Friday, October 31, 2014

Speaker Pakhtunkhwa Assembly PTI Asad Qasier Brother, Adnan Khan Beats up Deputy Commissioner in His Office for Taking Action Against Profiteers and Law Breakers .


Swabi Pakhutnkhwa : Officials from government departments and representatives of political parties went on strike and participated in a rally at Jirga Hall in Swabi on Thursday following Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser’s brother’s alleged hooliganism.

Adnan Khan is said to have manhandled Swabi Additional Assistant Commissioner Khaliq Dad Khan after a crackdown against profiteering.

According to Khaliq Dad, Adnan and his two bodyguards stormed his office on Wednesday. “They used foul language and beat me up,” Khaliq told the media. He said the Swabi Deputy Commissioner had been informed and a formal FIR had been lodged against the assembly speaker’s brother.

Khan claimed Adnan was unhappy over cases registered against some shopkeepers and butchers for overcharging and food adulteration. Adnan was told the cases were registered against the offenders and they should pursue legal recourse but he insisted on the cancellation of FIRs and retraction of cases.

Assistant Commissioner Altamash Janjua, Government Employees Coordination Council President Abdul Latif, Clerks Association representative Zakirullah Omarkhel, former nazim Ihsanul Haq Bamkhelvi and others addressed Thursday’s rally. They threatened a complete strike and further action starting Friday if Adnan is not taken to task for the misconduct. They warned relatives and aides of influential people to stay clear of the affairs of government functionaries.

Representatives of Awami National Party, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl also addressed the protest and accused the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf of promoting hooliganism in the province.

Bail before arrest

Adnan obtained bail before arrest from Swabi additional sessions judge on Thursday.

He claimed he had approached the officer after receiving complaints from poor shopkeepers. Before the court, Adnan accused the officer of using foul language against him.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 31st, 2014.

source : http://tribune.com.pk/story/783704/hooliganism-officials-take-to-the-streets-against-k-p-assembly-speakers-brother/

Friday, October 17, 2014

PTI + PAT Dharna and London Gate

Who is really behind it all? At first the agenda was hidden but now it is no more a secret. Strangely, another scandal is in the process of unearthing within a short span of two years.

Earlier, it was the Memogate. Many shocking revelations would be busted in the coming days. Analysts are labelling the new scandal as London Gate as the planning was done at the end of May in the office of a London based Pakistani businessman, Dr Ijaz Hussain, who was a former advisor to PML-Q’s Chaudhary Pervez Ellahi.

With the absence of certain factions of the PML-Q in London who all joined the PML-N, Dr Hussain did an important job. Dr Tahirul Qadri, chief of the Pakistan Awami Tahreek (PAT), was convinced by Dr Hussain
that he would be given the central role in Pakistani establishment if he launched a violent protest to topple the government of Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif, just democratically elected last May. Dr Hussain travelled with Qadri to Pakistan to introduce the Khomeini-type inqilab.
Newspapers revealed that Qadri undertook a ‘promotional tour’ of Europe and Iran before stepping into Pakistan to recruit activists
According to former Army Chief

General Mirza Aslam Baig, ‘Five years back, the Americans and the Canadians decided to unite the two schools of Islamic thought, Deobandi and Salafi, under Tahirul Qadri’s leadership to counter their
alliance in Afghanistan and Pakistan prior to the drawdown from Afghanistan’.

Qadri made an attempt in winter
2013 but miserably failed, so he was launched again.

The American and Canadian agenda
was to create a ‘secular Islam’ under Qadri and ‘liberal Pakistan’ under Imran Khan, Chairman Tahreek-i-Insaf.

Deobandis and PML-N are soft and lenient toward ‘political Islam’ – Taliban and their affiliates.

So this is a new Islamic ideological rift introduced by the West in
Pakistan.

Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) is more hit by both PTI and PAT. PML-N and PPP could easily accommodate JUI, so they must be ousted even by unconstitutional means, planned by the outsiders.
Why America, Britain, Canada, and Iran are behind this plan?

It is a business deal. Do they have
a common agenda? Do they want to grind their axes by overthrowing the PML-N regime?

Other than sabotaging an elected democracy in Pakistan, what was the global context of
this plan?

Many are arguing that the building of the Pakistan- China Economic Corridor was the target as Chinese President Xi Jinping was supposed to take a tour of Pakistan along with
other South Asian countries to sign agreements worth US$ 34 billion with Pakistan.

Following violent protests in Islamabad, Sri Lankan, and Maldives
Presidents cancelled their trips
to Pakistan.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Bangladesh and Sri Lanka alone on 6-8 September. His itinerary did not include Pakistan.
Leaders of the PTI, PAT, and MQM have been making repeated statements that Pakistan should not slide into civil war.

Why such fears are on their minds? Do they want to frighten the people to support their call? Or is it the civil war on the top of their agenda? And
can’t they implement their agenda without waging civil war?

General Mirza disclosed that America, Canada, Britain, and Iran were behind the conspiracy jointly launched by the PTI and PAT against a popularly elected
Prime Minister.

United States and Britain swiftly refuted such involvements. General Mirza did not elaborate but this is very threatening evidence about the
Azadi and Inqilab Marches and sit-ins staged in Islamabad since 14 August.

Their demands went unconstitutional and legal. They used violent and brutal means in the Red Zones by attacking the Parliament, Pakistan Secretariat, Prime Minister’s House, and PTV
Headquarters.

The Taliban-type of security control was launched in front of the Pakistan Secretariat. Servicemen were checked and bhata (forced
money) was taken for many days.

Reuters verified the claim of General Mirza on 5 September that the Army halted the ouster of the embattled Prime Minister.

According to the Federal Railways Minister Khawaja Saad Rafique the agenda of the London plan was to topple the Nawaz Sharif government and staging of anti-government demonstrations for which a
written agreement was made
between PTI, PAT, and PML-Q.

These parties, however, categorically refused to have
signed any such written agreement.

Qadri had come to Dorchester Restaurant for a dinner on the
invitation of Chaudhary brothers,
confirmed by PML-Q’s Information Secretary Senator Kamil Ali Agha, as reported in the media. Imran was already in London to ‘see his sons’,
ostensibly.

Qadri was on a medical check-up in London ‘from Toronto’. There they
organised anti-government strategy.

Qadri flew to Pakistan via Dubai Muttahida Qaumi Movement
(MQM) was taken into confidence by Qadri in London.

The agenda of MQM in this move was to save former dictator General Pervez Musharraf from the high treason trial as being an Urdu speaking general indicted while none other was.

MQM’s chief time and again spoke of that. Therefore, the alliance between PTI, PAT, PML-Q, Awami Muslim League, Majlis Wahdatul
Musilmin (MWM), with its alleged Iranian connections and MQM against the PML-N was natural.

Why is PML-N toeing the alliance with MQM when all was odd? Media broke the news on May 30 that these parties would form the anti-government alliance.

When Article 245 was imposed in Islamabad, the Army mainly remained a bystander.

It did not fire or apprehend the violent protesters. If such demonstrations were held in Washington DC or London, for
instance, violent protesters
would have been arrested and
killed and even the staging of
such protests would not have
been allowed from the start.

Pakistan is facing, however, an unusual situation. The government was forced by even PPP, MQM and Jamat-e-Islami etc to permit a sit-in protest ( dharna ) in Islamabad’s Red Zone.

Gen Mirza did not mention Army
or ISI in his statement. Rather, he appreciated the role of General Raheel Sharif who did not allow the conspiracy to succeed. Otherwise the country would have invited the fifth military regime. General Miza did mention that all those that
surrounded General Musharraf in
1999-2008 are now with Imran
and Qadri.

This is very strange because they claimed to be the true leaders yet they are coloured in military uniforms.

Their protestors shouted ‘ Army
Zindabad’ slogans in front of the
Parliament, PTV building, and PM House. What were they trying to teach?

The Army also did not arrest or kill a single protestor while they launched a violent protest in the Red Zone. A Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Operations, Asmatullah Junejo, was attacked with batons on 1 September and seriously injured
and many policemen were also
injured but no one was arrested
while the Article 245 was
invoked in Islamabad.

Is it not a mockery of the Article 245 in Islamabad? What would happen
if the Article 245 was seriously needed to ward off a security threat knowing the fact that terrorism is not over yet?

Anyway, General Mirza disclosed
threatening revelations. Pakistani internal politics is yet closely linked up to global conspiracy. Global actors want to see a destabilised Pakistan.

Canadian factor is a new invention. Qadri himself is a Canadian national. Why is Canada not preventing its national from staging an agitational politics in Pakistan
while he is using unconstitutional tactics? Like Canada, Iran is a new player in this whole game of conspiracy.

Shia-led MWM threw weight behind the PTI and PAT from the very beginning.

Dr Hussain made Qadri’s contacts with Pakistani officials linked with
Iran. Is this Iran’s connection?

Government must seek clarification from Iran. Meanwhile, PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi admitted the London meeting between Imran
and Qadri.

Chaudharys of PML-Q were actively involved in the London Plan, which has now been unveiled. This looks to be a new conspiracy against the
elected democratic government
of the PML-N, which got more
than two-thirds majority but is facing the unconstitutional demands of resignation of its elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The whole Parliament, except PTI and Awami Muslim League, stands behind the Prime Minister and does not want the Prime Minister to resign.

Forthem, it would be the resignation of the Parliamentand the death of democracy.

Strangely, MQM pleaded the same in the Parliament. Pakistani democracy has grown up much. It is the failure of the dharna that the Army did not come in to impose martial law while the situation was ripe for that. The Army remained within its professional bounds. Dharna leaders cannot avoid the statements given by the president of the PTI Javed Hashmi who alleged military connotation of these parties and leaders.

Imran and his PTI proclamations
are contradictory. PTI enjoys all
privileges. Imran rides on an expensive land-cruiser, lives in
a 700-kanal house in Islamabad,
flies over a private aircraft owned by a member of his party, Jehangir Tareen, and pays tax not matching with his lifestyle. Last year, for example, he paid Rs194,936 in taxes
only. He owns 1,644 kanals land
in Mianwali and Bhakkar.

In last year’s tax return, he did not
declare his assets. While in 2012 tax return, he declared assets worth Rs35,95,000. So far the dharna has cost Rs1 billion. Who has paid and still paying this cost?

Imran, Jehangir Tareen, or Azam Swati? Are they so generous or
somebody else is behind it all? PTI claims to be a poor man and
middle class party.

Yet the assets of PTI’s leaders match with no one. In dharna Imran misinformed the people about the reasons of his divorce from Jemima Goldsmith. Reasons of their divorce were not Maulana Fazalur Rhaman
and Nawaz Sharif and her conversion from being Jewish to
embracing Islam. Jemima cited
‘health issues, grimy furniture,,load shedding, and lack of separate room for children’ as the reasons for their divorce,along with his long absence
from home for political meetings fundraising activities and workout at gym.

She did not say a single word about her Jewish connection that became
the reason of their divorce but Imran publically admitted that because politicians alleged Jemima to be a Jew, so this led to their divorce.

Imran is not even fair about the reasons of his divorce and brought
religious biases for divorce,
which is not true. Yet Imran is determined to bring a ‘change’. With the bust of the London Gate the credibility of the PTI and PAT and their collaborators is at stake now.

In this whole episode of the London Gate, the role of UK- returned Chaudhary Muhammad Sarwar, Governor Punjab, is central. He is a mysterious player in this whole episode.

He is always a beneficiary in 40
years of ‘business’.

He has made dent in British politics.
What are his intentions and role
in this whole episode?

Governor Sarwar was a British Labour MP from Govan in Glasgow
(1997-2010). His son Anas,Sarwar occupies his constituency now. The former especially surrendered British
nationality to become the Governor of the Punjab.

He was present in the London meeting as was claimed by
ousted President of PTI Javed Hashmi on 20 September.

He promised to quit politics if this
would prove wrong. Hashmi is
known for his truthful politics in
Pakistan for decades.

Why was Governor Sarwar needed? He was the Governor of the Punjab and the PTI-PAT protests started from Lahore. The Model Town carnage would not have happened without his knowledge, as disclosed by Hashmi.

So Governor Sarwar was the most suitable person for PTI-PAT protestors.

Governor Sarwar did not categorically deny charges of being part of the London Plan though he was hit hard by Hashmi’s statement.

There are certain connections between Governor Sarwar and
Qadri.

The former refused to leave the Emirates flight EK 612 diverted to Lahore from Islamabad until Governor Sarwar took him in his bulletproof car in June.

Governor Sarwar took Governor Sindh Ishratul Abad in his plane to talk to Qadri at the dharna place in Islamabad’s Red Zone at the peak of the crisis. Why was he made mediator between the Government and PTI-PAT?

When Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif left Islamabad for New York to address the UN General Assembly session via London on 23 September, Governor Sarwar was busy in a press conference with MQM chief Altaf Hussain who demanded Nawaz Sharif’s resignation and offered the resignations of MQM’s MNAs to build pressure on PML-N.

MQM is behind the idea to form
a government of the technocrats. Governor Sawar and Altaf Hussain held a one- on-one meeting while Nawaz Sharif was facing ‘Go Nawaz Go’ slogans in front of his residence
in London on 23 September.

MQM threw full weight behind Qadri, Imran, and their dharna.

Moreover, in the worst flood-hit
time, why Governor Sarwar was
in Germany and Britain meeting
none but Altaf Hussain?

Raisingflood donations was not
government’s policy. Moreover, Governor Sarwar’s involvement in the Scottish referendum was criticised in Britain as being foreigner and involved in Scottish politics while his own province was
devastated by heavy floods.

Anas Sarwar has special ties with the PTI in Britain. As mentioned earlier that Hashmi claimed that Governor Sarwar arranged the meeting between Imran Khan and Qadri in London.

Why has PML-N not been cleaning up this mess and confusion? What are their concerns? Why have they ‘tolerated’ Governor Sarwar’s recent visit to London?

The London Gate was not unearthed, it was an open secret. The PML-N is itself part of it in the shape of Governor Sarwar from the very beginning.

This aspect should be explored
more to seek dharna’s justification and its motivations.

BY DR AHMAD
RASHID MALIK

The writer is Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad. He specialises in East Asian affairs.

Source: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/10/16/comment/dharna-and-london-gate/

Friday, October 10, 2014

Iconic Malalaa Yousafzai Pashtun Girl Youngest Ever winner of Noble Peace Prize.

 

OSLO: The Nobel Peace Prize went Friday to 17-year-old Pakistani Malala Yousafzai and India’s Kailash Satyarthi for their work promoting children’s rights.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the prize saying that peaceful global development can only come about if children and the young are respected.

Malala is the youngest person to be awarded the globally prestigious annual prize. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has congratulated teenage education campaigner Malala Yousafzai on winning the Nobel Peace Prize, calling her the “pride” of hiscountry.

“She is (the) pride of Pakistan. She has made her countrymen proud. Her achievement is unparallelled and unequalled. Girls and boys of the world should take the lead
from her struggle and commitment,” he said in astatement.

A number of congratulatory messages came pouring in as soon as the announcement of her win was made. The messages can beviewed here.

“The Nobel Committee regards it as an important point for a Hindu and a Muslim, an Indian and a Pakistani, to join in a common struggle for education and against extremism,” the Nobel committeesaid in a press release which canbe viewed here.

“The Norwegian Nobel Committeehas decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2014 is to be awarded to Kailash Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzai for their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education,” the jury said. The chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee ThorbjornJagland, announces
that education activist Malala Yousafzai and Kailash Satyarthi, Indian anti-child labour activist have been awarded the Nobel Peace

Prize 2014 at the Nobel Institute in Oslo on October 10, 2014. PHOTO:
AFP Malala Yousafzai — who survived being shot in the head by the Taliban in 2012 — was recognised for fighting for years for the right of girls to education, showing by example that children can contribute to improving their own situations. “This she has done under the most dangerous circumstances,” the committee said. “Through her heroic struggle she has become a leading spokespersonfor girls’ rights to education.”

It also said that the prize recognised work by Satyarthi to head various forms of protestsand demonstrations, all peaceful,focusing on the grave exploitationof children for financial gain. “Children must go to school andnot be financially exploited,” thecommittee said. “In conflict-ridden areas inparticular, the violation of children
leads to the continuation of  violence from generation to
generation.”

She is the second Pakistani tobecome a Nobel laureate after Abdus Salam who also shared the prize in 1979 with US nominee Steven Weinberg for physics. On July 12, 2013, Malala gave a powerful speech at the UN which
can be viewed here .

There was no clear frontrunner ahead of Friday’s Nobel PeacePrize announcement, with a
Russian opposition newspaper, Tunisia’s democratic leadership, Pakistan schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai and Pope Francis among a record number of candidates.

As in previous years, the chairman
of the Norwegian Nobel Committee,
Thorbjoern Jagland, will reveal the
laureate’s name at 0900 GMT at the
Nobel Institute in Oslo. The Nobel committee considered a record 278 candidates, but only those made public by their sponsors have been named.

The Nobel committee’s deliberations continued almost until the last minute and a decision wasn’t reached until last week, public broadcaster NRK reported.

The broadcaster, which sometimes
but not always has been able to
predict the winner, wrote on its
website that Tunisia’s powerful
UGTT workers union and President
Moncef Marzouki were among this
year’s favourites.

“Union can beat out Malala
tomorrow,” it wrote on its website.
The UGTT was nominated for its
role in Tunisia’s democratic
transition, brokering political
negotiations that resulted in a post-
revolution constitution being
signed.

Marzouki, a secular ally of the
moderate party Ennahda, was
chosen as president in Tunisia’s
first election since dictator Zine El
Abidine was toppled in 2011.

Pundits have also suggested that
individuals or groups from the
Russian opposition could be a
popular choice for the Nobel
Committee.

“Russia’s policy in Ukraine,
annexing Crimea and questioning
borders, but also the way the
Kremlin treats dissenters cannot be
ignored by the Nobel committee,”
said Antoine Jacob, author of a
history of the Nobel prizes.

For the Nobel committee president
Thorbjoern Jagland, “sanctioning
Moscow would… be a way to prove
that he acts independently, since
(Jagland) is (also) the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe,
which counts Russia as a member,”
Jacob told AFP.

Co-founded by Mikhail Gorbachev
in 1993 with part of his peace prize
money, the pro-democracy Moscow
newspaper Novaya Gazeta has
been tipped as a possible laureate.
It is one of the few independent
media outlets left in Russia and has
seen several of its journalists
murdered, including Anna
Politkovskaya who exposed huge
human rights abuses in Chechnya.
Pope Francis has become a
bookmakers’ favourite for speaking
out on poverty.

“Today everything comes under the
laws of competition and the
survival of the fittest, where the
powerful feed upon the powerless,”
the first Latin American pope
argued in an exhortation last year.
Experts have cited Edward
Snowden, the former intelligence
analyst who revealed the extent of
US global eavesdropping, as an
outside candidate.

However, most experts say he
would be a controversial choice for
the 878,000-euro ($1.11-million)
award. Pakistani girls’ education
campaigner Malala Yousafzai, a
favourite last year, is once again
being mentioned by observers
although many say her young age
makes her a somewhat less likely
choice for the committee.

It could also increase the terror
threat against the 17-year-old, who
pushed Nigerian president
Goodluck Jonathan to meet with
the parents of hundreds of girls
who were kidnapped by the
Islamist group Boko Haram.

Kristian Berg Harpviken, director
of the Peace Research Institute Oslo
(PRIO), a leading peace prize
analyst and one of the few to
publish a shortlist, put the peace
group Japanese People Who
Conserve Article 9 — which wants
to maintain the Asian country’s
anti-war constitution — in first
place.

“We may have come to think of
wars between states as virtually
extinct after the end of the Cold
War, but events in Ukraine and
simmering tensions in East Asia
remind us they may reappear,” he
wrote.

Among the other main contenders
was favourites were Congolese
doctor Denis Mukwege, also tipped
last year, who has treated female
victims of sexual violence for the
last 25 years, and the human rights
activist Ales Bialiatski from
Belarus, who was released from
prison by the Russian-backed
dictatorship in June.

Source: http://tribune.com.pk/story/773258/malala-yousafzai-shares-nobel-peace-prize-with-indian-activist/

Wild Life smuglling from Pashtun belt of Pakhtunkhwa , Baluchistan , and FANA causing 50 % reduction in Wild Life .

LAHORE : Disturbing findings:
Illicit wildlife trade jeopardising biodiversity The report stressed the importance of adopting environmentally friendly
solutions to counter rising threats
to nature.  Worldwide Fund for
Nature-Pakistan (WWF-P) director-general Hammad Naqi Khan said on Tuesday that illegal wildlife trade had been negatively impacting Pakistan by compromising the country’s
biodiversity.

He was speaking to journalists at
an event held to release the
foundation’s 2014 Living Planet
report. Khan expressed concern
over the increasing smuggling of
black scorpions, freshwater turtles
and pangolins.

He said rising deforestation constituted anothervthreat. Khan said the fund was striving to overcome these challenges. He said it wasvcommitted to supporting
sustainable development in Pakistan.

Khan said risingdeforestation had endangered species like the common leopard by comprising their habitats.

He said Pakistan’s carbon footprint had been consistently getting larger.
Khan said a World Bank report on
air pollution had ranked urban air
pollution in Pakistan as severe.

He said this had negatively impacted
public health, quality of life, the
environment and the economy in
Pakistan.

The report stressed the importance
of adopting environmentally-
friendly solutions to counter rising
threats to nature.

According to the report, it was imperative to adopt these measures urgently as an alarming decline had been witnessed in wildlife populations.

The population of fish, reptiles,
birds, mammals and amphibians
had declined by 52 per cent over
the 40 year period surveyed in the
report.

The decline in biodiversity
witnessed in the Asia-Pacific region
was second over the period only to
Latin America.

The report highlighted the
consistent increase in the ecological
footprint. The footprint is a
measure of humanities’ demands
on nature.

According to the report, a marked rise was witnessed in Pakistan’s footprint due to population growth, growing per capita consumption and declining biodiversity.

It particularly mentioned climate change, fishing, hunting, habitat loss and degradation as the greatest
challenges to.

Published in The Express Tribune,
October 1 st , 2014.

Source : http://tribune.com.pk/story/769475/disturbing-findings-illicit-wildlife-trade-jeopardising-biodiversity/

Temporary Half Baked Measures and Gimick Hallmark of FATA secretariate.

PESHAWAR : ‘Books on wheels’:
Mobile bookshop set to roll into Khyber Agency A bus will travel across the region from Monday and hold book fairs at universities. The much-awaited ‘Books on Wheels’ project will be launched in Khyber Agency on Monday, said National Book Foundation (NBF) director in
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P)
Murad Ali Mohmand.

The project is a joint venture of the
NBF, Cabinet Division and FATA
Secretariat. It was conceived in
July to promote reading habits
among students in the Federally
Administered Tribal Areas (Fata).

The progress of mobile bookshops
in Islamabad and other cities
motivated NBF to plan a similar
initiative in K-P and the tribal
region.

Under the initiative, a bus will
travel across the region as a mobile
book library and hold book fairs at
colleges and universities. According
to the press statement issued by
the NBF, the FATA Secretariat has
provided a heavy vehicle to the
NBF to operate the mobile book
shop.

“On Monday, ‘Books on Wheels’
will visit Government Girls Degree
College in Jamrud,” said Mohmand.
Jamrud’s assistant political agent
(APA) has been invited to inaugurate the project, he added.

According to the regional director,
over a thousand books on a variety
of subjects will be displayed in the
mobile book library. “The mobile
bookshop is an attempt to provide
books at subsidised rates to the
citizens of Pakistan,” Mohmand
said. “The education sector has
been badly affected by militancy
and the mobile book library is an
attempt to raise the standards of
literacy in the region.”

The mobile book library will also
visit Jamrud Degree College for
Boys and subsequently proceed to
Bara, Bajaur and Mohmand
agencies.

Published in The Express Tribune,
October 10 th, 2014.

Source : http://tribune.com.pk/story/773004/books-on-wheels-mobile-bookshop-set-to-roll-into-khyber-agency/

PTI Government Fails to Stop Wildlife Smuggling.


K-P fails to take steps to
control illegal trade

The Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) wildlifedepartment has failed to take
steps to control the illegal trade
of birds and other animals across
the province.
Leopard geckos, black scorpions,
turtles, tuatara and myna birds are
just a few of the animals that are
being poached from K-P, they are
then being traded illegally not only
in the province but throughout the
country and some are even being
smuggled out of it.
Like in all other provinces, the
black scorpion and the gecko have
been pushed to extinction by the
greed of poachers but it is the
province’s birds that are suffering
the most at their hands.
The trade is at its peak but arrests
and other measures by wildlife
officials is limited to vendors who
sells myna, parrots and other
colourful birds without obtaining
licences to do so. “We are poor
people and this is the only way we
can make a living,” justified
Bahadur Khan, who was arrested
by wildlife officials for hunting
down dozens of Myna birds.
Sardar Muhammad Khan, who also
illegally hunts and trades valuable
birds, told The Express Tribune that
almost every bird they catch has a
market. The hunting of such birds
is banned by the K-P government
but due to inaction and lack of
deterrents, the hunting continues,
from Chitral to Peshawar.
Choos Kata is one of the rare birds
being hunted in Chitral’s Shali and
Ayoun areas and can fetch
between Rs40,000 and Rs50,000.
The terinaak, is sold for Rs10,000,
while the Choora goes for up to
Rs20,000. However, the most
expensive of them all is the Bari
Surkh, with a single one being sold
for between Rs5 million and Rs6
million. The Bari Surkh is usually
smuggled to Arab countries as few
local buyers can afford it.
However, catching these birds is
not easy, especially as they become
increasingly rare. “We begin the
hunting season at the start of
October and it goes till the end of
December but we are only able to
hunt down 50 to 55 birds,” said a
poacher. “Some of these birds die
while they are being transported in
sacks to other cities so that’s even
fewer birds that we are able to
sell.”
Not all animals are exported
though. The sekar and the
peregrine falcon are being
smuggled into the province from
all over the world, despite their
trade being banned in the entire
country, according to divisional
forest officer Niaz Muhammad.
While proper data on wildlife is
lacking, Muhammad claimed that
there are 455 different species of
birds in the province, out of which
around a dozen are considered
rare.

Published in The Express Tribune,
October 10 th, 2014.

Source: http://tribune.com.pk/story/773013/k-p-fails-to-take-steps-to-control-illegal-trade/

Sunday, September 28, 2014

77 Rifles for Whole FR Peshawar - Who are Idiots Running it ?

Who are the Idiots who think they can Run whole District of Semi tribal FR Area with 77 Rifles while no Police , Frontier Corps Rangers  and  No FC Constabulary works there as it is Sent to Islamabad for VIP duties are 77 Rifles enough to Keep Criminals and terrorist away in FR Peshawar Embedded inside of Pakhtunkhwa . 

Government Policy of Denying Governance in FR Area  to help Taliban and Criminals as a Policy . 




Policing the frontier: Over 100 new levies to be recruited for FR Peshawar

Published: September 28, 2014

Officials familiar with the matter told The Express Tribune that at the moment 202 levies personnel are deployed in FR Peshawar. PHOTO: FILE
PESHAWAR:

In order to increase the strength of the levies force in Frontier Region (FR) Peshawar, the political administration will recruit 128 new personnel who will be trained by the security forces.

Management hurdles

Officials familiar with the matter told The Express Tribune that at the moment 202 levies personnel are deployed in FR Peshawar. However, they said, since the FR is a vast semi-mountainous area, it is difficult for a small force to manage it even with the help of the Frontier Constabulary and security forces which are also deployed there.

One insider said the levies are usually an ill-equipped force in the agencies and they face the same issue in the frontier regions.

For the 202 levies men deployed in FR Peshawar, there are only 77 AK-47’s available which speaks volumes of how neglected the force is, he said.

He added the levies force is also not paid on time which also causes hindrance in their performance. “Many people from poor families join the levies due to a lack of employment opportunities in the region,” he said.

Improving the force

Assistant Political Agent (APA) Muhammad Arif told The Express Tribune the region’s levies force is not active because all personnel cannot be armed. However, he maintained the administration has brought the matter to the interior ministry’s notice and has been promised that arms will be made available.

“We will recruit 128 men on merit by October 15 and the candidates will have to pass a physical fitness test,” said Arif.

Taken

He said 28 positions had been left unfilled since December 2012 when militants kidnapped and subsequently killed more than 20 levies personnel, and later five others quit. “We are recruiting one hundred more men and with the additions, the levies will become a proper law-enforcement authority,” added Arif.

Elaborating on training facilities for the force, Arif said previously new recruits were trained by the Frontier Corps, but now they will be trained by the army for six months.

The APA explained the basic salary of the recruits will be Rs5,000 but with the addition of allowances it will be increased to Rs12,000.

According to Arif, Governor Mehtab Abbasi is taking a keen interest in the affairs of the tribal areas and has decided the levies should be trained in traffic management, bomb disposal, investigation and evidence gathering techniques.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 28th, 2014.

source: http://tribune.com.pk/story/768215/policing-the-frontier-over-100-new-levies-to-be-recruited-for-fr-peshawar/

Right to Information is Incomplete Law and is not Extended to Tribal Areas FATA, PATA and Baluchistan




International Right to Know Day: CGPA urges citizens to use RTI laws

Published: September 28, 2014

The handout stated the right to know is incomplete without the right to information. Right to Information is Denied to Triabls and Baluchistan FATA and PATA ( Where Most of Missing Person are found ) and also it is Incomplete Law as it does not Have Right to information, as Government can deny certain Information. 

PESHAWAR:

The Centre for Governance and Public Accountability (CGPA) urged citizens of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab to use the Right to Information law to improve transparency and accountability in public service delivery.

Filing requests for information under these laws is not only a legal and constitutional privilege, but should also be taken as an obligation, stated a press release issued by the CGPA on Saturday to commemorate International Right to Know Day.

The day is marked on September 28 around the world. The handout stated the right to know is incomplete without the right to information. Therefore, the centre urged advocates of the law to promote its implementation on Right to Know Day.

CGPA Executive Director Muhammad Anwar said there has been remarkable progress in ensuring citizens’ right to information in Pakistan over the last year.

Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) and Punjab introduced excellent legislation in the form of the K-P RTI Act 2013 and the Punjab Transparency and RTI Act 2013.

These laws will allow the public to ensure there is transparency in public service delivery if they are implemented in their true spirit, said the statement. On International Right to Know Day, the CGPA urged the K-P and Punjab governments to notify rules under their respective laws, said Anwar.

The executive director said the Punjab and K-P RTI laws must not be restricted to the provinces and any citizen should be able to access information without providing a reason.

However, he stated that Sindh and Balochistan were yet to introduce such strong legislation. Anwar said the Federal Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002 needed to be replaced with the Right to Information law as per Article 19-A of the Constitution of Pakistan.

The CGPA also demanded the K-P government extend the law to the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (Pata).

Similarly, he added there should also be a Right to Information regulation for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata). The CGPA urged the media and civil society groups to play their role in raising awareness and use the law for investigative reporting.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 28th, 2014.

source : http://tribune.com.pk/story/768203/international-right-to-know-day-cgpa-urges-citizens-to-use-rti-laws/

How Afghans gave Indian Subcontinent Various Religions and Culture over Thousands of Years

History



Excavation of prehistoric sites suggests that early humans lived in northern Afghanistan at least 50,000 years ago and that farming communities in Afghanistan were among the earliest in the world. After 2000 bc successive waves of people from Central Asia moved into the area. Since many of these settlers were Aryans (speakers of the parent language of the Indo-European languages), a people who also migrated to Persia (now Iran) and India in prehistoric times, the area was called Aryana, or Land of the Aryans.
By the middle of the 6th century bc the Persian Empire of the Achaemenid dynasty controlled the region of Aryana. About 330 bc, Alexander the Great defeated the last Achaemenid ruler and made his way to the eastern limits of Aryana and beyond. After his death in 323 bc several kingdoms fought for control of his Asian empire. These kingdoms included Seleucids, Bactria, and the Indian Mauryan Empire.
A. Buddhist Period:
About the 1st century ad the Kushans, a central Asian people, won control of Aryana. Buddhism was the dominant religion from the 3rd century to the 8th century ad. Ruins of many monasteries and stupas, or reliquary mounds (structures where sacred relics are kept or displayed), from that period still remain. They line what was once a great Buddhist pilgrimage road from India to Balkh, in northern Afghanistan, and on into Central Asia.
Kushan power was destroyed at the end of the 4th century ad by a Turkic people of central Asian origin called the White Huns or Ephthalites. After the Ephthalites, the area was divided among several kingdoms, some Buddhist, some Hindu.
B. Islamic Period
In the 7th century ad Arab armies carried the new religion of Islam to Afghanistan. The western provinces of Herāt and Sistan came under Arab rule, but the people of these provinces revolted and returned to their old beliefs as soon as the Arab armies passed. In the 10th century Muslim rulers called Samanids, from Bukhara in what is now Uzbekistan, extended their influence into the Afghan area. A Samanid established a dynasty in Ghaznī called the Ghaznavids. The greatest Ghaznavid king, Mahmud, who ruled from 998 to 1030, established Islam throughout the area of Afghanistan. He led many military expeditions into India. Ghaznī became a center of literature and the arts.
The Ghaznavid state grew weaker under Mahmud’s descendants and gave way in the middle of the 12th century to the Ghurid kingdom, which arose in Ghur, in the west central region of present-day Afghanistan. The Ghurids in turn were routed early in the 13th century by the Khwarizm Shahs, another central Asian dynasty. They were swept away in about 1220 by the Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan, who devastated the land.
Near the end of the 14th century the central Asian military leader Tamerlane (Timur Lang) conquered the region of Afghanistan and moved on into India. His sons and grandsons, the Timurids, could not hold Tamerlane’s empire together. However, they ruled most of present-day Afghanistan from Herāt.
The period from the Ghurid through the Timurid dynasty produced fine Islamic architectural monuments. Many of these mosques, shrines, and minarets still stand in Herāt, Qal‘eh-ye Bost, Ghaznī, and Mazār-e Sharīf. An important school of miniature painting flourished at Herāt in the 15th century.
A descendant of Tamerlane on his father’s side and Genghis Khan on his mother’s side, Babur (Zahiruddin Muhammad) took Kābul in October 1504 and then moved on to India, where he established the Mughal Empire.
Throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, Afghanistan was fought over by the rulers of the Mughal Empire, centered in India, and those of the Safavid dynasty, in Persia. Usually the Mughals held Kābul and the Persians held Herāt, with Kandahār frequently changing hands. The Pashtun tribes increased their power, but they failed to win independence.
C. An Afghan Empire:
In the 18th century, Nadir Shah, the king of Persia, employed the Abdali tribe of Pashtuns in his wars in India. Ahmad Shah, an Abdali chief who had gained a high post in Nadir Shah’s army, established himself in Kandahār after Nadir Shah’s assassination in 1747. An assembly of tribal chiefs proclaimed him shah, and the Afghans extended their rule as far east as Kashmīr and Delhi, north to the Amu Darya, and west into northern Persia.
Ahmad retired from the throne in 1772 and died in Kandahār, whereupon his son Timur Shah assumed control. The Afghan empire survived largely intact through the next 20 years. He established his capital in Kābul to draw power away from his rivals in Kandahār, as well as to be closer to his richest province, the Punjab of India. Following Timur’s death in 1793, palace rivalries and internal conflicts led to the disintegration of the empire. Two sons of Timur, Shah Shuja and Shah Mahmud, fought over the remnants of the Afghan empire, with Shuja finally going into exile in India and Mahmud withdrawing to Herāt, as a number of other small principalities emerged throughout Afghanistan.
Dost Muhammad Khan emerged as the new ruler, or emir, in Kābul by 1826. Among the most pressing problems he faced was repelling the westward encroachment of the Sikhs, who gained control of the Punjab and the region up to the Khyber Pass, including the important trading post of Peshāwar. In 1837 Dost Muhammad’s forces defeated the Sikhs at Jamrūd, but failed to recover Peshāwar. This conflict and the arrival of a new Russian envoy in Kābul made the British, who were allies of the Sikhs, extremely nervous about the security of the western frontier of their growing empire in India. These events played out during the so-called Great Game between the Russian “bear” and the British “lion,” with both empires vying for regional dominance and Afghanistan becoming caught between them. In 1838 Lord Auckland, the British governor-general of India, ordered military intervention in Afghanistan to protect British interests, thereby setting off the First Anglo-Afghan War (1838-1842). With British and Sikh manipulation and support, Shah Shuja returned to Afghanistan to overthrow Dost Muhammad, as a British garrison was established in Kābul and elsewhere south of the Hindu Kush mountains.
A revolt by Dost Muhammad’s son Muhammad Akbar Khan led to the forced withdrawal of the British garrison from Kābul in the winter of 1842. Ambushed during the retreat, nearly all of the some 4,500 British troops and their 12,000 camp followers were killed. Dost Muhammad was able to return to Kābul, from where he spent the next 20 years reunifying parts of Afghanistan until his death in 1863.
Dost Muhammad designated his third son, Sher Ali, as his successor, but civil war erupted as rivals to Sher Ali vied for control. Sher Ali defeated his rivals, notably his brother Afzul Khan, by 1868. At the same time he tried to maintain good relations with the British Raj (British-ruled India). However, the Russian conquests in Central Asia had brought that empire to the Amu Darya river on the northern border of Afghanistan by 1847. The negotiations of a Russian envoy in Kābul renewed the unease of the British, who consequently invaded Afghanistan, instigating the Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-1880). Sher Ali was deposed in 1879, but the British, realizing the difficulties of ruling from within Afghanistan, in 1880 invited a nephew of Sher Ali, Abdur Rahman Khan (Afzul Khan’s son), to rule at their behest. However, the British limited his power beyond the borders of Afghanistan by securing control of Afghan foreign relations.
Known as the Iron Emir, Abdur Rahman recognized the threat from the expansionistic Russians and the defensive British. As a result he allowed the foreign delineation of his borders to encompass a smaller territory than he actually considered to be Afghanistan. The emergence of the present-day configuration of the country, with its narrow panhandle of the Wakhan Corridor projecting to China on the northeast, is an example of the establishment of a classic buffer state, in which, to avoid inadvertent conflict, the borders of the Russian and British empires were to have no contact points in common. Similarly, the establishment of the Durand Line, the southeastern border of Afghanistan, divided the territory of the militant Pashtun tribe into two halves, with one half under the control of the British Raj, and the other inside Afghanistan. This divide-and-rule policy allowed some nominal control of a difficult region, but problems related to the tribally unpopular (and for them, unrecognized) border have continued to the present day.
D. Modern Afghanistan:
Abdur Rahman Khan extended his control throughout the territory within the new boundaries of Afghanistan. His son, Habibullah, who reigned from 1901 until 1919, took the first steps toward the introduction of modern education and industry. Habibullah’s son and successor, Amanullah, initiated a brief war, the Third Anglo-Afghan War, in 1919 to end British control over Afghan foreign affairs. The resulting peace treaty recognized the independence of Afghanistan.
Amanullah was determined to modernize his country. In 1926 he took the title of king. His reforms, including efforts to induce women to give up the burka, or full-length veil, and to make men wear Western clothing in certain public areas, offended religious and ethnic group leaders. Revolts broke out, and in 1929 Amanullah fled the country.
Order was restored in 1930 by four brothers who were relatives of Amanullah. One of them, Muhammad Nadir Shah, became king, but he was assassinated in 1933. His son, Muhammad Zahir Shah, succeeded him. Power remained concentrated in the hands of Zahir and the royal family for the next four decades. In 1946 Afghanistan joined the United Nations (UN).
In 1953 Muhammad Daud, a nephew of Nadir Shah, became prime minister. Daud began to modernize Afghanistan rapidly with the help of economic and especially military aid from the USSR; the modern Afghan army was largely created with Soviet equipment and technical training. The United States declined to assist in this process. Social reform proceeded slowly because the government was afraid to antagonize conservative ethnic group leaders and devout Muslims. Relations with Pakistan deteriorated after Daud called for self-determination for the Pashtun tribes of northwestern Pakistan.
In 1963, hoping to halt the growth of Soviet influence and to improve relations with Pakistan, Zahir Shah removed Daud as prime minister. In 1964 Afghanistan adopted a new constitution, changing the country from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy. The armed forces still depended on the Soviet Union for equipment and training. A severe drought in the early 1970s caused economic hardship, and the popularity of the regime declined.
E. End of Monarchy
In 1973 Muhammad Daud overthrew the king in a coup. He declared Afghanistan a republic with himself as president. Daud announced ambitious plans for economic development and tried to play the USSR against Western donors, but his dictatorial government was opposed both by radical left-wing intellectuals and soldiers and by traditionalist ethnic leaders. The leading leftist organization was the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), which had been founded in 1965 and in 1967 split into a pro-Soviet Parcham faction and a much more radical Khalq faction. The two groups joined forces in 1976 to oppose Daud.
F. Leftist Coup and Soviet Invasion
In April 1978, after Daud launched a crackdown against the PDPA, leftist military officers overthrew him. PDPA leader Noor Muhammad Taraki became prime minister, subsequently assuming the title of president as well. Taraki and his deputy prime minister, Hafizullah Amin, both members of the Khalq faction, purged many Parcham leaders. Taraki announced a sweeping revolutionary program, including land reform, the emancipation of women, and a campaign against illiteracy. In late 1978 Islamic traditionalists and ethnic leaders who objected to rapid social change began an armed revolt against the government. By the summer of 1979 the rebels controlled much of the Afghan countryside. In September Taraki was deposed and later killed. Amin, his successor, tried vigorously to suppress the rebellion and resisted Soviet efforts to make him moderate his policies. The government’s position deteriorated, however, and on December 25, 1979, Soviet forces invaded Afghanistan. They quickly won control of Kābul and other important centers. The Soviets executed Amin on December 27 and installed Babrak Karmal, leader of PDPA’s Parcham faction, as president. Karmal, whom the Soviets considered to be more susceptible to their control, denounced Amin’s repressive policies, which reportedly included mass arrests and torture of prisoners, and promised to combine social and economic reform with respect for Islam and for Afghan traditions. But the government, dependent on Soviet military forces to bolster it, was widely unpopular.
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan played out in the waning days of the Cold War, as the leaden economy and political repressions of the Soviet Union were just beginning to show signs of strain. Despite the Soviet Union’s own domestic difficulties and high-level internal advice against such a move, the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan’s government and eventual full military invasion was a long-considered and reasonably well-thought-out plan. From its earliest foreign aid in construction of military-quality bridges and highways, to its progressive planting of special agents within the Afghanistan bureaucracy and military, the Soviet Union displayed an unremitting interest in expanding its influence in the country and moving farther south toward the warm-water ports and hydrocarbon riches of the Persian Gulf. Afghanistan’s location along part of the Soviet Union’s southern border made the installation of a Soviet-friendly government there all the more desirable. The leftist coup of 1978 in Kābul seemingly assured that the Soviets would not lose the strategic position that they had patiently established through expensive and pervasive efforts over the prior quarter-century. Elsewhere in the country, however, there was only minimal support for the emerging Communist government in Kābul; opposition to it mounted nationwide, eventually even including significant portions of the Afghan military. The Soviet Union’s large-scale military intervention aimed to protect its interests in the region by helping the Soviet-installed government to put down this widespread opposition.
Nevertheless, resistance to the Communist government and the Soviet invaders grew spontaneously throughout Afghanistan so that by the mid-1980s there were about 90 areas in the country commanded by guerrilla leaders. The guerrillas called themselves mujahideen (Muslim holy warriors). They had gained prominence by their fighting prowess rather than through the customary routes within traditional social structures. The resistance was roughly organized into seven major mujahideen parties, largely of Sunni background, based in Peshāwar, Pakistan, in the 1980s. Other mujahideen parties were based in Iran. The mujahideen were sustained by weapons and money from the United States, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and China. By the mid-1980s the United States was spending hundreds of millions of dollars each year to aid Afghan rebels based in Pakistan.
During the 1980s Soviet forces increasingly bore the brunt of the fighting. By 1986 about 118,000 Soviet troops and 50,000 Afghan government troops were facing perhaps 130,000 mujahideen guerrillas. Although the Soviet troops used modern equipment, including tanks and bombers, the mujahideen were also well armed, and they had local support and operated more effectively in familiar mountainous terrain. In 1986 the United States began supplying the mujahideen with Stinger missiles able to shoot down Soviet armored helicopters.
The effects of the war on Afghanistan were devastating. Half of the population was displaced inside the country, forced to migrate outside the country, wounded, or killed. About 3 million war refugees fled to Pakistan and about 1.5 million fled to Iran. Estimates of combat fatalities range between 700,000 and 1.3 million people. With the school system largely destroyed, industrialization severely restricted, and large irrigation projects badly damaged, the economy of the country was crippled. Despite some negative reaction, the presence of so many refugees in neighboring Pakistan and Iran actually improved Afghan relations with those countries. In addition, many of the refugees improved their lives considerably by leaving Afghanistan and the dangers of war therein. Because the majority of the refugees were religious, their fellow Muslims in Iran and Pakistan accepted them, even while the Iranian and Pakistani governments were striving to bring about the fall of the Communist regime in Kābul.
In May 1986 Karmal was replaced as PDPA leader by Mohammad Najibullah, a member of the Parcham faction who had headed the Afghan secret police. In November 1987 Najibullah was elected president.
G. Soviet Withdrawal
When Mikhail Gorbachev became the Soviet leader in 1985, he gave high priority to getting Soviet troops out of the costly, unpopular, and apparently unwinnable war in Afghanistan. In May 1988 Afghanistan, Pakistan, the USSR, and the United States signed agreements providing for an end to foreign intervention in Afghanistan, and the USSR began withdrawing its forces. The Soviet withdrawal was completed in February 1989. See also Soviet-Afghan War. H. Civil War
The mujahideen, who did not sign the agreement concerning the Soviet withdrawal, maintained their fight against the Afghanistan central government with weapons that they continued to get from the United States via Pakistan. They rejected offers from Najibullah to make peace and share power, and refused to consider participating in any national government that included Communists. Thus the civil war continued. The United States and Pakistani sponsors prompted the Peshāwar-based rebels to besiege Jalālābād, a strong point for Najibullah in southern Afghanistan. After months of fighting, however, the Afghan government scored a clear victory. A March 1990 coup attempt also failed to bring down Najibullah. He continued to receive Soviet food, fuel, and weapons to help maintain his control. However, rebels persisted in terrorizing the civilian population by rocket bombardment of Kābul and other cities. Finally in late 1991 the USSR and the United States signed an agreement to end military aid to the Kābul government and to the mujahideen rebels.
In 1992 as the resistance closed in on Kābul, the Najibullah government fell, in part because of the defection of General Abdul Rashid Dostum, an Uzbek from northern Afghanistan whose militia had served the PDPA government. Two mujahideen parties from Peshāwar, both considered fundamentalist, joined forces with Dostum and Ahmad Shah Massoud, a Tajik military commander, in the north and central mountains of Afghanistan. They won control of Kābul, and Burhanuddin Rabbani, an ethnic Tajik, became interim president from July through December 1992, taking office as full president in January 1993. A strong attempt was made to keep the Pashtun leaders, who traditionally held the power in Afghanistan, out of the most important government positions. Kābul was besieged beginning in 1992, first by various mujahideen groups and then by the Pashtun-dominated Taliban, which sought to reestablish Pashtun dominance in the capital.
The Taliban emerged in the fall of 1994 as a faction of mujahideen soldiers who identified themselves as religious students. The movement started in the south and worked its way toward Herāt in the northwest and Kābul in the east. It made outstanding military gains using armor, heavy rocket artillery, and helicopters against government forces. The Taliban’s stated mission was to disarm the country’s warring factions and to impose their strictly orthodox version of Islamic law. Some experts suspected the Pakistani government of supporting the Taliban, in order to keep the combat within Afghanistan and out of the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan, which is a major part of the Pashtun homeland. During the many vagaries of shifting alliances, as Afghans sought a new political equilibrium, one fundamentalist and one moderate party from the Peshāwar-based mujahideen groups contributed considerable personnel to the Taliban.
The term of Rabbani’s government expired in December 1994, but he continued to hold office amid the chaos of the civil war. Factional fighting since the beginning of January 1994 kept government officers from actually occupying ministries and discharging government responsibilities. Most cities outside of Kābul were administered by former resistance commanders and their shuras (councils). In June 1996 Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who had resigned as prime minister in 1994 to launch a military offensive against forces loyal to Rabbani, again assumed the post, this time to help Rabbani’s government fight the Taliban threat. Despite their efforts, the Taliban took Kābul in September 1996. By that time, the capital had been devastated by the civil war.
Rabbani and Hekmatyar fled north to join the northern-based anti-Taliban alliance led by the military commanders Massoud and Dostum. The alliance was a coalition of ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras who were opposed to the Pashtun-dominated Taliban. The alliance took the name United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, commonly known as the United Front or the Northern Alliance. Massoud was the military commander of its chief political wing, Jamiat-i Islami (Islamic Society). The Taliban advanced north toward the mountain strongholds of the Northern Alliance and by the late 1990s had taken control of almost all of Afghanistan. Northern Alliance forces held a small portion of the country’s territory in the north. I. Taliban Regime
After taking over Kābul, the Taliban created the Ministry for Ordering What Is Right and Forbidding What Is Wrong to impose and enforce its fundamentalist rules of behavior. The Taliban’s laws particularly affected women, who were ordered to cover themselves from head to toe in burkas (long, tentlike veils), forbidden from attending school or working outside their homes, and publicly beaten if they were improperly dressed or escorted by men not related to them. The Taliban also made murder, adultery, and drug dealing punishable by death and made theft punishable by amputation of the hand. Many of the laws alarmed human-rights groups and provoked worldwide condemnation. Most countries did not recognize the Taliban regime as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
In 1998, after terrorist bombings struck U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the United States launched cruise missiles at alleged terrorist training camps in eastern Afghanistan. The camps were reportedly connected to an international terrorist ring allegedly run by Osama bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi Arabian expatriate named by U.S. officials as the mastermind behind the embassy bombings. Bin Laden was active in the Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation forces during the 1980s, and toward the end of that war he established al-Qaeda (Arabic for “the Base”), an organization based in Afghanistan that, according to U.S. officials, connects and coordinates fundamentalist Islamic terrorist groups around the world. Al-Qaeda also supported the Taliban regime, with its special forces, called the Arab Brigade, fighting alongside Taliban troops in the civil war against the Northern Alliance.
On September 9, 2001, pro-Taliban suicide bombers assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance. Two days later in the United States, terrorists hijacked passenger airplanes and deliberately crashed them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, killing thousands of people (see September 11 Attacks). The U.S. government identified bin Laden as the prime suspect behind the attacks. Mullah Muhammad Omar, the supreme leader of the Taliban, refused U.S. demands that the Taliban surrender bin Laden. The U.S. government built an international antiterrorism coalition, securing the approval of many nations for a war on terrorism. American and British forces began aerial bombings of al-Qaeda camps and Taliban military positions on October 7. The Northern Alliance, meanwhile, continued its front-line offensive north of Kābul and other strategic areas. Many Afghans fled to refugee camps in border areas of Pakistan and Iran to escape the bombings, adding to the millions of Afghans already displaced from more than two decades of war.
While the United States and Britain continued the aerial bombardment in November, Northern Alliance forces captured several strategic cities, including Kābul. In late November hundreds of U.S. marines landed near Kandahār in the first major infusion of American ground troops into Afghanistan. The Taliban surrendered Kandahār, their last remaining stronghold, by December 10. The U.S.-led offensive then focused on routing out al-Qaeda forces holed up in the rugged Tora Bora cave region of eastern Afghanistan, near the border with Pakistan. In March 2002 U.S. troops undertook a mission, known as Operation Anaconda, to clear Taliban and al-Qaeda forces from the Shah-i-Kot Valley, in the vicinity of Gardēz in eastern Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the whereabouts of bin Laden remained unknown.
J. Afghanistan After the Taliban
United Nations-sponsored negotiations in Bonn, Germany, resulted in agreement on December 5, 2001, among four major Afghan factions to create an interim post-Taliban administration in Afghanistan. Hamid Karzai, a widely respected Pashtun leader, was chosen to head the interim administration, which took power in Kābul on December 22. An international peacekeeping force maintained a measure of law and order in the capital.
J.1. Transitional Government
Karzai’s administration was given up to six months to prepare the country for the introduction of a broad-based, multiethnic transitional government. In January 2002 international donors—including more than 60 countries, major development institutions, and nongovernmental organizations—pledged more than $4.5 billion in aid to Afghanistan over a period of five years. In April deposed Afghan king Zahir Shah returned to Afghanistan, ending nearly three decades of exile, in order to serve a symbolic role in the country. In June he formally convened the loya jirga, or grand council, which was responsible for electing a transitional government to rule the country for 18 months, until general elections scheduled for 2004. The loya jirga elected Karzai interim president of Afghanistan.
J.2. New Constitution
In January 2004 the loya jirga ratified a new constitution and Karzai signed it into law. The new constitution created a strong presidency, a two-chamber legislature, and an independent judiciary. It recognized Islam as the country’s sacred religion but guaranteed protections for other religions. It also recognized equal rights for women and language rights for minorities.
The adoption of the new constitution paved the way for elections, originally scheduled for June 2004 but then postponed due to the continued lack of security in many parts of the country. The Taliban and its al-Qaeda allies, who had regrouped as a military force despite new U.S.-led offensives to combat them, were waging a sporadic guerrilla campaign against the Karzai government and the international forces stationed in the country. In March 2004 Pakistan conducted a military operation along its border with Afghanistan in an attempt to flush out the insurgents.
About 18,000 non-Afghan troops were stationed in Afghanistan in 2004 to fight Taliban forces and offer protection for the Karzai government. Of these, about 8,500 were U.S. troops, and about 3,000 soldiers came from other coalition partners. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) stationed about 6,000 troops in Afghanistan. NATO took charge of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003 and for the first time played a military role outside of Europe. The ISAF was authorized by the United Nations Security Council to act as peacekeepers in the Afghan capital, Kābul, and surrounding areas. By the end of 2005, about 19,000 U.S. troops and about 9,200 ISAF troops remained in Afghanistan.
In October 2006 about 12,000 of the 20,000 U.S. troops then serving in Afghanistan became part of the ISAF forces as NATO reportedly assumed primary responsibility for international military operations in Afghanistan. The remaining 8,000 U.S. troops were assigned to counterterrorism efforts and to training Afghan security forces as part of Combined Forces Command Afghanistan. The ISAF consisted of about 31,000 troops and faced an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 Taliban fighters in October 2006.
J.3. Presidential Election
Afghanistan held its first-ever presidential election on October 9, 2004. Large numbers of Afghans turned out to vote in the election, which was largely free of the violence threatened by the country’s former Taliban leaders. Karzai won 55.4 percent of the vote, easily beating 15 other candidates in the first round of voting. His victory was officially announced on November 3, following an investigation into charges of electoral fraud. According to a three-member United Nations panel set up to examine the complaints—made mostly by the losing candidates—the election’s “shortcomings…could not have materially affected the overall result.”
Karzai’s top goals after forming a new government included curbing the power of regional warlords, building an effective national security force, and pursuing national redevelopment plans. Uniting the country despite its longstanding ethnic, religious, and regional rivalries remained one of Karzai’s highest priorities.
J.4. Parliamentary Elections
Elections to the lower house of the National Assembly took place in September 2005, and in December 2005 President Karzai used his constitutional powers to appoint the members of the upper house. On December 19 Afghanistan’s first democratically elected legislature in more than 30 years officially convened. The new legislature represented a wide spectrum of the country’s political groupings and factions, including former warlords and former Taliban officials.
J.5. Continued War Against a Taliban Insurgency
Despite its initial defeat following the U.S. invasion of 2001, the Taliban regrouped, using remote areas of Pakistan for refuge and staging sporadic guerrilla attacks in areas of Afghanistan near the Pakistan border. By 2007 the Taliban adopted tactics that included suicide bombings and roadside bombs, while also besieging remote U.S. and NATO outposts in the countryside. In June 2007 U.S. defense secretary Robert Gates expressed cautious optimism that the military campaign was having success against the resurgent Taliban. Defense Department officials said they believed NATO operations had helped thwart a planned spring offensive by the Taliban.
However, Afghan civilian support for the U.S. and NATO military operations waned in the spring of 2007, particularly after a series of attacks that resulted in civilian casualties. In early May, following an April ground attack and air strike on a small village in western Herāt province in which about 50 civilians were reportedly killed, Afghan president Karzai told U.S. and NATO officials that civilian deaths had reached an “unacceptable level.” About a week later lawmakers in the upper house of parliament, the Meshrano Jirga (House of Elders), passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire with the Taliban and for setting a date for the withdrawal of foreign troops. Many of the legislators cited an incident in March in which a U.S. Marine Special Operations force opened fire on civilians lining a highway as the marines fled the scene of a suicide bombing attack. The incident in the eastern Afghanistan province of Nangarhār resulted in the deaths of 19 Afghan civilians and the wounding of about 50 others. A U.S. military commander later determined that the marines had used excessive force and he referred the incident for a possible criminal inquiry.
By June 2007 the Associated Press reported a death toll of 2,300 in insurgency-related violence in 2007 alone. The International Red Cross said that violence was occurring throughout Afghanistan. The Department of Defense reported nearly 400 U.S. military deaths in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion, and the United Kingdom reported the deaths of 60 British soldiers during that same period.
United Nations (UN) figures showed that the death toll in Afghanistan totaled more than 8,000 people in 2007, including about 1,500 civilians. The average monthly death toll soared to 566 from an average of 465 in 2006. About 230 troops from the U.S.-NATO coalition were killed in 2007, the highest yearly number since the war began.
As 2008 began the director of national intelligence for the United States, Michael McConnell, reported that the security situation for the Afghan government had deteriorated. McConnell told the U.S. Congress that the Taliban had made inroads in the western part of Afghanistan and around the capital, Kābul, as well as in southern Afghanistan. In July 2008 the number of U.S. military deaths in Afghanistan exceeded those in Iraq for the second straight month, with 46 U.S. personnel killed in Afghanistan compared to 31 in Iraq. By August the total U.S. death toll for 2008 was around 100. A U.S. Defense Department report found that Taliban attacks on U.S. and NATO forces increased by 40 percent in 2008 compared with the previous year. The same report noted two distinct Taliban insurgencies, one based in Kandahār in southern Afghanistan and another in eastern Afghanistan, where the insurgents often obtained refuge in neighboring Pakistan’s rugged North-West Frontier Province.
The insurgency was described as a loosely organized alliance of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, foreign fighters, and Afghan warlords. The forces operating in northeast Afghanistan and around the capital were led by former mujahideen leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Hekmatyar was believed to be allied with the Taliban but not formally part of the movement. The insurgency in the east, southeast, and southern parts of Afghanistan was thought to be led by remnants of the original Taliban, foreign fighters, and al-Qaeda.
The Taliban was also establishing shadow, or parallel, governments in regions where they exerted control or where the central government in Kābul had only a loose hold on security. In some cases the shadow governments consisted of judges and other officials, along with finance and defense councils. Some experts estimated that the insurgency controlled as much as 40 percent of Afghanistan. Many Afghans reportedly welcomed the security that the Taliban provided from criminal elements or saw the Taliban as an alternative to corruption in the central government. In some cases the Taliban provided services that the government could not. Still others gravitated toward the insurgents in response to U.S. air strikes that often mistakenly killed civilians.
In August 2008 a U.S. air strike on a suspected Taliban compound in the village of Azizabad near Herāt killed a large number of civilians. The Afghan government, backed by a United Nations investigation and accounts from independent observers, alleged that more than 90 civilians were killed in the attack. The U.S. military initially dismissed the charges, saying that at most only 6 or 7 civilians were killed, but a subsequent military investigation concluded that 30 civilians, including women and children, had died. U.S. air strikes increased 31 percent from January 2008 to September 2008 compared with the same period in 2007. During the first nine months of 2008 U.S. and NATO aircraft flew about 14,000 missions and dropped about 3,000 bombs. U.S. military officials said the air strikes were necessary because ground troops were thinly dispersed throughout the country. As of mid-November 2008, there were about 65,000 allied troops in Afghanistan, of which about 36,000 were U.S. troops.
The U.S. role in Afghanistan became an issue during the U.S. presidential election with Democratic candidate Barack Obama promising to redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, in part to strengthen the ground presence and make the U.S.-NATO coalition less reliant on air strikes. Following a November air mission that mistakenly strafed a wedding party in the village of Shah Wali Kot in southern Afghanistan, killing 40 civilians, Afghan president Hamid Karzai called on President-elect Obama to cease all air strikes that might risk civilian casualties. The same month Karzai extended an invitation to Taliban leader Mohammed Omar, promising him safe passage if he agreed to negotiate a peace settlement. Omar was believed to be based in Quetta, Pakistan. However, the Taliban rejected the overture.
Once in office, Obama followed through on his promise and committed an additional 17,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan, bringing the total to 53,000. Obama said the increase was necessary due to the deteriorating security situation. He also promised a review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan while saying that he believed the conflict could not be resolved “solely” through military means. In the meantime the United Nations released figures for the civilian death toll in Afghanistan in 2008, reporting that it rose 40 percent to 2,118 from 1,523 in 2007. More than 50 percent of the deaths were caused by the insurgents, while 39 percent were caused by pro-government forces.
J.6. 2009 Presidential Elections
Afghanistan held its second presidential election in August 2009. The weeks preceding the election saw a rise in insurgent violence. The day of the election, August 20th, was one of the most violent days since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. The wave of violence contributed to a voter turnout estimated to be only 35 percent.
The preliminary results showed Karzai winning approximately 47 percent of the vote and former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah winning approximately 33 percent of the vote. With no candidate winning more than 50 percent of the vote, a run-off election seemed likely. There were also numerous accusations of voter fraud leveled against Karzai and his followers. As a result, Abdullah threatened to not accept the outcome of the vote, raising the possibility of additional violence.
Contributed By:
John Ford Shroder, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.
Regents Professor of Geography and Geology, University of Nebraska. Editor, Himalaya to the Sea: Geology, Geomorphology, and the Quaternary and other books.