Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by admin in CIA AGENT NAWAZ SHARIF, Nawaz "Badami Lassi Kim Barker Thurke" Sharif, Nawaz 's Dauphin, Nawaz Dangerous, Nawaz Sharif & Kashmiri Biradari, Nawaz Sharif Dangerous Man, NAWAZ SHARIF DICTATOR, NAWAZ SHARIF FAMILY TURPITUDE, NAWAZ SHARIF US & SAUDI AGENT, Nawaz Sharif US Agent, NAWAZ SHARIF US CIA ASSET IN PAKISTAN, Nawaz Sharif Womanizer, Nawaz Sharif-The Prime Minister from Hell, NAWAZ SHARIF: THE LOOTER, Nawaz US Agent on January 22nd, 2014
Dear Sir,
Find below a Piece that my regular Papers simply refused to publish; and this after over five years of a relationship between me and these mainstream Papers. Question: How deep is this conspiracy to strangulate Musharraf? Many of us may have many reasons to dislike Musharraf – I have many – but is this how justice is dispensed.
What Pakistan’s mainstream Papers would not publish because it just might seem to offer a ray of hope to Musharraf needs to be widely disseminated.
Let no voice be stifled.
Please share widely with your contacts.
Regards.
Shahzad Chaudhry
When in 1999 Nawaz Sharif dithered inexplicably on sacking Musharraf following Kargil, he began a series of actions that only blighted this nation and his personal self. A stand-off pregnant with the possibility that either man may strike against the other ensued. Nawaz Sharif procrastinated endlessly and provided Musharraf the opportunity to regain his balance. Musharraf struck on October 12, in response to a botched attempt by Mian Sahib to finally remove him.
Musharraf’s coup was an aberration; there being no earthly reason for him to call a coup other than preserving his position as the army chief. It derailed democracy; stunted political growth, and disenfranchised the political spectrum of the society by forcing Nawaz Sharif, and Benazir soon after, into exile. Within the military it wasn’t a popular coup; though, once it occurred it slowly engendered hope and promise against the dismal performance of the government that Musharraf dislodged. In his nine years Musharraf did well on economy with a strong team, but it all came at the cost of another inevitable estrangement between personalities and institutions. Today Musharraf finds himself in the dock as a payback for that excess; at least that should have been the case. It is not.
The original sin, the October 12, 1999 coup, which was universally abhorred, stands condoned, but the November 03, 2007 Emergency is what will not go unpunished. Strange ways. The November 03 emergency was a bona fide Constitutional measure under Article 232; but it must be brought to book because some judges refused to take a new oath after having already been tainted with an earlier oath under a PCO. One could question Musharraf’s judgment, or intent, but not his right to impose Emergency; and judgment remains a matter of opinion while intent is difficult to stand the test of legal evidence.
Mian Sahib, given his personality, hates confrontation; his previous proclivity for the same proscribed considerably with unpleasant experiences in his previous tenures. Nawaz Sharif would have known that he, Musharraf and Chaudhry Iftikhar, the former Chief Justice, were all tied into a triangular relationship around events that occurred in 1999, and after, and a recall on one would invariably mean bringing the other two into perspective with all the attendant fall-out – mostly adversarial and negative. A recall, that comes in the manner of an ill-timed trial, will bring alive the accompanying din of vengeance. Yet, he and his government have in hand a hot potato that they rather not have touched in the first place.
Perhaps, he has his Minister of Interior, Chaudhry Nisar, and some expedient politics, to blame for the ensuing discomfort. When seriously deficient administrative measures caused a most unfortunate mayhem and loss of life in the Ashura incident in Rawalpindi, the government fell back to the most infamous political tactic of introducing a diversion sure to take the focus away from a tardy failure. Out of nowhere, and having stayed quiet all this while on the issue, the government in its wisdom decided to bring Musharraf to justice. The Ashura incident since has long been forgotten. What we have instead is another challenge.
Mian Sahib is knee deep in the quagmire that is terrorism; tanked-out economy; impossible and deficient energy state; inflation and poverty that now are monstrosities; a nation that stands so fragmented along its various fault-lines that it seems on the verge to implode; sans direction, possibly without a vision, dysfunctional, smacking of incapacity to get out of the hole that it finds itself in. Instead he digs, and the hole only gets deeper, insurmountable.
This is what a Musharraf trial will deliver. A commonly held belief among the masses – and the upper crust one percent is no masses, please – that by indicting Musharraf the civilians will have evened out with the military. To the masses, Rule of Law is a farce of the elites that has no relevance to their lives. To the vocal elites, it is an opportunity to flag Rule of law as a divine principle that in reality they will never let touch their personal or collective lives. The veneer of morality is shamelessly superficial. Peel a layer, and you will soon be confronted by the argument, ‘but was not a civilian Prime Minister hanged?’. Right, he was, and Pakistan is poorer for it. But does that justify a repeat of the heinousness of our collective animalistic instincts; again. Who are we? And what games are we indulging in? We are already having trouble qualifying as people to the rest of the world. For heaven’s sake, know what is right; and even more importantly, when is right.
When the courts in the previous government brought many a retired general before it on various charges, the army leadership was internally castigated by both the serving and the retired community for abandoning their own to the travesties of disrespect and dishonor that were wrought in the name of Rule of Law and civilian supremacy. To a military mind, appearing before courts – any court including their own – is an indignity; one simply is not meant to err. Musharraf’s trial will rekindle that sense of indignity especially when in the parallel civilian structures – that bay for Musharraf’s blood – there is nothing of moral capital to show. Inevitably, bringing Musharraf to justice may have already forced military’s hand. For the moment Musharraf lies sick with the army, but he has also walked into the safety of army’s hands. Those who sought army’s position on the issue have it in no uncertain terms. This is a risky place. Whatever institutional balance seemed to have been restored lies at the cusp of another vulnerability. Such is the fragility of this governing structure of ours.
Why may the Rule of Law be established only through one man alone? Is it not a pervasive need across the spectrum? What of the rampant corruption; parking of ill gotten money in accounts abroad; failure to pay taxes; mis-governance; policies that only target to benefit the chosen few of the politico-economic clans? These too are crimes against humanity that remain unattended. Musharraf erred, big time, on October 12, 1999, but that isn’t even under consideration. Instead what we have is a recourse to selective justice. Deal whatever way you may with it here-on, Pakistan would have regressed
Posted by admin in DAMAGE TO PAKISTAN BY NAWAZ FAMILY, NAWAZ SHARIF MUZZLES PRESS, NAWAZ SHARIF SAGA OF ABSOLUTE & CHRONIC CORRUPTION, NAWAZ SHARIF US & SAUDI AGENT, Nawaz Sharif US Agent, NAWAZ SHARIF US CIA ASSET IN PAKISTAN, Nawaz Sharif Womanizer, Nawaz Sharif-The Prime Minister from Hell, NAWAZ SHARIF: THE LOOTER on November 14th, 2013
Posted by farrukh in BADAMI LASSI & PHAJJAY KAY KABAB on August 26th, 2013
HAS NAWAZ SHARIF IN LUST FOR POWER GONE MAD? DOES FOREIGN AGENT NAWAZ SHARIF POSE A DANGER TO PAKISTAN’S SECURITY & STRATEGIC PROGRAMS?
A recent interview of General Parvez Musharraf with Geo program has revealed some lucidity among Pakistani politicians and ex-spies toward Afghanistan and the war. Two of his closed soldiers Mehmood and Usmani who wanted to be vice-chief of the army and refused the loyalty they demanded by left the army. Musharraf described General Hamid, the retired ISI chief a very ambitious person and was very close to pro-religious forces of Pakistan. Musharraf divulged Hamid Gul greed of power when he wanted Musharraf to stay behind him as chief of army and let him rule Pakistan.
He called Nawaz Sharif, Muslim League-N, very dangerous man for Pakistan. When asked regarding WikiLeaks revelation of Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari, “dirty” he refused to comment on Zardari, but called Nawaz Sharif a “closet Taliban” and a “threat to the country.”
PHAJA’S KABAB, BADAMI LASSI, & KIM BARKER REBUFF MAY BE CAUSING THIS LUNACY IN AMBURSARI KASHMIRI “HATHOO,’ THURKEE NAWAZ SHARIF
“He has said very good thing. If we get a chance to rule this country, this will be our main priorities”, Sharif said. On cross-border terrorism, the PML-N chief, who is widely expected to form the next government here, said, “We don’t want our territory to be used for terrorist activities. These elements are deliberately spoiling the relationship”. Asked about Mumbai attack mastermind and JuD chief Hafiz Saeed, he said, “Many of these organisations have already been banned. If I become prime minister I will make sure that Pakistani soil is never used for any such design against India. We must not allow such speeches to be made against India by anybody including Hafeez Saab”. Posted by admin in Pakistan Security and Defence: Enemy & Threats (Internal & External), SHIA +SUNNI = MUSLIMS=ISLAM=PEACE, THE NEOCON STRATEGY IN PROCESS on March 1st, 2013
Pakistan is a nation born on the 27th of Ramazan.
It’s birth and survival is miracle and its safety is under Allah’s protection.
From time to time Shaitan’s in human shape spread rumours to frighten and throw doubt unto believers, so the best approach is to know
wherein lies the source of such news.
And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners. Surah Âl ‘Imran (3:54)
In an article titled ‘A mutiny Grows in the Punjab’, Anatol Lieven (author of Pakistan: A Hard Country) wrote the following: Division of Punjab is part of plan for disintegration of Pakistan.”
These articles are coming in torrents (so they should be taken with a grain of salt), since Pakistan and Iran signed a the gas pipeline agreement and transfer of Gwadar Port Operations to a Chinese Company.
In an article titled ‘A mutiny Grows in the Punjab’, Anatol Lieven (author of Pakistan: A Hard Country) wrote the following:
“The U.S. strategy toward Pakistan has been focused on trying to get Islamabad to give serious help to Washington’s campaign against the Afghan Taliban. There are two rather large problems with this approach. The first is that it is never going to happen because Pakistani strategic calculations and the feelings of the country’s population make it impossible…. except in return for U.S. help against India—which Washington also cannot deliver.
“The second problem is that it gets America’s real priorities in the region back to front. The war in Afghanistan is a temporary U.S. interest, in which the chief concern is not the reality of victory or defeat as such (if only because neither can be clearly defined) but preserving some appearance of success in order to avoid the damage to American military prestige that would result from obvious failure. By contrast, preserving the Pakistani state and containing the terrorist threat to the West from Pakistan is a permanent vital interest not only of the U.S. military and political establishments but of every American citizen.
“While the prospects for any real success in Afghanistan look gloomy, but if saving Pakistan is the real priority, then things do not look so desperate. This is because while getting large numbers of Pakistanis to help America is virtually impossible, getting enough Pakistanis to preserve their existing state is much easier. To a great extent, this is for negative reasons: the elites and indeed the masses have an acute sense of the horror from the country’s collapse. However, a degree of positive loyalty is also present in one key institution and in one key province: namely the military and the Punjab. If Pakistan is to be broken as a state, it will be on the streets of Lahore and other great Punjabi cities, not in the Pashtun mountains.”
Unlike US think tanks and most American writers, who subjectively project Indo-Zionist interests in the region, Anatol Lieven is British, and objective. His article was published nearly two years ago in ‘National Interest’ of March-April 2011, A lot has changed since; Britain has assumed a central role in resolving the Afghan imbroglio and it is the view of Anal Lieven that appears to have prevailed. Disintegration of Pakistan is still on the agenda but it is hoped it will follow rather than precede heightened Civil War in Afghanistan that is likely to result from NATO/US withdrawal.
Pakistan has been ruled by a four party coalition for five years – Zardari League, MQM, ANP and JUI(F) – all of who have a history of opposition to Pakistan. President Asif Ali Zardari is the head of the PPP although his spoilt son – Bilawal – is formally the chairman of the Party. The father of Asif Zardari – Hakim Ali – was the President of ANP in Sindh after he was expelled from the PPP allegedly for trying to blackmail late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB). No one has revealed why was ZAB being blackmailed but it is well known that he was so angry with Hakim Ali that he sold all his assets and moved to the UK only to return after the execution of ZAB.
The relationship Asif Zardari with his wife Benazir was characterized by the Hollywood film ‘sleeping with the enemy’. But my point here is not their marital relationship; my point is that Asif Zardari has strong nerves; he has lived a life with dangerous briefs. For securing US sponsorship of the NRO, every one has wondered: “what is the quid pro quo that the USA wants from Asif Zardari?” It appears that Asif Zardari signed up to disintegration of Pakistan. He has been tasked to destroy the two institutions that hold Pakistan together: 1) the armed forces and 2) the Punjab.
The Memo written by Pakistan’s Ambassador Hussain Haqqani at the behest of President Zardari to the US Government revealed how AZ intended to undermine the command structure of the armed forces on the pretext of ‘civilian control’. Now he has launched a scheme for the division of the Punjab only weeks before the installation of a ‘care-taker administration’. The constitutional amendment proposed by his press secretary – Senator Farhatullah Babar is unlikely to be passed but it indicates the array of forces being assembled to secure the nefarious ends.
In not understanding the nature of enemy schemes and being so inadequate in articulating viable popular opposition the PML(N) and TIP share equal blame. India has for decades funded opposition to Kalabagh Dam and promoting Seraiki province. Disintegration of Pakistan has been at the top of Indian agenda since 1947. There should have been no doubt left after the invasion and separation of East Pakistan in 1971.
But the very same political parties that are in the ruling coalition today were at the helm in West Pakistan in 1971. Their leaders readily embraced the Indian propaganda that East Pakistan separated because of ‘maltreatment’ by the Punjabis. Ever since, the Punjab has been the favourite whipping boy – blamed for every real or imagined grievance. But the leaders of Punjab have never flinched from making a sacrifice in any inter-provincial deal – the recent finance award as well as the Water Accord of 19991. But the Indian propaganda continues to be mouthed by President Zardari and his coalition partners.
Not content with the Punjab giving in to every demand of cut in its legitimate share, the Zardari Administration is now embarked on Sheikh Mujib style campaign of subversion supplemented by direct attacks on the military and the integrity of the Punjab province.
The 2008 announcement of cancellation of the Kalabagh Dam, the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, and now the Freudian Slip, attempt to separate the BJP (Bahawalpur Janubi Punjab) from the Punjab, are all a part of the same plan.
Mian Nawaz Sharif does not appear to understand how diabolical the scheme is. His party came up with a proposal to carve out three provinces instead of two. PML(N) get no votes – just ridicule and disgust. The people and politicians of Sindh have been wiser in understanding that the real reason for the new Local Bodies Ordinance is to give Indian protégés – the MQM – perpetual control over not just Karachi but all the urban centres of Sindh. Are the Punjabis so dim that they cannot understand the real intent behind the proposed division of the Punjab?
In Pakistan, land has always belonged to the provinces but river water is owned by the federation. This is a sensible division that has stood the test of time. Large reservoirs of water in dams have been built and operated by the federal government but the barrages and the canals have been owned and operated by the provincial governments. Kalabagh Dam is an exception because it is a dam as well as a barrage. Its right bank canal would irrigate DIK area of South KPK, and the left Bank canal would irrigate the area between Rivers Indus and Jhelum. The reservoir would serve the interest of South Punjab and Sindh Province as Sindh gets 37% of the water of any reservoir built on River Indus. Tarbela Dam, built in the KPK has increased supply of irrigation water at Sukhar as well Kotri barrages. Kalabagh Dam would be even more beneficial to Sindh because it would conserve huge amount of extra water from all the tributaries of River Indus down stream of Tarbela and hill torrents that have caused death and destruction in South Punjab.
Kalabagh Dam is so detested by India because it would link all the provinces of Pakistan into a nationwide irrigation system.
Farhatullah Babar included the Districts of Mianwali and Bhakkar in BJP in his proposal. The people of the two districts understood his intent and protested. Thy understood that it would imply that the only dam in the Punjab – the Kalabagh Dam – would be located outside the province.
Farhatullah Babar proposal undermines the link canals and the entire irrigation system of the Punjab but the real reason is more sinister. The BJP locked into disputes with Punjab in perpetuity would be sight for sore hostile eyes. The fiendish scheme has escaped the attention of Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif but that may not be ignored by the farmers and irrigation experts. However, India and its protégés in Pakistan have good reasons for hope; if the benefits of Kalabagh Dam to Sindh can be sold as damaging because the Dam would also benefit the Punjab, why the damage to Multan and Bahawalpur be sold as beneficial merely because the rest of the Punjab disapproves of the division of the Punjab.
The reason why the Indo-Zionist lobby wants the division of the Punjab is the one given by Anatol Lieven:
“If Pakistan is to be broken as a state, it will be on the streets of Lahore and other great Punjabi cities, not in the Pashtun mountains.”
East Pakistan was the largest province of Pakistan until 1971 but its people were not able to see the benefits in the union. It split from Pakistan and is forever reduced to the status of a vassal state of India.
The Punjabis are 60% of the Pakistani nation now. As noted by Anatol Lieven, they see the vital need for maintaining the union and the Army is willing and able to defend every part of Pakistan.
The only way Pakistan may not succeed in maintaining the integrity of the federation is that the political process brings a Boris Yeltsin to power and the armed forces are too discredited or demonised to resists threats to national integrity.
Pakistan has had a Boris Yeltsin in the shape of Asif Zardari in power for five years but the military has maintained national cohesion despite him.
“The U.S. strategy toward Pakistan has been focused on trying to get Islamabad to give serious help to Washington’s campaign against the Afghan Taliban. There are two rather large problems with this approach. The first is that it is never going to happen because Pakistani strategic calculations and the feelings of the country’s population make it impossible…. except in return for U.S. help against India—which Washington also cannot deliver.
“The second problem is that it gets America’s real priorities in the region back to front. The war in Afghanistan is a temporary U.S. interest, in which the chief concern is not the reality of victory or defeat as such (if only because neither can be clearly defined) but preserving some appearance of success in order to avoid the damage to American military prestige that would result from obvious failure. By contrast, preserving the Pakistani state and containing the terrorist threat to the West from Pakistan is a permanent vital interest not only of the U.S. military and political establishments but of every American citizen.
“While the prospects for any real success in Afghanistan look gloomy, but if saving Pakistan is the real priority, then things do not look so desperate. This is because while getting large numbers of Pakistanis to help America is virtually impossible, getting enough Pakistanis to preserve their existing state is much easier. To a great extent, this is for negative reasons: the elites and indeed the masses have an acute sense of the horror from the country’s collapse. However, a degree of positive loyalty is also present in one key institution and in one key province: namely the military and the Punjab. If Pakistan is to be broken as a state, it will be on the streets of Lahore and other great Punjabi cities, not in the Pashtun mountains.”
Unlike US think tanks and most American writers, who subjectively project Indo-Zionist interests in the region, Anatol Lieven is British, and objective. His article was published nearly two years ago in ‘National Interest’ of March-April 2011, A lot has changed since; Britain has assumed a central role in resolving the Afghan imbroglio and it is the view of Anal Lieven that appears to have prevailed. Disintegration of Pakistan is still on the agenda but it is hoped it will follow rather than precede heightened Civil War in Afghanistan that is likely to result from NATO/US withdrawal.
Pakistan has been ruled by a four party coalition for five years – Zardari League, MQM, ANP and JUI(F) – all of who have a history of opposition to Pakistan. President Asif Ali Zardari is the head of the PPP although his spoilt son – Bilawal – is formally the chairman of the Party. The father of Asif Zardari – Hakim Ali – was the President of ANP in Sindh after he was expelled from the PPP allegedly for trying to blackmail late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB). No one has revealed why was ZAB being blackmailed but it is well known that he was so angry with Hakim Ali that he sold all his assets and moved to the UK only to return after the execution of ZAB.
The relationship Asif Zardari with his wife Benazir was characterized by the Hollywood film ‘sleeping with the enemy’. But my point here is not their marital relationship; my point is that Asif Zardari has strong nerves; he has lived a life with dangerous briefs. For securing US sponsorship of the NRO, every one has wondered: “what is the quid pro quo that the USA wants from Asif Zardari?” It appears that Asif Zardari signed up to disintegration of Pakistan. He has been tasked to destroy the two institutions that hold Pakistan together: 1) the armed forces and 2) the Punjab.
The Memo written by Pakistan’s Ambassador Hussain Haqqani at the behest of President Zardari to the US Government revealed how AZ intended to undermine the command structure of the armed forces on the pretext of ‘civilian control’. Now he has launched a scheme for the division of the Punjab only weeks before the installation of a ‘care-taker administration’. The constitutional amendment proposed by his press secretary – Senator Farhatullah Babar is unlikely to be passed but it indicates the array of forces being assembled to secure the nefarious ends.
In not understanding the nature of enemy schemes and being so inadequate in articulating viable popular opposition the PML(N) and TIP share equal blame. India has for decades funded opposition to Kalabagh Dam and promoting Seraiki province. Disintegration of Pakistan has been at the top of Indian agenda since 1947. There should have been no doubt left after the invasion and separation of East Pakistan in 1971.
But the very same political parties that are in the ruling coalition today were at the helm in West Pakistan in 1971. Their leaders readily embraced the Indian propaganda that East Pakistan separated because of ‘maltreatment’ by the Punjabis. Ever since, the Punjab has been the favourite whipping boy – blamed for every real or imagined grievance. But the leaders of Punjab have never flinched from making a sacrifice in any inter-provincial deal – the recent finance award as well as the Water Accord of 19991. But the Indian propaganda continues to be mouthed by President Zardari and his coalition partners.
Not content with the Punjab giving in to every demand of cut in its legitimate share, the Zardari Administration is now embarked on Sheikh Mujib style campaign of subversion supplemented by direct attacks on the military and the integrity of the Punjab province.
The 2008 announcement of cancellation of the Kalabagh Dam, the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, and now the Freudian Slip, attempt to separate the BJP (Bahawalpur Janubi Punjab) from the Punjab, are all a part of the same plan.
Mian Nawaz Sharif does not appear to understand how diabolical the scheme is. His party came up with a proposal to carve out three provinces instead of two. PML(N) get no votes – just ridicule and disgust. The people and politicians of Sindh have been wiser in understanding that the real reason for the new Local Bodies Ordinance is to give Indian protégés – the MQM – perpetual control over not just Karachi but all the urban centres of Sindh. Are the Punjabis so dim that they cannot understand the real intent behind the proposed division of the Punjab?
In Pakistan, land has always belonged to the provinces but river water is owned by the federation. This is a sensible division that has stood the test of time. Large reservoirs of water in dams have been built and operated by the federal government but the barrages and the canals have been owned and operated by the provincial governments. Kalabagh Dam is an exception because it is a dam as well as a barrage. Its right bank canal would irrigate DIK area of South KPK, and the left Bank canal would irrigate the area between Rivers Indus and Jhelum. The reservoir would serve the interest of South Punjab and Sindh Province as Sindh gets 37% of the water of any reservoir built on River Indus. Tarbela Dam, built in the KPK has increased supply of irrigation water at Sukhar as well Kotri barrages. Kalabagh Dam would be even more beneficial to Sindh because it would conserve huge amount of extra water from all the tributaries of River Indus down stream of Tarbela and hill torrents that have caused death and destruction in South Punjab.
Kalabagh Dam is so detested by India because it would link all the provinces of Pakistan into a nationwide irrigation system.
Farhatullah Babar included the Districts of Mianwali and Bhakkar in BJP in his proposal. The people of the two districts understood his intent and protested. Thy understood that it would imply that the only dam in the Punjab – the Kalabagh Dam – would be located outside the province.
Farhatullah Babar proposal undermines the link canals and the entire irrigation system of the Punjab but the real reason is more sinister. The BJP locked into disputes with Punjab in perpetuity would be sight for sore hostile eyes. The fiendish scheme has escaped the attention of Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif but that may not be ignored by the farmers and irrigation experts. However, India and its protégés in Pakistan have good reasons for hope; if the benefits of Kalabagh Dam to Sindh can be sold as damaging because the Dam would also benefit the Punjab, why the damage to Multan and Bahawalpur be sold as beneficial merely because the rest of the Punjab disapproves of the division of the Punjab.
The reason why the Indo-Zionist lobby wants the division of the Punjab is the one given by Anatol Lieven:
“If Pakistan is to be broken as a state, it will be on the streets of Lahore and other great Punjabi cities, not in the Pashtun mountains.”
East Pakistan was the largest province of Pakistan until 1971 but its people were not able to see the benefits in the union. It split from Pakistan and is forever reduced to the status of a vassal state of India.
The Punjabis are 60% of the Pakistani nation now. As noted by Anatol Lieven, they see the vital need for maintaining the union and the Army is willing and able to defend every part of Pakistan.
The only way Pakistan may not succeed in maintaining the integrity of the federation is that the political process brings a Boris Yeltsin to power and the armed forces are too discredited or demonised to resists threats to national integrity.
Pakistan has had a Boris Yeltsin in the shape of Asif Zardari in power for five years but the military has maintained national cohesion despite him.
But that would not last forever. Our enemies hope that Mian Nawaz Sharif would play the role of blunderbuss Boris even better. Pakistan is not out of the woods yet. ++
Washington’s intent goes beyond the narrow objective of “regime change”. The thrust of US foreign policy consists in weakening the central government and fracturing the country.
The ongoing US drone attacks under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism” are part of that process.
This article first published five years ago in December 2007 focuses on the historical process of collapse of Pakistan as a nation state following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.
Washington has been planning a scenario of disintegration and civil war in Pakistan for more than five years. According to a 2005 report by the US National Intelligence Council and the CIA, Pakistan is slated to become a “failed state” by 2015, “as it would be affected by civil war, complete Talibanisation and struggle for control of its nuclear weapons”.
Since the outset of the Soviet Afghan war, US intelligence using Pakistan’s ISI as a go-between has supported Al Qaeda and its various affiliated organizations.
“Talibanisation” is the direct result of US-led covert operations.
What is not mentioned in the NIC-CIA report is that the destabilization process– including covert support of terrorists groups as well the ongoing drone attacks– is part of a longstanding US led intelligence operation.
The US course consists in fomenting social, ethnic and factional divisions and political fragmentation, including the territorial breakup of Pakistan. This course of action is also dictated by US war plans in relation to both Afghanistan and Iran.
Michel Chossudovsky, December 27, 2012
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Global Research, 30 December 2007
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has created conditions which contribute to the ongoing destabilization and fragmentation of Pakistan as a Nation.
The process of US sponsored “regime change”, which normally consists in the re-formation of a fresh proxy government under new leaders has been broken. Discredited in the eyes of Pakistani public opinion, General Pervez Musharaf cannot remain in the seat of political power. But at the same time, the fake elections supported by the “international community” scheduled for January 2008, even if they were to be carried out, would not be accepted as legitimate, thereby creating a political impasse.
There are indications that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was anticipated by US officials:
“It has been known for months that the Bush-Cheney administration and its allies have been maneuvering to strengthen their political control of Pakistan, paving the way for the expansion and deepening of the “war on terrorism” across the region.
Various American destabilization plans, known for months by officials and analysts, proposed the toppling of Pakistan’s military…
The assassination of Bhutto appears to have been anticipated. There were even reports of “chatter” among US officials about the possible assassinations of either Pervez Musharraf or Benazir Bhutto, well before the actual attempts took place. (Larry Chin, Global Research, 29 December 2007)
Political Impasse
“Regime change” with a view to ensuring continuity under military rule is no longer the main thrust of US foreign policy. The regime of Pervez Musharraf cannot prevail. Washington’s foreign policy course is to actively promote the political fragmentation and balkanization of Pakistan as a nation.
A new political leadership is anticipated but in all likelihood it will take on a very different shape, in relation to previous US sponsored regimes. One can expect that Washington will push for a compliant political leadership, with no commitment to the national interest, a leadership which will serve US imperial interests, while concurrently contributing under the disguise of “decentralization”, to the weakening of the central government and the fracture of Pakistan’s fragile federal structure.
The political impasse is deliberate. It is part of an evolving US foreign policy agenda, which favors disruption and disarray in the structures of the Pakistani State. Indirect rule by the Pakistani military and intelligence apparatus is to be replaced by more direct forms of US interference, including an expanded US military presence inside Pakistan.
This expanded military presence is also dictated by the Middle East-Central Asia geopolitical situation and Washington’s ongoing plans to extend the Middle East war to a much broader area.
The US has several military bases in Pakistan. It controls the country’s air space. According to a recent report: “U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly expand their presence in Pakistan, as part of an effort to train and support indigenous counter-insurgency forces and clandestine counterterrorism units” (William Arkin, Washington Post, December 2007).
The official justification and pretext for an increased military presence in Pakistan is to extend the “war on terrorism”. Concurrently, to justify its counterrorism program, Washington is also beefing up its covert support to the “terrorists.”
The Balkanization of Pakistan
Already in 2005, a report by the US National Intelligence Council and the CIA forecast a “Yugoslav-like fate” for Pakistan “in a decade with the country riven by civil war, bloodshed and inter-provincial rivalries, as seen recently in Balochistan.” (Energy Compass, 2 March 2005). According to the NIC-CIA, Pakistan is slated to become a “failed state” by 2015, “as it would be affected by civil war, complete Talibanisation and struggle for control of its nuclear weapons”. (Quoted by former Pakistan High Commissioner to UK, Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Times of India, 13 February 2005):
“Nascent democratic reforms will produce little change in the face of opposition from an entrenched political elite and radical Islamic parties. In a climate of continuing domestic turmoil, the Central government’s control probably will be reduced to the Punjabi heartland and the economic hub of Karachi,” the former diplomat quoted the NIC-CIA report as saying.
Expressing apprehension, Hasan asked, “are our military rulers working on a similar agenda or something that has been laid out for them in the various assessment reports over the years by the National Intelligence Council in joint collaboration with CIA?” (Ibid)
Continuity, characterized by the dominant role of the Pakistani military and intelligence has been scrapped in favor of political breakup and balkanization.
According to the NIC-CIA scenario, which Washington intends to carry out: “Pakistan will not recover easily from decades of political and economic mismanagement, divisive policies, lawlessness, corruption and ethnic friction,” (Ibid) .
The US course consists in fomenting social, ethnic and factional divisions and political fragmentation, including the territorial breakup of Pakistan. This course of action is also dictated by US war plans in relation to both Afghanistan and Iran.
This US agenda for Pakistan is similar to that applied throughout the broader Middle East Central Asian region. US strategy, supported by covert intelligence operations, consists in triggering ethnic and religious strife, abetting and financing secessionist movements while also weakening the institutions of the central government.
The broader objective is to fracture the Nation State and redraw the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Pakistan’s Oil and Gas reserves
Pakistan’s extensive oil and gas reserves, largely located in Balochistan province, as well as its pipeline corridors are considered strategic by the Anglo-American alliance, requiring the concurrent militarization of Pakistani territory.
Balochistan comprises more than 40 percent of Pakistan’s land mass, possesses important reserves of oil and natural gas as well as extensive mineral resources.
The Iran-India pipeline corridor is slated to transit through Balochistan. Balochistan also possesses a deap sea port largely financed by China located at Gwadar, on the Arabian Sea, not far from the Straits of Hormuz where 30 % of the world’s daily oil supply moves by ship or pipeline. (Asia News.it, 29 December 2007)
Pakistan has an estimated 25.1 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of proven gas reserves of which 19 trillion are located in Balochistan. Among foreign oil and gas contractors in Balochistan are BP, Italy’s ENI, Austria’s OMV, and Australia’s BHP. It is worth noting that Pakistan’s State oil and gas companies, including PPL which has the largest stake in the Sui oil fields of Balochistan are up for privatization under IMF-World Bank supervision.
According to the Oil and Gas Journal (OGJ), Pakistan had proven oil reserves of 300 million barrels, most of which are located in Balochistan. Other estimates place Balochistan oil reserves at an estimated six trillion barrels of oil reserves both on-shore and off-shore (Environment News Service, 27 October 2006) .
Covert Support to Balochistan Separatists
Balochistan’s strategic energy reserves have a bearing on the separatist agenda. Following a familiar pattern, there are indications that the Baloch insurgency is being supported and abetted by Britain and the US.
The Baloch national resistance movement dates back to the late 1940s, when Balochistan was invaded by Pakistan. In the current geopolitical context, the separatist movement is in the process of being hijacked by foreign powers.
British intelligence is allegedly providing covert support to Balochistan separatists (which from the outset have been repressed by Pakistan’s military). In June 2006, Pakistan’s Senate Committee on Defence accused British intelligence of “abetting the insurgency in the province bordering Iran” [Balochistan]..(Press Trust of India, 9 August 2006). Ten British MPs were involved in a closed door session of the Senate Committee on Defence regarding the alleged support of Britain’s Secret Service to Baloch separatists (Ibid). Also of relevance are reports of CIA and Mossad support to Baloch rebels in Iran and Southern Afghanistan.
It would appear that Britain and the US are supporting both sides. The US is providing American F-16 jets to the Pakistani military, which are being used to bomb Baloch villages in Balochistan. Meanwhile, British alleged covert support to the separatist movement (according to the Pakistani Senate Committee) contributes to weakening the central government.
The stated purpose of US counter-terrorism is to provide covert support as well as as training to “Liberation Armies” ultimately with a view to destabilizing sovereign governments. In Kosovo, the training of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in the 1990s had been entrusted to a private mercenary company, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI), on contract to the Pentagon.
The BLA bears a canny resemblance to Kosovo’s KLA, which was financed by the drug trade and supported by the CIA and Germany’s Bundes Nachrichten Dienst (BND).
The BLA emerged shortly after the 1999 military coup. It has no tangible links to the Baloch resistance movement, which developed since the late 1940s. An aura of mystery surrounds the leadership of the BLA.
Baloch population in Pink: In Iran, Pakistan and Southern Afghanistan
Washington favors the creation of a “Greater Balochistan” which would integrate the Baloch areas of Pakistan with those of Iran and possibly the Southern tip of Afghanistan (See Map above), thereby leading to a process of political fracturing in both Iran and Pakistan.
“The US is using Balochi nationalism for staging an insurgency inside Iran’s Sistan-Balochistan province. The ‘war on terror’ in Afghanistan gives a useful political backdrop for the ascendancy of Balochi militancy” (See Global Research, 6 March 2007).
Military scholar Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters writing in the June 2006 issue of The Armed Forces Journal, suggests, in no uncertain terms that Pakistan should be broken up, leading to the formation of a separate country: “Greater Balochistan” or “Free Balochistan” (see Map below). The latter would incorporate the Pakistani and Iranian Baloch provinces into a single political entity.
In turn, according to Peters, Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP) should be incorporated into Afghanistan “because of its linguistic and ethnic affinity”. This proposed fragmentation, which broadly reflects US foreign policy, would reduce Pakistani territory to approximately 50 percent of its present land area. (See map). Pakistan would also loose a large part of its coastline on the Arabian Sea.
Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, have most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles. (See Mahdi D. Nazemroaya, Global Research, 18 November 2006)
“Lieutenant-Colonel Peters was last posted, before he retired to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, within the U.S. Defence Department, and has been one of the Pentagon’s foremost authors with numerous essays on strategy for military journals and U.S. foreign policy.” (Ibid)
It is worth noting that secessionist tendencies are not limited to Balochistan. There are separatist groups in Sindh province, which are largely based on opposition to the Punjabi-dominated military regime of General Pervez Musharraf (For Further details see Selig Harrisson, Le Monde diplomatique, October 2006)
“Strong Economic Medicine”: Weakening Pakistan’s Central Government
Pakistan has a federal structure based on federal provincial transfers. Under a federal fiscal structure, the central government transfers financial resources to the provinces, with a view to supporting provincial based programs. When these transfers are frozen as occurred in Yugoslavia in January 1990, on orders of the IMF, the federal fiscal structure collapses:
“State revenues that should have gone as transfer payments to the republics [of the Yugoslav federation] went instead to service Belgrade’s debt … . The republics were largely left to their own devices. … The budget cuts requiring the redirection of federal revenues towards debt servicing, were conducive to the suspension of transfer payments by Belgrade to the governments of the Republics and Autonomous Provinces.
In one fell swoop, the reformers had engineered the final collapse of Yugoslavia’s federal fiscal structure and mortally wounded its federal political institutions. By cutting the financial arteries between Belgrade and the republics, the reforms fueled secessionist tendencies that fed on economic factors as well as ethnic divisions, virtually ensuring the de facto secession of the republics. (Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order, Second Edition, Global Research, Montreal, 2003, Chapter 17.)
It is by no means accidental that the 2005 National Intelligence Council- CIA report had predicted a “Yugoslav-like fate” for Pakistan pointing to the impacts of “economic mismanagement” as one of the causes of political break-up and balkanization.
“Economic mismanagement” is a term used by the Washington based international financial institutions to describe the chaos which results from not fully abiding by the IMF’s Structural Adjustment Program. In actual fact, the “economic mismanagement” and chaos is the outcome of IMF-World Bank prescriptions, which invariably trigger hyperinflation and precipitate indebted countries into extreme poverty.
Pakistan has been subjected to the same deadly IMF “economic medicine” as Yugoslavia: In 1999, in the immediate wake of the coup d’Etat which brought General Pervez Musharaf to the helm of the military government, an IMF economic package, which included currency devaluation and drastic austerity measures, was imposed on Pakistan. Pakistan’s external debt is of the order of US$40 billion. The IMF’s “debt reduction” under the package was conditional upon the sell-off to foreign capital of the most profitable State owned enterprises (including the oil and gas facilities in Balochistan) at rockbottom prices .
Musharaf’s Finance Minister was chosen by Wall Street, which is not an unusual practice. The military rulers appointed at Wall Street’s behest, a vice-president of Citigroup, Shaukat Aziz, who at the time was head of CitiGroup’s Global Private Banking. (See WSWS.org, 30 October 1999). CitiGroup is among the largest commercial foreign banking institutions in Pakistan.
There are obvious similarities in the nature of US covert intelligence operations applied in country after country in different parts of the so-called “developing World”. These covert operation, including the organisation of military coups, are often synchronized with the imposition of IMF-World Bank macro-economic reforms. In this regard, Yugoslavia’s federal fiscal structure collapsed in 1990 leading to mass poverty and heightened ethnic and social divisions. The US and NATO sponsored “civil war” launched in mid-1991 consisted in coveting Islamic groups as well as channeling covert support to separatist paramilitary armies in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia.
A similar “civil war” scenario has been envisaged for Pakistan by the National Intelligence Council and the CIA: From the point of view of US intelligence, which has a longstanding experience in abetting separatist “liberation armies”, “Greater Albania” is to Kosovo what “Greater Balochistan” is to Pakistan’s Southeastern Balochistan province. Similarly, the KLA is Washington’s chosen model, to be replicated in Balochistan province.
The Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in Rawalpindi, no ordinary city. Rawalpindi is a military city host to the headquarters of the Pakistani Armed Forces and Military Intelligence (ISI). Ironically Bhutto was assassinated in an urban area tightly controlled and guarded by the military police and the country’s elite forces. Rawalpindi is swarming with ISI intelligence officials, which invariably infiltrate political rallies. Her assassination was not a haphazard event.
Without evidence, quoting Pakistan government sources, the Western media in chorus has highlighted the role of Al-Qaeda, while also focusing on the the possible involvement of the ISI.
What these interpretations do not mention is that the ISI continues to play a key role in overseeing Al Qaeda on behalf of US intelligence. The press reports fail to mention two important and well documented facts:
1) the ISI maintains close ties to the CIA. The ISI is virtually an appendage of the CIA.
2) Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA. The ISI provides covert support to Al Qaeda, acting on behalf of US intelligence.
The alleged involvement of either Al Qaeda and/or the ISI would suggest that US intelligence was cognizant and/or implicated in the assassination plot.
[Part Two: Pakistan and the “Global War on Terrorism” at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7746]
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international bestseller America’s “War on Terrorism” Global Research, 2005. He is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Center for Research on Globalization.
– See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-destabilization-of-pakistan/7705#sthash.0pEuRMZC.dpuf
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
