Trading with Pak -- When hope is a policy
March 28, 2012

The current discourse is that India should encourage trade with Pakistan as this would lead
to better relations and eventual normalisation of relations between the two countries. This reasoning is not borne by empirical facts. Trade creates profits, wealth, inequalities, vested interests and heartburn but does not solve political disputes.

There is no denying that Japan-China (US $ 300 billion) and China-US (US $ 800 billion) relations in trade are booming but political rivalry bordering on animosity and hostility is well known. Pak-China trade relations are pathetic (US $ 8 billion) yet the political-military
relations are higher that the skies and deeper than the oceans. Disillusionment: The current mantra is that trade between India and Pakistan is the magic key that will transform
India-Pakistan relations and lead to eternal peace

Our trade with China is burgeoning but has it solved or even looks remotely possible that this will solve the border problem? On the other hand, trade imbalances such as ours with China and the content of the trade have inbuilt characteristics of a future conflict. Wars have been fought globally over trade and resources for centuries and continue till today. Europeans had to go through two bloody wars after years of colonial battles to seek economic advantages over
each other .

The mood and the rhetoric on the Pakistani street gives little scope for comfort with little evidence that the Pakistani ruling establishment has undergone a permanent change of heart. The strident anti-India and anti-Hindu attitude by organisations like the Difa-e-Pakistan is testimony to the fact that the military-jihadi complex is strong and that this is the line
the rulers wish to follow. This is their first option and also the fall back
position, depending upon the circumstances.

In India we continue to delude ourselves. The current mantra is that trade between India and Pakistan is the magic key that will transform India-Pakistan relations and lead to eternal
peace. Once again hope has become policy. Arguments are now being discovered to
buttress this hope.

The only difference today is that Pakistan, is in the middle of an economic slump. It faces an acute power and energy shortage, a low growth rate and rising deficit, high inflation and low investment, would want to temporarily shed the Kashmir-first slogan and get over its economic plight before reverting to form.

We are now rationalising why it is not necessary for India to insist on a reciprocal MFN (sabse pasandida mulk) from Pakistan because that country has compulsions. As long as they move to reduce the negative list India can live with it, is the argument. Issues like transit trade can also wait. Further to attract Pakistani business and encourage it to perform better India should be able to sell power and petroleum products to Pakistan.

The economic argument is that it is more viable (read profitable) in some situations to sell electricity to Pakistan rather than to a state within India. The offer to sell gas that we import through our terminals in Gujarat and give to Lahore via Bhatinda despite our own shortages, is
misplaced generosity. It is therefore extremely illogical and we should instead be building our strategic reserves for the difficult times ahead following reduction of imports from Iran. We pretend that the wheat we sent to Afghanistan via Karachi did not originate in India and Pakistan pretends it has given transit to Afghanistan and not India.

There are other issues of implementation that would have to be resolved. What would happen to the visa regime - security related issues relating to destinations, frequency, ports of entry and exit, mode of travel are some of them. Pakistan has traditionally sought parity with India on almost every issue; the most recent being the Indo-US nuclear deal. Pakistani leaders forget that in international relations only sovereignty is generally, though not always, equal; military strength and economic power are not. Pakistan has used the jihadi and nuclear options as
force equalisers. This attitude has not changed nor will it. Pakistan will not be able to accept that trade between India and Pakistan will be weighted heavily in India's favour.

That being so, it will not be long before the Army, the main 'stakeholder' in the India policy -changes its mind and resorts to jihadi economics. It may be beneficial to trade, it is also desirable to be realistic.

Wrote this for Midday Mumbai

PAKISTAN-THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK- THE DIFA-E-PAKISTAN

March 24, 2012

They are there on web pages, on FaceBook and Twitter and, using the latest technology, wish to push their society back to the Dark Ages. This is the creed of the newly formed Difa-e-Pakistan Committee –Defence of Pakistan Committee (DPC). The Vision Statement of the DPC on its website “Will You Defend Pakistan” says:-
“We envisage defending Pakistan, the only ideological nation carved in the name of Islam with our wealth and Lives (sic). Pakistan stands as the beacon of the unity of Ummah, on ‘La Illaha Ilallah’ (There is no God but Allah) the bedrock of our faith.”

The defence of Pakistan has to be arranged through jihad, the fundamental doctrine of the DPC’s main component, the much older and by far the biggest organisation, Lashkar e Tayyaba (LeT). Religious indoctrination is the key; it is quite professional and extensive. Amongst other literature, the LeT also has a 22 stanza anthem on jihad and is often recited at training centres of the LeT. The first stanza is

“Jihad jari rahega ta qayamat
Jihad hargiz naheen rukega”

Translated it means - Jihad will continue till the Day of Judgement; Jihad will never stop. The LeT refrain has been constant. Among the slogans heard in 2009 have been “India ka aik ilaj, al jihad al jihad”,

The ostensibly banned LeT has been consistent in its hatred for the last two decades. What Hafiz Saeed said in 2007 following the Hyderabad bomb blasts in August 2007 was not different from what the LeT’s spokesman Abdullah Muntazir had repeatedly from at least 1994 or what is currently being said. The theme is Pakistan must reclaim Muslim areas like Kashmir, Hyderabad, Junagadh and Bengal.
Last April Saeed had declared at a funeral prayer meeting
“Muslims in Hyderabad and Junagarh who want independence from the oppression of Hindus” should learn from the struggle in Kashmir.

Arrested in early 2002 following America pressure, Hafeez Saeed walked a free man in November that year. He was rearrested in December 2008 following the LeT led Mumbai carnage to be released in February 2009 when the court declared his detention a violation of the constitution and the law of the country.
While the LeT began to keep a low profile the mother organisation the Jamaat ut Dawa continued to be active. However, around the same time (2007-2011) the regime had other problems.

The Army had begun to lose some of its sheen following terrorist attacks on its establishment during Musharraf’s time, followed by anti-state and Army activities of the Tehrik e Taliban. The US Special Forces attack on the Abbotabad hideout of Osama bin Laden’s safe house on May 6 which killed him was a major embarrassment for the Pakistan Army. Worse, this was followed by the revenge attack on the PNS Mehran naval base in Karachi a few weeks later and then the US helicopter raid on Pak Army check post in November killing 24 Pakistan Army personnel in Salala in FATA leading to the stoppage of NATO trucks into Afghanistan. US Pak relations already were in a trough following the Raymond Davis incident and the Memogate affair.

It was then that the Difa-e-Pakistan was born. On its website it says
“..this was the right time when people of Pakistan woke up to the occasion and the under the chairman ship of Maulana Samiul Haq and Professor Hafiz Saeed a magnanimous movement was launched which also saw General Hamid Gul, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed and many more renowned leaders as its pioneers... for a legitimate and non-political cause which only envisioned to defend Pakistan...”

Leaders like Maulana Ahmed Ludhianvi, of the Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wal-Jamaat (ASWJ-a breakaway from the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan), Abdul Rehman Makki of the JuD, Liaqat Baloch and Munnawar Husain of the Jamat e Islami and others from the Jamaat Ulema Pakistan, making a total of 36 organisations that vowed to defend Pakistan. The reasoning was that they opposed granting of MFN to India, revenge for the ‘atrocities‘ in Kashmir, Gujarat, Hyderabad; Indian interference in Balochistan and ‘NWFP’ (sic), opposed India’s ‘Cold Start’ doctrine. They also offered to protect the Pakistan economy from Indian depredations. The DPC also intends to thwart what it described as:-

“US desire to leave India in a position where it can dominate the region and serve the interests of Zionist controlled world if not only the US.” Quite clearly this is LeT/JuD speak.

The Difa-e-Pakistan which includes members of banned organisations, seems extremely confident of itself and since December 2011 has held huge rallies in Lahore, Karachi, Quetta, Rawalpindi and Peshawar. The black and white flags of the JuD were the most prominent at these rallies. Three DPC leaders, Hafiz Saeed, Maulana Ahmed Ludhianvi and Dr Khadem Hussain Dhillon (both from Sipah Sahaba) were barred from the Islamabad rally although they were allowed to go there. The slogans were
“Difa-e-Pakistan jihad fi sabil allah se hoga” that is - the defence of Pakistan lies in jihad. Incidentally the motto of the Pakistan Army given by Gen Zia ul Haq is also Jihad fi sabil allah which has not changed since.
Hafiz Saeed in his trademark speech said:-

“Pakistan is facing very severe threats from both sides – India is one side, America and NATO forces on the other and the agenda of both is Pakistan. We want to send a message to them that the defence of Pakistan is uppermost in our minds” adding that Pakistan government’s plans to greater market access to Indian goods was a conspiracy to destroy Pakistan’s economy. He said that India was a greater threat than the US. On Afghanistan, Saeed had declared that

“This is America’s war and we only want to fight Pakistan’s war.”

The strength of these so called banned outfits who are constituents of the DPC can be seen from a recent incident. On March 9 BBC’s Urdu language service reported that the ASWJ had been secretly banned through a secret circular in February 2012. As soon as this leaked and the Urdu website of the AWSJ published there was tremendous pressure on the Government from Lashkar e Jhangvi, ASWJ and SSP so that three days later, on March 12, Interior Minister Rehman Malik described reports of a ban as baseless. All these three rabidly Sunni and anti Shia organisations – LeJ, ASWJ and SSP remain organisationally act vein Pakistan and use the Internet extensively.
Supporting the DPC is a website called “Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz” (May God Protect Pakistan). Those behind this are persons like Zaid Hamid, Shireen Mazari and Hamid Gul. This only embellishes the description as an ultra-nationalist, anti-American, anti-Indian and pro-Khilafat organisation. Its leanings become transparent when Zaid Hamid says:-

“If the politicians are for sale and hostile powers are ready to buy them, to hell with democracy. Let the country be ruled by benevolent dictator on the model of the Khilafat e Rashida. Till that time, the army and ISI must make sure that these treacherous politicians do not sell the country to hostile powers.”

There are many who believe that this new organisation has unofficial blessings if not active support from the ‘establishment. ’ The Army has often used religion and ‘military-mullah’ nexus in the past to counter nationalist movements or to keep democratic parties in check. Ayub Khan used the Jamaat-e-Islami against his political opponents; later Yahya Khan deployed them in the then East Pakistan. And of course Gen Zia refined this into a fine aggressive art form. Later, Gen Aslam Beg conjured up the IJI (Islami Jamhoori Ittehad) to bolster its protege Nawaz Sharif against Benazir Bhutto whom the Army did not trust. An Army worried at with its dwindling fund goodwill and command at a time when coups have become unpopular in the West, had to work out other arrangements for maintaining its primacy.

The sudden surge of the political green horn despite years in the field, Imran Khan and the cobbling together of the Difa-e-Pakistan may have been a coincidence but on the other hand may not have been a coincidence. Imran Khan’s right wing tendencies at home are barely concealed from the discerning but he is someone the Army led establishment would be comfortable with – he is a Pathan from Lahore, sufficiently right but not fundamental in the mullah sense, could be acceptable in Washington DC, considered close to the Army and therefore hopefully pliable. What is more important, Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehrik Insaaf party was unlikely ever to be able to form a government on its own. Imran Khan himself did not participate in the Lahore rally of the DPC but endorsed the gathering by sending his message and a messenger to participate.

There are many purposes of organising the DPC. A consolidation of the ultra-right forces reinforces Pakistani nationalism in religious terms; the argument being that Pakistan is equal to Islam and to criticise Islam is to criticise Pakistan and vice versa. It is designed to tell the US that this - the DPC mindset - is the possible alternative to the present dispensation and that the military has the backing of the mullahs. It is possible that the Army needs the support of mullahs like Sami ul Haq and Hafiz Saeed who have close contacts with the Tehrik Taliban Pakistan, in its negotiations with them. Described by some observers as a ‘circus’ the DPC is also meant to frighten political parties from getting too close to the US and India especially on trade relations with India, to generally frighten the US through hatred for Israel to extracting concessions and largesse as before. Fear of the unkown provides an impetus to organise vetoes from time to time.

Was written for ANI and has reappeared elsewhere too.

India's Human Capital Formation
March 15, 2012

Security is a term that is viewed differently by most of us most of the time. From the basic definition that perhaps seeks only a padlocked house to the most elaborate definitions that
include all aspects of human life and that of a nation. In the present context where India seeks greatness and its role in global affairs the larger definition is relevant. A state must also provide security through effective law and order to its citizens. It must also provide appropriate education, health and employment for its citizens whose quality of life must continually improve along with complete governance that ensures basic freedoms and justice.

Nations become great through their own efforts and greatness cannot be had free. No other nation will grant it to us. Military might and economic power will bestow regional dominance. But this alone will not sustain the country unless we go beyond electoral opportunism, limit dependence on external sources for the defence of the nation and become a manufacturing nation and not just one that provides goods and services. External greatness will be attained only
through internal cohesion of this gigantic effort not through seeking its membership of the UNSC or being able to dine under Baccarat chandeliers with other rich leaders from richer countries. A stray Lamborghini that we see merely expresses economic disparity, not well being

Ultimately it is the quality of the man or woman that handles the business of building a nation which matters most. It is people working in their own area of expertise, skill and attainments that will determine the kind of cohesiveness that these skills bring to the nation which will help it attain greatness. It is not correct to measure greatness in term of GDP in a country that fairs poorly in all Human Development Indicators.

There is a long list of prerequisites that will have to put together to help us get where we want to be. Apart from the degradation of politics and institutions, the criminal political bureaucratic and entrepreneur nexus, which allows for continued oppression of the underprivileged that sustains Naxalism and degradation of the environment. It is this lack of political cohesion and decline of values which will affect the well being of the future generations.

When we look at the problems and advantages of the youth bulge of our population we find that we are going to have a young potentially employable and socially productive population which could be a boon to our growth story. Cold statistics however tell their own story.

Dedicated and qualified teachers are difficult to find in India, especially in the rural areas, 25 per cent of primary school teachers are absent according to World bank figures, and 90 per cent of children in villages work mostly in agriculture. Our starting blocks in other aspects are weak too given our standards of illiteracy and malnutrition. By 2030 there will be 1.53 billion of us, with 962 million employable in the age group of 15-59 years and of which 423 million will be unemployed.

A demographic dividend from this will be available only if there is no mismatch between labour skills required and jobs available in the market. And to judge how far behind we are in providing quality education is that we have only 348 universities for a billion plus population as compared to 4,000 in Japan for its population of 127 million and 3,650 in the US for its population of 301 million.

Will we have adequate jobs for all these young by then? Will we be able to equip them with the requisite and varied skills that will be required at a time when technology would have advanced
exponentially? If we continue to churn out semi literates and mass produced graduates with non employable skills and exploding expectations, we are going to have a revolution on our hands.

Education -- from primary to doctoral and everything in between -- is far too important to be left to quotas and road side fly-by-night operations. Instead, we need a gigantic, national, all inclusive
effort by the government and the corporate sector who are stake holders too. Unless this happens with political cohesion and a vision that looks beyond survival politics, our dreams will sour.

Source Midday, Mumbai, March 15, 2012

The Baloch battlefield


March 7, 2012

From the West’s perspective, while Syria has to be destabilised to get at Iran, Balochistan must be kept stable in order to keep Pakistan happy

.The killing of Zamur Domki along with her 13-year-old daughter Jaana on January 31 in Karachi was a new low in that violence-prone city. It may have been routinely described as yet another criminal act except that Zamur was the granddaughter of slain Baloch leader Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti and the sister of Brahamdagh Bugti. Brahamdagh is wanted by the Pakistani authorities for rebelling and waging war against Pakistan. This brutal murder was a ruthless message to Brahamdagh. There was immediate retaliation by the Baloch Liberation Army, which killed 15 Frontier Corps men and injured 12 others in attacks on four posts.

Balochistan has been in perpetual revolt ever since Pakistan became independent — there were four other campaigns after 1948. The current rebellion gained momentum after the assassination of Nawab Bugti in August 2006 and the murder of Balaach Marri, son of Nawab Khair Bux Marri, one of the two surviving leaders of the famous 1973 Baloch uprising. The other survivor is Sardar Ataullah Khan Mengal. Among younger leaders of a possible Baloch revolt, Brahamdagh Bugti lives in exile in Switzerland, while Hyrbair Marri (Khair Bux’s son) is in London. But there is no totem pole in Balochistan around which the Baloch nationalists can rally.

The constant Baloch grievances against Islamabad have ranged from deprivation of profits from its contribution to the national exchequer to inequitable sharing of the province’s abundant natural resources with the Baloch people (which are siphoned off, mainly to Punjab). The Baloch also resent the fact that they are outnumbered by outsiders (mostly Punjabis), and that prime arable land is being parcelled out to these “outsiders” and the Army, which, in many cases, is double jeopardy. The nationalists probably echo Ataullah Mengal’s warning last year — “Balochistan will not remain with you.”
There are other problems for the Baloch. The Baloch lack centralised leadership in the campaign for their rights. There are as many as six Baloch insurgent organisations that have been banned by Islamabad, including the Baloch Liberation Army, Balochistan Republican Army and Baloch Liberation Front. In the absence of reliable data, conservative estimates assess that there have been at least 180 attacks since 2005.

While the West may fret over events in Syria, very little attention has been paid to what has been happening in Balochistan. From the West’s perspective, while Syria has to be destabilised to get at Iran, Balochistan must be kept stable in order to keep Pakistan happy and maybe helpful in Afghanistan. Balochistan provides access to Kandahar and borders the predominantly Sunni province of Sistan-Balochistan in Iran. It is not in America’s interest, therefore, to make any noise about killings and disappearances in Balochistan. The province is thrice the size of Syria in area, located on the borders of Iran and astride the Strait of Oman, and not far from the Strait of Hormuz. Balochistan was a base for drones, and Pakistan remains far too important for America’s global calculations to allow anything more than congressional hearings. The deliberations of the US House foreign affairs committee on February 8 upset the Pakistan government as much as it elated the Baloch nationalists. The US simultaneously has been making moves to “normalise” relations with Islamabad.

There is also considerable long-term Chinese interest in having access to the port of Gwadar, which would shorten the route for China from and for its African and Gulf interests to Xinjiang. The Chinese have considerable interests in the Saindak copper mines, in mineral resources, Sui gas and the possibility of participating in the Iran-Pakistan pipeline if and when it materialises. The Iranians have alleged that Mujahideen-e-Khalq as well as Jundullah are sectarian Sunni-US proxies operating from Balochistan against Iranian interests.

Having learnt from the tactics used in the Arab Spring protests last year, the Baloch nationalists — many of whom are outside Pakistan — have been using Internet platforms such as Twitter to spread their message rather effectively. Almost every day one reads about killings, abductions and kidnappings both by the state and the nationalists; there are reports of explosions but very little is reported outside the province. There have been a few brave articles in Pakistan’s English-language press, but the Baloch anger at years of discrimination, deprivation and suppression — at the hands of Pakistan’s Punjabis — continues to manifest itself.

The reaction from Islamabad to all this has been predictable. It has been a policy of kill and dump bodies of young Baloch nationalists as a warning to others. Human Rights Watch, in its 2012 World Report, documented that 200 Baloch nationalists had disappeared or were killed in the previous year. The Asian Human Rights Commission report says at least 56 bullet-ridden bodies of “disappeared persons” had been found in Balochistan. An estimated 200 extra-judicial killings had taken place since 2010. There were a total of 711 killings in 2011 — comprising 122 SF personnel, 47 militants and 542 civilians.
The situation is further complicated because, along with Baloch insurgents, there are Pushtun Islamists and sectarian mafia. The Quetta Shura of Mullah Omar, which is present in the midst of a strong Afghan Pushtun population, is another complication and cause for ethnic tension. Sectarian militant outfits like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have repeatedly targeted the Shias. It is suspected that this has the blessings of Islamabad/Rawalpindi. Over 50 Hindus have also been kidnapped for ransom in Balochistan in a bid to discredit the nationalists, which gives a clear indication of the lawlessness in the province. And last year around 12,000 Persian-speaking Hazaras had to leave Quetta, fearing for their lives. All this is a form of Wahabi ethnic cleansing.

The best way out for Pakistan would be to negotiate with Baloch leaders in good faith; but possibly it feels the jackboot is the better option. The world will continue to ignore Balochistan, while the Baloch will continue their lonely struggle, which the Pakistan government will try to suppress through force, and innocents will continue to die.


The Asia Age New Delhi and the Deccan Chronicle March 7 2012