Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by Fiona in Middle East on July 15th, 2017
Over the past two years, Qatar has conducted over $86 billion worth of transactions in Chinese Yuan and signed several economic agreements with China.
Is the Saudi-led crackdown on Qatar a Washington manoeuvre to nix the Emirate’s attempts to sell oil and gas in Chinese yuan, via Iran, undermining the hegemony of the US dollar that has been the international standard since the Nixon Presidency?
America’s hostility to Iraq and Libya was rooted in their attempts to sell oil in currencies other than the US dollar, and led to regime change in both nations, along with the brutal deaths of Saddam Hussain and Muammar Gaddafi, respectively.
Observers have long opined that the “real” reason for the war in Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s decision, announced in October 2000, to price Iraqi oil in the new currency of the European Union, rather than in US dollars, “the currency of the enemy”. It is well known that unless the price of oil is denominated in dollars, Washington cannot run its huge balance of payments deficits, as other nations hold accounts and reserves in dollars only to pay for oil.
According to a Guardian report of 2003, Iraq made handsome profits in selling oil in euros, until the US invasion (March 2003) forced oil sales back to the dollar. Prior to that, from 2001, under the UN oil-for-food program, almost all Iraqi oil exports were paid in euro and roughly 26 billion euros (£17.4 bn) was paid for 3.3 billion barrels of oil into an escrow account in New York. It earned a higher rate of interest in euros than it would have in dollars.
According to a Guardian report 2003, Iraq made handsome profits in selling oil in euros, until the US invasion forced oil sales back to the dollar.
Wikileaks has since revealed Hillary Clinton’s emails which show that the US and French President Nicolas Sarkozy were keen to attack Libya’s Gaddafi to scuttle his plan to unite Africa under a single gold-backed currency (African gold dinar) to be used to buy and sell oil on the global markets.
France moved UN Security Council Resolution 1973 for a no-fly zone over Libya, ostensibly to protect civilians. But an April 2011 email to Hillary Clinton, titled “France’s client and Qaddafi’s gold”, exposes Nicholas Sarkozy as saying for Gaddafi’s blood to obtain Libyan oil (French company, Total), ensure France’s regional influence, boost Sarkozy’s domestic reputation (for re-election; he lost), assert French military power, and curb Gaddafi’s sway over “Francophone Africa” (French colonial Africa).
Iraq made handsome profits in selling oil in euros, until the US invasion (March 2003) forced oil sales back to the dollar.
The email deals lengthily with the enormous threat that Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves, estimated at “143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver,” posed to the French franc that was a leading African currency.
The “confidential” reason behind the war was that “This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).”
The 2 April 2011 email to Hillary Clinton (UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05779612 Date: 12/31/2015) reports a high-ranking official on the National Libyan Council as stating that factions have developed within the Council, partly due to French cultivation of clients among the rebels.
General Abdel Fatah Younis is said to be the leading figure closest to the French, and Younis has told his clique on the NLC that the French have promised to provide military trainers and arms.
There is some impatience over the pace of delivery, and the men understand that France has clear economic interests at stake. Sarkozy’s occasional emissary, the intellectual Bernard Henri-Levy, is not respected by the pro-France NLC action.
The email notes that Qaddafi has immense financial resources. On April 2, 2011, sources with access to advisors to Saif al-Islam Qaddafi revealed in strictest confidence that while the freezing of Libya’s foreign bank accounts did affect Muammar Qaddafi, his ability to equip and maintain his armed forces and intelligence services was intact. These sources said that Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold and a similar amount in silver.
The recently promoted Saudi crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman, is reputed to be the prime mover behind the attempt to isolate Qatar.
In late March 2011, these stocks were moved to SABHA (south-west in the direction of the Libyan border with Niger and Chad), from the vaults of the Libyan Central Bank in Tripoli.
This gold was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden dinar and was to offer the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc.
Seen in this context, Qatar could be the next country to face a Syrian or Yemen-style attempt at regime change. It is pertinent that on June 5, soon after the visit of US President Donald Trump to Saudi Arabia, Riyadh led other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in an attempt to browbeat Qatar through a list of 13 demands that Doha must comply with, or face unspecified action. Most western capitals agree that the demands are difficult to accept.
Briefly, these include shutting down Al-Jazeera and its affiliate stations, and other news outlets funded by Qatar such as Middle East Eye; curbing diplomatic ties with Iran and expelling members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (who are not present in Qatar); terminating the Turkish military base in Qatar; consenting to monthly audits for a year after accepting the demands, and aligning with other Gulf and Arab countries militarily, politically, socially, and economically. As of now, Qatar has rejected the demands as unreasonable.
The recently promoted Saudi crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman, is reputed to be the prime mover behind the attempt to isolate Qatar. The aim is to curtail Qatar’s links with Iran, Riyadh’s main regional rival. But this is not practical for Qatar as it derives much of its wealth from the offshore South Pars natural gas field, which it shares with Iran. This relationship is why Iran, like Turkey, immediately sent Doha food supplies after the Saudi blockaded the only land route to the emirate.
It is pertinent that Qatar, like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, had initially wanted to build a natural gas pipeline to Europe, through Syria, against the wishes of President Assad. This prompted the Syrian Alawi/Shia government to urge Shia-majority Iran and Iraq to build a pipeline eastward, excluding the Sunni-majority Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, which backed the anti-Assad fighters. Qatar has since reconciled to the near collapse of the anti-Assad front.
Over the past two years, Qatar has conducted over $86 billion worth of transactions in yuan and signed several economic agreements with China.
It is notable that Iran too conducts its oil-related business deals with China in yuan. Soon after the nuclear deal with Washington in 2015, Tehran moved to improve its economy by upping production on its share of the Iran-Qatari gas reserve and signed a deal with France’s Total in November 2016.
Qatar was forced to join and lifted a self-imposed ban on developing the gas field in April 2017.
The Iran-Qatar deal has the potential to derail American hegemony over world financial markets. This explains President Trump’s move to make Riyadh his first foreign visit. Trump has made his intention to secure regime change in Tehran clear. How he intends to cope with Qatar, which hosts the largest US military base in the region, with around 11,000 troops, is less clear. Shifting the base could potentially destabilise other host countries. For now, he could leave the problem to Riyadh. But as events in Syria and Yemen show, it is easier to get embroiled in a conflagration in the Middle East than it is to get out.
Posted by syed abbaa in CURRENT EVENTS on July 14th, 2017
KARACHI: The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) probing money laundering allegations found Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif “could not satisfactorily answer most of the questions” during his appearance on June 15.
The JIT report, submitted to the Supreme Court on Monday, said he was “evasive, speculative and non-cooperative”.
“He was generally evasive and seemed preoccupied during the interview,” the report said. “Major part of his statement was based on ‘hearsay’. He remained non-committal, speculative and at times non-cooperative while recording his statement before the JIT,” said the team’s analysis of the prime minister’s statement.
It went on to say that Prime Minister Sharif tried to “parry most of the questions” by giving indefinite answers or by stating that “he does not remember, ostensibly to conceal facts”.
Sharif insists his assets reflected in income tax returns, wealth statements
In his statement to the JIT, the prime minister gave details of his early life, his entry into politics and the offices he held during his three-decade-long political career.
He claimed that the assets he owned, possessed or had acquired “are, in their entirety, reflected in my income tax returns and wealth reconciliation statements”.
“I do not own or possess, nor have acquired any assets or interests therein other than those mentioned in my income tax returns and wealth reconciliation statements,” he stated.
He, however, informed the JIT that initially, he had been a shareholder and/or director in one or more companies established by his late father in Pakistan. But for about three decades “I have not been the director in any of those companies. In any case, I have not been actively involved in the business of any of those companies since 1985”.
“I became finance minister in 1981. I was not overseeing any businesses myself after 1981, although I may have been the director of some companies. I, however, disassociated myself from all businesses in 1998,” he said, adding: “As far as the meaning of disassociation from business is concerned, it is true that it is more in terms of disassociation from any management function, rather than in terms of holding financial interests in a company. After all, how can you make a living if you disassociate yourself from the financial interest…”
Talking about the London properties, he said he had gone there in 1989 and in the 1990s and stayed in the Avenfield apartments. “I knew Hussain and then Hassan, who were studying in London, were living in those apartments. All the expenses related to their stay were met by the money my father used to send them. I know broadly that we were paying the ground rent, service charges and utilities but do not know whether rent was being paid or not. Hussain was dealing with these issues and he knows the most. I knew it was an arrangement made by Mr Al Thani and my father. I do not, however, know about how the bearer certificates were transferred.”
Mr Sharif informed the JIT that he did not refer to the investment between the Qatari family and his father in his speeches but clearly said that he would tell the details when the time came.
About a Guardian report that quoted his wife as saying that the Avenfield apartments were purchased for Hassan and Hussain in 2000 while they were studying in London, “my response is that sometimes these things are said because of lack of knowledge”, he said.
Regarding a huge sum of money gifted to him by his son Hussain, he said in the statement: “I do not find any issue with the fact that my son Hussain sends me money as gifts which I either spend myself or gift it to my daughter Maryam. It is foreign exchange coming into Pakistan and the money was sent through the official banking channels.”
Q: In your speeches, you had mentioned that all record relating to Azizia and Gulf Steel was available but later your counsel stated in the Supreme Court that no such record was available. Can you explain this contradiction?
A: I am not sure, maybe I had given the record to the speaker, but I am not sure about this.
Q: You have stated that you stand by whatever respondents 6, 7 and 8 have submitted before the Supreme Court of Pakistan during the proceedings of the case about Gulf Steel and Azizia etc. Did you personally see what they have submitted before the Supreme Court of Pakistan or your knowledge is based on family discussions?
A: I had not seen the submissions, my knowledge is based on the family discussions but I endorse whatever has been submitted by them.
Q: Do you have any other documents that you want to produce in addition to the ones you have brought today?
A: There are no further documents to be produced. We have already provided all the documents we had.
Q: In 1999, the Queens Bench Division had put a caution on the Avenfield properties which was removed on the basis of a settlement. What is your knowledge about the terms of the settlement?
A: I have heard about it but I do not know about the terms of the settlement.
Q: You had referred to the settlement of family assets in 2005. Was the matter of investment of proceeds of Gulf Steel discussed especially with regards to the Avenfield properties?
A: Yes, perhaps it was discussed and since they had remained in the possession of Hassan and Hussain. I think Hassan is the owner but I’m not sure.
Q: Hussain claims to own the apartments now but practically Hassan has lived in one of the apartments for decades now. Don’t you find this a bit odd?
A: It is not unusual for brothers.
Q: Do you know about the trust deed signed between Mr Hussain Nawaz Sharif and Ms Maryam Nawaz Sharif with reference to the companies of Mr Hussain?
A: I have no knowledge of the trust deed signed by Mr Hussain Nawaz Sharif on behalf of Maryam (Nawaz) Safdar.
Q: Do you know Saeed Ahmed of National Bank of Pakistan and did you have any business with him?
A: I know Saeed Ahmed since a very long time but I do not have any business links with him.
Q: Do you know the Qazi family?
A: I do not know them. I meet a lot of people and do not remember them all.
Q: Do you know Sheikh Saeed?
A: Yes, I know him since a long time, but I do not have any business relationship with him.
Q: A settlement with NAB was carried out on your behalf in 2001-2 for the case of Hudabiya papers mills and payment were made through loans taken from Chaudhry and Ramzan mills. Please apprise us with the details of this settlement.
A: I do not know if there was a loan. I do not have any knowledge of this matter.
Q: Did you send any money abroad to any of your family members?
A: No I did not.
Q: Was a portion of the money received from Hill Metals used for political funding?
A: No, but if I did, is it a crime?
Q: Would it not come under foreign funding?
No reply was made.
Reference
Published in Dawn, July 12th, 2017
Posted by admin in CURRENT EVENTS on July 12th, 2017
Standing tall and dominating the famous Tiger Hill on the Line of Control (LoC) is a grim reminder of the Kargil war. Point 5353, the highest peak in the region which has a clear view of the National Highway 1 D, remains occupied by Pakistan even a decade after the battle.
While the point is clearly on the Indian side of the LoC, it remains in Pakistani control which has fortified it with reinforced bunkers and has even built a special road nearby to carry up supplies for soldiers.
The Indian Army, which made several unsuccessful attempts to occupy the post after the Kargil war, has since given up the post as “untenable” given the geography of the region that makes it fairly easy for Pakistani troops to climb.
What makes Point 5353 so valuable for the two armies is that it has a clear view of the national highway that connects the Kashmir valley with Kargil. The main reason the Army retaliated hard to the Pakistani intrusion in 1999 was that disruption of traffic on the road would cut off supplies to Ladakh and the Siachen glacier.
While officers say that Point 5353 is surrounded by three Indian posts, including Point 5240 and any action from there would be neutralised, the fact remains that artillery observers from the post can easily direct fire on a 25 km stretch of the national highway.
Besides, the most dominating feature in the region has a clear view of the Tiger Hill and surrounding areas. Sources say Pakistan has constructed concrete bunkers at the location and have a special supply base on their side of the LoC that has substantial reinforcements.
Posted by admin in Kargil Coward Nawaz Sharif-Backstabber US President Clinton, Northern Light Infantry-Kargill War Heroes, Pakistan Army on July 12th, 2017
First Published on January 29th, 2014
Nawaz Sharif and India have one trait in common, both lie to protect their failures. India lied about their Kargil defeat.
Nawaz Sharif and his PMLN members lie about Pakistan Army’s Kargil War Victory.
Every Jiyala of PMLN will tell you Kargil War was a Failure.
Indian Army Chief of Kargil War wants to Forget It!
Nawaz Sharif’s reason behind this chicanery is that he did not want to give credit to Pakistan Army under the leadership of Gen.(Retd) Pervez Musharraf for thrashing the Indian Army at the heights of Kargil, which resulted in killing 3,000 Indian Army soldiers and officers. Gen.(Retd) Musharraf may have a thousand flaws, but, Kargil War was his finest hour. Gen(Retd) Aziz and Gen(Retd) Musharraf played a stroke of genius in Kargil War Strategy. Pakistan’s Political Pundits demonise him and due to personal bias portray him as responsible for a Kargil “fiasco.”
If Kargil War was a “fiasco” for Pak Army, then, the question arises, why did India Court Martial several GOCs and Corp Commander of Indian Army, XV Corp ?:
Indian Heavy Losses in Kargil War Are Remembered
in Huge Monument Build to Honour Over 3,000 War Dead
“But the General has not shared the lapses and neglect of responsibilities of the Army leadership, particularly of the sector commanders, and to an extent, his own. Some of these are by now, well known, including the mindset of the 15 Corps Commander, Lt Gen Krishan Pal, who insisted that there were only a handful of infiltrators 60 to 80 and that none of them was a Pakistani soldier. He committed troops without allowing them adequate weapons and strength, and if facts given by Lt Gen Y M Bammi in a book are taken into account, he punished an officer, Brig Devinder Singh, who wanted better preparations insisting that there were a large number of Pakistani soldiers inside the Indian territory.
The officer had eight battalions under his charge, and by all accounts, he fought very well, leading the troops from the front. Gen Malik himself has been seen and heard praising this officer at various fora. Yet, Brig Devinder Singh’s career was cut short to save those who were wrong.
To recall, the biggest players of the Kargil War were:
The Government at the highest echelon of the Political Leadership;
The Army Chief, GOC-in-C Northern Command, 15 Corps Cdr, and the 3 Div Cdr. The intelligence agencies, primarily the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). The Indian Air Force (IAF) and its exercise of Air Power.
The dedicated and committed soldiers and the middle and junior level officers.
(Reference: http://defence.pk/threads/the-kargil-conflict.50085/”)
Nawaz Sharif was paranoid that after such a great victory. He was afraid that Gen (Retd) Musharraf would achieve same status as FM Ayub Khan and thereby kick out the absolutely corrupt and incompetent illegitimate Nawaz Sharif PMLN “Dandhelee”) Govt. Nawaz Sharif propaganda against Kargil is unrelenting. He did not want Pakistan public to believe that Pakistan Army was capable of achieving this victory. Nawaz Sharif is very astute about his business interests.
Nawaz Sharif’s objectives were to promote his business interest in India, a larger market for his Ittefaq Industries products. He wanted to save India and Indian Army from humiliation from this ignominious defeat. He used a two-pronged approach, 1) Stop the War and Prevent Pakistan Army to Make Gains in Kargil sector, which may make Indian Army’s Movements under Pakistan Army Observation Posts. Thus allowing Pakistan Artillery to cause serious damage to India convoys providing supplies to units in Kashmir. 2) To make Pakistan Army look weak, humiliated bungling, and a “rogue” organisation. This would give Nawaz and his party to keep Pak Army on the defensive and not interfere in national affairs, no matter how much corruption Nawaz and his friends do.
Nawaz Sharif is a CIA’s major asset in Pakistan’s political scene. He is weak, easily intimidated, cowardly, incompetent, and in times of crisis gets a “mind freeze.” He cannot handle crisis well and that can be seen in his vacillation and foot dragging against TTP. He is co-dependent on CIA and gets his direction through their position papers and relies heavily on their analyst. Even today, Sartaj Aziz, the Octogenarian is in Washington to get direction from Secretary John Kerry.
During Kargil War, Nawaz Sharif was morbidly afraid of Indian intrusion across the international boundary in Lahore. His fears most likely included the capture of Lahore and his own arrest by the Indian Army. All of the above factors resulted in his mad dash to President Clinton to stop, “Pakistan Army,” which he could not do, from further escalation and consolidation in Kargil.
Nawaz Sharif does not car an iota about Pakistan or its people. His interests lie in survival and accumulation of wealth and power. Nawaz Sharif is a Pakistani “Banya,” who has a Banya Mentality. His upbringing by a corrupt father, who accumulated enormous wealth and went from a small brick Kiln foundry to acquisition of Pak Army’s major asset. The Ittefaq Foundry.
Nawaz Sharif is the causative agent for withdrawal of Pakistan Army from Kargil, which resulted in the only causalities due to their exposure to forward observers of Indian Artillery. Thus Nawaz snatched, a defeat from victory. He is responsible for all the Shahadats of the extremely brave NLI and Sindh Regiment soldiers when they were asked to pull back. Nawaz Sharif has PAK ARMY BLOOD on his hand. He has also demonised Pak Army through a whispering campaign by PMLN Jiayalas, that Kargil War was a defeat for Pak Army. He knows the truth. One day, that truth will catch-up to Nawaz, when he and his whole family may have to pay for it with their own blood. India is having a hard time swallowing Kargil defeat, in spite of heavy losses and post-defeat embarrassment, Indian Army continues to console itself, by reading false and concocted reports by Indian Media.
As usual, Pak Media was asleep at the wheel and due to its hatred of Pakistan Army for its meddling in politics, Pak media could not digest Pakistan Army’s finest hour and went along with lies and snake oil which India and Nawaz Sharif were selling.
{COMMENT}
If Kargil victory is so great, why is India , the Victor trying to forget it.
Victors Do Not Forget Victory, Only losers Do
New Delhi: Thirteen years ago, the Indian Army found itself drawn into a messy low-intensity conflict with Pakistan in the icy heights of Kargil in Jammu and Kashmir that cost it 527 soldiers. Today, Gen VP Malik, the then Army chief, laments that the major victory scored has all been forgotten. Kargil was India’s first television war and could have promoted a “strategic culture” in the country, but the gains were lost because of political compulsions, Malik says.
“We must celebrate the Kargil victory. Unfortunately, the Kargil war has become a political football,” 74-year-old Malik, who lives in the Chandigarh suburb of Panchkula, told a news agency in an interview.
“Politics got into the Kargil victory and the celebrations became a political football. That’s what we saw with political rivals celebrating and criticising the war for reasons that suited them,” Malik said.
“The armed forces had tremendous support from the people and the media,” he said, adding: “But politics got into all this and that’s why there were good celebrations initially and there are hardly any celebrations. Slowly people are beginning to forget because it is not providing much political mileage.”
From 2000 to 2003, July 26, the day the war ended, was commemorated in a variety of ways. This, however, stopped when the United Progressive Alliance government came to power.
Calling for grander celebrations, Malik said, “We have to tell the people about these battles and if we want to build a strategic culture, we need to celebrate these victories and inform people how these battles were won.”
The Kargil war in May-July 1999 saw India throwing back Pakistani regulars who had occupied key heights in the sector that had been vacated by the Indian troops during the harsh winter.
At the same time, Malik readily agreed that the victory in the 1971 war with Pakistan that saw the creation of the independent nation of Bangladesh was “much bigger” and “greater” than Kargil.
“The 1971 war was certainly a much bigger, greater victory for India, as we had fought on both (eastern and western) fronts. But that was 1971. In 1999, we were reacting to a situation, as in 1965, and were playing on the back foot.
“In 1971, we had taken the initiative in view of the refugees pouring in from the East and there was time for us to prepare for the war,” Malik said.
But the situation in 1999 was different, he said, noting that the whole world was watching India with suspicion following its 1998 nuclear tests.
“We did exceeding well with the Army, Navy and the Air Force jointly working out a strategy in a limited war scenario,” he added.
IANS
Posted by Dr. Salman in Kargill War Heroes, OUR BRAVE SONS & DAUGHTERS SERVING PAKISTAN ARMED FORCES, Pak Army Kargil Victory on July 12th, 2017
Capt Romail Akram – Kargil War(1999) Hero – Pakistan Army – Full Video HD PakArmy
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
