When it comes to Pakistan, there are at least two narratives in the American media; one constructed by quasi-positive direct quotes of the administration, the other, an acrimonious narrative created by ‘unnamed’ official sources.

From stories that raised concerns on the safety of nuclear assets to exposes that alleged Pakistan reverse engineered legacy Harpoon missiles; from allegations that ISI engineered attacks on the Indian embassy in Kabul to claims that ISI officials participated in high level Taliban meetings in Quetta; an image of ‘Pakistan gone wild’ is well established in the American imagination.

After a New York Times story last week claimed that Pakistanis had become “emboldened” by the firing of Gen. McChrystal, Pakistan has been painted in a box that can be very easily labeled ‘evil’ when needed. The New York Times story and subsequent commentaries on American TV channels claim that Pakistan is trying to exploit the Obama administration’s perceived vulnerability in Afghanistan to carve a larger role for itself.

Interestingly, none of the sources were named. As a journalist with nearly twenty years of reporting I understand one often needs to protect the source, but even after not finding WMDs in Iraq, even after recognizing how many critical mistakes were made in the past ten years, mainstream journalists continue to trust the ‘whisperers’ who say one thing on the record another behind closed doors. This duplicitous tactic puts Pakistan in a very tenuous situation.

Up until recently, American think tanks and officials had complained that Kabul and Islamabad were extremely hostile to each other and that they should work together. The entire AFPAK strategy was premised on the argument that you can’t have enduring peace without participation of all local stakeholders. I remember attending an elegant reception co-hosted by Pakistani and Afghan diplomats in Washington DC where Special Representative Holbrooke was positioned as the potential grand savior of the region. This reception was touted by the American administration as a clear demonstration that both the Afghans and Pakistanis were willing to work together. It was Holbrooke’s first milestone. Americans at that time complained that Kabul and Islambad had very siloed strategies and that was counterproductive.

But, now the American media has begun complaining that General Kayani and President Karzai are keeping the Obama administration out of loop.

One wonders why this story was leaked a few days before General Kayani and Lt. General Pasha are heading back to Kabul. New York Times on June 24 reports: “Though encouraged by Washington, the thaw heightens the risk that the United States will find itself cut out of what amounts to a separate peace between the Afghans and Pakistanis, and one that does not necessarily guarantee Washington’s prime objective in the war: denying Al Qaeda a haven.”

There is another, more ominous possibility, though. Perhaps the Obama administration is persisting in the tradition of a popular Bush camp negotiating tactic, and the NYT story is the “stick” that follows promises of supplemental military aid and enhanced engagement with Pakistan army.

This is a high stake “tactic” that was used by the Bush administration; dates of events and the names of people and places, would continuously transform along a trajectory of a lethal narrative. Somehow, the identities of the main players manage to elude the mesmerized spectators, who watch an endless cast of characters all playing the same role of “evildoer” in “multiple theaters of wars.” In an instant, a cave-dwelling religious fanatic becomes a nationalist dictator. In an instant, an ally becomes an enemy.

Citing unnamed sources, the New York Times writes, “Despite General McChrystal’s 11 visits to General Kayani in Islamabad in the past year, the Pakistanis have not been altogether forthcoming on details of the conversations in the last two months, making the Pakistani moves even more worrisome for the United States.”

This should be “worrisome” for Pakistan as well. Is the Obama administration preparing to put the blame of possible failure in Afghanistan squarely on Islamabad? Or is it possible that Pakistani Generals are misreading an American exit strategy as ‘retreat’ and demanding a bigger role for Pakistan through extremist proxies?

Either scenario is lethal for Pakistan.

If the United States faults Pakistan for it’s failure in Afghanistan there is a possibility of direct retaliation against Pakistani assets that will not bode well for the region. And, if the Pakistan army is really pushing the Haqqani network and GHQ still views extremists as ‘strategic assets’, the country has no hope of progress.

By Malik Rashid

There is a council of Islamic ideology in Pakistan that advises government and legislative bodies on laws that are repugnant to Islam. Maulana Sherani, a rural maulvi from Baluchistan, without any academic credentials, has been appointed the chairman of the council replacing Dr. Khalid Masud, a PhD from Mcgill University. Insani Huqooq Ittehad (Human rights alliance), a body consisting of 30 NGOs demanded that the decision to appoint Maulana Sherani must be repealed because it contravenes the criterion laid out for such appointment.

But the nomination of Sherani to please JUI(F), a belligerent ally, for the passage of budget from the current session of parliament raises concerns. Prime Minister ZA Bhutto strengthened his government by declaring Ahmedis as non-Muslims and delivered Pakistan to fundamentalists.

Islamic Ideology Council was instituted by the 1962 constitution. It has been presided by academics and ex-judges of superior courts. Human-rights organizations view the appointment of a rural maulvi without proper education as a reversal to the dark days of extreme Islamism under Zia-ul-Haq. The presidency of the organization by a PhD could not become a guarantee against orthodoxy and religious extremism.

Maulana Sherani criticized the passage of a bill on harassment of women and walked out of the senate. The fight to purge the constitution of Pakistan from discrimination against women and minorities is still in its initial stage. Council’s recommendations on a woman’s right to divorce were sharply criticized by traditionalists. In 2007, the council recommended modification of hudood laws allowing exemption for victims of rape from the charge of adultery.

Recommendations of the council from earlier years include one that suggests erasure of human image from rupee bills. Prohibiting a woman from marrying without approval of a male sponsor (wali), banning women from appearing in ads or songs to banning co-education, the council of Islamic ideology , Federal Shariat Court and ministry of religious affairs have provided enough material to keep Pakistanis embroiled in futile controversy and played their role in perpetuating ignorance.

Khaled Ahmed, in his column published in Friday Times (January 11 to 17, 2002) wrote, “Most people think that extremism comes out of a misinterpretation of Islam. This is wrong. Extremism and violence occur when people do not accept what the Islamists regard as the irreducible crux of Islam in the shape of shariah.” Chopping hands and heads to prohibiting music, dance, insurance and banking, they are all held as the righteous way of sharia.

Instead of a council for rational investigation and enquiry, Pakistanis are stuck with the Council for Islamic ideology and Shariat court. Concern of human rights activists on Maulana Sherani’s headship of the council must be appreciated and shared by law-abiding, conscientious citizens.

Pop quiz: do you know Pakistan’s Ambassador to Chile, Malaysia, Venezuela, Brazil, or Russia? It is very likely that you don’t and, there is a reason – these countries don’t get adequate visibility in Pakistan.

Hussain Haqqani (USA), Wajid Shamsul Hassan (UK) and, Shahid Malik (India) are the few ambassadors that Pakistani media finds relevant, relegating all others to secondary and tertiary positions.

Every country has their list of top 10, top 25, top 50, and “rest of the world” often referred to in international parlance as “ROW” but Pakistan’s foreign policy lacks depth and width.

At the United Nations in New York, a venue that provides effective medium to socialize ideas of national interest, Pakistan has no traction in South-South diplomacy. And, the reason is rather simple; our foreign policy is so focused on the US, and India that Pakistani diplomats at the UN have no clear directives from Islamabad.

One can argue that maintaining friendship with the US and keeping an eye on the threat from India consumes so much energy and resources that we are unable to adequately interact with rest of the world. But, you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand that diversity in ‘diplomatic contacts’ will yield multi-faceted benefits for our country.

Unlike our engagements with the US, diplomacy with fellow developing countries are premised on the principle of voluntary partnerships – free from conditionality’s typical of neo-colonial interactions.

Would it benefit Pakistan to build a relationship of trust with Venezuela? Caracas can play strategic role in improving Pakistan’s position among developing nations – and provide Pakistani entrepreneur another destination to export. Google “Pakistan ambassador to Venezuela” and you will be disappointed with the result.

The cynics among us will proclaim: we can’t afford to build stronger ties with Venezuela without ruffling feathers in Washington and that is why we don’t do much with Caracas. But Chile is a trusted American ally.

And we have established a mission in Chile – a state that shares several similarities with Pakistan. Chile is often described as an American proxy state, had been under military rule for a major part of it’s post colonial history, and a country where a powerful intelligence agency had become the state within state. Sounds familiar?

Pakistani Ambassador to Chile Burhanul Islam seems to be gaining some ground with local political and business elite. Ambassador Islam says that Pakistan opened Embassy in Chile to establish multidimensional cooperation with particular focus on politics, economy, commerce, culture, defense and education. But these areas of focus were overshadowed when a Pakistani man with alleged terror ties was briefly held in Santiago. It was the first time you may have heard of Ambassador Islam or that we have a presence in Chile.

Why was Saif-ur-Rehman held – only time will tell but we know the evidence against him are so flimsy that the local judge finds it impossible to hold him behind bars.

It is easy to digress in conspiracy theory: Pakistan had started to make progress with Chilean elite and Americans felt it had to be contained. Or the American version of conspiracy theory: Pakistanis have established Chancery in Santiago to facilitate terror activities and export fanaticism to America via South America. Neither of these assumptions can be verified. And, let’s leave it at that.

Saif-Ur-Rehman’s arrest was not the only story about Chile-Pakistan relations lately: The provincial government of Balochistan has decided to terminate a multi-billion-dollar agreement with a Canadian-Chilean joint venture company to develop a copper and gold mine at Reko Dik. (This is a separate story which I plan to follow shortly).

In Brazil, an emerging power that should be our top priority, we have an embassy but no ambassador. First Secretary Ali Haider Altaf holds fort at the capital. Financial and cultural hubs of Sao Paulo and Rio De Janeiro are represented by honorary personal.

Google “Brazil” and look this country’s key performance indicators and tell me if you would want your top guy or gal to represent you in this rapidly emerging power. I bet you would. But, those who formulate our foreign policy in Islamabad don’t think so.

Take for example, Colombia – another important nation that we can easily call our friend – and we are represented by a Honorary Investment Counselor in it’s capital Bogota.

Going back to the pop quiz above – we do have embassies in Malaysia and Russia but chances are you have not heard names of these ambassadors. And, that is because these missions receive no visibility in Pakistani media – and old proverb “out of sight out of mind” is apropos.

Over the past 30 years, there has been an upsurge in South-South cooperation – ties that go far beyond trade and investments: education, science, agriculture, medicine, health services and information technologies.

I believe that this decade has been a truly transformational one in the South-South relationship. Many milestones have been met. Interactions between developing nations have yielded rich dividends in terms of cooperation between countries in many areas, underscoring the vitality and the relevance of strategic partnership.

The transformation in South-South relationship have taken place against the backdrop of developing nations’ initiatives to reform their economy and the geopolitical changes in the post-Cold War world.

To my mind, there are three main drivers that have led to this transformation.

First are shared values of democracy, pluralism, and tolerance and respect for fundamental freedom, which provides the underpinning of a durable relationship.

Second, there is the reality of growing economic linkages and people-to- people contact. Over the last two decades, businesses have formed strong and mutually beneficial partnerships; cooperation touching the lives of ordinary people about the power to connect and reaching out to the common denominator.

And, third, there is an increasing convergence of interests on major global issues. The imperatives of a multi-polar and interconnected world today set the stage for developing nations to work together to address global challenges whether it be the rising threat of terrorism and extremism or ensuring a balanced, equitable, and sustainable development for all — energy security and food security for the world at large.

Diplomacy plays a critical role in statecraft and foreign policy and Pakistan needs to start making it a priority. If you attend international ceremonies and festivities in Islamabad or Washington DC, you will often find that diplomats are called “bridge” between nations. There is more to that: diplomatic representatives abroad are the eyes, ears, and the mouth of the foreign office back home. If foreign policy is devised appropriately, diplomatic representatives in the field can fulfill their symbolic, legal and political roles. But effective execution by the foot soldiers is only possible when the visionaries at the head office are doing their job well.

Islamabad appears to be so focused on maintaining friendship with Washington and keeping an eye on Delhi that it has no time for rest of the world.

Every state apparatus requires intelligence agencies, and Pakistan is no different. There are actually three well known intelligence agencies in Pakistan: Intelligence Bureau (IB), Military Intelligence (MI), and ISI. There are 26 intelligence agencies in the US.

Somehow, the ISI and the CIA are the two that are most demonized.

The turmoil in Pakistan’s past has led to censure of the ISI. A visible feature of the ISI’s history that has done great damage to its reputation is the continual deterioration of civilian institutions due to multiple military coups. Despite some improvements in civil-military relations in recent years, the army remains a dominant actor in Pakistan’s political makeup.

Previous abuses of power should put intelligence reform at the top of the agenda for change. Before Pakistan can continue its democratic transition, these changes must be addressed. It seems some corrections to the system have already been made; ISI has recently demonstrated a previously unseen forthrightness with both local and international media.

However, the international community continues to blame the country’s problems on the ISI, but still maintains working relations with the agency. Often, these relations undermine the democratic government and vindicate the very intelligence actors that need to be controlled. This double standard can be avoided by direct involvement with the Pakistani government, rather than going through intelligence services.

Additionally, the integration of former ISI agents into other civilian bodies, particularly the IB, should be limited or stopped. Cross-recruitment prevents organizations from becoming independent.

Pakistan also needs to strengthen the police force. A better-trained and better-equipped police force can do a better job of counter terrorism, which work is currently used by the intelligence agencies to legitimize control over politics in Pakistan.

US Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano says that the US government is prepared to help develop Pakistan’s law enforcement infrastructure. From training police to setting up point-of-entries at Pakistan-Afghanistan borders, the US can help Pakistan using its experience regulating the US-Mexico border.

Ignoring the need to establish supremacy over the intelligence community would be a grave mistake on the part of Pakistan’s civilian government. Reducing the role of the military in the intelligence sector will allow the government to consolidate itself domestically, so it should be a top priority. In addition, government control over military and intelligence will cast a positive light on the state of Pakistan’s emerging democracy, and will improve international opinions of Pakistan.

Although reform to intelligence agencies will be difficult, the good news is that with patience, resolve, and international assistance, Pakistan’s government can indeed reassert civilian control over the intelligence community. Luckily for Pakistan, there are predecessors to take notes from. Indonesia and Chile have both undergone transformations in the intelligence arena and have plenty to offer Pakistan by way of example.

Intelligence agencies reform in Indonesia and Chile became a reality after media began exposing the atrocities and, people had the courage to reject authoritarianism. Reform of the murky Indonesian intelligence service, Badan Intelijen Negara (BIN), were spurred by revelations that emerged in the trial of the alleged killer of the country’s top human right activist.

Munir Said Thalib, died from arsenic poisoning while on a flight on Garuda, Indonesia’s national airline, from Jakarta to Amsterdam via Singapore on Sept. 7, 2004. Indonesian media exposed the hands behind Munir’s murder.

Extensive exposure by the mass media of the massive human rights violations and power abuse by the Tentara Nasional Indonesia (TNI), led to the abrupt breakdown in its public image. And, the abolition of “Dwifungsi ABRI” (the dual-function of the military) became a major demand of the pro-democracy movement.

In this same sense, the Pakistani media’s role is necessary to question the functioning of ISI. To cite but one example, there has been no follow-up on Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s accusations of ISI agents, kidnapping her.

In saying all this, though, we must remember not to throw out the baby with the bath water. Like any other state, Pakistan needs a strong defense system. Calling for military and intelligence reform should not be confused with anti-nationalism; we must always remember the sacrifices of those foot soldiers that valiantly put their lives on the line for their nation’s security.

This article was first published here: http://tribune.com.pk/story/19739/transform-muscle-flexing-isi-into-civil-intelligence/

NOTE: Our website was compromised but we were able to restore it. We will continue to amplify voices of the subaltern – the most vulnerable minorities, women, peasants, workers, and students.

All the contributors to this blog believe human values should express a commitment to improve human welfare in this world. Ethical principles should be evaluated by their consequences for people, not by how well they conform to preconceived ideas of right and wrong.

We are open for debate again! We believe that through a process of value inquiry, reflective men and women can reach rough agreement concerning values, and craft ethical systems that deliver desirable results under most circumstances.

I am reposting an article by Malik Rashid – let’s continue to talk

==============
Friday prayer congregations at two Ahmadiyya mosques were attacked by grenades, gun-fire and suicide-bombers in Lahore. More than 90 individuals lost their lives and over 100 suffered wounds. Taliban of Punjab claimed responsibility.

Journalists reporting the hour long brutality might have been surprised to know that Ahmadiyya worship places cannot be referred as ‘mosques’, according to a constitutional amendment introduced by General Zia-ul-Haq.

Ahmadiyya is a sect that came into being in early 20th century among Punjabi Muslims. Besides making fantastic claims like all other religions, Ahmadis relinquished Jihad(Holy war) by sword, and resolved to rely on the power of argument.

Religious extremism, especially killing and persecution of Ahmadi-Muslims in Pakistan is as old as the country itself. An army doctor, Major Mahmood was murdered by a mob of mullas in Quetta in 1948. A martial-law was imposed in Lahore to curb anti-Ahmadi riot in 1953. Muslim League made an alliance with ‘Ahrar’, the Ahmadi-haters, in the elections of 1951 and the religious zealots celebrated ‘Yom-e-Tashakkur’ (thanksgiving) because no Ahmadi made it into the parliament. Mian Daulatana, the Muslim-League Chief Minister, was sacked by the Governor General after the 1953 riot.

A prominent TV journalist was recently caught on tape talking to Punjabi Taliban against the Ahmadis. Attempt to show strength against Facebook by religious sections did not gain much support among Muslims in Pakistan and abroad. This brutality against unarmed, innocent worshipers could have been another show-off by Islamic extremists who fear extinction.

As families in Lahore grieve the demise of their loved ones, Pakistanis all over the world feel perplexed over the resolve of those who should be fighting the scourge of Taliban. Quoting instances of Taliban presence in Punjab, a Dawn editorial expressed,” What more will it take to convince the provincial government that the Punjabi Taliban are a reality that cannot be wished away?”

The ruling Muslim League in Punjab enjoys friendly relations with Jihadi outfits for political gains like the Muslim League of 1953. Talking to media, Senior Advisor to Punjab Chief Minister Zulifiqar Khosa said that an operation was started in the tribal areas because the writ of the government was challenged, but Punjab is not facing such problems.

Justice Munir and Justice Kayani wrote in their report on anti-Ahamadiyya riot of 1953, “If there is one thing that has been conclusively demonstrated in this inquiry, it is that provided you can persuade the masses to believe that something they are asked to do is religiously right or enjoined by religion, you can set them to any course of action, regardless of all considerations of discipline, loyalty, decency, morality or civic sense.”

A proper analysis of religious extremism and its influence on military, politics and government could help us understand the problem in its depth and width. After condemning Arabs for the 9/11 terrorist incidents and invading Afghanistan in 2001, US media has been identifying Pakistan as the root-problem.

USA and their allies are waging a war against the terrorists to address their own security problem but Pakistanis have been mutilated and oppressed by these faithful warriors for ever. Educated Pakistanis must rise up against religious fanaticism if they do not want to see their country descend into a Somalia.