Pakistan No Place For Other Faiths

Pakistan No Place For Other Faiths- by Ajit Kumar Singh*

March 28, 2016

On early reports, at least 72 people have been killed and more than 300 injured in a suicide blast inside the Gulshan-e-Iqbal Park in the Iqbal Town area of Lahore, the provincial capital of Punjab Province, on March 27, 2016. Lahore’s District Coordination Officer Muhammad Usman stated, “The bomber managed to enter the park and blew himself up near the kids’ playing area where kids were on the swings”. Significantly, a large number of people, mostly Christians were present in the park, celebrating Easter [Christendom’s holiest day].

The Jama’at-ul-Ahrar (JuA), a breakaway faction of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) claimed responsibility for the suicide attack. JuA ‘spokesperson’ Ehsanullah Ehsan declared, “We had been waiting for this occasion. We claim responsibility for the attack on Christians as they were celebrating Easter. It was part of the annual martyrdom attacks we have started this year.” The operation was codenamed Saut-ul-Raad [Voice of Thunder]. JuA had declared its ‘support’ for Daesh (Islamic State, previously Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham, ISIS) in March 2015.

The bomber involved in the March 27, 2016, attack has been identified as Yousuf, son of Ghulam Farid, a resident of Muzzafargarh District in Punjab. According to preliminary investigations, the bomber had been teaching at a seminary for eight years in Lahore after completing his religious education in Dera Ghazi Khan District. SAIR has noted on numerous occasions in the past that most of the seminaries across Pakistan are breeding grounds for terrorism and Islamist extremism.

Even on the presently known fatalities, the Easter Sunday attack is the second worst ever targeting Christians inside Pakistan. In the deadliest attack on Christian minorities in Pakistan, at least 79 worshippers, including 34 women and seven children, were killed and another 130 were injured when two suicide bombers attacked a Christian congregation at the historic All Saints Church in the Kohati Gate area of Peshawar, the provincial capital of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Province, on September 22, 2013. According to varying media reports, some 600 to 700 people were inside the church at the time of the attack.

There have been at least another four such attacks, resulting in 19 deaths, in the intervening period. The last terrorist attack targeting Christians was on March 15, 2015. At least 15 persons, including 13 Christians and two Policemen, were killed and more than 70 were injured, when two suicide bombers attacked two churches near the Youhanabad neighbourhood in Lahore, sparking mob violence in which two terrorists were killed. Youhanabad is home to more than 100,000 Christians. JuA had claimed responsibility for the attack as well.

According to partial data compiled by the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP), at least 21 terrorist attacks targeting Christians, resulting in at least 200 fatalities, have taken place across Pakistan since 2001. Some of the major incidents (each resulting in three or more fatalities) among these included:

March 10, 2010: Six persons, including two women, were killed and seven persons were injured when over a dozen terrorists armed with Kalashnikov rifles, pistols and hand-grenades attacked the office of World Vision International, a US-based Christian aid agency, in the Oghi village of Mansehra District in KP.

September 25, 2002: Seven persons were killed and another three were injured in a terrorist attack on a Christian welfare organisation’s office, Idara Amn-o-Insaaf (Institute for Peace and Justice), in Karachi District, the Provincial capital of Sindh Province. Lashkar-e-Islami Mohammadi (LIM), a little-known terrorist group, was blamed for the attack.

August 5, 2002: Six persons were killed and another four were injured in a terrorist attack on a Christian missionary school in the Jhika Gali Town of Murree tehsil (revenue unit) in Rawalpindi District of Punjab Province.

March 17, 2002: Five persons were killed and more than 40 were injured, including the High Commissioner of Sri Lanka to Pakistan, in a grenade attack during the Sunday morning service at the Protestant International Church located between the American and Russian Embassies in the heavily protected area of the Diplomatic Enclave in Islamabad. Amongst those killed were Barbara Green, wife of an American diplomat and her daughter; two Pakistanis and an Afghan. The injured belonged to different countries including USA, Britain, Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Afghanistan, Iran, Ethiopia, Iraq and Sri Lanka.

October 28, 2001: 17 Christians – including five children – and a Policeman, were killed and nine persons were injured, when six gunmen opened fire on a church in the Model Town area of Bahawalpur District in Punjab Province.

The Christians constitute a meagre 1.6 percent of Pakistan’s population of 193 million. While they have been victims of terrorist atrocities, they have also been intermittently attacked in mass and targeted violence by Islamist extremists. Christians have, moreover, been systematically targeted by Pakistan’s perverse blasphemy laws, which prescribe a mandatory death sentence for any purported act bringing against Islam and its Prophet to disrepute. On May 24, 2015, Police arrested one Humayun Faisal Masih, a mentally ill person, who was burning newspapers in Sanda, a Christian locality, in Lahore. Muslim onlookers accused him of blasphemy, alleging that some of the pages contained verses of the holy Quran. A number of people gathered outside the Ravi Road Police Station and demanded that the accused be handed over to them. Simultaneously, a mob rampaged through the Christian neighbourhood. An unnamed local Christian stated, “some angry Muslims, some armed with guns, ransacked churches and attacked Christian residences and houses pelting stones… (there was) a horrific and gruesome scene of violence against the innocent women, children, and elderly.” According to reports, local Christians were warned of impending violence by Police, and many had fled the area before the attack began.

Underlining the complicity of the state in such incidents, the Supreme Court had observed, on March 13, 2013, that the Punjab Police had failed to protect the lives and properties of the inhabitants of Joseph Colony in Lahore. Notably, on March 9, 2013, hundreds of protesters turned arsonists and attacked some 160 houses and 80 shops belonging to Christians in Joseph Colony, a predominantly Christian locality in the Badami Bagh area of Lahore, just a day after allegations of blasphemy were levelled against a man in the region.

Christians have been the principal targets for alleged acts of blasphemy. Significantly, then Federal Minister for Minorities’ Affairs, Shahbaz Bhatti, a Christian, was killed on March 2, 2011, by terrorists of Fidayeen-e-Muhammad, a TTP faction, and al Qaeda Punjab Chapter, for his opposition to the country’s blasphemy laws. The Christians are also attacked for opposing often forcible conversions to Islam. Asia Bibi, 46, who has been sentenced to death and has been in prison for the last four years following a conviction for blasphemy, in her memoir Blasphemy, describes how she had been asked to convert to Islam to ‘redeem herself’.

Terrorists and Islamist extremists have issued threats against the Christian community on several occasions. On May 18, 2011, for instance, in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing, the TTP vowed to fight with “new zeal” against “Our enemies… NATO, Jews and Christians.” In another such threat, in June 2008, an extremist group, Jesh Ahle-i-Alqiblat al-Jihadi al-Sari al-Alami [Army for the Direction of the Movement of Global Jihad], distributed pamphlets demanding that Christian Pakistanis convert to Islam or face death. The group declared, “every Muslim had a duty to take such action against Christians”. It also called on Muslims to attack and kill Christian foreigners.

Seeds of religious intolerance have been systematically sown in Pakistan since its inception in 1947 – and, indeed, even earlier, during the struggle for independence. There was a further and escalating radicalization during and after the regime of military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq. Since then, Pakistan has witnessed rising attacks against all minorities, including the Christians. According to the Annual Report, 2015, of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), between July 2013 and June 2014, 122 incidents of sectarian violence occurred in Pakistan, resulting in more than 1,200 casualties, including 430 fatalities. The report, thus observed, “Pakistan represents one of the worst situations in the world for religious freedom for countries not currently designated by the U.S. government as ‘countries of particular concern’… Pakistan continued to experience chronic sectarian violence targeting Shi’a Muslims, Christians, Ahmadi Muslims, and Hindus.”

Similarly, the Jinnah Institute of Pakistan in a report titled State of Religious Freedom in Pakistan 2015, stated that, during the period 2012-2015, at least 543 incidents of violence were carried out against religious minorities in Pakistan. Shias were targeted on at least 288 occasions during this period, followed by Hindus (91 occasions), Christians (88 occasions), and Ahamadiyas (76 occasions).

In another development that reiterates the fact that religious extremists have enormous support, national capital Islamabad was turned into a fortress as supporters of Mumtaz Qadri put the city under siege. Qadri was the bodyguard and killer of Salman Taseer, then Governor of Punjab and an advocate of the amendment of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. In a message on Twitter on March 27, 2016, Director General Inter-Services Public Relations Asim Bajwa disclosed that the Army had been requisitioned by the Government to control situation and secure the ‘Red Zone’, the area which includes the Parliament House, Pakistan Secretariat, Supreme Court, Prime Minister’s House, President’s House, and Diplomatic Enclaves in Islamabad. Qadri was hanged on February 29, 2016. The hanging was followed by protests in most major towns of the country.

The seeds of religious extremism sown over the decades have brought Pakistan to the verge of virtual anarchy. State-backed extremism has made life impossible for minorities and, indeed, for Muslim sects deemed ‘deviant’ by the Sunni majority. Indeed, sectarian violence between Sunni factions is also a growing reality as takfiri ideologies (which arrogate to themselves the right to declare others ‘apostate’) take firm root across the country. State agencies continue to harness Islamist extremism and terrorism to extend their strategic agenda into the country’s neighbourhood – particularly in Afghanistan and India – creating wide spaces for armed extremism that have produced a bloody blowback in Pakistan as well. There is little evidence, however, of any radical review of this ‘strategy’ at present.

* Ajit Kumar Singh Research Fellow, Institute for Conflict Management

http://www.eurasiareview.com/28032016-pakistan-no-place-for-other-faiths-analysis/

The new Silk Road and the sea, JENNIFER MCKAY

The new Silk Road and the sea, JENNIFER MCKAY

The tales of the old Silk Road have captured the imagination of people across the world for centuries. A network of trade routes connecting east and west has linked ancient China with the wider world to trade in silks, spices, and other exotic commodities throughout recorded history. However, the term 'Silk Road' or 'Silk Route' did not come into common usage until coined by the German, Ferdinand von Richthofen, who made seven expeditions to China from 1868 to 1872. 

The trade routes, a network of roads and caravan routes that were sometimes barely more than rough tracks, started as far back as the Han dynasty (207 BC - 220 AD). These trade routes crossed to the west through Central Asia, India, and what is now Pakistan. Today, we can still see the remnants of some of those tracks in parts of Gilgit Baltistan, alongside the Karakoram Highway. 

A maritime Silk Route opened up between Chinese-controlled Giao Ch? (near Hanoi, in what is now modern Vietnam) sometime around the first century. It extended via ports on the coasts of India and Sri Lanka, all the way to Roman-controlled ports in Egypt and the Nabataean territories on the north eastern coast of the Red Sea. 

Today, a new 'Silk Road' is starting to wind its way from China down through Pakistan to the Arabian Sea, with the western corridor ending at Gwadar in Balochistan, and in the east, at Karachi. The China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is being constructed at a cost of USD 46 billion. Consisting of roads, rail and pipelines, the CPEC will shorten the distance between China and Europe, cutting the costs enormously of transporting goods, and oil and gas to the western provinces of China. The benefits to Pakistan are potentially enormous if managed properly. 

The CPEC is not without controversy. There has been considerable political debate between the Provinces and the Federal Government about the routes, actual benefits to Pakistan, jobs for Pakistanis, and the transparency of the deal with China. This is hardly surprising. 

This is the biggest project to come to Pakistan and every province wants the best deal for itself. However, in the end, it is what will bring the best overall outcomes for the nation that matters. China, as the investor, is also entitled to negotiate the best deal based on their needs. Debate is healthy but it should be productive, not destructive, and seek to achieve fair outcomes for all of Pakistan as well as the investor and partner in the project, China. 

Otherwise, this huge investment will be ineffective and aspects of it may even fade away. This would be a great loss of an outstanding economic long-term opportunity for Pakistan. 

Security has been a major topic of concern. A special security force has been tasked to protect the Chinese contractors and the infrastructure during construction and beyond. But while there has been considerable focus on the security of the land components, the maritime security aspects have received much less attention, at least by the media and the public. The whole point of CPEC is to open up shorter shipping routes to and from Europe and other markets for China's inland provinces. Without enhanced security of the main ports and Pakistan's territorial waters, the project will be at risk. The security of the port, and territorial waters of Pakistan through which ships to and from Gwadar and Karachi must sail, is paramount to the future viability of this trade route. 

'Sea blindness' seems to be an issue here. The 1,000 km coastline, extending from Iran in the west, and India to the east, already presents Pakistan with a number of security challenges though there is no doubt that the Pakistan Navy is capable of addressing these. But the CPEC will bring new considerations, which must be factored in. However, while the nation is highly supportive and aware of the Army's important role in the security of the country, few seem to give much thought to that of the Navy. Somehow, the wider population seems to be blind to the threats that come from the sea, perhaps because it does not resonate with our daily lives in the way the possibility of a terror attack in our cities does. The risks are real and there is no room for such blindness. The Indian Navy, for example, is building up its Navy with new warships, nuclear submarines and an aircraft carrier. Compare this to the Pakistan Navy and it is easy to understand the increasing imbalance in maritime deterrence. While talks between Pakistan and India are on the cards in the hope of reducing the bilateral threats, we cannot know what the future will hold. History tells us to be wary. 

Piracy poses a significant threat to shipping in the Arabian Sea and other major shipping routes around the world such as the Straits of Malacca. The economic cost of piracy and the taking of merchant marine ships have necessitated a rise in insurance premiums for shipping companies and clients. Some shipping companies have engaged private security companies to have armed protection teams onboard their ships. These issues raise the costs of merchant shipping and affect the viability of sea transport. Ships sailing to and from Gwadar and Karachi will be at risk of pirates who operate across a wide region, if maritime security is not at its optimum. 

The Pakistan Navy is already very experienced in international maritime security. It has for some time played an important and highly regarded role in two important Task Forces as part of the Maritime Security Operations that protect the Arabian Sea. Combined Task Force 150 (CTF-150) is a multinational coalition naval task force that works under a 25-nation coalition of the Combined Maritime Forces. Based in Bahrain it was established to monitor, inspect, board, and stop suspect shipping as a response in the "Global War on Terrorism" in the Arabian Sea, the Horn of Africa region, and to support maritime operations in the Indian Ocean. 

Established in 2009, the Combined Task Force 151 (CTF-151) is also a multinational Naval Task Force set up to combat piracy attacks in the Gulf of Aden and off the eastern coast of Somalia. Its mission is to disrupt piracy and armed robbery at sea and to engage with regional and other partners to build capacity and capabilities to protect global maritime commerce and secure freedom of navigation. It operates in conjunction with the EU's Operation Atalanta and Nato's Operation Ocean Shield. At times, the Pakistan Navy has taken its turn in leading the Task Forces. According to my international defence sources, Pakistan's leadership was very highly regarded, as has been its overall participation. However, this has had little publicity here in Pakistan. 

The substantial experience gained from participation in these Task Forces will stand the Navy well in its role to provide maritime security for the CPEC. This new role could be transformative for the Navy in Pakistan through drawing greater attention to their role and the need for greater budgetary support for future requirements, which will need to be addressed in terms of ships, equipment and possibly manpower. 

Maritime exercises are being conducted with the Chinese Navy, which also has a strong interest in the maritime security of CPEC and to protect the massive investment. This will further enhance the Pakistan Navy's capabilities and extend its relationships with foreign maritime forces beyond the existing Task Force commitments. 

There is however, a significant issue which must be addressed. The Navy receives only a very small percentage of the Defence budget. This must be increased to meet the future needs of the nation's maritime security in an increasingly unstable region. New ships are expensive but required to expand the protection of maritime borders and the CPEC maritime route in territorial waters, as well as maintain commitments to other regional maritime security operations. The CPEC is a long-term project. It will take years to be fully operational and effective and to realise the full benefits for Pakistan and China as the investor and partner. New ships and equipment take time to procure so now is the time to start the process and this begins with larger budget allocations to facilitate procurement. 

If the CPEC is to truly fulfil its potential and become the new 'Silk Road', and provide Pakistan with broader economic opportunities, then the country must also invest in its own future. Maritime operations and security must take their place as a critical component to be included in all discussions and decision-making considerations, and the Navy must be fully equipped and resourced to meet the future requirements of a successful and secure nation state. 

http://www.brecorder.com/supplements/88/28469/

China Pakistan Economic Corridor and the Growing Rivalry in the Indian Ocean, Latheef Farook

China Pakistan Economic Corridor and the Growing Rivalry in the Indian Ocean, Latheef Farook

(This paper on China –Pakistan Economic Corridor and the Growing Rivalry in the Indian Ocean". was presented  by Sri Lankan journalist and author Latheef Farook at the two day International Conference on China-Pakistan Economic Co-operation in Islamabad 14 and 15 March 2016)

In the aftermath of the collapse of the former Soviet Union in December 1979, United States, Britain, Europe, Russia and Israel began invading and destroying Muslim countries in the Middle East and beyond in their drive to create Greater Israel by annexing  Syria and Iraq.

While the west was busy with their wars, China began peacefully entering African countries, concluding agreements and undertaking numerous development projects besides finding markets for its wide range of products.

As a result China’s trade with Africa which stood at around ten billion dollar in 2002 reached around 180 billion dollar in 2004. China’s four trillion dollar trade and seven million barrels of daily oil is transacted through the Indian Ocean sea route. 

Thus the Indian Ocean is indispensable to China. However there were fears that this sea trade route can be choked by blocking mainly Malacca Strait by hostile powers.

To overcome this threat China tied up with its longstanding trustworthy partner- Pakistan started building an alternate trade route as part of an ambitious 46 billion dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor-CPEC project.

The CPEC is unique in the sense that it connects China and Pakistan only. Also it connects China to the sea through the quickest route. Under this overall program China intends to build a web of networks such as the Southern Silk Road, the Central Asia Silk Road, the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road and the CPEC.

It could be a pivot to China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) concept that aims to connect 60 countries on the Asia and European land mass. 

One of them was linking the strategically important Pakistani port of Gwadar in the Persian Gulf to China’s Xinjiang region through a vast network of highways and railways, upgrading and expanding infrastructure and overhauling of the transportation infrastructure, sea ports, imports oil and gas pipeline. This land route, shortens distance with the Gulf market by 10,000 kilometers, and it is bound to change the entire geo politics of the region.

One should not forget that one of the main reasons why the now collapsed Soviet Union dispatched troops to Afghanistan was to gain access to warm waters of Persian Gulf.

Thus the development of the strategically located port of Gwadar and a modern airport there also bound to raise concern from Gulf sheikhdoms, Tehran, Moscow to Washington, London, Paris, Tel Aviv and New Delhi.

China also developed its own strategy for the Indian Ocean by setting up a series of ports in friendly countries along the ocean's northern seaboard from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. 

The Chinese government is also planning a canal across the Isthmus of Kra, in Thailand, to link the Indian Ocean to China's Pacific coast -- a project on the scale of the Panama Canal. This could further tip Asia's balance of power in China's favor by giving China's expanding navy and commercial maritime fleet easy access   from East Africa to Japan and the Korean Peninsula.

Simultaneously China is cultivating its relations with countries of the region through aid, trade and defense agreements. One important factor pushing China to build alternative routes is the fact that  Indian navy, soon to be the third largest in the world after those of the United States and China, will function as an antidote to Chinese military expansion. 

 Pakistan

The CPEC will give Pakistani economy an unprecedented boost as the overall project involves development of ports, air ports, extensive road and railway networks, oil and gas pipelines linking Iran and many more.

Pakistan’s only coastline is on the Indian Ocean and it is vital for trade and energy supply besides preventing India from dominating the areas closest to Pakistan.  

Pakistan is   a country surrounded by many enemies. For example   India which played a decisive role in the breakup of Pakistan in 1971, has its own design on Pakistan under its   Greater India program that covers the entire South Asia and the India Ocean.

With its ambitious program to expand its influence on land and sea from Iran to   Thailand, India cannot view CPEC positively. 

Recently an Indian comentator said in a television discussion that Indian border is with Afghanistan. This  is cause for   concern  especially in view of  India’s deep involvement   in Afghanistan with more than a dozen consulate offces and  allegations of arming and funding separatist forces in Baluchsitan.

Already Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has expressed India’s concern during his visit to China in 2015. The Indian Foreign Minister, Sushma Swaraj reportedly told Chinese Premier Xi Jinping that projects passing through Gilgit-Baltistan are "unacceptable" as they require road construction in territory India regards as its own.

However Chinese Premier dismissed the concerns, describing CPEC as a "commercial project"  that would not target any third party.  

Meanwhile the growing ties between India and Israel should be of concern to Pakistan in view of the two countries declared hostility towards Islam and Muslims.

Bharata Janatha Party,BJP ,one of the deceptive fronts of Hindu extremist  Rashtriya Swayam Sevak,RSS, was elected to power.  RSS’s  declared agenda is to turn India into Hinduraj and openy demand that Muslims either convert to Hinduism or leave the country. 

Israel, on the otherhand, reported to have  spent more than 281 crore Indian rupees  to bring to power BJP   led by Prime Minister  Mr Narendara Modi, the architect of Godhra massacre of Muslims.

Thus the growing Indian Israel ties is deadly threat Pakistan’s very existence.India has now lined up with the United States,Britain,Europe and Israel  polarising the world into two groups competing for its zone of influence in the india Ocean. The fear that Gwadar may one day become a Chinese naval base also troubles New Delhi.

 United States

One of the biggest Challenges United states is facing in the world politics is in the Indian Ocean where both China and India are emerging as the major maritime and economic powers and posing challenge to US’s decades of hegemony. 

It is common knowledge that USA is manipulating regional states to push countries away from Chinese Camp to obstruct China’s expansion in the South China Sea as well as in East China Sea. USA does not want the region to be dominated by any single state because that would seriously jeopardize USA’s long term economic interests as well as disturb the balance of power in the region.

This is specially so in view of the shifting of economic center from the west to the east. If controlled by any [Asian] nation, key choke points in the Indian Ocean, including the Strait of Malacca, the Strait of Hormuz, and Bab el Mandeb, could tilt the balance of trade further towards Asia.

In the Indian Ocean region the United States also has a naval presence in Bahrain, Djibouti and Diego Garcia and engages in exercises with various African, Asian and Middle Eastern countries along the Indian Ocean coastline.

Under the new Washington, Tel Aviv and New Delhi axis, U.S. is courting India to assign the lead role in the Indian Ocean, which is unacceptable to both China and Pakistan. In fact, India’s cozying up to powers that China is suspicious of, compels China and Pakistan to strengthen their alliance further. China-Pakistan strategic naval partnership centered on Gwadar will scuttle the Indo-U.S. ambition of dominating the Indian Ocean. 

Europe

Europe has strong economic and security interests in the Indian Ocean. European countries are working to obtain rights to mine the seabed of the Indian Ocean for valuable metals, with some foreseeing a rush in the coming years. In addition, European countries have substantial fishing interests; Sri Lanka’s fisheries minister estimates they harvest 48 Percent  in the Indian Ocean

Middle East despite its vast resources, military and economic power is in turmoil due to on going US led European-Israeli wars and the treachery of the dictators installed in power by the west to serve them obediently.

Iran is the other emerging power of the Indian Ocean with control of the most crucial Strait of Hormuz, a transit passage responsible for the supply of oil to most of the world   can potentially be the cause of triggering conflict in the region. 

 As rightly pointed out by Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International and Pakistan affairs, Indian Ocean has become the hub of political, strategic and economic activities because of the presence of conventional and nuclear vessels of the major powers in the area and because of its own economic and strategic significance.

One columnist pointed out that Indians and the Chinese are likely to enter into a dynamic great-power rivalry in these waters, with their economic interests as major trading partners locking them in an uncomfortable embrace; while Pakistan would continue to assert its position by establishing alliance with China and by building its own capacity, especially naval power.

He added that what is becoming obvious as things unfold is that no single state would be able to dominate the region singularly; therefore, a sort of multilateral set up will have to be established whereby each country can “equitably” pursue its goals.  

Thus the discussions taking place today in Islamabad at the International Conference on China-Pakistan economic cooperation dealing with challenges and opportunities are bound to attract the attention of countries near and far.  Ends

Not Opposed To Chinese Troops In Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir: Hurriyat

Not Opposed To Chinese Troops In Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir: Hurriyat

Hard-line Hurriyat Conference led by Syed Ali Geelani has justified the presence of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.

It said that “unlike India, PLA has not forcibly occupied Azad Kashmir and they are there due to mutual agreement between China and Pakistan.”

Hurriyat Conference also rejected former chief minister Omar Abdullah’s assertion that separatists have maintained silence over the presence of the PLA troops along the Line of Control in PoK. The party said Omar had no moral justification to criticize separatists.

“Azad Kashmir is now a part of the Pakistan-China economic corridor and pro-freedom people here have no reason to oppose presence of the PLA there. China is a strong supporter of right to self-determination of Kashmiri people so it is in no way fair to compare the Chinese army with occupational forces of India,” the spokesman said.

After frequent incursions in Ladakh area, PLA troops were spotted at forward posts along the Line of Control (LoC) on the Pakistani side of Kashmir. This could have raised the worries of Indian security agencies.

The Hurriyat Conference said China will not do anything which will endanger sovereignty and Jammu & Kashmir after it attains “freedom from India.”

The spokesman said Kashmiris were thankful to China for its unconditional support to their freedom struggle.

http://topyaps.com/hurriyat-not-opposed-to-china?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=TYAKP

Chinese Army spotted along LoC in Pak-occupied Kashmir

Chinese Army spotted along LoC in Pak-occupied Kashmir

By: PTI | Srinagar March 13, 2016

Army has officially maintained complete silence on the issue but have been constantly updating various intelligence agencies about the presence of PLA troops along the Line of Control.

After frequent incursions in Ladakh area, Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops have been spotted at forward posts along the Line of Control (LoC) on the Pakistani side of Kashmir, ringing alarm bells in the security grid.

The Army has spotted presence of senior PLA officials at the forward posts opposite Nowgam sector in North Kashmir after which some intercepts of Pakistani army officers suggested that the Chinese troops have come to create some infrastructure along the LoC, sources in the know of developments said on Sunday.

Army has officially maintained complete silence on the issue but have been constantly updating various intelligence agencies about the presence of PLA troops along the Line of Control, the sources said.

The PLA troops were first spotted in the later part of the last year and ever since their presence was witnessed opposite Tangdhar sector as well. In this area, Chinese government-owned China Gezhouba Group Company Limited has been building a Jhelum-Neelum 970 MW Hydel power project.

The hydel project is being built in response to India’s Kishanganga power project being built in Bandipore of North Kashmir. The Indian project is designed to divert water from the Kishanganga River to a power plant in the Jhelum River basin and will have an installed capacity of 330 MW.

Construction on the project began in 2007 and is expected to be complete this year.

The intercepts also suggested that Chinese PLA would be digging some tunnels in Leepa Valley, located in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), to build an all-weather road which will serve as an alternate route to reach Karakoram Highway.

The visit by PLA officials is seen by experts as part of Beijing’s 46 billion dollar China-Pakistan-Economic Corridor (CPEC) under which Gwadar port in Karachi is linked to Chinese Xinjiang province through Karakoram highway, an area under illegal occupation of China.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/chinese-army-spotted-along-loc-in-pak-occupied-kashmir/

Assuaging the complexities of the Kashmir Issue by freezing it! Junaid Qureshi

Distinguished guests,

Before starting with my speech, I would like to congratulate the organizers for hosting such an important and successful event at this epitome of diplomacy. I am thankful to you for inviting me once again to share my views and become part of your endeavours. I am hopeful that going forward, you and I can together strive to provide more space to the youth of Jammu & Kashmir, in order to enable them to share their views in such august gatherings.

Being a Kashmiri Muslim from the Valley of Kashmir, makes me worry about the injustice and human right violations there. At the same time, I - as a Kashmiri - am equally concerned about the fate of the Kashmiris living in Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan Administered Kashmir, Jammu & Ladakh.

For me, the State of Jammu & Kashmir comprises much more than the Kashmir Valley only.

I am here as a representative of the whole state of Jammu & Kashmir. A state which belongs to all State Subjects, irrespective of their religion, caste, creed or colour. A state which is equally mine as it is of Dogras, Kashmiri Pandits, Bakarwals, Dards, Baltis, Ladakhis, Pushwaris, Gujjars and all other ethnicities.

It is with the utmost respect and with the utmost pain as well, that I have to conclude that the international community of Human Rights defenders along with the United Nations has failed us Kashmiris.

It couldn’t stop Pakistan from proposing changes to the clauses of the UN resolutions on Jammu & Kashmir and thereby allowed the issue to transform into a mere territorial dispute between India and Pakistan.   

Since the dawn of the 22^nd of October, 1947, it has also failed in freeing my land from invading forces.

It could not prevent Pakistan from gifting more than 5000sq miles of Jammu & Kashmir to China under the pretext of their Border Agreement of 1963.    

It failed again when the issue of 20 million Kashmiris was further marginalized into a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan when they both signed the Shimla Agreement.

It failed to act when a proxy war was started by the Pakistani military establishment in the Kashmir Valley, whereby it used innocent young Kashmiris as sacrificial lambs.

It also, did not react when human right violations were committed by the Indian Security Forces.

It silently watched when ethnic cleansing of my Kashmiri Pandit brethren took place by the hands of fundamentalists.

And currently, it is silently silent when Pakistan is undertaking steps to formally annex Gilgit Baltistan, while China is aiming to cement its stake in the Kashmir-issue by building an illegal economic corridor through this part of Jammu & Kashmir.  

Both these actions of Pakistan and China are deliberate attempts to further exacerbate the complexities of the Kashmir-Issue and jeopardize any kind of solution while totally negating the interests of the people of Jammu & Kashmir.     

The Kashmir-issue along with its many interrelated layers like proxy warfare, political and historical sensitivities and the contention over water resources remains the biggest threat to peace and development in South-Asia. Sadly, we Kashmiris continue to suffer the heaviest losses because of the hostility between India and Pakistan.

Let’s face it, ladies and gentlemen.

We all have failed in solving the Kashmir-Issue and liberating the Kashmiri people and the common people of India and Pakistan from uncertainty and hostility.

Yet, my longing for peace has not been extinguished. It is because of this deep desire for peace that I have come here again.

With a wish.

A wish to stop the bloodshed and the destruction of my generation.  

A wish of peace.

Peace, which should be superior to anyone’s ideology or stated positions. We Kashmiris are fed-up with this violence. This borrowed gun has brought us to the edge of destruction. It has looted us from our dignity and snatched our identity. It has corrupted our pillars of secularism, brotherhood, tolerance and Kashmiriyat.

It must stop before it obliterates our very existence.

The Kashmir-Issue undoubtedly requires a political solution, but first the people of Kashmir, India and Pakistan are in urgent need of liberation from fear and uncertainty.

Maybe solving the Kashmir-Issue is a task too great for our generation. Perhaps we should be compelled to conclude from the past 70 odd years that solutions can only be found in an atmosphere of tranquillity, which we have failed to conceive.  

Based on that, I think that we all should try to establish that atmosphere of tranquillity, so that the next generation might have a much more realistic chance to solve this deadlock.

I have come here to make an appeal to the International Community, the United Nations and the human rights defenders present here; We Kashmiris need your help in facilitating an atmosphere of tranquillity, mutual trust and dialogue between India and Pakistan which could pave the way for an alternative narrative in the future. A solution oriented narrative, which can only be followed if a harmonious environment is created.  

I believe that we should formally freeze the Kashmir-issue for the next 20 years in order to de-freeze it.

During these twenty years, India and Pakistan should solve all other outstanding issues which will ensure economic and political interdependency among both the countries, demolish the erected walls of hatred and eventually assuage the complexities of this conflict.  

While freezing the Kashmir-issue, both countries should demonstrate the utmost flexibility by giving something back to us Kashmiris. This will pave the way of satisfying our genuine demands, create a tangible sense of hope and at the same time address our intangible, yet undeniable yearning of regaining our lost dignity.

Total withdrawal of armed forces in both parts of Jammu & Kashmir, revocation of laws like PPO, AFSPA and PSA, immediate halt to terrorism and religious extremism sponsored by rogue elements in the Pakistani military establishment and extremist religious parties, release of all political prisoners in Indian- and Pakistani Administered Kashmir, establishment of judicial enquiry commissions on disappearances and political killings like the one of Arif Shahid in 2013, rejection of violence and displays thereof by all stakeholders without any selectiveness, rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits according to their wishes, dispensation of justice and opening up of the borders in order to facilitate people-to-people interaction, are immediate steps which could provide some relief to the Kashmiri people and at the same time address the growing trust deficit.

The de facto border, LOC, should be made irrelevant and free movement of goods, persons, services and capital should be guaranteed. Pakistan should ensure that no further attempts will be made to disassemble Gilgit Baltistan from Jammu & Kashmir.  

A sustainable economy consisting of models for industrial, agricultural and touristic developments should be encouraged and invested upon by both countries.

Full autonomy should be given to the Kashmiri people on both sides by constituting regional assemblies in all the five regions and only the portfolios of Defence, Foreign affairs and Currency should be managed by India and Pakistan respectively in their current administered parts of J&K.

Simultaneously, an institutionalized Intra-Kashmir dialogue should be facilitated in all the 5 regions of Jammu & Kashmir, in order to enable us Kashmiris to create a genuine consensus regarding our future.

I firmly believe that an everlasting solution to the Kashmir-issue will naturally follow this freezing period. When both countries will have solved all other outstanding issues and Kashmiris would have liberated themselves from violence, religious extremism and proxy warfare, none of the parties would be willing, NOT to solve this entanglement.

The interrelated stakes, collective appetite for peace, economic progress and the respective introspection among all stakeholders would necessitate a solution based on the principles of give-and-take.

The interdependency will inevitably make giving less painful, while it will diminish the urge of taking.

It has already taken too much from us Kashmiris.

We cannot afford to give anything, anymore.    

Speech of Junaid Qureshi during a Side-event seminar, ‘Human Rights situation in South Asia’, at the 31^st Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on the 10^th of March 2016.

Debate on Two Nations Theory, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Debate on Two Nations Theory

Dr Shabir Choudhry      11 March 2016

Pakistan will be 69 years old in August, but still people are not sure what the purpose of establishing this new country was. Moreover, what is the future of this unfortunate country, which suffered humiliating defeat in 1971 and a break up of its Eastern wing, now known as Bangladesh?

Growing body of opinion now believe that Pakistan was not created to serve Islam or for the benefit of Muslims of united India, if anything, the partition of India divided Muslims of the Indian Sub Continent. Also it resulted in death of more than half million innocent people, rapes, destruction and unending hatred and extremism.

Some critics even say that creation of Pakistan was designed to serve the British interests after their departure from South Asia. The British Generals in India proposed a creation of a buffer state between India and Afghanistan, stretching from Gilgit Baltistan to Balochistan. Idea was to protect India from Soviet Russia. The British also wanted to reward the landed aristocracy and the men in uniform who helped the British Raj to expand and survive in the Indian Sub Continent.

Muslim League under the unyielding command of Mohammed Ali Jinnah apparently championed the cause of Pakistan in name of Islam. Before we analyse what Mr Jinnah wanted to do with his new country, let us look at what were the aims and objectives of the Muslim League, the party that spearheaded the campaign for Pakistan. The Muslim League was set up on 28 December 1906 in Dhaka, with the following objectives:

1.    To promote among Muslims a feeling of loyalty to the British government and to remove misunderstandings;

2.    To protect and advance the political rights and interests of Muslims, and to represent properly their needs and aspirations to the British government; and

3.    To prevent the rise of hostility among Muslims toward other communities. 1

The Muslim League and the rulers of Pakistan, to date, have very sincerely served the British and the American interests in Pakistan and in the region. To accomplish this task, the landed aristocracy and the men in uniform also played their part brilliantly, and benefited immensely.

The bitter fact is that the landed aristocracy, the Generals and the security forces now control Pakistan and its destiny; and sad thing is even they don’t know what is the destiny of this unfortunate country and how to reach there. Another bitter fact is, service to Islam and welfare of the Muslims is no longer priority of those who control and run Pakistan. I have heard Muslims of other countries saying that they feel sorry for the Pakistani Muslims, as they are not safe even in their own country.

Was Two Nations Theory a political stunt?

Of course millions of Pakistanis still believe that the Movement for Pakistan was to advance the cause of Islam. In reality that is not true. Some analysts believe there was a competition between two brilliant Gujrati lawyers – Mr Jinnah and Mr Gandhi for supremacy in the Indian Congress and in the Indian politics. Both had charisma and brilliance, and both had great influence in the Congress. However, gradually Jinnah felt he was outmaneuvered by politics of Nehru and Gandhi; and in frustration he shifted to Britain.

Critics ask, if he was such a staunch Muslim and true and dedicated soldier of Islam who wanted to advance the cause of Islam, then why did he accept the Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946, which provided a unitary State within India?

Jinnah was not a fool. Indeed he was a shrewd politician. He knew he could not take all Muslims to his new country – Pakistan. He knew millions of Muslims will stay behind in India. He also knew that nearly all Islamic scholars opposed his idea of dividing India in name of religion. Then question arises why he was bent upon to get India divided. Was it because of his pride and ego; or was there some other agenda?

Mountbatten had a meeting with Mohammed Ali Jinnah on 17^th April 1947; and told him that if he insisted on dividing India in name of religion, then the provinces of Punjab and Bengal should also be divided on religious lines. This, Mountbatten asserted, would mean you will have ‘Very moth-eaten Pakistan, the eastern and north-west parts of which were unlikely to be economic propositions, and which would still have to come to some centre for general subjects for a long while after we had  left’.

To this Mr Jinnah replied by saying: ‘I do not care how little you give me as long as you give it to me completely’. 2

These words of Mr Jinnah ‘I do not care how little you give me’, makes it clear that his project did not have service to Islam or welfare of the Muslims of India as his top priority. However, he and his team skilfully used the name of Islam as the slogan to motivate Muslims, millions of whom were illiterate. Smaller and truncated Pakistan meant a weaker Pakistan, separated by one thousand miles. This kind of Pakistan did not have a bright future. Moreover, millions of Muslims would be left outside of this Pakistan. Did he not think for a minute, what would be the fate of the Muslims left back in India, especially when the Two Nations Theory unleashed a genie of hatred and violence?

It leads people to only one conclusion: Mr Jinnah wanted the division of India at any cost, and become a Governor General of the new country that he could be at par with Mountbatten who would be the Governor General of India after independence.

Furthermore, before the creation of Pakistan Mr Jinnah forcefully asserted that Muslims and non Muslims cannot live together. However soon after the creation of Pakistan he asserted:

‘You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places 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........... Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State’. 3

Question arises, if it was not possible for Muslims and non Muslims to live together because of strong differences and bitterness, then how could all this changed soon after Pakistan was established? Is it because his agenda of dividing united India was accomplished with disastrous outcome? Or Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s ego was satisfied and he had become the Governor General of Pakistan.

Why Jogendra Nath Mandal was appointed first Law Minister of Pakistan

Critics argue if the purpose of establishing Pakistan was to serve Islam and have Islamic laws in Pakistan, then why he made the above statement in the Constituent Assembly? His speech clearly shows he wanted to have some kind of a secular Pakistan. Furthermore, if he wanted to serve Islam and have an Islamic Pakistan then he should have appointed a Mufti or a religious scholar as a Law Minister of Pakistan.

Instead of appointing a Muslim Scholar as a Law Minister he appointed Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Hindu, as the first Law Minister of Pakistan. Surely he did not expect Jogendra Nath Mandal to enact and implement Islamic laws. People of Pakistan have been fooled for too long in name of religion. Time has come to call spade a spade, and understand what was done in name of Islam.

Many people might not know that Mr Jinnah appointed Jogendra Nath Mandal the first Chairman of the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. He presided over the historic session of the Constituent Assembly on 11th August 1947, where Mohammed Ali Jinnah was sworn in as the first Governor-General of Pakistan. Apart from being the Law Minister, Jogendra Nath Mandal was also the Minister of Labour, and Second Minister of Commonwealth and Kashmir Affairs.

On the role of Jogendra Nath Mandal, Ahmed Saleem notes:

“The fact that one of the minority members was elected to preside over the session hints at the progressive attitude of the new state, and it augurs well for the future. Pakistan itself was brought into existence by the unrelenting efforts of a minority of the Indian Subcontinent. 4

After the death of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Jogendra Nath Mandal was disgraced; and he was left with no choice but to resign. Chaudhry Mohammad Ali sincerely served the British Raj before the emergence of Pakistan. After becoming Secretary-General of the Pakistani Cabinet Secretariat, he thought Mr Mandal was not a sincere Pakistani, and perhaps Mohammed Ali Jinnah made an error of judgement in appointing Mr Mandal to this key Ministry. On this topic, Pir Ali Mohammed Rashidi wrote:

‘Consequently, he tried to keep many cabinet documents away from the Law Minister. It was too much for Mandal. His pride was hurt. Hitherto, he had lived as a self reliant man, who knew his self-worth. Before becoming a minister, he had offered huge sacrifices and as a Hindu, swum against the tide to support our Quaid in the Pakistan Movement. How could he possibly pocket the insult from a cabinet secretary, who had taken it upon himself to judge a Hindu minister for his political character and loyalty to his country? Mandal quit as minister and went back to Calcutta to spend the rest of his life being taunted by Hindus.’ 5

Frustrated and humiliated Jogendra Nath Mandal, on 8th October 1950, wrote 18 pages long letter to Liaquat Ali Khan, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, and narrated his services to Pakistan Movement and Pakistan; and explained why he had to resign. In the last paragraph of his long letter he wrote:

‘Leaving aside the overall picture of Pakistan and the callous and cruel injustice done to others, my own personal experience is no less sad, bitter and revealing’. 6

Plight of Chaudhry Rehmat Ali

Chaudhry Rehmat Ali was the man who first coined the word Pakistan. He arranged a reception in honour of Mohammed Ali Jinnah in Waldorf Hotel, London; and explained to him his idea of Pakistan. He presented him his booklet ‘Now or Never, We are to Live or Perish for Ever’, which he wrote in 1933. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was not persuaded; and retaliated by saying, ‘Pakistan was an impossible dream’.7

Later on in life, Mohammed Ali Jinnah got convinced that he had to use his skills and ability to accomplish the task of this ‘impossible dream’. After creation of Pakistan, in April 1948, Chaudhry Rehmat Ali also moved to Pakistan – a land of his dream. However, he soon developed some differences with the Muslim League government; and he was ordered by the government to leave Pakistan. He left Pakistan in October 1948 and settled in England, where he died on 3 February 1951. No one was there to even take responsibility for his funeral. This duty was performed by a Professor of the Cambridge University and he was buried on 20 February in a grave yard on New Market Road, Cambridge.8

As always, I know some emotional Pakistanis will use foul language against me to express their anger and frustration; but I hope some sane people will appreciate the effort and the valuable information this article provides.

Writer is a political analyst, TV anchor and author of many books and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs. Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com

References:

1.    Quaaid-i- Millat Liaquat Ali Khan', Page 27, by Ziuauddin Ahmed.

2.    Marseger, Nicholas, Transfer of Power, Volume 12, H.M. Stationery Office, London, 1982-83. Viceroy’s Personal Report No. 3: Point 19.

3.    Speech of Mohammed Ali Jinnah to the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on 11 August 1947.

4.    Ahmed Saleem ‘Pakistan aur Aqliatien’ (Pakistan and Minorities), page 104

5.    Jogendra Nath Mandal: Chosen by Jinnah, banished by bureaucracy, Akhtar Balouch, Dawn 4 November 2015

6.    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Resignation_letter_of_Jogendra_Nath_Mandal

7.    Collins, Larry and Lapierre, Dominique, Freedom at Midnight, London, 1976, page 120

8.    Dr Lal Khan, Abi Manzil ne ahi

http://dunya.com.pk/index.php/author/dr-lal-khan/2014-03-23/6481/47312849#.Uy9rpfl_uSo