Jewish Agenda against Muslim World By Mahrukh A Mughal: New Age Islam's Selection, 10 January 2018
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
10 January 2018
• Jewish Agenda against Muslim World
By Mahrukh A Mughal
• Has Pakistan Made Winning Choices?
By Mosharraf Zaidi
• Jilted Lover Syndrome
By Zahid Hussain
• A Tell-All Account
By Mahir Ali
• Caught In the Crossfire
By Kamal Siddiqi
• Justice with Benefits
By Bilal Rana
• Say No To US Dictates
By Dr Muhammad Khan
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
-----
Jewish Agenda against Muslim World
By Mahrukh A Mughal
January 9, 2018
A looming perception all around the globe of insecurity, haphazardness and uncertainty has developed over Jerusalem recognition as Israel’s capital. Jerusalem was ever since recognized from three Abrahamic religions with Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Innocent killings of Palestinians ignited the Muslim world much more as the days and time is passing by. Jews and a wide swath of evangelicals referring Trump to Persian King who had lobbied hard for it as putting all his efforts to build the Jewish third temple where the Mosque Al-Aqsa stands today. In 1897, “the protocols of the Elders of Zion” purport a global plan for Jewish hegemony by subverting the goals of gentiles through controlling the world and its economy. A map was presented in its meeting by the Jewish leaders in which all the calculated lands were surrounded by the snake and was published in 1903. For 1900 years, it has been thought that the Jewish holy sacred place was fallen by Titus, the Roman Emperor. But this will eventually happen that all lands of Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, some northern part of Saudi Arabia like cities of Tabuk and Khyber, southern part of Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine all will be taken away from Muslims by Jews for the construction of “Greater Israel”.
Jews persists with their current global population of 14.41 million and in Israel about 6.5 million Jews resides. So they want a formulation of all the Jews at one place in their “Greater Israel.” Zionists had planned to rule over this world with their four primary agendas as “Armageddon” which is an immense of mass destruction, formulation of “Greater Israel”, “Demolition of Masjid al-Aqsa (Bayt al-Maqdis) and Dome of the Rock and construction of their third temple”. Temple Mount is the noble sanctuary and believed that from here the Holy Prophet (PBUH) ascended to the “Divine Presence” on the back of a winged horse so is therefore its highly venerated for Muslims as a holy site. Thereafter, Abdul Malik Bin Marwan built the Dome of the Rock in 691 CE, which was than covered through the thin sheet of gold by late Shah Hussain with 35 tones’, which the Jews believed to be use in their purpose when they will build their own third temple in future.
“Throne of David” still exists in the today’s world and the Jews want that “Throne of King David” into their “Greater Israel” as when it is silhouetted. It is that stone upon which Prophet Dawood (A.S) and Suleman (A.S) sat for coronation, and is now placed as coronation chair in Westminster Abbey. From ancient times till yet, the crown that is awarded to any Britain King or Queen and to all subsequent Israeli Kings the coronation is happened to be over that “Throne of David” which is placed in Westminster abbey and the Jews along with neo conservatives are agreed that when greater Israel will be constructed, they will take back that stone (Throne of David) there. But prior to burgeoning, the Jews want to destabilize Pakistan and Afghanistan, potentially when they will descend Masjid Al-Aqsa and Bait Al Maqdas, the whole Muslim world will be so ignited and flared up. At that time Muslim countries will be so fragile, fragmented by the influence of global powers that they would be their pocket unions and would not be enough competent to take any substantial action against their enemies and so could not be in position to consolidate the Muslim Ummah.
The governments will therefore be functioning like puppets and dummy so they will eventually be unable to stand out for their own people and will loose the base to support the basic Muslim cause. In the six days war of 1967 Arab-Israel war, Israel defeated three Muslim states and took Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights and West Bank. And in the West Bank, the two holy sites of Muslims exist as Masjid Al Aqsa and Temple Mount. And Israel in celebration of their first victory in Paris under David Ben Gurion (1st Prime Minister of Israel) proclaims, “We do not endure any apprehensions from any Muslim state we just have the fear from Pakistan.” At that time Pakistan was not even the nuclear power. We need to be well aware that our enemies have penetrated so much into our country and much into us. We must be cognizant of the aspirations of US, Israel and India for Pakistan so to know as where we are heading. May Allah protect Pakistan from such prospective venomous agendas?
Source: pakobserver.net/jewish-agenda-muslim-world/
----
Has Pakistan Made Winning Choices?
By Mosharraf Zaidi
January 10, 2018
Let us examine Pakistan’s response to international pressure on three UNSC sanctioned groups – the Haqqani Network, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Muhammad.
The Haqqani Network (HQN) is now essentially the Afghan Taliban – whatever distinction we may once have been able to make between the two groups stands largely erased after the multiple changes at the top of the Afghan Taliban’s leadership, and the more prominent role for members of the Haqqani clan in that leadership structure. When anyone asks for the HQN to be shut down, they are essentially asking for Afghanistan to be rid of the most potent challenger to the US-backed Afghan state. So the question on the HQN really is this: What does Pakistan gain from clinging to the HQN and, in the bargain, destroying its friendship with the US?
The Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) is now essentially the Milli Muslim League (MML); whatever distinctions we may be compelled to draw between them are non-essential. Pakistani strategists have taken a long-standing international liability and transformed it into a domestic tumour. How fast it spreads and how deeply it penetrates will be determined by the people of this country – but, left unmolested, there are those who feel that ‘Prime Minister Hafiz Saeed’ would be the best antidote to Pakistan’s problems. That such people are not in jail, and not getting mental health support, is an indictment of the accountability mechanisms for public servants. When anyone asks about the LeT or JuD now, they are not asking for only about internationally sanctioned group accused of terror anymore, they are also asking about a political party that is perceived to be close to the views of some in the establishment.
So the question on the LeT, and more importantly on Hafiz Saeed is this: what does Pakistan gain from taking Hafiz Saeed out of house arrest, onto television screens with male bimbos interviewing him breathlessly, and into the political mainstream via the Milli Muslim League? Especially if all this is done whilst thumbing Pakistan’s nose at the international community – including, as it turns out, the Palestinian Authority, for whom Hafiz Saeed is what he is to the rest of the world: a terrorist.
The Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) receives the least attention, but represents the most complicated of the three. Unlike the Haqqanis, the JeM is not the guarantor of a Pakistani seat at the table. Unlike the LeT, the JeM has not been launched as a legitimate mainstream political party. When indications after the Pathankot incident pointed toward the JeM, and Indian officials suggested that there was no evidence that the JeM had the support of the Pakistani state, many optimists on the Pakistan-India relationship felt buoyed. But India’s suspicions are certainly piqued when China blocks the naming of Masood Azhar as a terrorist by the UN, not once but twice. So the question on the JeM is this: what does Pakistan gain from China going to bat for Masood Azhar at the UN?
These questions are deeply interlinked with the Trump administration’s dangerous and escalatory behaviour with Pakistan. The low-IQ reaction to American accusations of a double-game is to trot out the same hackneyed lines about Pakistan’s great sacrifices in the “war on terror”. This is low IQ for many reasons, but let us actually lists some of them out to clarify what they are.
First, when Pakistan suggests that it should be respected because it has sacrificed 70,000 of its citizens in the fight against terror, it is shifting the agency for this fight away from Pakistan, and to those whose respect it craves. Did the Pakistan Army and the politicians who go along with it really fight the war on terror for America? Are the soldiers, spies and officers (not to mention police personnel) that have died in this fight a sacrificial offering to the US? No. They are not, were not, never will be. Pakistanis died for Pakistan. Not for the US.
econd, when Pakistan suggests that it should be respected because 70,000 lives have been lost in its fight against terror, it is attributing great competence and success to terrorists. Have you ever heard anyone try to win an argument by emphasising how much was lost? Pakistan is the only country in modern history to beat back a terror-fuelled, internationally financed campaign to destroy the country – what it has achieved against the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi are case studies in beating terrorism. No other country can boast of this kind of track record. Yet Pakistani talking points begin and end with how much Pakistan has lost: how many lives were lost, how much money was lost, how much of our syncretic culture was lost, how much tolerance was lost.
Meanwhile, Pakistan produced its best art, its best music, its best film, its best heroines, its best political resistance, its best urban infrastructure, and its best education, health and public services reforms during the same period when it was fighting the terrorists. So yes, many thousands of Pakistanis have died – but their deaths should not be currency in our negotiations with international partners or adversaries. We should have kept them alive. What we can legitimately be proud of is our ability to power through despite odds that would have flattened and destroyed many other countries.
Third, and this is most important, when Pakistan claims that it should be respected because of its sacrifices in the struggle against violent extremism and terrorism, it must remember that the country is then compelled to respect other countries with similar experiences. Most importantly, this would include Afghanistan, a country that has lived through conflict constantly since the late 1970s. Four generations of Afghans know only war and conflict. Four generations of Afghans know only displacement and disability. Four generations. There is no Afghan alive today that has not lived through a war that has destroyed major Afghan cities entirely. So if Pakistan deserves respect because it has suffered conflict and casualties and economic damage, then Afghanistan does too.
The problem with this moral equivalence is that Pakistan’s arguments for respect around the world are burdened with the HQN, LeT, and JeM. Pakistan’s case, otherwise very strong, is saddled with questions about what the country gains from continuing to cling to these three groups that are deemed to be terrorist entities by the United Nations Security Council sanctions regime.
When Indians claim victimhood to terror, despite belonging to a country that elected a religious extremist with a reputation as a butcher, and despite the continued brutality of India’s occupation of Kashmir, the world listens. When Afghans claim victimhood to terror, they do it in sync with similar claims by the world’s most powerful country. The president of that country has now explicitly claimed this victimhood, and announced an intention to end it.
Most of Pakistan’s next moves will be determined by the military, because civilian leaders keep passing up opportunities to take ownership of the national security agenda. This is unfortunate because Trump’s tweet is like the US raid on Bin Laden or the terrorist attack on APS Peshawar, an exogenous shock that allows for difficult questions to be asked. While the world asks why Pakistan clings to the HQNs, LeTs and JeMs of the world, Pakistanis should know better. There is one reason and one reason alone: India.
So the real question is not why the HQN, LeT (now MML), or JeM are still in business. The real question is whether these tools have served in any way to prevent the emergence of a regional hegemon status for India. The real question is whether these tools have helped or harmed Pakistan’s own narrative about itself, for its people, forgetting for a moment what other countries think of Pakistan. The real question is: what do we think of ourselves? If these tools were meant to have prevented India from winning, and Pakistan from losing, then the real question is: is this what winning feels like?
Source: thenews.com.pk/print/266586-has-pakistan-made-winning-choices
----
Jilted Lover Syndrome
By Zahid Hussain
January 10, 2018
IT was coming for a long time; yet, we had remained in a state of deep denial. President Trump’s tweet may be humiliating and obnoxious, but should we be surprised by the US action? What the self-proclaimed “stable genius” declared in the crudest way possible has been stated in a more nuanced manner by other US officials many times in the past.
Now a faulty relationship is about to break even if a complete rupture may not be imminent. It is, indeed, reprehensible to be ‘put on notice’ by an old ally. But no less disgusting is our jilted lover syndrome. Our response to Trump’s tweet and the subsequent suspension of US military assistance has been perplexing.
hile crying hoarse over the ‘betrayal’ and recalling our sacrifices, many in the government and opposition have declared in the same breath that ‘it is not our war’. They need to make up their minds. Our own tweeting foreign minister is trying to match the irrationality of Trump with his bombastic retorts which make no sense.
Not to be left behind is our ubiquitous ISPR spokesman who laments the “misunderstanding with a friend”. Meanwhile, the foreign ministry dumps its angst on Afghanistan. It is not just about articulation; these incoherent and often contradictory statements reflect a state of utter disarray in our own policymaking process.
The Trump administration now seeks to extend the Afghan war well inside Pakistan.
It is so obvious that there is not even clarity about the challenges, leave aside dealing with them rationally. Indeed, a critical alliance is at stake, but there is no point in getting hysterical. It is not the first time we are witnessing a low in our relations with Washington, though such a show of hostility by the US administration is unprecedented.
We had seen Pakistan-US ties hitting their lowest ebb in 2011 following the air strike on the Salala border post that killed more than a dozen army soldiers and officers. But we handled the crisis more deftly without compromising our national security interests. The incident drove Pakistan to close down the supply lines to the coalition forces in Afghanistan. They were reopened after the US apologised for its action.
That also resulted in a recalibration of relations between the two allies — morphing from being a strategic alliance to more of a transactional arrangement. Both civil and military aid from the US had already been drying up during the fag end of the second Obama term — a clear manifestation of the growing distrust though there was still some convergence of interests between the two countries in ending the Afghan war.
Now the residual transactional relationship too has come under strain after Trump’s latest punitive move. The aid is now directly linked to Pakistan more actively supplementing the US war in Afghanistan. More precisely, the Trump administration now seeks to extend the Afghan war well inside Pakistan.
Undoubtedly, the Trump administration’s policy towards Pakistan is driven mainly by its own growing frustration over the American failure to defeat the Afghan Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. There are other geopolitical factors too determining the new American hard-line approach.
But it also reflects, to some extent, our diplomatic failure to effectively push our narrative in Washington. There is hardly any Pakistani lobby in the Congress. While there is some criticism on the crude way Trump has handled the issue, Pakistan’s position has no takers in Washington despite this country’s contribution to fighting terrorism.
It may not be entirely our fault but we could see it coming. In fact, there was already a clear warning when Trump announced his administration’s South Asia policy last year. His new national security strategy left no ambiguity about the US administration turning the screws on Islamabad. In fact, Trump had used much harsher language while presenting the controversial strategy accusing Pakistan of not ‘delivering what it was being paid for’.
It is apparent that the suspension of the US military assistance and the Coalition Support Fund is only the first step and that some other measures are likely to follow. American officials have already laid on the table the conditions for Pakistan if the aid is to be revived; these include taking action against the Afghan Taliban, especially the Haqqani network allegedly operating from Pakistani soil.
It has been hard for Pakistan to satisfy the American demand so far and it is not likely to happen. So there is certainly a need for reviewing our options, but that must not be driven by the suspension of US aid. It is time to rationally think where our interests converge and where they diverge.
We must not hesitate to take action against any militant group if it is using our territory for cross-border terrorist attacks. This is in our own security interest. The stability of Afghanistan is important for us and we must cooperate with the international community in combating terrorism. But surely, we must not fight any other country’s battle just for the sake of financial assistance. Pakistan has survived the 1990s when it was the most sanctioned country with all US aid having been stopped, and it can do so now as well.
What is most dangerous, however, is the revival of the retrogressive discourse that fighting terrorism and militancy is America’s war. Nothing could be more nonsensical. Thousands of our soldiers have not been killed fighting for the American cause; they gave their lives fighting the terrorists responsible for the death of thousands of Pakistanis. Pakistan faced an existential threat with our northwest tribal regions and part of KP once being under the control of the Pakistani Taliban. We have to continue fighting them irrespective of our future relationship with the US.
Relations between nations are based on mutual interest and respect. Interstate relations are not static and there is no such thing as permanent friendship as many in Pakistan tend to believe. There is certainly a need for resetting this faltering alignment keeping in view our own national security interests. But it must not be used to reverse our commitment to fight terrorism that threatens our own security much more.
Source: dawn.com/news/1381973/jilted-lover-syndrome
----
A Tell-All Account
By Mahir Ali
January 10, 2018
THERE are 10 days to go for the first anniversary of Donald Trump’s inauguration as the president of the US, and the run-up has hardly been propitious.
Michael Wolff’s book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, rush-released last Friday following a threat to seek an injunction against its publication after juicy extracts appeared in The Guardian and New York Magazine, prompted a presidential meltdown, with Trump tweeting that when his chief strategist Stephen Bannon lost his job he also lost his mind and that, contrary to the claims attributed to a wide range of his closest aides, he himself “would qualify as not smart, but genius … and a very stable genius at that!”
If this were to be a part of legal proceedings, the prosecution could at this point safely rest its case. No one needs to read Wolff’s book to realise that the president is as far from being a genius as any of his predecessors. And that’s saying quite a lot, given the mental acuity of recent incumbents such as George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. As far as stability is concerned, there’s a Twitter feed going back to 2009 that more than suffices as incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.
Petty-minded sniping against Barack Obama consumes much of Trump’s tweeting energy beyond 2011, but there is also frequent kowtowing to the Clintons and, in 2012 — after his favoured candidate, Mitt Romney, had lost to Obama — this little gem: “The electoral college is a disaster for democracy.” It was followed by: “He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!”
Trump’s slow-motion car crash could continue.
The latter tweet was deleted not long afterwards. Obama did not lose the popular vote in 2012: he had an advantage of well over four million. In 2016, by contrast, Trump gained the electoral college but was almost 3m votes behind Hillary Clinton in the popular count. A disaster for democracy indeed. Claiming that Clinton’s popular advantage was based on fake votes, he instituted a probe which was unceremoniously wound up recently.
The vintage tweets come from an annotated collection, published last year, called How Trump Thinks. In a nod to Mao Zedong, perhaps a better title would have been ‘The Thoughts of Chairman Chump’. After all, the stream of semi-consciousness that finds its way into Trump’s Twitter feed, ranging from ad hominem attacks to international policymaking — not least the cessation of security assistance to Pakistan based on complaints about Islamabad’s duplicity — tends to substantiate some of the worst fears about his presidency’s predilections.
For the most part, Wolff’s book reiterates much of what is already known about the Trump White House. It contains considerable detail, though, and some interesting revelations. Wolff has a bit of a reputation for sexing up what he knows and occasionally using his imagination to fill in the blanks. Yet, although the White House has predictably damned the book as fiction and fantasy, most of the attributed quotes have not been denied.
Bannon, cut off not just by Trump but also by the Mercer family that parachuted him into the Republican presidential campaign in 2016, has sought to clarify that his accusation of treason in the context of a Trump Tower meeting with Russian representatives who offered the campaign dirt on Clinton was directed at then campaign manager Paul Manafort rather than Donald Trump Jr. He did not, however, mention Jared Kushner, who was also present.
The president’s son-in-law, whose responsibilities stretch from bringing peace to the Middle East (notwithstanding his family’s business interests in Israel) to overseeing the modernisation of the US economy, despite a lack of experience, was Bannon’s chief adversary in the West Wing, alongside his wife Ivanka, and remains a bête noire for the far-right Breitbart ideologue who, according to Wolff, sees himself as a presidential contender for 2020 who could carry on the Trump ‘revolution’ without the burden of coping with Trump himself.
The president, meanwhile, is reportedly keen on UN ambassador Nikki Haley as a replacement for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. For whatever it’s worth, Wolff’s book, based on insider access quite possibly on false pretences, is just the prologue. The slow-motion car crash could carry on for at least another three years.
But let’s not forget, as someone recently put it, this presidency is a case of the cartoon running alongside the main feature. The latter ranges from tax cuts for the rich, the lifting of environmental controls and belligerence towards immigrants to sordid understandings with Israel and Saudi Arabia. Wolff, like many of us, is mainly focused on the cartoon. But, who knows, the main feature might end with a mighty bang before the cartoon limps to a conclusion.
Source: dawn.com/news/1381984/a-tell-all-account
----
Caught In the Crossfire
By Kamal Siddiqi
January 8, 2018
Earlier this month, the US State Department added Pakistan to a special watch list, while re-designating a group of other countries as being of “particular concern” on the issue of religious freedom. Under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, the US re-designated Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. What a wonderful club we have joined.
The timing of this placement comes when Pakistan and US are fighting a war of words over the tweet by the American president. Officials in Pakistan feel that the US will try and censure Pakistan in more ways than one. The placement is cited by our bureaucrats as one such example.
This takes away attention from a very real issue — the consistent manner in which members of our religious minorities are being targeted by different groups, while the government looks the other way.
Pakistan has to seriously look at its record not only with regards to religious minorities but also certain communities like the Hazara community. The government has largely been unable to trace the attackers and bring them to justice. Hundreds of innocent people have lost their lives for no fault of their own.
I recall meeting members of the Hazara community in Karachi as hundreds have migrated here from their hometown of Quetta given how unsafe it is there for them. Bright young men and women tell me how hard it is for them to venture out of their homes to earn a living or pursue an education. It is a shame for us that we allow them to live in such fear and danger.
Random killing of members of their community continues to be a common occurrence. Out of desperation they leave the country. I once interviewed a Pakistani journalist of Hazara origin in Sydney, where he had fled after threatened by a religious outfit while doing his job in Pakistan.
This young man pines for home but says he fears he will be killed if he goes back. I wonder why citizens of Pakistan have to face this fate in their own country. This young man risked life and limb to board an illegal boat to Australia. Today he barely ekes out a living. But he says he is happy as at least he is alive. Where did we lose the August 11 vision of the Quaid? What has become of us?
Several religious minorities suffer from random attacks on its members. Systematically members of these communities are being killed by unidentified persons on account of their beliefs. Despite the dangers they face, most of the members of the community continue to live as best they can in Pakistan as not all of them can leave and claim political asylum.
The Christian community received a number of jolts after their places of worship and homes were attacked and hundreds killed. Apart from the daily mistreatment many of them receive, they continue to live the best they can in their homeland. It is only now, after the ending of the separate electorate system that some politicians have started to pay lip service to these communities.
Christians are frequently targeted for their beliefs and in many disputes end up being accused of blasphemy. Most Christians are poor and illiterate and easy targets. In most instances, it is the parcels of land that they own which are sought after by greedy landlords.
Forced conversions continue to be a recurring theme for the Hindu community in Sindh. Despite legislation and protests, many young Hindu women have been kidnapped and converted forcibly to Islam under the eyes of the law. The Hindu community is targeted for other reasons and every time there is a lynching in India of a Muslim, the community has to bear the brunt on this side of the border.
These are only a small number of examples of a much larger problem. Those arrested for rioting in Youhanabad have been offered to be let off if they convert to Islam. The whole attitude of the majority is to convert all minorities to Islam, taking away the beauty in diversity of this country. It is time we looked at ourselves in the mirror and had a serious dialogue. We don’t need the US to tell us that.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1603118/6-caught-in-the-crossfire/
-----
Justice with Benefits
By Bilal Rana
January 9, 2018
Dr Tahir ul Qadri’s comments at the outset of All Parties Conference (APC) set the agenda for his future course of action. Along with seeking justice for the Model Town tragedy, he emphatically declared the annihilation of Sharif Sultanate as the broader objective of his struggle.
Timings could not be more opportune for Dr Qadri. Despite its public bravado, the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) is visibly brittle after the successive fiascos of Dawn Leaks, Panama Case, and Khatm-e-Nabuwwat issue. Their recent tirade against the judiciary and the establishment is not helping their cause either. With the ouster of the elder Sharif from electoral politics, the younger Sharif is poised to carry the mantle of the PML-N in the next elections as prime ministerial candidate. Regarded as the architect of party strength in Punjab, he exercises a firm grip over party affairs in the province. Dislodging Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and embroiling him in the Model Town case with serious legal ramifications, poses an existential threat to the Sharif clan and PML-N politics.
Mainstream opposition parties sense the opportunity. After all, it makes political sense to pursue the high ideals of justice and the rule of law, and in the process gain critical political mileage.
Former president Asif Zardari — an acclaimed maestro of political manoeuvering and surprises — visited the Minhaj Secretariat twice. Thumping his fist on the dais repeatedly, he chanted slogans for the ouster of the Punjab CM. This is the same PPP which stood with the elder Sharif when similar demands were voiced by the PAT during the 2014 sit-in. If their stance was to safeguard democracy then, has the PPP consulted some other dictionary to reconsider the contours of democracy in 2018? With their electoral presence in disarray in Punjab, the PPP is desperate to regain its lost turf. Their current aggressive posture betrays aspirations other than their new found love for justice.
The PTI has been consistent in hounding the Sharifs from day one. Thus, Imran Khan’s close consultations and unwavering support for Dr Qadri falls in the pattern. But can we forget how the two brothers in arms fell out when the PAT left the PTI midstream at the height of the sit-in? However, such flimsy misunderstandings can be conveniently set aside in realpolitik if the prized booty is the head of probably the last bastion of PML-N fortress. If the Hudaibiya decision dampened PTI expectations regarding the political future of the Punjab CM, the Model Town case has the potential to deliver the same outcome with venom. The prospect of contesting Punjab without Shehbaz at the helm promises significant electoral dividends to the PTI.
Waiting with open arms for some months, the PML-Quaid has yet to welcome old comrades from the PML-N in hordes, as the ruling party displays some semblance of resilience. Shehbaz’s exclusion from the scene can reinvigorate their political fortunes and electoral relevance. The Jamaat-e-Islami, the Sunni Tehreek, Mustafa Kamal’s Pak Sarzameen Party, and other participants of the APC, besides unifying for a worthy cause, are repositioning and launching their electoral campaigns for 2018. Missing the bandwagon will only do political harm.
Despite fluctuating perceptions, the 2018 elections appear as a tangible reality now. Political parties need to galvanise their internal ranks and street power to brace for a robust political campaign. The Model Town incident offers them an occasion to flex their muscles before the final thrust.
Spearheading a national alliance to replace the entrenched Sharif power, Dr Qadri is in a unique position to become relevant and potent on the national scene. Demanding resignations from the Punjab CM and the law minister, invoking a legal course by appealing to the CJ for suo-motu action and seeking Panama-style Joint Investigation Team, building public pressure with sit-in and agitation, he is prepared to utilise all avenues to subdue the Sharifs. Besides seeking retribution for Model Town victims, Dr Qadri must be relishing the prospect of leading political heavyweights from across the spectrum.
The Punjab government must be thinking hard these days. Recent humiliation of the PML-N government to grapple with the Islamabad sit-in at the centre must be haunting them. Can the Punjab government afford the breakdown of civil order and authority right at their nerve centre? Resorting to force will be disastrous, cowing down to pressure will expose vulnerability. With their firebrand law minister and a brigade of loud-mouthed spokesmen, a balancing act has traditionally not been the PML-N forte. It would be a surprise if they can bring some novelty out of their rusted political armour.
Flashed live on our television screens, the brutal massacre of 14 people, with more than a hundred injured, maimed and incapacitated by state troopers in broad daylight demands nothing less than justice. The Punjab government has failed to satisfy victims and aggrieved parties about its seriousness to pursue the case transparently. The report by the Baqir Najfi Commission has added fresh fuel to the already simmering cauldron of the Model Town tragedy. Whether Dr Qadri’s allies further their own political agenda in the garb of high ideals, or whether they invoke public, political, or legal options to seek elusive justice, the Model Town episode refuses to die down easily. Whether it sweeps away the rug under the Sharif rule is for time to determine. For now, the grand political chessboard is spread and the players are anticipating their moves.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1603619/6-justice-with-benefits/
----
Say No to US Dictates
By Dr Muhammad Khan
January 10, 2018
ALTHOUGH, the entire world community finds it difficult to pull on with Trump’s America, however, Islamabad is particularly finding trouble to have an honourable bilateral relationship with Washington. Ever since President Trump announced his South Asian policy, there have been repeated hostile and pejorative statements from almost all security related departments of United States. The main focus of US fury has been that, Pakistan is hospitable to Afghan Taliban, especially the Haqqanis. On January 8, 2018, CIA Director Mike Pompeo while talking to CBS News said, “We see that Pakistan is continuing to provide safe harbour, havens inside of Pakistan for terrorists who present risks to the United States of America. We are doing our best to inform the Pakistanis that that is no longer going to be acceptable.”
The funny Pompeo like his boss is issuing statements as if Pakistan is a joke and 210 million Pakistanis are US paid servants. On a number of occasions, Pakistan has told both civil and military officials of US that, Islamabad does not harbour any terrorist outfit in its soil and has adopted a uniform policy in combating terrorists. Even Pakistan offered US to provide evidence, if it has against this group if really they are inside Pakistani soil. Earlier US Secretary of State and Defence Secretary have followed the footprints of President Trump. This is first time in its recent history that, Pakistan has refused to accept US demands and gave a cold response to its directives. Rather, in the heart of their hearts, the people of Pakistan are very happy that, finally they are getting rid of US financial and military assistance, which has been quite meagre, however brought lofty US demands in lieu. It is noteworthy that in the past, the scanty US assistance has made Pakistan a dependent state, rather independent. Now, Pakistan is exploring other options for self-sufficiency, indigenous production and diversification in its international relations.
But, Pakistan quest for an independent policy, discarding the peanut financial aid is not liked by Washington either. The CIA boss on one hand threatened Pakistan and on other hand said, “If they (Pakistan) fix this problem, we’re happy to continue to engage with them and be their partner. But if they don’t, we’re going to protect America.” In a way, U.S wants to have carrot and stick policy, which it had with Pakistan since last seventy years? Defence Secretary, James Mattis too have similar thinking for a re-engagement with Pakistan but on US terms. Mattis told DNA on January 6, 2018 that, Washington will restore security aid to Pakistan, provided Pakistan takes action against Haqqanis. “We’re still working with Pakistan, and we would restore the aid if we see decisive movements against the terrorists, who are as much of a threat against Pakistan as they are against us.” The ISPR clarified Pakistani position and its Director General said, “The Pakistan Army has indiscriminately targeted terrorists, including the Haqqani network at a heavy cost of blood and treasure.” This is the factual position, Pakistan has explained to US many times.
There is a strong feeling at White House and Pentagon that, US pressure and dictates on Pakistan have proved counter-productive. Rather, Pakistan feels more comfortable, while being away from this exploitative super power. Furthermore, such a US attitude is pushing Pakistan closer to China and Russia, to whom US has already declared rivals and revisionist states in Trump New National Security Strategy. Indeed, US did not expect such a straightforward response from Pakistan, which was very rare in the bilateral history of both countries. In the past Pakistan generally accepted US dictates without much resistance. In this regards, the statement of Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif is very significant. He said, “US behaviour is neither that of an ally nor of a friend. They, the US and allies, have the best and highly equipped forces. How come they could not perform in Afghanistan?” In fact, while putting blame of its own failure in Afghanistan on Pakistan, Trump and his military establishment want to come clean in front of US masses, who questions $700 billion defence budget of U.S military. Pakistani refusal to take US blame has put the Trump administration and the Pentagon in a state of embarrassment.
The bilateral Pak-US relationship is at a critical juncture, dictated by the principles of either disengagement or re-engagement. Both sides have a desire to maintain a working relationship with each other, the policy of re-engagement. However, with the current hard-line US stance against Pakistan, this policy will not work anymore. US will have to be realistic in the inter-state relationship with a nuclear power having prolonged strategic partnership with it. Gone are days, when Pakistan used to succumb infront of United States strategic objectives. The future direction of Pak-US relationship should be guided by the principles of sovereignty, national integrity and equality. The policy formulators and people at the helm of affairs at Islamabad must not accept any demand from Washington at the cost of national interests and collective national pride of Pakistan. Bold and futuristic decisions at decisive moments always make the nations strong and great. Pakistani nation is resilient, courageous and respectful, let’s have a similar leadership and say No to any US dictate.
Source: pakobserver.net/say-no-us-dictates/
----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/pakistan-press/jewish-agenda-muslim-world-mahrukh/d/113878