(Bush And Obama) Identical Policies To Pakistan?
Identical Policies?
Similar to his ratings drop at home, abroad President Obama is being accused of not living up to expectations. In DAWN news this week there’s an article entitled: “Obama’s Changing Tone” suggesting our President is reverting to foreign policy reminiscent of the Bush administration on Pakistan, and to an extent, the greater Muslim World. The idea is that Obama’s planned troop surge in tandem with ever toughening rhetoric post the Fort Hood Massacre and the Christmas Bomber, reflects leadership that’s not much different than former President Bush’s.
But on the contrary, our escalating presence in Pakistan is exactly what Obama promised. During the campaign trail, he made clear that his main focus was Al Qaeda and destroying terrorists in Pakistan (militants having spilled over from Afghanistan into Pakistan). The rhetoric was so hawkish, it actually became a sticking point before the primaries that Republicans and Democrats like Hillary criticized. Also, the media publicized his staunch rhetoric at length, so
Obama really has not changed tone on Pakistan: an intensified war matches his rhetoric from the start.
Plus is it fair to expect something radically different than the previous administration in the first place? Let’s not forget that it is often the political system and circumstances that drive leadership, and not vice versa. The fact is, America was already deeply engaged in two very problematic wars at the inception of Obama’s Presidency. He inherited an intensely worsening situation in Afghanistan that rapidly spilled across the border into Pakistan. President Obama anticipated this and is thus living up to campaign promises: a more hawkish foreign policy to Pakistan.
Which of course then raises the question: is hawkishness the right approach to Pakistan at this time? Pakistani’s certainly don’t think so. CIA drones have the entire country in an uproar, while Islamabad isn’t taking well to DC’s tacit encouragement of rapidly increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan, and even billions in aid from America is frowned upon with unprecedented magnitude. And it’s not that the Obama administration isn’t aware of skepticism. Rather, toughening policies are a matter of practicality.
My guess is that the President is thinking: we’re already in Afghanistan, the war is deteriorating into Pakistan, what’s the best way to mitigate the situation, secure the region enough to exit in the next couple years while leaving behind more cooperative players in the region so as to ensure our energy and geopolitical interests in South/Central Asia.
Phew. Now there’s a dilemma. And when looked at from this possible perspective, the Pakistan quagmire is revealed as tremendously complex. It’s such a multifaceted, sweeping, consequential and changing situation that involves so many players who work within the confines of political systems that only history should be the best judge of whether Obama’s stance on Pakistan is constructive or progressive. And that itself is relative. So let’s not be surprised at his hawkishness. It was naive of anyone to expect otherwise in the case of Pakistan.
Drone Strikes Kill 21 In Pakistan.
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Two drone strikes since Monday in North Waziristan have killed at least 21 people, possibly including a top local commander, said a Pakistan security official and residents of the area, a stronghold of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The latest strike, on Wednesday, killed 12 people in Madakhel, when seven missiles hit a compound and two vehicles, residents said.
The dead may include Hafiz Gul Bahadar, a Waziri commander, they said, though the claim could not be confirmed.
The Pakistani military has resisted extending its operations to North Waziristan, where American and Pakistani interests seem to divide.
Pakistan Army Digs In On Turf Of The Taliban.
A Pakistani soldier stood overlooking a school that was used by Baitullah Mehsud as his headquarters in Makeen, Pakistan.
MAKEEN, Pakistan — From a forward base in the bare brown foothills of the soaring mountains of South Waziristan, Pakistani soldiers fired artillery at insurgents sheltering in scrub across the valley. Smoke blotted the sky as the soldiers set ablaze houses once used by the Taliban to hide caches of heavy weapons.
Pakistani soldiers launched mortars near Makeen, Pakistan, on Thursday.
In the Makeen bazaar, where the former leader of the Pakistani militants, Baitullah Mehsud, was once king, the army has flattened the jerry-built stores, including the ice cream parlor, scotching any idea of easy return.
Here in the heartland of the Pakistani Taliban, the army has fought for five months to claw back territory from its indigenous enemy. A rare trip under military escort revealed that the battle had turned into a grinding test of wills with no neat resolution in sight.
The Pakistani Army has, at least for the moment, gained the upper hand by taking the war to the Taliban in these barren mountains rather than retreating behind successive peace deals, as it once did. But it is not claiming victory.
“The terrorists are nowhere and everywhere,” Lt. Col. Nisar Mughal said as he looked out on a landscape devoid of people, crops, animals or any sign of normal life. “This is a strange kind of warfare. We can’t say the area is completely sanitized. We are hunting them, killing them.”
Mr. Mehsud and his men, allies of Al Qaeda, used this area over the past few years to attack Pakistani cities and military installations with a ferocious onslaught of suicide bombings and commando raids.
Most have now fled to North Waziristan, or to other parts of the tribal areas and to Pakistan’s cities, leaving behind small bands of dedicated guerrillas. They continue to inflict casualties on the army with ambushes and sniper fire in a region where the British tried but failed to subdue the tribes during their colonial rule.
The United States, a long-distance participant and a keen cheerleader in the current Pakistani campaign, killed Mr. Mehsud in a drone strike in August and appears to have killed his successor, Hakimullah Mehsud, in another drone attack in January. But the suicide attacks continue, as evident in the bombings that killed more than 40 people in Lahore on Friday.
Washington has sent extra artillery, helicopters, body armor, radio sets and evensurveillance drones to help Pakistan’s ground war. During a recent visit Secretary of StateHillary Rodham Clinton pledged $55 million to upgrade roads in the area.
In return, the Obama administration would like the Pakistani military to pursue a full-scale offensive in North Waziristan against the Afghan Taliban, who use the area to launch operations against American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and who serve as Pakistan’s proxies against Indian interests there.
So far, the chief of the Pakistani army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, has made clear that India remains Pakistan’s prime enemy, despite the persistent insurgent threat, and that the army has its hands full with the South Waziristan campaign.
It is a fight that his nuclear-armed military, which is trained for conventional warfare against Indian forces on the plains of Punjab, has been forced to adapt to in strange ways.
At Nawazkot, a village just north of Makeen, Lt. Col. Yusuf Mehmood said one of his officers, trained in mountain climbing, scaled a 7,000-foot peak with ropes and crampons. The officer had 15 soldiers with him.
“They managed to get above a group of about 300 militants, and then fired on them,” the colonel said. The militants scattered, he said.
On a hill above Makeen, Colonel Mughal’s men hacked a trail with one bulldozer and six donkeys, used to carry weapons and ammunition. The trail was needed as the path for a new forward base overlooking Makeen, a series of small villages of flat-roofed mud compounds stretched out along a narrow valley.
Each night, squads of soldiers, charged with fending off efforts by the militants to steal the lone bulldozer, guarded the precious machine.
The trail took 45 days to build. “We are fighting within our means,” one major said wryly.
Then the trail needed upkeep. Two army engineers, protected with their screen of 15 soldiers, scan the trail every morning for improvised explosive devices planted at night by the militants.
Now that the snow has melted and pink flowers are blooming, lending a surprising softness to the harsh landscape of dry riverbeds and gravel tracks, the army says it will ask civilians who were ordered to leave last fall to return to their villages.
The return of the people, many of them marooned in camps in North-West Frontier Province, will probably prove the hardest part of the operation.
First, many militants are expected to drift back among the civilians.
Second, the military will remain in South Waziristan for perhaps the next 18 months or so, the army says.
But neither the army nor the national civilian government has done much preparation for fixing the broken system of indirect rule in the tribal areas that has failed over the last 60 years to deliver development.
Much of the rebellion of the Pakistani Taliban was fueled by anger at the corruption of tribal leaders who pocketed government money intended for economic development, said a retired army officer, Murad Khan Mehsud, from the village of Nano, not far from Makeen.
“I told General Kayani that half the teachers in my village are sitting in Dubai or Karachi, not in the schools,” Mr. Mehsud said.
This was because under a time-honored practice in the tribal areas, teachers’ salaries were not paid to teachers, but to tribal leaders who in turn split the money between their relatives and a government bureaucrat, he said.
Some residents have expressed hesitation about returning while the military remains.
“We are being asked to go back, but we will only go back when the military leaves,” said Nasir Muhammad Mehsud, 18, an engineering student from the village of Khaisore, now living in Dera Ismail Khan, a city filled with the displaced from South Waziristan.
If the military stays in South Waziristan, Mr. Mehsud said, Pakistani civilians will again be subject to attacks by the Taliban, who are not yet defeated. The soldiers, he said, will become targets of the militants, and the people will be caught in between.
But most galling, Mr. Mehsud said, was the destruction of family property during the fighting, including 200 houses in his area. So far, there had been no offers of compensation for all that was lost, he said.
Brig. Sarfraz Sattar, who leads the army operation in Makeen, acknowledged some of the difficulties of reform. But, he said, he remained upbeat.
“The Mehsuds as a tribe did not support the Pakistani Taliban,” Brigadier Sattar said. “Baitullah Mehsud terrorized the people, slit the throats of the tribal leaders, and the people had to submit.” The army inflicted enough damage on the militants, he said, to make it hard for them to regain that kind of control.
Tension Marks US-Muslim Relations.
President Obama’s inauguration speech, and especially after his Cairo address to the Muslim world, Muslims around the world have been waiting for concrete steps to improve U.S.-Muslim relations. A group of scholars, diplomats and American-Muslim leaders are recommending practical steps to achieve that goal.
Since the September 11th attacks, U.S. relations with the Muslim world have been tense, with a rise in anti-American sentiment on one side and rhetoric linking Islam with terrorism on the other.
President Obama’s speech to the Muslim world called for a new beginning based on mutual respect and mutual interest.
“So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity,” the president said.
President Obama said he will fight the stereotyping of Muslims.
Shaun Casey is professor of Christian ethics at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington. He says the president already started in Cairo.
“The president said in his speech that violent extremists represent only a tiny fraction of the Muslim world, and I think that is the distinction that he needs to make,” Casey says. “He needs to avoid somehow feeding the stereotype that all Muslims are terrorists, and he needs to spend a lot of energy educating the American public on that distinction and those facts.”
There are more than 1,000 mosques and Islamic centers in the United States, serving between five and seven million Muslims.
Amr Ramadan is deputy chief of mission at the Egyptian Embassy in Washington. He says tensions between the Muslim world and the United States are not religious but political.
Muslims, he says, are waiting for President Obama to take steps to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He says the president’s approach requires improving the dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims.
“One very positive consequence after the speech in Cairo is that many Christians in America are engaging with American Muslims and trying to talk more on religious and cultural issues. We have seen that starting.”
Nihad Awad is executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. He says President Obama should speak out against anti-Muslim rhetoric and discrimination against Muslims.
“We should have [a] clear stance by the U.S. government and intellectual leaders to fight against Islamophobia and anti-Muslim discrimination that has been rampant after 9/11.”
Muslim activists, like pop star Youssef Islam, once known as Cat Stevens, have been barred from the United States, although recently Islam was admitted.
Awad says U.S. visa policies should be changed to allow Muslim intellectuals and business leaders to travel to America without fear of harassment at points of entry.
Awad notes that President Obama cannot act alone and Congress must help to fix the damage done to U.S.-Muslim relations over the past several years.
Pakistanis Praise Obama Cairo Speech But Await Specifics.
A group of Pakistanis who watched President Barack Obama’s Cairo speech to Muslims are praising the American leader for his skill as a public speaker. But after seeing the speech on television at VOA’s Islamabad bureau, they say it lacked specific policy details that they consider crucial to improving U.S. relations with Pakistan.
For Sajid Mahmoood Qazi, a student of law and international relations who works for the Pakistani government, there is no doubt that Obama’s speech in Cairo was impressive.
“It was a beautiful discourse on the evolution of American society and the role Islam played, and the role of Muslims, whether they are cabbies in New York or have made fabulous riches,” he said. “It is wonderful to listen [to] from the highest level of American leadership.”
But he says, as a student of law, President Obama’s description of the Iraq war as a “war of choice” struck him as hypocritical.
“Well, I’m sorry Mr. President. It was much more beyond that. As a start, he [Obama] should have expressed the regrets, if not the apologies, for the invasion of Iraq,” he added.
Muhammad Arif Muqueem, a university student in Islamabad, also praised Mr. Obama’s speech. But Muqueem said it did not propose solutions to specific policy issues that he believes must be addressed.
“His speech was good but just for listening. Not for understanding,” Muqueen said. “I think this is impossible until you solve the Israel and Palestinian dispute, Pakistan and Afghanistan dispute and the Iraq dispute.”
Asad Farooq, is a student at Bahria University in Islamabad. He also says the speech was a brilliant effort. However, Farooq wonders whether Mr. Obama would acknowledge that U.S. missile attacks – commonly referred to as drone attacks – on suspected terrorist bases in Pakistan make it difficult to trust his intentions.
“What is extremism? Now come the drone attacks which happen in Pakistan. Now there’s a reason for extremism. They usually kill children and women in tribal areas. They don’t kill the terrorists,” Farooq said. “Drone attacks are not going to help; use of force is not going to help. I often say a statement that ‘terror is an idea and you don’t fight ideas with conventional armies’.”
Overall, these Pakistanis say it will take much more than just a very well-delivered speech to alter Pakistani Muslims’ attitudes about the United States. They say it will take concrete change to decades of American policy in Pakistan.
Yes Obama Addresses World’s Muslims.
U.S. President Barack Obama says it is time for a new beginning in relations between America and the world’s Muslims. The president said they should unite to confront violent extremism and promote the cause of peace.
Fresh start
President Obama says, after decades of frustration and distrust, it is time for candor … for dialogue … and a fresh start.
“I have come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition,” the president said.
Seeking common ground
He spoke in a packed auditorium on the sprawling campus of Cairo University. But his intended audience was far broader: more than one-billion Muslims around the world.
“I am convinced that in order to move forward we must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors,” President Obama said. “There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other, to learn from each other, to respect one another, and to seek common ground.”
The president spoke of his own perspective as a Christian with Muslim relatives who spent part of his youth in predominantly Muslim Indonesia.
“That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it is not,” he said. ” And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
Hatred of a few
President Obama said problems must be dealt with through partnership, and tensions must be faced head on.
He said extremists are playing on their differences, and are killing people in many countries of many faiths.
“The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few,” President Obama said. “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism, it is an important part of promoting peace.”
Eliminate friction
The president said it is important to talk directly about all the issues that have created frictions in the past, from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
“If we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security,” he said.
Israeli-Palestinian conflict
President Obama said the Palestinians must renounce violence, and Israel must cease settlement activity. He said all sides must look honestly and openly at the reality of the situation.
“Privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away,” the president said. “Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.”
Nuclear proliferation
The president also spoke of the need to work together to curtail the spread of nuclear weapons, making specific mention of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
And he spoke bluntly of the need to promote democracy, religious freedom, and women’s rights.
“I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality,” President Obama said.
Before the speech, Mr. Obama met with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and visited a mosque. After the address, he headed to the outskirts of the city to see the pyramids – a nod to the Egyptian capital’s long history at the heart of the Arab world.
France Asks Britain, Switzerland For Information On Zardari.
PARIS: A French judge probing a bomb attack that killed 11 French engineers has asked Britain and Switzerland to provide whatever information they have on allegations of Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, legal sources here said Friday.
Judge Marc Trevidic made the request to help him advance his probe into claims the 11 were killed in May 2002 by Pakistani agents taking revenge after a new French government cancelled illegal commissions on an arms deal.
Last month families of victims filed suit in Paris against supporters of former French presidential candidate Edouard Balladur, who was prime minister at the time, alleging they benefited from the deal.
In 1995, newly elected president Jacques Chirac cancelled the pay-offs, which he believed had funded his rival’s campaign, angering Pakistani officers awaiting their share of the graft, according to a report commissioned by France’s state naval construction firm and leaked last June.
The families believe they were deceived by the French state and top ranking French and Pakistani political leaders, and that their loved ones were exposed and killed as a result of a sordid political funding scandal.
One leaked French report on the affair said that the commissions paid to Pakistani figures were ordered by Zardari, the widower of the assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
In all, 14 people were killed on May 8, 2002, when a suicide bomber attacked a bus carrying French naval engineers from their Karachi hotel to where they were working on the submarines sold to Pakistan in the suspect deal.
At first, officials in both countries blamed Islamic radicals at war with the West for carrying out the attack, but French counter-terrorism officers have begun privately to accuse Pakistani spies of ordering it.
We Were Going To Break Pakistan!
Sindh Home Minister Dr. Zulfiqar Mirza has said we were ready to break Pakistan and were much more determined to chant slogan of ‘Pakistan Na Khapay’ – No need of Pakistan, following assassination of former PM Benazir Bhutto but we deliberately opted otherwise just because of President Asif Ali Zardari suggestion ‘Pakistan Khapay’.
This he said speaking to the attendees of seminar held here in connection with Benazir Bhutto’s second death anniversary. He also said that “Former president Musharraf dubbed Sindhi people as ineligible community but today! a Sindhi has replaced him.”
Syed Qaim Ali Shah, Chief Minister Sindh , said Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was an international leader and wanted promotion of politics of reconciliation while PPP is engaged in fulfillment of her dreams.
“We are forced to tolerate what we would have never borne if president Asif Ali Zardari were not promoting the politics of reconciliation.”
Others speakers including Nisar Khoro, Dr. Shafqat Soomro, Ayaz Soomro and other leaders of PPP also spoke to seminar and paid a rich tribute to Shaheed Benazir Bhutto.
So Is Muslim Youth Ready To Face Challenge Of Increasing Radicalisation In UK? In UK?
Recent media coverage and ever growing complaints of increase in radicalisation whereby young students aged 18-24 are potential victims at the hands of trained fire brands who are confusing young minds with the disputed foreign policy issues or conflicts is threatening the future and careers of many youth of Asian heritage. Muslim community is confronted with one of its own self denial whether ‘radicalisation’ exist and or on the increase in the Muslim Youth in Great Britain. We cannot blame them neither. Newspapers and electronic media have left no stone unturned to project Islam4UK, Hizb ul Tahrir or Al-Muhajeroun carrying the flag of Muslim representation in the last decade where the good of community were never projected in the same tone. On top of it series of legislation on the name of terrorism startled them whereby executive eroded civil liberties and only superior courts came to their rescue after naming and shaming has been completed. North West 10 (Operation Pathway), Risen trial, Football stadium trial, Conviction of lyrical terrorist Samina Malik or various other(s) overturned convictions on appeals are a clear example of the agony the Muslim families who have been through a trial and tribulations. The work of organisations, net work of mosques and activities of Muslims in general are peaceful and law abiding in an atmosphere where they feel vulnerable in general due to first 9/11 and then 7/7 tragic incidents.
Trail of terrorism related legislation and finally Government’s untimely discussion over ‘Hijab’, bearded Muslims and forced marriages deprived the opportunity to strengthen the links between ancient civilisations and put emphasis on ‘tolerance’ and curbing militancy jointly. Whilst Govt. is allowing media for selective negative publicity of this minority whilst the other radical groups are carrying on their work to fuel the fire and recruit young minds towards radical and extremist activities, though regrettable but a real threat to de harmonise the bilateral community relations, and unrest. This cornering strategy has portrayed Muslims as a victim in the Great Britain and they lost the drive of self accountability as it was impossible to fight on two fronts. Radicalisation is at increase and ‘yes’, Young Muslims aged 18-24 are the prime targets of the radical groups who used annoyance, attitude and their loneliness as an excuse to incite them towards ‘revenge.’
What are the causes of youth falling prey to such outfits are multiple in number and have different dimensions and here we analyse one by one the core four reasons: 1) communication gap: there is a generation gap between dual nationals came in 70’s for economic betterment whose only lust was to make economic betterment in their life style abroad and to make their future here and return in good time. Their children do not have such baggage and their priorities have changed from economic betterment to compete with locals, professionalism, football and integration in English culture. This led to individual development other than that of a group. This communication gap and change of goal post in families have caused the biggest rift where living under the same roof, parents sometimes are clueless about the likes and dislikes of their children and children culturally bound are scared to tell the truth. This situation in a few lead to a situation where forced marriages take place too where consent is missing. Language has also played a big barrier in expressing their views rightly, first generation sticking to their mother tongue whereas British youth preferred to speak English, watch football and hang around with their age group. If those young minds are lonely, feel betrayed or have a tragic episode in their lives and they are disillusioned, they have a potential to fall a prey to gang masters or outfits breeding religious lawlessness. 2) Lack of community support: Muslim youth do not have any support network where whilst holding their ideas, and belief they could interact with other age fellows and parents at a network which is sound, fool proof and thoroughly supervised by elders of the community. Mosques could have provided that platform but they are themselves enslaved of their sectarian compulsions and religious order thus community net work on ethnic or nationality basis was the only alternative which is mainly preoccupied by pensioners who are unwilling to retire unnecessarily. Thus Muslim youth remain voiceless, without a platform and without guidance and clear objectives. Funding too could be the real reason of the lack of such infrastructure, but to me political will seems more the cause. 3) Lack of governmental support: the main important aspect of young minds to feel neglected is that despite having degrees they are jobless. If they are on the streets they are stopped more, and they are not that obedient as were their predecessors. They know their rights, which are not given easily. Their negative activities are projected more and there is no fund to accommodate young Brits on a forum or a platform where they could express themselves. Young children have NSPCA for protection from cruelty, birds and animals have RSPCA to ensure their welfare but Muslim youth has none, and nowhere to go. Some of the organisations working already in the field need cloned participants and are granted conditional funding which does not help either, as if you do not follow their do’s and don’ts you may not be able to seek membership successfully. I think if Muslims and Pakistani youth is administered as the Jewish community or Indian doctors community or Black African communities have done by their own general public the results would be fantastic, or alternately govt spend some money to provide national outsourcing, a platform where these people can rightly participate as a community. Govt need to support the youth to walk on their feet before they could run on their own. 4) Foreign Policy reasons: Wars in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan are true foreign policy considerations which has forced the young minds to feel neglected at home when their religion sakes are beaten abroad. Commenting on George Bush’s policies is the hobby of Asian or Muslim youth only because of their own treatment, unemployment, lack of preference in jobs in Civil service, judiciary, police force, armed forces and or Parliament at home. Deprivation of young educated minds in the early days of their careers are trapped in red tape polices are devastating and very ambiguous approach of govt on their foreign policy decisions is causing the may hem. This is the very key which is exploited by outfits at places where such commodity is heavy in number(s) such as outside mosques with leaflets, universities, local deprived areas, crime hubs and playgrounds and they are working freely in UK in disguise, they first speak to youth and then invite them to their gigs and initiate from leafleting to a trap which lead the young minds to their own battlefield.
From experience as a lawyers interacting with British youth I am strongly and regrettably of the opinion that young British Muslims who are studying in their early university days, or unemployed after graduating or living in deprived areas without hope for future are vulnerable and all because of lack of community net work, parental neglect and lack of Governmental support. Muslim youth suffers due to lonely life style and cultural and religious compulsions which force them to get attracted to the people in masks who in the name of religion teach the kids something which are not in Quran and of which parents have no knowledge of it. ‘Death of a man is a death of a mankind’ is a true version of humanity as per Quran, therefore responsibility is greater to save the coming generations from underlying increasing problem before it’s too late.
It’s time that British Government takes true Muslim representatives on board unconditionally without the bribe of peerage or seat in the houses of parliament to tackle the problems confronted by Asian and Muslim Youth. It’s all about winning the hearts and minds in the fight which is being fought all around and Britain is losing so far and British Government needs to take concrete measures whilst beefing up security, to ensure public safety and steady multi religious & cultural relations of communities in Great Britain. Muslim community is willing to suggest measures such as restricting non academic and unrelated subjects as well as institutional levels check and balance to restrict uninvolved firebrands and academics entry exit to those institutions where our future is taught. As it is noted that many radical outfits are targeting youth distracting them from studies and entangling their young immature minds towards foreign policy issues and confusing them thus restricting their performance academically.
International as well as British Media must broadcast students genuine views and community support unit and police must hold open days at major universities to equal the efforts that of radical outfits giving them options and other side views too or at least let the students ask questions which irritates them. Universities itself may opt out to take lead to accommodate students anger and frustration giving them ample opportunities to produce one off papers rather than repressing their inner feelings and then later become prey to the unwanted elements. Asian parents have no communication with lecturers about their children therefore young minds are potential victims at the early days of their liberty at the time of transfer from high school to a university, and a collective effort is needed to defeat extremism and increase of radicalisation which is a clear and present danger. Student societies has a lot to offer, creative, productive and humanitarian.
Pakistan International Airline Pilot Flies Friend Sans Boarding Pass.
A pilot of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) flew hisfriend to London without ticket and boarding card bypassing all formalities, Geo News reported Monday.
According to Geo News exclusive report, the incident happened on Sunday at PIA’s flight PK-787 bound for London.
Pilot Hamid Gardezi, also serving as Principal Director Airport Services in Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on deputation took his friend Syed Salim Zaidi, a member of CAA and former minister along with him without fulfilling the requirements and immigration formalities.
Defying all rules and regulations, Gardezi stunned personnel of the FIA, immigration and the ASF that formalities will be completed later.
The flight than departed but soon was forced to land at Karachi airport again after a passenger Azam Khan got heart attack.
All the details of the incident have been registered in PIA’s logbook.
Captain Hamid declared himself as a close friend of Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Salim Zaidi called him as a friend of President Asif Zardari.
What Is Happening In Pakistan?I Know All The Bombings And Stuff But Why Are They Happening?
(1).why did this start? (2).who is causing it?
(3).when will it end? (4).what it is the fight? (5).is this going to end soon?
My Thinking is.!
Depending upon how you look upon it, the problems started thousands of years ago. That part of the world is made up of tribes, each with their own warlords and mullahs. There are blood feuds that have been going on for so long that nobody remembers how they started and nobody knows how to stop them.
Another part of the problem is that the countries we think of as “Pakistan/Afghanistan/Turkey/Iraq etc” are artificial constructs that do not reflect ethnic boundaries. Most of these borders were put in place in two ways.
The first way is that colonial powers (Britain, France, and others) designed the borders based on the areas that they each controlled through their colonies. This worked okay while they ruled those areas because they could maintain order through military and economic power, but when they were forced, the artificial boundaries remained. The ethnicities and tribes resumed the fights that had been going on before the colonial powers showed up.
The second way that the current countries came to be is through war. In WW1, the different combatants occupied different parts of the middle east. When the war ended, the victors (Britain, France, etc) carved up the middle east for their own economic and political purposes) into different countries. This was not an accident. If you want to control a large area of someone else’s homeland, it is easier if you bind enemies together. Then their hatred of eachother makes it impossible for them to unite against you. You can play them off against eachother. (Israel does that brilliantly with Hamas and Fatah) Again, when the great powers left, the tribes fought for control.
The current problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan are made worse by the tribal structure. When one group is in power, they pour all the wealth and resources on their own tribe. (In the US, Canada, and Europe, we would call that corruption. In the Mid-East, it is an expectation.) Well that makes the other tribe(s) angry so the retaliate the same way they have for generations, with violence. The difference is that now they have guns, bombs, and rockets.
The simplest way to solve this problem would be to redraw the map of the middle east according to ethnic and tribal boundaries, but it is probably too late for that. Existing governments are not going to let their countries be cut up and their resources given to someone else.
Nobody has any idea how to solve this problem. Anybody who says otherwise is a fool or a liar.
