Wednesday 30 March 2016

Christians, Hindus and Shia Muslims are under attack every day, Farahnaz Ispahani

 Christians, Hindus and Shia Muslims are under attack every day, Farahnaz Ispahani
Interview: By Muhammad Akbar Notezai   March 10, 2016
Farahnaz Ispahani is a well-known Pakistani writer based in Washington, D.C. She has recently authored a book, Purifying the Land of the Pure: Pakistan’s Religious Minorities. In 2013-2014, she served as a Public Policy Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. In 2012, she was listed among Foreign Policy magazine’s Top 100 Global Thinkers, as well as Newsweek Pakistan’s Top 100 Women Who Matter. Besides writing for national and international papers, she has also worked at ABC News, CNN and MSNBC as a journalist. She recently spoke with The Diplomat’s Muhammad Akbar Notezai.
What do you mean by “Purifying the Land of the Pure?”
Pakistan was originally conceived of as a homeland for South Asia’s Muslims. Pakistan’s purpose was to protect the subcontinent’s largest religious minority. Over time, however, religious and political leaders declared the objective of Pakistan’s creation to be the setting up of an Islamic state. Much of the prejudice against religious minorities can be traced to the effort by Islamists to make Pakistan “purer” in what they conceive of as Islamic terms.
What do you think about the role of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah in protecting the rights of Pakistan’s religious minorities?
When Pakistan was founded in 1947, Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, clearly stated that non-Muslims would be equal citizens in the new country. In his famous speech of August 11, 1947, Jinnah declared, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” Reflecting his secular views, Jinnah – himself a Shia – nominated a Hindu, several Shias and an Ahmadi to Pakistan’s first cabinet. Today, non-Muslim representation at the Cabinet level is limited to symbolic appointments. Christians, Hindus, Shia Muslims are under attack every day. And the Ahmadis – who were among the most ardent supporters in the quest for a Muslim homeland on the subcontinent – are completely unrepresented; they live as virtual outcasts in Pakistan today. Unfortunately, as part of the gradual Islamization of Pakistan, the average Pakistani is not taught Jinnah’s true vision of a pluralistic and inclusive [society].
Why was the Objectives Resolution brought? And to what extent has the Objectives Resolution affected the rights of religious minorities?
The Objectives Resolution cannot be seen in isolation but rather in the context of partition and post-partition developments. There were those in the Muslim League who considered Pakistan “a laboratory for applying Islamic ideals” in the modern world and as a citadel of Islam. These views meant that non-Muslims were not equal citizens.
Pakistan’s first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan although closely associated with Jinnah, led the way in creating a national narrative for Pakistan that perpetuated the sense of Islamic victimhood. Liaquat also embraced Islamic clerics, many of whom had earlier opposed the creation of Pakistan on the grounds that, according to Jinnah’s pronouncements, it was not to be an Islamic state. Discussions about how to transform Pakistan into an Islamic state thus started almost immediately after Independence.
Liaquat described Pakistan as “a moral sheet anchor” for Muslims in India. In a public statement in January 1948, barely five months after Quaid e Azam Jinnah had spoken about religion having nothing to do with the business of the state, Finance Minister and later Governor General Ghulam Mohammad insisted that Pakistan should be established on purely Islamic concepts. With these public statements and political machinations, Pakistan’s early leaders adroitly steered the country away from the Quaid-e-Azam’s vision.
With the discussion of Pakistan as an Islamic State began the denial of the rights of religious minorities along with the official denial of atrocities committed against them. It is in this context that we need to look at the 1949 Objectives Resolution: a declaration of the goals of the new state that would form the basis of its future constitution and laws. The resolution described a vision for Pakistan diametrically opposed to the secular one Jinnah had offered in his August 11, 1947 speech. The net effect of the Objectives Resolution was to define the state in Islamic terms, opening the door for further legislation based on the interpretation of Islam by a parliamentary majority. In the ensuing decades, democracy in Pakistan became intermittent, leaving the authority of inferring the Quran and Sunna (practices of the Prophet Muhammad) for long intervals in the hands of military dictators.
How do you look at religious freedom in Pakistan today?
Religious minorities are targets of legal as well as social discrimination. We have the toughest blasphemy laws in the world.
In recent years, Pakistan has witnessed some of the worst organized violence against religious minorities since Partition on the Pakistan side of the border. Unfortunately religious and communal violence is also a harsh reality in India and Bangladesh.
In Pakistan, over an eighteen-month period covering 2012 and part of 2013, at least 200 incidents of sectarian violence were reported. These incidents led to some 1,800 casualties, including more than 700 deaths. Many of those targeted for violence during this period were Shia Muslim citizens, who are deemed part of Pakistan’s Muslim majority under its constitution and laws. During the same year-and-a-half period in 2012–2013, Shias were subject to 77 attacks, including suicide terrorist bombings during Shia religious observances. Fifty-four lethal attacks were also perpetrated against Ahmadis, 37 against Christians, 16 against Hindus and three against Sikhs. Attackers of religious minorities are seldom prosecuted – and if they are, the courts almost invariably set them free. Members of the majority community, the Sunnis, who dare to question state policies about religious exclusion are just as vulnerable to extremist violence.
What are the motives behind violence against religious minorities in Pakistan?
In 1947 non-Muslim minorities comprised 23 percent of Pakistan’s population, today that number is 3 percent. Religious minorities both Muslim and non-Muslim face discrimination, threats and violence on a regular basis. Over a period of decades there has been a gradual Islamization of Pakistani state and society. We have an educational curriculum that preaches hatred against minorities, a legal system that discriminates against them, and a national identity that is seen by Islamists to emphasize that you are Pakistani only if you are Sunni Muslim has created an environment that has both tolerated and boosted extremism. This radicalization and Islamization has created an environment that condones attacks on minorities.
What are your thoughts on the state’s response towards violence against religious minorities?
The attempted purification of Pakistani society has taken place over decades and the state apparatus and leaders have played a key role in this process. During the 1950s the state acquiesced in an identity based on religion. Every military dictator from Ayub to Musharraf used Islam as a glue to bind Pakistan together and civilian leaders have sometimes been unable [to do anything to stop that process] and at other times complicit in the creation of the Islamic state. During the time of General Zia ul Haq, the state supported the creation and funding of Islamist and sectarian organizations that have attacked both non-Muslim minorities as well as Muslim sects like Shias and Ahmadis.
A positive recent development has been that the rise in extremism has united many important actors in our civil society to push back in a concerted way.
It has also propelled the civilian leaders to begin to act both symbolically and literally against the dangers of extremism. Recently, Pakistan’s political leaders have been publicly celebrating non-Muslim festivals, which is a positive step. The process of changing the educational curriculum in the provinces of Sindh and Punjab has also begun.
Yet the creation of an identity based solely on religion, the influence of Islamist clergy and their organizations, the laws that have already come on the books, the wide array of jihadi groups that indulge in violence, and the belief by some members of the coercive apparatus of the state of the difference between good jihadis and bad jihadis means that we have a long way to go before we see the end of extremism in my country.
As you have also been leading a voice for women, how do you view women’s rights in the country as compared to the conditions for religious minorities?
As Pakistan became an Islamic state not only in the terms of its constitution but also the gradual radicalization of its society women’s rights suffered alongside those of religious minorities. Women who are religious minorities have suffered from being accused of blasphemy (e.g., Asia Bibi), been forcefully converted to Islam (e.g., Rinkle Kumari) and not been allowed to call themselves Muslims (Ahmadi Muslim women). Women have also suffered from the laws enacted during the time of General Zia when the infamous Hudood ordinances came into being and are still on the rulebooks. Women, both those in public life and those who live outside of that are also often the main casualties of terrorist violence and suffer greatly as refugees or internally displaced persons. Women and girls are also the victims of practices like honor killings that continue to be perpetrated in parts of Pakistan.
On this medieval practice Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has just announced that laws that allow families to murder their daughters in the name of “honor” and avoid punishment will be changed as soon as possible. That would be an extremely important and positive development if this promise is acted upon seriously.
In several cases of violence against religious minorities, mob justice has been witnessed in Pakistan. In your opinion, what can the Pakistani government do to fight this?
Mob justice, in many countries of South Asia, is often the result of planning by elements of the state, political factions or organized non-state actors. What the state can do in these cases is first to ensure that the security forces defend the rights of the minorities and not allow the mob to rule. What is even more important is that instigators of violence should not be seen as being allowed to get away with what they have done. Finally, the government must change the educational curriculum and the media narrative so that all Pakistanis are treated as equal citizens.
In Pakistan, some writers say that the Zarb-e-Azb operation carried out by Pakistan’s military has affected the capabilities of Pakistani Taliban that has been behind the atrocious attacks on minority communities. How do you view this? 
Operation Zarb-e-Azb has been fairly successful but it’s a limited operation that does not target all terrorist groups. Until we make the decision to eliminate all terrorists we cannot declare a real and lasting victory. Pakistan and Pakistanis have suffered from selectivity in opposing terrorists for too long. Targeting those responsible for attacks in Pakistan but letting those attacking our neighbors to survive has allowed terrorists to pretend they are in one group while being in another. The same people deemed useful by the state for regional influence have been found involved in sectarian attacks. So, Zarb e Azb is a good first step but it cannot be declared the final step in what is definitely a long battle for Pakistan’s soul.


Militancy and peace initiatives cannot go together, Senge Hasnan Sering

Militancy and peace initiatives cannot go together, Senge Hasnan Sering

Washington D.C., Mar. 30 (ANI): Asserting that Pakistan should treat all the regions of Jammu and Kashmir equally, Director of Gilgit Baltistan National Congress, Senge Hasnan Sering said that militancy and peace talks cannot go hand in hand, adding that peace will come only when all the stakeholders would share dividends and responsibilities.

"Militancy and peace initiatives cannot go hand in hand. You have to equally treat all the regions of Jammu and Kashmir. If you leave Gilgit Baltistan and Ladakh then that's a exude policy. India must not support that. This is an issue of the whole region and peace will come when all the stakeholders will share dividends and responsibilities," Sering told ANI.

Sering further stated that India cannot take Pakistan seriously until and unless it treats the violent elements seriously.

"If Pakistan promotes peace initiatives and make the divided families meet and a situation is created to test Pakistan's sincerity, then India and Pakistan should not delay in talking about the Kashmir issue. Pakistan is not against violence. It is against those elements who give a tough time to Pakistani elements," he added.
Sering was speaking in context of Pakistan Joint Investigation team's probe in the Pathankot terror attack.

The probe team arrived in the national capital on March 27 and visited the headquarters of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) the next day.
However, it did not demand any input of the investigation carried out by the Indian agency.
The NIA, on its part, gave a detailed presentation to the JIT on the evidence collected during the course of the Pathankot terror attack probe.

The probe team visited the Pathankot air base yesterday and begun the probe into the deadly terror attack by visiting the site of the incident. After the investigation, which went on for near about two hours, the Pakistan JIT left for Pakistan.
This was the first time that Pakistani intelligence and police officials travelled to India to investigate a terror attack case. (ANI)


http://www.aninews.in/newsdetail2/story258556/militancy-peace-initiatives-cannot-go-together-senge-hasnan-sering.html


Pakistan’s Policy To Use Terrorists Against India Has Backfired - Haqqani: Pak Ex-Diplomat

Pakistan’s Policy To Use Terrorists Against India Has Backfired - Haqqani: Pak Ex-Diplomat
March 29, 2016
WASHINGTON:  Pakistan's involvement with jihadi terror groups at the highest level, aimed at using against India in Jammu and Kashmir, has backfired, Pakistan's ex-diplomat Husain Haqqani said today following the deadly terror attack in Lahore.

"And even as Pakistan's decades-old policy (on jihadi groups) has backfired, the Pakistani establishment is reluctant to declare an all-out war against terrorist groups," Mr Haqqani, the country's former envoy to the United States, told a news channel in an interview.

"Pakistan's involvement with jihadi terror groups initially was primarily done as a strategic investment, which was supposed to bring them benefits through influence in Afghanistan and to be used against India in Jammu and Kashmir. That has backfired," said Mr Haqqani.

"Now even though it has backfired, Pakistan has been very selective in going after these jihadi terror groups. That is the reason why the jihadis pick specific targets like Shias, Ahmadis or Christians, to improve their recruitment, playing on various kinds of polarisation, and taking advantage of that," he said.

"The real problem lies in that attitude of the Pakistani government of trying to protect the parties in Pakistan's Punjab province, while going after the terrorists in other parts of the country, but not in Pakistani Punjab province. That's what has come back to bite them," he said.

Mr Haqqani said "the fact of the matter is that the Pakistani military and civilian leadership easily gets distracted by delusions of fighting India and its influence in Afghanistan and allowing certain jihadi terror groups to pursue those objectives, not realising that they can end up having offshoots, just like the Pakistani Taliban emerged out of the Afghan Taliban."

"The Pakistani component of the Afghan Taliban ended up becoming a separate group. And now Jamaat-ul-Ahrar has broken away from the Pakistani Taliban. Pakistan has to make a decision to go after all terrorist groups, as well as the mindset that breeds these terrorists. And Pakistan has not been able to make that decision," he said.

Jamaat-ul-Ahrar claimed responsibility for Sunday's grisly suicide attack in Lahore that killed 72 people.

Mr Haqqani said that the "Pakistani establishment is not taking action against India-centric terrorist groups in Pakistan."

"The state has not taken any of the measures that are necessary to isolate them (terror group). So, there are groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed which attack India. They are spared. Once they are spared, it's very possible that some of their members will actually join splinter groups which will also attack Pakistan," he said.




A nation under siege, Zahid Hussain

A nation under siege, Zahid Hussain

Yet another bloodbath, yet another day of mourning. It is the Pakistan story so regularly repeated that we have forgotten the count. From the Peshawar school massacre, to the Lahore park explosion, it is children who are bearing the brunt of the unending cycle of militant violence. One thought the Peshawar tragedy would be the final turning point uniting the nation, but that public outrage proved to be fleeting.
Now the latest carnage has taken place in the heart of Punjab and has shaken the nation yet again. But have we really been shaken out of our slumber? One is not sure. The situation is now much more complex and grave with the cancer of religious extremism spreading all over. The state is now confronted with a fresh challenge following the emergence on the scene of a new coalition of extremists of all hues blended with the mainstream Islamic political parties.
As Lahore bled, a horde of zealots protesting the execution of Mumtaz Qadri stormed Islamabad breaking security barriers and leaving behind a trail of destruction. They virtually put the high-security Red Zone under siege demanding that the former police guard and murderer of former Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer be declared a national hero and martyr. The army was called in after police and paramilitary troops were unable to control the rampaging fanatics. The haplessness of the civilian administration was pitiable.

Sunday’s incidents laid bare the government’s patchy and lacklustre response to violent extremism.

It is quite intriguing how the government allowed Qadri’s supporters to gather at Liaquat Bagh despite warnings of anticipated violence. It was so obvious that the crowd had been mobilised from across the province and had come prepared for a confrontation. The capital was at the mercy of the mob for several hours before the military took charge. Even then, the rioters continue to occupy Constitution Avenue defying the government’s authority.
Those two incidents on Sunday evening laid bare the government’s patchy and lacklustre response to violent extremism that continues its unabated rise. Surely there has been a significant decline in terrorist attacks over the past year, but the problem is far from over. The attacks on the air force base in Badaber outside Peshawar and on Bacha Khan University in Charsadda district are cases in point. One of the main reasons for this impunity is the lack of a coherent counter-terrorism and counter-extremism strategy.
Seemingly there was no connection between the Lahore terror attack and the Islamabad siege, but one is not sure that the two were completely isolated incidents. The common objective was to create fear and bring the government under pressure to pull back from some of its recent policy measures that these radical groups believe could limit their space.
It is not without reason that squabbling religious groups have come together to defend what they describe as the ‘Islamic identity of Pakistan’. ‘Islam is in danger’ is the mantra being evoked once again to whip up religious sentiments. The execution of Mumtaz Qadri has simply worked as a catalyst uniting various religious factions. It is not just the alliance of different sectarian and militant outfits, they are also joined by mainstream Islamic parties like Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) and factions of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam.
What happened on Sunday must not come as a surprise. Although the civilian administration has as usual been in a state of denial, one could see it coming. There has been a concerted campaign to mobilise support not only on the Qadri issue, but also other matters such as the Punjab government’s law on violence against women.
Curiously, the law prohibiting hate speech and incitement to violence was not invoked by the administration. Efforts to revive the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal, putting aside the parties’ ideological and political differences, are mainly dictated by a common cause to stop full implementation of NAP. It is a backlash by the radical Islamic groups critical of the military operation against the Pakistani Taliban and other militant groups. The government’s decision to execute Qadri and Nawaz Sharif’s liberal stance on women and other issues has also angered the conservative lobby.
Most interesting, however, is the role of JI in the current anti-government campaign. While it had traditionally kept itself out of sectarian religious politics, the party has been very active in pro-Qadri protests. It has also been vocal in the movement against the Punjab women’s protection law. The Jamaat has staged protests in favour of Qadri and supported the agenda that called for declaring the convicted killer a martyr.
The religious groups protesting Mumtaz Qadri’s execution have also called for the hanging of Aasia Bibi, the Christian woman charged for blasphemy. She is the same woman whose support cost Salmaan Taseer his life.
It is a desperate attempt by JI — which once was arguably the most powerful and well-organised Islamic party in the country — to regain its shrinking political base. While many of its more radical youth activists joined Al Qaeda and other jihadi groups, the party has lost its electoral base significantly after the disintegration of the MMA. The Qadri issue has apparently provided it with an opportunity to come back on the national political scene. But that may also be its undoing.
Surely, the Lahore carnage and the storming of the capital by the zealots have finally forced the Sharif government to shed its ambiguity in dealing with religious extremism in Punjab. Yet the government is still not willing to take full ownership of the counter-terrorism operation in the province. It is the military leadership that has taken the initiative yet again.
Sharif may have found the courage to execute Qadri, but there is still a lot of confusion on how to deal with its aftermath. The attempt to lay siege to Islamabad by a few thousand fanatics highlights the vulnerability of the nation’s capital. It is not just the capital but the entire nation that is under siege. The battle lines have clearly been drawn. Is the state ready to take this battle to its conclusion?
The writer is an author and journalist.   Published in Dawn, March 30th, 2016


Tuesday 29 March 2016

Pakistan’s Role in Black September and killing of 25000 Palestinians under Brig. Zia Ul Haq

Pakistan’s Role in Black September and killing of 25000 Palestinians under Brig. Zia Ul Haq
During Black September the head of Pakistani training commission took command of the 2nd Division and helped kill and cleanse the Palestinians (est. 25,000 dead) from Jordan.
It was none other that Zia ul Haq.
So much for the Palestinian cause.
The butcher was awarded Jordan’s highest honour for the services rendered.
Zia was stationed in Jordan from 1967 to 1970 as a Brigadier, helping in the training of Jordanian soldiers, as well as leading the training mission into battle during the Black September operations as commander of Jordanian 2nd Division, a strategy that proved crucial to King Hussein’s remaining in power.

Zia remained posted in Jordan from 1967 till 1970, where he was involved in training and leading Jordon’s military. He is still highly respected in Jordan for his role in the Black September operations in support of King Hussein, where he commanded Jordan’s 2nd division. Zia’s troops were heavily involved in street-to-street urban fighting and are credited with killing scores of Palestinians. Black September was a great example of how the Arab nations despise the Palestinians, and their support of them only goes as far as to encourage and help the Palestinians to kill Jews.
http://prophetofdoom.net/Good_Muslim...a-ul-Haq.Islam

Black September
September 1970 is known as the Black September in Arab history and sometimes is referred to as the “era of regrettable events.” It was a month when Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan moved to quash the autonomy of Palestinian organizations and restore his monarchy’s rule over the country. The violence resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority Palestinian. Armed conflict lasted until July 1971 with the expulsion of the PLO and thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon.
….
Jordanian army attacks
On September 15, King Hussein declared martial law. The next day, Jordanian tanks (the 60th Armored Brigade) attacked the headquarters of Palestinian organizations in Amman; the army also attacked camps in Irbid, Salt, Sweileh,Baq’aa, Wehdat and Zarqa. Then the head of Pakistani training mission to Jordan, Brigadier Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (later Chief of Army Staff and President of Pakistan), took command of the 2nd division. In addition, the Iraqi army in Jordan after 1967 war serving as a reserve forces supported the Jordanian army.
Arafat later claim that the Jordanian army killed between 10,000 and 25,000 Palestinians.
The armored troops were inefficient in narrow city streets and thus the Jordanian army conducted house to house sweeps for Palestinian fighters and got immersed in heavy urban warfare with the inexperienced and undisciplined Palestinian fighters.
Amman experienced the heaviest fighting in the Black September uprising. The American backed Jordanian army shelled the PLO headquarters in Amman and battled with Palestinian guerillas in the narrow streets of the capital. Syrian tanks rolled across the Yarmouk River into northern Jordan and began shelling Amman and other northern urban areas. Outdated missiles fired by the PLO struck Amman for more than a week. Jordanian infantry pushed the Palestinian Fedayeen out of Amman after weeks of bitter fighting.
….
Muhammad Aamir Mughal writes:
To all jihadi and sectarian activists (i.e., Ziaists), look at your spiritual and political Godfather General Zia:
“QUOTE”
“The most promising comparison between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Jewish State of Israel came from Gen. Zia ul-Haq. Lacking a political constituency, he skillfully exploited Islam to legitimize and consolidate his military dictatorship. Presenting himself as a simple, pious and devoted Muslim, he institutionalized religious radicalism in Pakistan. In so doing, he found Israel to be his strange ally. Toward the end of 1981, he remarked:
“Pakistan is like Israel, an ideological state. Take out the Judaism from Israel and it will fall like a house of cards. Take Islam out of Pakistan and make it a secular state; it would collapse.” He likewise surprised many observers in March 1986, when he called on the PLO to recognize the Jewish state. As discussed elsewhere, he was actively involved both in the 1970 Black September massacre of the Palestinians in Jordan as well as in Egypt’s re-entry into the Islamic fold more than a decade later. From 1967 to 1970 our Commander of the Faithful Late. General Muhammad Ziaul Haq was in Jordan in Official Militray Capacity and he helped late. King Hussain of Jordan in ‘cleansing’ the so-called Palestinian Insurgents, Zia and Hussain butchered many innocent Palestinians in the name of Operation against Black September {a militant organization of Palestinians**. The intensity of bloodletting by Zia ul Haq and King Hussain was such that one of the founder father of Israel Moshe Dayan said:
“King Hussein (with help from Zia-ul-Haq of the Pakistani army) sent in his Bedouin army on 27 September to clear out the Palestinian bases in Jordan. A massacre of innumerable proportions ensued. Moshe Dayan noted that Hussein “killed more Palestinians in eleven days than Israel could kill in twenty years.” Dayan is right in spirit, but it is hardly the case that anyone can match the Sharonism in its brutality.”
“UN-QUOTE”
As per a book: “Charlie Wilson’s War by George Crile during the so-called Afghan Jihad following things did happen;
“He told Zia about his experience the previous year when the Israelis had shown him the vast stores of Soviet weapons they had captured from the PLO in Lebanon. The weapons were perfect for the Mujahideen, he told Zia. If Wilson could convince the CIA to buy them, would Zia have any problems passing them on to the Afghans? Zia, ever the pragmatist, smiled on the proposal, adding, “Just don’t put any Stars of David on the boxes” {Page 131-132**.
For further reading:
P. R. Kumaraswamy
Beyond the Veil: Israel-Pakistan Relations
Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies (JCSS)
http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/memoranda/memo55.pdf
Memories of Barbarity: Sharonism and September By Vijay Prashad
April 9, 2002 in COUNTERPUNCH.
Charlie Wilson’s War by George Crile.
……..

In 2005, the outgoing ambassador of Palestine to Pakistan Ahmed Abdul Razzaq stated that late president of Pakistan General Ziaul Haq’s bombardment on Palestinians in 1970, was done without taking any permission from Pakistani people, who would never allow this to happen.

============================================
Background on the above statement:
The most promising comparison between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Jewish State of Israel came from Gen. Zia ul-Haq. Lacking a political constituency, he skillfully exploited Islam to legitimize and consolidate his military dictatorship. Presenting himself as a simple, pious and devoted Muslim, he institutionalized religious radicalism in Pakistan. In so doing, he found Israel to be his strange ally.
Toward the end of 1981, he remarked: “Pakistan is like Israel, an ideological state. Take out the Judaism from Israel and it will fall like a house of cards. Take Islam out of Pakistan and make it a secular state; it would collapse.” He likewise surprised many observers in March 1986, when he called on the PLO to recognize the Jewish state.
He was actively involved both in the 1970 Black September massacre of the Palestinians in Jordan as well as in Egypt’s re-entry into the Islamic fold more than a decade later. From 1967 to 1970 our Commander of the Faithful Late. General Muhammad Ziaul Haq was in Jordan in Official Militray Capacity and he helped late. King Hussain of Jordan in ‘cleansing’ the so-called Palestinian Insurgents, Zia and Hussain butchered many innocent Palestinians in the name of Operation against Black September {a militant organization of Palestinians**.
The intensity of bloodletting by Zia ul Haq and King Hussain was such that one of the founder father of Israel Moshe Dayan said: “King Hussein (with help from Zia-ul-Haq of the Pakistani army) sent in his Bedouin army on 27 September to clear out the Palestinian bases in Jordan. A massacre of innumerable proportions ensued. Moshe Dayan noted that Hussein “killed more Palestinians in eleven days than Israel could kill in twenty years.” Dayan is right in spirit, but it is hardly the case that anyone can match the Sharonism in its brutality.”
….
Saleem writes:
Some authors are trying to change the history (or hoodwink his readers). What I have read and know about Black September and role of Zia-ul-Haq in that operation, is quite horrible. Actually, main character of that operation was Zia-ul-Haq under whose command operation took place. Whatever this writer wrote is very funny. Just imagine that even if a Jordanian General decided not to command the force than why Jordanian government would make Zia-ul-Haq commander of that force and not any of their own Jordanian Generals or officers?
On the other hand, one must reflect upon the reason behind Syrian army moving towards Jordanian border. What interest Syrian army would have at the border of Jordan? Was it that since Syria was pro-Palestinians, they came to pressurise Jordan not to act against Palestinian with force and Jordanian General (as any Jordanian officers would have done) agreed on Syrian stand, so he may have declined to oppose them, hence need for non-Jordanian officer like Zia-ul-Haq to replace him?
What I have read is that even though Jordanian force is small but it is most potent and professional amongst forces facing Israel. They always fought bravely against Israelis though are not big enough to really do much.
As for battle of Karameh, Israel attacked Palestinian camp with consent of Jordanian King. Anyhow, when attack took place (in March 1968), Jordanian government ordered Jordanian forces not to intervene or engage IDF. Anyhow, Jordanian General Haditha along with some Jordanian officers ignored King’s order and engaged IDF. Palestinians were putting resistance but it was Jordanian army entering the battle turned the table and inflicted heavy casualties on IDF, forcing IDF to pull out. Comparatively, Jordanian army casualties were much less than IDF. Result was that, even though decisive role played by Jordanian armed forces, most credit of that defeat got attributed to Palestinians and they attracted a lot of volunteers to fight, not only against Israelis but King of Jordan too.
After battle of Karameh, several attempts were made to assassinate King Jordan. On 7th Sept, Palestinian hijacked many planes and landed them in Jordan. The area of desert they got the plane landed was almost under their control and Jordan was unable to do much to the disgust of King Jordan (probably, Jordanian army did not wanted to do much about it).
King of Jordan declared Martial law on 15th Sept and started operation against Palestinian on 16th. With background of ‘Karameh battle’ and knowing the sentiments of Jordanian Generals towards Palestinians, Jordanian King could not have trusted Jordanian Generals doing operation against Palestinians, killing them, crushing them, and expelling them out of Jordan. Actually, there is little difference between Jordanians and Palestinians. So it is obvious that to crush Palestinians under Jordanian General was impossible. Jordanian Generals in command of the forces would not have allowed that.
Since King of Jordan (and Jordanian Government) could not have trusted Jordanian Generals or commanders for such operation, Zia-ul-Haq was chosen for the job. Black September operation started on 16th September. Jordanian 2nd division under the command of Zia-ul-Haq (along with Iraqi army stationed in Jordan as reserve force) took part, killing Palestinians living in camps inhumanly, crushing them and then throwing them out of Jordan. Estimated 10 thousand Palestinians were killed within few days.

Black September and Role of Pakistan
After the Six Days War, Israel proved itself a Strategic and Military Power in front of Arab nations and the world. Israel which was equipped with the latest equipment provided by USA outclassed the Arab attacking countries Jordan, Egypt and Syria who were further helped by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco and Algiers (Some Pakistani Air force Pilots also helped) who were mostly equipped with equipment provided by USSR. This conflict made Israel the Power House of Middle East making a downfall for Big Arab leaders like King Hussein, Nureddin Attassi and most importantly Jamal Abdul Nasser who resigned (and reconcile his decision) after this incident. Nasser lost his charismatic power over the Arab world. But at that time the newly created Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was gaining power.
After the war, PLO was the new emerging threat for Israel. Previously following the ideas of Nasser, the main aim of PLO was the liberation of Palestine. After the war, PLO started to gain fame and power. It was having small conflicts with Israel Defence Forces. Arabs were coming to join PLO for their cause. In 1969, during one of the conflict Israel Forces entered PLO bases in Jordon but were repelled back by PLO with the help of Jordanian Security Forces. That battle was named the Battle of Karameh. That was a huge success for PLO giving it a wider fame all over the Arab and Muslim World. Yaseer Arafat emerged as the new leader of PLO and the new saviour of the Arab People. Muslims all over the world were now coming to Jordan to join PLO. Yaseer was a phenomenon at that time with people comparing it with revolutionary leaders like Che Guevara who were not going to lean in front of the Imperial World. USA and Israel begins to seem PLO as the last remaining threat after the war.
The Six Days War not only ended the Arab Unity Dream of Arab leaders but it also completely changed the political scenario of the Arab World. Iran and Saudi Arabia were already in US control. Egypt and Jordon also started to negotiate with USA and especially Israel. The influence of USSR in middle east was now minimal after the collapse of its ammunition in front of USA superior battle machine and it give USA a relief as it was badly wounded by USSR in Vietnam at that time. Jordon especially which was previously negotiating with Israel secretly doubled its effort to get their support.
The growing power of PLO was also becoming a threat for King Hussein of Jordon. Due to his negotiations with Israel he was getting unpopular in his own country and PLO was gaining support in both general public and Security Forces. PLO has now taken the full charge of Ibrid, Jordon where they had their stations and training camps. From here, they were also making small attacks on Israel. For the King this was a growing threat which needed to be eliminated for the stability of his own Government and for his own credibility.
With this Jordanian Government started to take action against PLO. But this created a high rift between Jordon, PLO and Jordanian people as most of them were supporting PLO at that time creating more problems for the King authority. PLO has its own little state now within Jordon from where they were creating problems for Israel and now King Hussein too.
PLO on the other hand were also having very much trouble from King Hussein too. His efforts for deals with Israel and for the removal of PLO was creating a lot of problems for them. So they thought too that it will be one way or another. They made many unsuccessfull assassinations attempts on King Hussein which failed. So they started to execute a bigger action plan.
In September 1970, PLO hijacked three aeroplanes a Swissair and a TWA which was landed in Azraq and a Pan Am which was taken to Cairo. After emptying the planes from passengers they blew it up in front of cameras. Later they claim Ibrid in Jordon a liberal territory which make the King to take action against them. On 15th September he order the state of Martial Law in the Country and order a full crackdown against PLO.
Jordanian Security Forces along with a Pakistani Training mission headed by a Pakistani Brigadier and an Iraqi troop attacked Ibrid. The Pakistani Brigadier was heading the assault as they attacked Ibrid and started killing Palestinians. Arab Radio claimed it a genocide. Arafat claimed the loss of more than 10,000 people during the fighting. Ultimately Arafat withdraw from Ibrid signing a peace deal with Jordanian King under the influence of President Nasser but the death of Nasser on 28th September prove to be another blow for PLO and the King continue the crackdown giving the biggest setback to PLO at that time.
Syria tried to help Palestinians due to a plea by Arafat but withdraw its forces due to Israel and USA who threatened Syria of severe consequences. PLO received such a blow that for revenge a new organization named Black September came into existence which was than latter responsible for the Munich Killing of Israel’s Athletes.
The Pakistani Brigadier, who was at that time heading the training mission to Jordon and headed the 2nd Jordanian Division, when came back to Pakistan his name was suggested for Court Martial due to his role in Black September and for the killings of Palestinians. There was anger among people regarding this act. But due to unknown reason than Chief of Army Staff General Gul Hassan removed his name from the list which was sent to then President Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Instead of a Court Martial that Brigadier was promoted to the rank of Major General. He was than in next few years again get promoted to the ranks of Lt General by “special attention”. He was latter made Chief of Army Staff ahead of seven other senior officials. All this top flight from Brigader to the Chief of Army Staff was completed in just 6 years after the Black September.
The name of the Chief of Army Staff and than Brigader at the time of Black September was “General Zia Ul Haq” who than overthrow the elected Government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto due to his “doings” and later hanged him to “make him an example for the Free World”.


Black September The role of Pakistan’s General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1970 massacre of 25,000 Palestinians in Jordan

Black September The role of Pakistan’s General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1970 massacre of 25,000 Palestinians in Jordan
zia
During Black September (1970), the head of Pakistani training commission took command of the 2nd Division and helped kill and cleanse the Palestinians (est. 25,000 dead) from Jordan.
It was none other that General Zia ul Haq, who later became chief sponsor of Deobandi and Salafi fanatics in Pakistan as the country’s Chief Martial Law Administrator from 1977 to 1988.
So much for the Palestinian cause.
The butcher was awarded Jordan’s highest honour for the services rendered.
Zia was stationed in Jordan from 1967 to 1970 as a Brigadier, helping in the training of Jordanian soldiers, as well as leading the training mission into battle during the Black September operations as commander of Jordanian 2nd Division, a strategy that proved crucial to King Hussein’s remaining in power.
A rare photograph of late Pakistani military ruler Gen Ziaul Haq in Jordan, during what was known as Black September.
A photograph of late Pakistani military ruler Ziaul Haq in Jordan, during what was known as Black September.
Zia remained posted in Jordan from 1967 till 1970, where he was involved in training and leading Jordon’s military. He is still highly respected in Jordan for his role in the Black September operations in support of King Hussein, where he commanded Jordan’s 2nd division. Zia’s troops were heavily involved in street-to-street urban fighting and are credited with killing scores of Palestinians. Black September was a great example of how the Arab nations despise the Palestinians, and their support of them only goes as far as to encourage and help the Palestinians to kill Jews.
http://prophetofdoom.net/Good_Muslims_General_Muhammad_Zia-ul-Haq.Islam
Black September
September 1970 is known as the Black September in Arab history and sometimes is referred to as the “era of regrettable events.” It was a month when Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan moved to quash the autonomy of Palestinian organizations and restore his monarchy’s rule over the country. The violence resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority Palestinian. Armed conflict lasted until July 1971 with the expulsion of the PLO and thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon.
Jordanian army attacks
On September 15, King Hussein declared martial law. The next day, Jordanian tanks (the 60th Armored Brigade) attacked the headquarters of Palestinian organizations in Amman; the army also attacked camps in Irbid, Salt, Sweileh, Baq’aa, Wehdat and Zarqa. Then the head of Pakistani training mission to Jordan, Brigadier Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (later Chief of Army Staff and President of Pakistan), took command of the 2nd division. In addition, the Iraqi army in Jordan after 1967 war serving as a reserve forces supported the Jordanian army.
Arafat later claim that the Jordanian army killed between 10,000 and 25,000 Palestinians.
The armored troops were inefficient in narrow city streets and thus the Jordanian army conducted house to house sweeps for Palestinian fighters and got immersed in heavy urban warfare with the inexperienced and undisciplined Palestinian fighters.
Amman experienced the heaviest fighting in the Black September uprising. The American backed Jordanian army shelled the PLO headquarters in Amman and battled with Palestinian guerillas in the narrow streets of the capital. Syrian tanks rolled across the Yarmouk River into northern Jordan and began shelling Amman and other northern urban areas. Outdated missiles fired by the PLO struck Amman for more than a week. Jordanian infantry pushed the Palestinian Fedayeen out of Amman after weeks of bitter fighting.
Muhammad Aamir Mughal writes:
To all jihadi and sectarian activists (i.e., Ziaists), look at your spiritual and political Godfather General Zia:
“QUOTE”
“The most promising comparison between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Jewish State of Israel came from Gen. Zia ul-Haq. Lacking a political constituency, he skillfully exploited Islam to legitimize and consolidate his military dictatorship. Presenting himself as a simple, pious and devoted Muslim, he institutionalized religious radicalism in Pakistan. In so doing, he found Israel to be his strange ally. Toward the end of 1981, he remarked:
“Pakistan is like Israel, an ideological state. Take out the Judaism from Israel and it will fall like a house of cards. Take Islam out of Pakistan and make it a secular state; it would collapse.” He likewise surprised many observers in March 1986, when he called on the PLO to recognize the Jewish state. As discussed elsewhere, he was actively involved both in the 1970 Black September massacre of the Palestinians in Jordan as well as in Egypt’s re-entry into the Islamic fold more than a decade later. From 1967 to 1970 our Commander of the Faithful Late. General Muhammad Ziaul Haq was in Jordan in Official Militray Capacity and he helped late. King Hussain of Jordan in ‘cleansing’ the so-called Palestinian Insurgents, Zia and Hussain butchered many innocent Palestinians in the name of Operation against Black September {a militant organization of Palestinians}. The intensity of bloodletting by Zia ul Haq and King Hussain was such that one of the founder father of Israel Moshe Dayan said:
“King Hussein (with help from Zia-ul-Haq of the Pakistani army) sent in his Bedouin army on 27 September to clear out the Palestinian bases in Jordan. A massacre of innumerable proportions ensued. Moshe Dayan noted that Hussein “killed more Palestinians in eleven days than Israel could kill in twenty years.” Dayan is right in spirit, but it is hardly the case that anyone can match the Sharonism in its brutality.”
“UN-QUOTE”
As per a book: “Charlie Wilson’s War by George Crile during the so-called Afghan Jihad following things did happen;
“He told Zia about his experience the previous year when the Israelis had shown him the vast stores of Soviet weapons they had captured from the PLO in Lebanon. The weapons were perfect for the Mujahideen, he told Zia. If Wilson could convince the CIA to buy them, would Zia have any problems passing them on to the Afghans? Zia, ever the pragmatist, smiled on the proposal, adding, “Just don’t put any Stars of David on the boxes” {Page 131-132}.


Pakistan’s Military Cooperation with Israel

Pakistan’s Military Cooperation with Israel
Pakistan’s secret military cooperation with Israel raised serious questions about its circumventive policy towards the Arab world. During the last three decades, Israel and Pakistan had a constructive rapprochement to coordinate their stances on the Afghan issue and exchange military information. There was a turning point in the country’s foreign policy, when Pakistan worked closely with Israel in Afghanistan during the Soviet intervention in 1980s. After a successful operation against the Palestinians in 1970, General Zia-ul-Haq (From Pakistan) was awarded Jordan’s highest honour for the services rendered.
Gen Zia, who led the operation as Brigadier General deployed in Jordan at that time. It was said that in this war around 5,000 to 7,000 Palestinians were killed, although Yasser Arafat claimed the death toll was more like 25,000. The Operation was on the direct order of Jordanian King Hussein. Israeli General Moshe Dayan noted to King Hussein that:
“Hussein killed more Palestinians in eleven days than Israel could kill in twenty years.”
After the Operation Black September, Gen Zia became most favourite person to the state of Israel. At that time, Zia was the only figure in Pakistan Army whom Israel could trust and could make good political and military relations with his country. In Afghan war, Israel was one of the most important countries that assisted Pakistan in weapons and training to the Afghan Mujaheddin. Israel’s intelligence agency MOSSAD assisted Pakistan in training Afghans near the Pak-Afghan border.
The Russian weapons which captured from PLO in Lebanon by Israel Defence Force (IDF) were given to Pakistan and ISI supplied all weapons to the Mujaheddin against the USSR. Israel has accomplished many missions along with Pakistan because Pakistan and Israel are both good allies of the US. General Zia likewise, surprised many observers in March 1986, when he called on the PLO to recognize the Jewish state.
Operation Cyclone was the code name for the American CIA to arm and finance Afghan Mujaheddin prior to and during the Afghan/Soviet war. American CIA and Pakistani ISI worked shoulder to shoulder against the Soviet Regime. The USSR was the number one financier of Palestinian terrorist organisations such as the PLO. Pakistan’s ISI had established professional relations with Israel’s Mossad and had secretly passed on intelligence data to Mossad. ISI had intercepted information that Israeli civilians may be targeted in a terrorist attack in India during September and November 2008. It was reported by Wiki Leaks that Pakistan’s Lieutenant-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha was in direct contact with Mossad. In 2013, Britain’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills revealed that: “In 2011, Israel allegedly exported military equipment to Pakistan via Britain; this equipment apparently included electronic warfare systems and aircraft parts”. However, Pakistan & Israel, both denied these claims.
In 2001, Pakistani Government through the ISI, passed intelligence to Israel about the Gulf States and the nuclear ambitions of Iran and Libya, whose programs Pakistani scientists had helped to build. In 2010, according to unconfirmed “leaked”(Wiki Leaks) American diplomatic cables, from October 2009, head of Pakistan’s intelligence agency ISI, Lieutenant-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha provided intelligence about potential terrorist attacks in India to Israel through Washington. According to the cable,
“Gen Pasha had been in direct touch with the Israelis on possible threats against Israeli targets in India.”
A few weeks before the cable was written, the Israeli Counter-Terror Bureau had issued a travel advisory warning of possible attacks against Israeli sites in India. In 2011, Israel was alleged to have exported British military technology to Pakistan.

In 2015, Israeli scientist attended the scientific conference sponsored by Pakistan Academy of Sciences held in Lahore, Pakistan. In August 1997, the Ex- Chief of army staff from1988-91, General Mirza Aslam Beg said:
“Pakistan has no direct differences with Israel, therefore, was a third party to the dispute… We have no conflict with Israel, therefore we should not hesitate in recognising Israel.”
Whenever Pakistan recognises and establishes relations with Israel, it will not be the first Islamic country to do so. Since it has no direct disputes with Israel, Pakistan is not under any compulsion to seek a “cold peace” with Israel, and therefore has several options to choose from.
These options according to a writer P. R. Kumaraswamy are the Turkish model, it means Pakistan can recognize Israel without establishing diplomatic relations immediately, like an Iranian model, it can follow the precedent set by the Shah of Iran and recognise the Jewish state, but maintain its relationship under wraps, however, in the Jordanian model, the country can imitate the Jordanians and maintain close political as well as military relations with the Jewish state without granting any official recognition, and finally, in the Chinese model, it can adopt the Chinese example and view military contacts as a means of promoting political relations.”
At least in the foreseeable future, the political status of the relationship is likely to be tentative. While maintaining and even intensifying political contacts in private, both Israel and Pakistan will probably be extremely reluctant to discuss the nature and intensity of their contacts and relationship in public. Israel’s Relations with Pakistan would help dilute Islam-based opposition toward Israel and Pakistan should move closer to Israel because there are no bilateral disputes or conflicts between them. In search of historical contacts between both Armies and Intelligence agencies; I have absolutely no doubt that both countries still collaborate in secretive operations and work together to achieve their military benefits in the region. Pakistanis are intelligent people who keep the country safe and strong through professional governance strategies and cooperation with other nations.
The Ex-Army Chief and Former President of Pakistan, Mr Pervez Musharraf once said in June 2003:
“What is our dispute [with Israel]? I have been saying: ‘Should we be more catholic than the pope or more pious than the pope or more Palestinian than the Palestinians themselves? Is this the right attitude or should there be some change in it? There should be national consensus on it.”
Israel wanted Pervez Musharraf to stay in power; it was Israel’s national interest making Musharraf strong and in power.  Israel was concerned about Musharraf’s wellbeing and wanted him to remain on the seat with power in 2007. According to the Wiki Leaks cables from Tel Aviv’s American embassy:
“The Israeli spy chief Meir Dagan met US under-secretary Burns and said that he was concerned about how long then-Pakistani President Musharraf would survive, saying: “…he is facing a serious problem with the militants. Pakistan’s nuclear capability could end up in the hands of an Islamic regime.”
Gen Pervez Musharraf knew that Israel is a reality and it is not going away from the map of the world, he always insisted that making good relations with Israel, Pakistan will get political soft corner in the world. Relations with Israel could help Pakistan on the world’s political stage. In his first interview with Israeli Newspaper Haaretz, Pervez Musharraf stated that:
“Israel is a fait accompli”
He states. “A lot of the Muslim world has understood that and I know many Muslim countries have relations with Israel, whether above board or covertly. So this is the change in reality I am talking about. Pakistan has to keep demanding the resolution of the Palestinian dispute… [But] Pakistan also needs to keep readjusting it diplomatic stand toward Israel based on the mere fact that it exists and is not going away.”
To establish good relations with Jews and Israel is a tenet of Islam, Islam teaches Muslims to make good relations with other religions and Islam permits its followers to engage with people of other faiths. It is in the supreme national interest of Pakistan to recognise Israel and make diplomatic ties because recognition of Israel could solve the Israel Palestine conflict which was spoiled for centuries.