldia Town factory fire in which 250 persons were killed. On February 8, this year, the Rangers also arrested a senior MQM worker namely Rafiq Rajput who not only ran a team of ‘hit men’ but was also involved in the May 12, 2007 carnage in the Karachi.

On February 10, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan disclosed that MQM Chief Altaf Hussain based in London has let loose a “reign of terror” in Karachi. He elaborated, “I am absolutely clear that the MQM is responsible for bringing Karachi to a stage where nobody is safe at the hands of the party’s armed wing. Now with the revelation of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report in which Mr Hussain’s party has been held responsible for the killing of over 250 Baldia Town factory workers…the responsibility now lies with the federal government to take action against the perpetrators of the tragic incident.”

The MQM responded with shrewd tactics, with the Rabita Committee, taking the PTI chairman to task over his remarks against the MQM chief—and held a rally in Karachi in this respect.

Earlier, Imran Khan even went to London and approached the Scotland Yard for action against Altaf Hussain. However, Imran Khan also once again pledged to take Altaf Hussain to the British court, as he is also behind the killing of PTI’s leader Zahra Shahid and journalist Wali Babar in Karachi.

However, in response, Altaf Hussain who had earlier blamed Pak Army and Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) for arrest and harassment of MQM workers in order to conceal criminal acts of his party members—in a telephonic address, also made some derogatory remarks against PTI spokesperson Shireen Mazari and other women-members of the party. But, MQM Chief Altaf Hussain on February 10 apologized to Shireen Mazari for his insulting remarks.

Despite it, PTI decided on February 11 that the party leadership will not take back its letter to the British High Commission, urging to take action against MQM leader Altaf Hussain for “using British territory to incite people to violence in Pakistan.”

Nevertheless, the real character of the MQM Chief Altaf Hussain needs analysis. In this context, it is notable that sometimes, he blames Pak Army and ISI for harassing his party workers, calling the residents of Karachi to defend themselves, sometimes, he admires these security agencies, sometimes, he threatens to separate Karachi from the federation, sometimes, he shows a strong sense of patriotism for Pakistan, sometimes, he suspends the membership of his party’s committee or sector incharges, sometimes, he restores the same, sometimes, he submits his own resignations, sometimes, he takes it back, sometimes, he instructs his party to join Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, and sometimes, Pakistan Peoples Party, especially when these parties are in government. He also blackmails these mainstream parties for the advantages of MQM at the cost of peace in Karachi.

In fact, full of confusion, the contradictory statements of Altaf Hussain including his changing stance display his real face, as he wants to continue armed wing of the MQM.

It is mentionable that Zulfiqar Mirza, Sindh Home Minister and Senior Vice President of the then ruling party—Pakistan Peoples Party claimed on April 9, 2011 that he had been relieved from his ministry owing to pressure from the government’s coalition partner, the MQM.

Mirza revealed that the issue of target killing and extortion was just a ruse to remove him from his post. He added that the police had arrested the murderers of Geo News reporter Wali Khan Babar—the real “culprits belong to the MQM.”

It is worth-mentioning that in June 3, 2014, Altaf Hussain was arrested by Scotland Yard Police in London. London Police and agencies were holding investigation against him in three cases including money laundering, after recovery of 7 Lac pounds from Altaf Hussain home and office in London—controversial speeches from London and Imran Farooq murder case. In this regards, in his article, Salman Mugsi wrote on August 27, 2011, “Altaf Hussain designated Waseem Akhtar in Karachi to arrange for the murder of Imran Farooq. Waseem Akhtar gave this task to Khalid Shameem and Hammad Siddiqui, who are incharge of militant wing of the MQM in Karachi. Khalid Shameem picked two boys from the student wing of MQM, APMSO and arranged students-visas for them for England. These boys reached London, followed Imran Farooq for few days and noted his routines and then carried out his assassination according to the plan.”

As regards “Batha khauri”, everyone in Karachi knows that MQM has been collecting this illegal money from the local businessmen, owners of the factories and shops, who are afraid of threats or terror-related actions of this party’s the militant wing. While a majority of the innocent people of the city and followers of the MQM do not know the malpractices and criminal activities of this political party and are being misguided by their old leaders who act upon the directions of Altaf Hussain.

The loyal Pakistanis, living in Karachi must know that Karachi is Pakistan’s largest port and financial hub with the largest commercial markets, collecting 70 per cent of the country’s tax revenue. So, besides causing unrest in the city, creating instability in Pakistan, another aim of the MQM is to cripple the economy of the city which is intermittently brought to a halt with shut-down strikes—many shops including other business centers are forced to be closed. And, old leadership of MQM misguides the people by propagating that national institutions are not made to develop other areas of Pakistan like Karachi.

Nevertheless, MQM Chief Altaf Hussain who has also been creating prejudices through his misperceptions by inciting the residents of Karachi including moderate members of his party—termed the targeted operation in Karachi as replay of 1992, alleging that the establishment is once again doing the “ethnic cleansing of Muhajirs.” He further asked the party workers to physically get ready to face state oppression.

In September, 2013, Attorney General submitted a government report before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, disclosing that Mohajir Republic Army was present in Karachi. For face-saving, MQM denied its truth, terming it as ridiculous, while others demanded to launch a targeted operation against criminal gangs using the Rangers and Police.

Nonetheless, understanding the ground realties, and for restoration of peace in Karachi, the residents of the city including moderate elements must make efforts for reorganization of MQM by replacing the old leaders like Altaf Hussain, Farooq Sattar etc. with the new ones. For the purpose, all the peace-loving segments of society of Karachi belonging to MQM will have to take bold decision jointly, without being afraid of MQM’s militant wing.  

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

US Backs Indian Hegemony in Asia

                                        

By Sajjad Shaukat

International politics is passing through transitory period, as rapidly developing geo-political differences among global powers in Asia show that the next Cold War is likely to be waged between the Russia-China alliance and the US-led bloc in Asia, while Pakistan has already become its arena.

In this regard, US still backs Indian hegemony in Asia to counterbalance China. During American President Barack Obama’s visit to India, on January 25, this year, the US and India announced a breakthrough on a pact which would allow American companies to supply New Delhi with civilian nuclear technology. On November 2, 2010, US agreed to sell India the most expensive—the new F-35 fighter jets including US F-16 and F-18 fighters, C-17 and C-130 aircraft, radar systems, Harpoon weapons etc. Besides acquisition of arms and weapons from other western countries—especially Israel, America is a potential military supplier to India. US also pressurized International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers Group to grant a waiver to New Delhi for obtaining civil nuclear trade on larger scale. However, US President Obama also announced $4 billion of new initiatives aimed at boosting trade and investment ties as well as jobs in India.

In this respect, Indian Foreign Mistier Sushma Swaraj was on a maiden visit to China since January 31, 2015. Along with sideline commitments, she attended 13th trilateral meeting between China, India and Russia held in Beijing on February 2, 2015. She was having series of meetings with Chinese leaders in the backdrop of recently concluded visit of US President Obama to India.

In the joint communiqué of their trilateral meeting, the foreign ministers of Russia, India and China have emphasized cooperation to maintain international and regional peace and stability and promoting global economic growth and prosperity. But with the support of America, New Delhi has been playing double game with Beijing and Moscow.

The warming up of Indo-US relations, especially in the nuclear domain poses a direct threat to Chinese national interests, and both China and Russia feel uneasy over Indian overtures towards US. Consequently, as part of duplicity, Indian leadership is launching intense diplomatic activities to conciliate Beijing and Moscow that their overtures to US will not be at the cost of bilateral relations with Russia and China.

In fact, US in the garb of this controversial deal is enticing New Delhi to assume anti-China role and would have footprints in India to eavesdrop Chinese activities. China is apprehensive about the emerging threat, as the intent of President Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi was quite clear, while mentioning about free sea lanes and air passages in the South China Sea. Russia, however, remained quiet over Obama’s comments at a press conference in Delhi slamming President Vladimir Putin’s role in Ukraine.

It is notable that in 2013, during his visit to New Delhi, and after meeting Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang said that the two emerging Asian economies were going to enhance cooperation. No doubt, Beijing wants cordial relationship with New Delhi. But, India which apparently emphasizes mutual cooperation with China, showing lethargic approach in the solution of border dispute, has been increasing military build near the Chinese border, coupled with secret support to the Tibetan insurgents as part of its overt and covert maneuvering.

In the recent, part, tension arose between India and China when Indian army erected a military camp in Chumar Sector of Ladakh at the Line of Actual Control (LAC)-disputed border, situated between the two countries. Similarly, Indian soldiers crossed over the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir on January 6, 2012 and attacked a Pakistani check post, killing one Pakistani soldier. Afterwards, Indian troops shot dead more Pakistani soldiers on the LoC.

It is mentionable that under the Pak-China pretext, Indian ex-Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, revealed on December 29, 2010 that the Indian army “is now revising its five-year old doctrine” and is preparing for a “possible two-front war with China and Pakistan.”

Particularly, fast growing economic power of China coupled with her rising strategic relationship with the Third World has irked the eyes of Americans and Indians. Owing to jealousy, America desires to make India a major power to counterbalance China in Asia.

Besides, it is due to the fact Pakistan has a strategic geo-political location at the corridor of world’s major maritime oil supply lines, and has close proximity to oil rich Central Asian countries. Its location could influences Central Asia, South Asia and the Middle East. Besides, Balochistan’s mineral resources and geo-strategic location with deep Gwadar seaport, entailing Islamabad’s close ties with Beijing pinches the eyes of the US, India, Israel and some western countries.  Beijing has already invested billion of dollars to develop Gwadar seaport. It is owing to multiple strategic designs that the US backs India in destabilizing both Pakistan and Iran. Notably, by rejecting US growing pressure, on March 11, 2013, Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari inaugurated the gas pipeline project with Iran.

Taking cognizance of the enemy’s intensions, during his trip to Beijing, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang signed eight agreements on July 5, 2013 in various fields. The most important one envisages the establishment of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) between deep Gwadar seaport of Balochistan and the historic Silk Road city in western regions-Xinjiang of China—connecting to Gilgit-Baltistan through Khunjerab Pass. Beijing has also offered to build an international airport, while the roads infrastructure in Gwadar would be connected with the communication network of rest of the country to facilitate transportation of goods. By rejecting US growing pressure, Pakistan has handed over the control of Gwader seaport to China.

While, in May, 2013, a day before Chinese Premier Li Keqiang arrived in Islamabad; Chinese engineers being driven through Clifton Block-1 in Karachi escaped a major bomb attack. As regards anti-China diplomacy, Afghanistan has become a hub from where external secret agencies like Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad have been assisting subversive activities in other parts of Pakistan—especially in Balochistan through their affiliated militant groups at the cost of Pakistan, China and Iran. In the past few years, they abducted and killed many Chinese and Iranian nationals in Pakistan.

It worth-mentioning that during China’s visit of Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff Gen. Raheel Sharif, on January 25, this year, China’s Vice Chairman of Central Military Commission Gen. Fan has assured that China will assist Pakistan in every challenge.

Taking note of US supported Indian plans; Pakistan has also cultivated its relationship with the Russian Federation. In 2012, Moscow and Islamabad agreed to enhance bilateral relations in diverse fields. Addressing a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar in Islamabad on October 4, 2012, Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov said that the two countries agreed that they had common goals on regional and current global challenges. Lavrov stated that Russia supports Pakistan’s stance on Afghanistan by pointing out that any solution imposed from outside would not work there.

In 2010, the then Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin publicly endorsed Pakistan’s bid to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which includes the former Central Asian republics as permanent members. Putin also remarked that Pakistan was a very important partner in South Asia and the Muslim world for Russia.

The then President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari participated in the 12th summit of the SCO held in Beijing. While addressing the summit, hinting out towards Indo-US secret designs, Chinese president Hu Jintao said, “The international situation has been complex, thus bringing many uncertainties to the regional situation.” He explained that only when SCO member states remain united can they effectively cope with emerging challenges. President Putin said, “The SCO should enhance security cooperation.”

In fact, China, Pakistan, Russia and Iran know that after the withdrawal of most of the NATO troops from Afghanistan, the US-led NATO has been maintaining military presence in that country, having eyes on the energy resources of Central Asia, while encouraging Indian role in Afghanistan.

It is noteworthy that on July 20, 2011, while hinting towards Pak-China ties, the then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged India to be more assertive in Asia, saying that as American ally, the country should play more of a leadership role. She explained, “India has the potential to positively shape the future of the Asia-Pacific.”  

Nonetheless, US approach of backing Indian role in Asia would cause imbalance in the region with serious implications for global security, and will embolden India to attain her   hegemonic designs at the cost of modern world trends such as peaceful settlement of disputes, economic development and disarmament.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com