Insurrection, Terrorism and the Pakistan Army

By Brian Cloughley

Terrorism has thrived in Pakistan largely because the education system has failed throughout the country, thus allowing quasi-religious fanaticism to thrive more than it might otherwise have done. The essentiality of education and employment for potentially disaffected young people cannot be over-emphasised. The army can play its part by ensuring that schools can operate without interference, but it is the responsibility of the civil power to build, staff and maintain the schools and to create a societal organization that supports their operation. Without this realisation, the army’s efforts will have been in vain.

The situation in Balochistan is also disquieting because rebels, in the name of nationalism, have attempted to disrupt the province, which is said to be a base for insurgents engaged in conflict in Afghanistan. In November 2009 the central government offered a major package of development and social improvements, including withdrawal of troops, in return for cessation of violence, but the rebels rejected the offer.38 The need to maintain or even reinforce the army presence in the province is an important factor in the army’s overall planning.

The overall picture in Pakistan is sombre.

The army is regarded as a bastion of reliability by most of the population, but it is disturbing that a survey in late 2009 found that “An overwhelming majority of young Pakistanis say their country is headed in the wrong direction . . . and only 1 in 10 has confidence in the government.

The despair among the young generation is rooted in the condition of their lives, the report found. Only a fifth of those interviewed had permanent full-time jobs. Half said, they did not have sufficient skills to enter the work place. And one in four could not read or write, a legacy of the country’s abysmal public education system, in which less than 40 percent of children are enrolled in school, far below the South Asian average of 58 percent.”

10th December 2009

These are a few excerpts from the concluding chapter of a very comprehensive study available online as a report that covers many aspects of Pakistan’s present socio political conflict – SAS / Editorial

For complete report, click link –

http://spaces.brad.ac.uk:8080/download/attachments/748/Brief+53Finalised.pdf

Let Them Speak: Truth about Sri Lanka’s Victims of War

“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall – think of it, ALWAYS.”   – Mahatma Gandhi

Executive Summary

This latest report from the University Teacher for Human Rights (Jaffna) documents the final chapter of Sri Lanka’s war 26-year war. Drawing on individual eyewitness accounts, it chronicles the relentless violence experienced by survivors of the conflict between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam between September 2008 and May 2009, when the Sri Lankan government ultimately crushed the LTTE leadership and declared victory.   What these survivors’ stories make clear is that for both parties, the key to military dominance lay not in brilliant strategies, but in an utter disregard for the lives of civilians and combatants alike, driven by their leaders’ single-minded pursuit of personal power.

Both sides treated truth as an enemy.  Outsiders who could bear witness to these events were kept out or silenced; dissent on either side was crushed; the poor and powerless were treated as cannon fodder and in the case of Tamil civilians, ultimately locked up to prevent them from revealing  what they had experienced. As the report notes, Sri Lanka’s “war against truth has grave implications for the future of democracy.”

But this report is more than a catalogue of war-time atrocities; it provides an analysis of the social and political underpinnings of the conflict that made atrocities possible, and that have historically shielded the people who committed such crimes from justice.

This report is a call to Sri Lankans of all communities to examine their history and take control of their present; to acknowledge the degeneration of the country and its democratic institutions, to demand justice for the crimes that have been committed in the name of fighting terrorism or securing Eelam, and to declare “never again.”

~~~

It was bloody war and international norms were breached by both sides, which by trapping people in the conflict zone wrought large scale death and destruction. The State systematically marginalised and restricted the operation of international organisations, subverting their efforts to humanise the conduct of the war and secure reduced casualties. It convinced the majority of people in the country (and many outside), that utter annihilation was only way to deal with the forces like LTTE. At the same time the Government blatantly lied about the real number of civilians trapped in the zone, and the number killed by their disproportionate use of force in the form of intense shelling and bombing.

The LTTE’s callous attitude towards the civilians, its forced conscription and the violent and coercive methods it used to prevent people from fleeing for their lives, further helped the government to successfully neutralise any criticism against their modes of operation.

Perpetrators must be brought to account.

It is also imperative for international human rights activists and organisations to go beyond mere condemnation of the way in which this war was conducted and recognise what it has shown us about the limitations of the present broader architecture of international Human Rights and Humanitarian mechanisms and institutions, which failed utterly to avert this disaster.

Social and political forces with narrow ethnic or religious ideological trappings continue to undermine democracy in most of the developing nations. These are not new phenomena; the world had seen many major religious crusades to wars between nations which in the modern era led to the creation of international institutions, conventions and treaties. The unequal economic and military power structures operating at a global level continue to undermine these institutions while allowing local actors to blame the external powers for their own failures.

In Sri Lanka, the political elite continues to fail the people, and whatever potential the country had to move towards a healthier path of development and prosperity has been continuously undermined by narrow electoral politics. The country is at a crossroads. Improvement will not be achieved by relying on the political elite in the belief that they will have at last to moderate self interest and address the many underlying social and economic issues which caused the war.

The callousness of Sri Lanka’s powerful towards their own people has been clearly shown in the persistent undermining of state institutions, the deterioration of which has been met with major armed resistance again and again. Today politicians continue to use this war, this monumental tragedy,  for political capital in their narrow power game in the South, while the removed and insensitive Tamil Diaspora tries to further polarise people in their home country with their meaningless rhetoric and slogans of Transnational government.

There is only one way forward. An initiative to forge a broad multi-ethnic and multi-religious movement that challenges these narrow ethnic and religious agendas and Sri Lanka’s climate of impunity; that demands accountability for the grave and systematic violation of human rights that has for so long prevented Sri Lanka from progressing. This should be the priority for all those who desire to fight for social justice and human rights.

University Teachers For Human Rights (Jaffna) Sri Lanka.

Special Report No: 34

Date of release: 13^th December  2009

For complete report – click link

http://www.uthr.org/SpecialReports/Special%20rep34/Uthr-sp.rp34.htm

China emerging as S. Asia’s “Super Cop” hurts India

by
Chandan Mitra

In the backdrop of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s tepid visit to Washington last month, followed by President Obama unveiling a half-hearted Afghanistan policy, India has significant reasons to worry about its relegation to the junior league in America’s foreign policy world view. Earlier, the Hu Jintao-Barrack Obama joint statement in Beijing had made it clear that the US regards China as the regional superpower and is prepared to “outsource” South Asian affairs to it. Although the State Department subsequently tempered this statement, there are sufficient causes for New Delhi to worry that China would henceforth act as the local “dada” overseeing India-Pakistan issues, including Kashmir, with overt US approval. Coincidentally, this was the subject on which I presented a paper at the annual Track Two dialogue held this year in Singapore under the aegis of the German think tank, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) on 23-24 November. Reproduced below is a slightly abridged version of my presentation.

China’s role in the sub-continent, especially its ability to engage constructively in tensions between India and Pakistan is circumscribed by two factors: It’s partisanship in Pakistan’s favour on the Kashmir issue from the inception and its role in the UN Security Council since Beijing replaced Taipei at UN forums, and China’s inconsistent behaviour in Indo-Pak matters, which vary in accordance with ups and downs in Beijing’s relations with New Delhi. Hence, the huge trust deficit between India and China.

By accepting Pakistan’s formulation on the right to self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, China, in effect, rejected India’s position that a series of free and fair elections in the Indian part of the State is adequate proof of its assimilation into India’s democratic process. China also historically came to Pakistan’s aid during each military conflict between India and Pakistan, by upping the ante along the disputed Himalayan border. Besides it has consistently provided military hardware and technology to Pakistan both directly and also through its ally North Korea.

Further, China has a long history of conflict with India on the boundary issue. It disputes the McMahon Line and during the 1962 border conflict occupied large parts of Aksai Chin apart from over-running Arunachal Pradesh to which it persists on staking a claim. India-China border talks, agreed during Prime Minister Vajpayee’s 2003 visit to Beijing, have progressed fitfully. China has reneged on its earlier agreement that “settled populations” on either side of the Line of Actual Control should be disturbed to the minimum. This backtracking has resulted in a virtual stalemate in the talks between the designated Special Representatives.

During the Vajpayee visit, it was informally agreed that China would finally concede Sikkim to be a part of India and, thus, the Middle sector would pose the least problem in the resolution of the border dispute. In exchange, India would be willing to make adjustments in Aksai Chin, provided China abandoned its claim to Tawang district in Arunachal. It was also discreetly agreed that the issue of the slice of J&K ceded to China by Pakistan would be kept on the backburner pending an overall settlement between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir issue.

However, China’s recent acts of intrusion in the Aksai Chin region, gradual encroachment along the undemarcated boundary on Pangong Tso and the Demchok sector, suggest a new aggressiveness not seen in the last four decades. Beijing’s strong denunciation of the Dalai Lama’s visit, preceded by its objections to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s tour of Arunachal Pradesh, have added to misgivings in India about China’s real intentions.

China loves to believe it is on the verge of acquiring superpower status and looks to the US for legitimising its aspirations, although Beijing’s aim has always been to overtake the US as the world’s pre-eminent economic power.

During President Obama’s visit to Beijing earlier this month (November 2009), he acknowledged that China could play a role in lowering tensions between India and Pakistan. Despite India’s voluble protests that no third party could be admitted into the India-Pakistan dialogue process, as the issues, including J&K, were bilateral, Washington did not retract satisfactorily from the position President Obama took during his meeting with President Hu Jintao.

It would appear that two significant uprisings, first in Tibet on the eve of the Beijing Olympics of 2008 and later in Xinjiang involving fierce clashes between native Uighur Muslims and Han settlers persuaded Beijing to adopt a hard line towards India. It stops just short of directly blaming India for the troubles in Tibet but its diatribe against India for harbouring the Dalai Lama and nearly one lakh Tibetan refugees has grown shriller in recent months.

At another level, it seems to be altering its approach towards Muslim discontent in Xinjiang. Whereas it has always followed a policy of “strike hard with an iron fist” towards any form of insurgency, particularly the simmering East Turkistan movement in Xinjiang, it appears to be seeking Pakistan’s cooperation in preventing the influx of Taliban-inspired militants into that province. In the past it even hanged two Pakistani nationals after a summary trial for fomenting jihadi terror in Xinjiang.

Clearly, Beijing now believes in befriending Pakistan even more and exerting pressure on it to contain Talibani influence from creeping into its outlying Muslim dominated regions. As a corollary, it has adopted a particularly hostile stance towards India in the last few months, thus reassuring the Pakistani establishment of its unstinted support.

Given this scenario, India cannot accept the Obama-Hu formulation in view of the deep and genuine misgivings about Beijing’s objectives. China is in a conflict situation with India and hence a party to the prevailing disputes. It is ranged on Islamabad’s side.

Finally, China’s aggressive expansionism in countries contiguous to India has added to New Delhi’s concerns. Beijing’s “garland of pearls” policy, which entails construction of a naval base in Myanmar’s Coco Islands, barely 600 km from the Andamans, and ports at Gwadar in Pakistan and Hambantota in Sri Lanka, besides its links with anti-India forces in Nepal further complicate the prospects of India accepting a legitimate role for China in South Asia. The growing competition between India and China for acquiring oil fields in Africa and Kazakhstan adds a further dimension to the ongoing tussle for economic positioning between the two countries.

Therefore, the only role China can possibly play in the sub-continent is to assist Pakistan in combating and containing Talibani ambitions in the region. It also has a role in supporting the US-led Western forces in stabilising the Kabul regime because that is the only hope for an indigenous Afghan political leadership to keep militancy in check. China has already invested heavily in Afghanistan and therefore must have a stake in helping the Karzai Government regain control of that country.

Although India-China co-operation at the economic level is increasing, there remain sharp divergences in their political and strategic objectives. China’s attempt to emerge as an independent player in South Asia with a view to deny India its pre-eminent role in the region as well as the Indian Ocean cannot be accepted by New Delhi.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/220612/China-S-Asia%E2%80%99s-supercop.html

Obama defends US wars as he accepts peace prize

By Associated Press Writer Ben Feller

OSLO – President Barack Obama entered the pantheon of Nobel Peace Prize winners Thursday with humble words, acknowledging his own few accomplishments while delivering a robust defense of war and promising to use the prestigious award to “reach for the world that ought to be.”

A wartime president honored for peace, Obama became the first sitting U.S. president in 90 years and the third ever to win the prize — some say prematurely. In this damp, chilly Nordic capital to pick it up, he and his wife, Michelle, whirled through a day filled with Nobel pomp and ceremony.

And yet Obama was staying here only about 24 hours and skipping the traditional second day of festivities. This miffed some in Norway but reflects a White House that sees little value in extra pictures of the president, his poll numbers dropping at home, taking an overseas victory lap while thousands of U.S. troops prepare to go off to war and millions of Americans remain jobless.

Just nine days after ordering 30,000 more U.S. troops into battle in Afghanistan, Obama delivered a Nobel acceptance speech that he saw as a treatise on war’s use and prevention. He crafted much of the address himself and the scholarly remarks — at about 4,000 words — were nearly twice as long as his inaugural address.

In them, Obama refused to renounce war for his nation or under his leadership, saying defiantly that “I face the world as it is” and that he is obliged to protect and defend the United States.

“A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida’s leaders to lay down their arms,” Obama said. “To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism, it is a recognition of history.”

The president laid out the circumstances where war is justified — in self-defense, to come to the aid of an invaded nation and on humanitarian grounds, such as when civilians are slaughtered by their own government or a civil war threatens to engulf an entire region.

“The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it,” he said.

He also spoke bluntly of the cost of war, saying of the Afghanistan buildup he just ordered that “some will kill, some will be killed.”

“No matter how justified, war promises human tragedy,” he said.

But he also stressed the need to fight war according to “rules of conduct” that reject torture and other methods. And he emphasized the need to exhaust alternatives to violence, using diplomatic outreach and sanctions with teeth to confront nations such as Iran or North Korea that defy international demands to halt their nuclear programs or those such as Sudan, Congo or Burma that brutalize their citizens.

“Let us reach for the world that ought to be,” Obama said. “We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace.”

In awarding the prize to Obama, the Nobel panel cited his call for a world free of nuclear weapons, for a more engaged U.S. role in combating global warming, for his support of the United Nations and multilateral diplomacy and for broadly capturing the attention of the world and giving its people “hope.”

But the Nobel committee made its announcement in October when he wasn’t even nine months on the job, recognizing his aspirations more than his achievements.

Echoing the surprise that seemed the most common reaction to his win, Obama started his 36-minute speech by saying that others who have done more and suffered more may better deserve the honor.

“I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage,” the president said. “Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize … my accomplishments are slight.”

The list of Nobel peace laureates over the last 100 years includes transformative figures and giants of the world stage. They include heroes of the president, such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela and others he has long admired, like George Marshall, who launched a postwar recovery plan for Europe.

Earlier, Obama had said that the criticism might recede if he advances some of his goals. But, he added, proving doubters wrong is “not really my concern.”

“If I’m not successful, then all the praise in the world won’t disguise that fact,” he said.

The timing of the award ceremonies, coming so soon after Obama’s Afghanistan announcement, lent inspiration to peace activists.

The president’s motorcade arrived at Oslo’s high-rise government complex for Obama’s meeting with Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg as a few dozen anti-war protesters gathered behind wire fences nearby. Dressed in black hoods and waving banners, the demonstrators banged drums and chanted anti-war slogans. “The Afghan people are paying the price,” some shouted.

Greenpeace and anti-war activists planned larger demonstrations later that were expected to draw several thousand people. Protesters have plastered posters around the city, featuring an Obama campaign poster altered with skepticism to say, “Change?”

The debate at home over his Afghanistan decision also followed the president here. He told reporters that that the July 2011 date he set for the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan to begin will not slip — but that the pace of the full drawdown will be gradual and conditions-based.

“We’re not going to see some sharp cliff, some precipitous drawdown,” Obama said.

Obama’s first stop in Oslo was the Norwegian Nobel Institute, where the Nobel committee meets to make its decisions. After signing the guest book, Obama told reporters he had penned thanks to the committee and noted the pictures of former winners filling the wall, many of whom gave “voice to the voiceless.”

In the evening, Obama is expected to wave to a torchlight procession from his hotel balcony and stroll with Norwegian royalty to a dinner banquet. He will offer comments a second time there and cap his brisk jaunt to Europe.

The president and his wife, Michelle, arrived here in the morning, coming off Air Force One holding hands and smiling. Having left Washington Wednesday night, Obama was due back by midday Friday.

The Nobel honor comes with a $1.4 million prize. The White House says Obama will give that to charities but has not yet decided which ones.

[Associated Press writers Matti Huuhtanen and Ian MacDougall contributed to this report.]

Obama’s Afghan war for the new trans national gas pipeline by 2014

By McCamy Taylor

I don’t pretend to know why President Obama is so determined to escalate the war in Afghanistan, the country that drove the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. Maybe he covets the executive privilege that goes with being a war time president. Maybe he is courting the center and center-right in anticipation of the 2012 election. Maybe he does not want to bring too many troops home all at once for fear of worsening the economic recession at home. Maybe he is scared of being called a waffler a flip flopper or some other unpleasant name if he goes back on his word. Maybe he is afraid that terrorists will attack the mainland U.S. again and he will be blamed for ending one of Bush’s foreign wars too soon. Maybe, maybe, maybe.

The only thing I know for certain is that the troops will not be back home until after 2014. That is when the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is scheduled to be operational.

A Brief History of Greed

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is the reason the Taliban rose to power. In the mid 1990s, Unocol began plans for an oil and a gas pipeline that would run from the Caspian Sea, through Afghanistan and Pakistan and finally to India. You know, the country where they are sending all our jobs. Unocol and the CIA helped to put the Taliban in power, thinking that the new regime would permit them to build the pipeline.

Southasiaspeaks – this is a very revealing story on US objectives of continuing the war in Afghanistan,  we wish to recommend to all our readers. Click this link for the full article; http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×7159913

Bhopal 25 years on: A legacy of poison, trials and tears

Earthmovers lay paths and workers clear the undergrowth with a pace of urgency that the derelict Union Carbide factory site in Bhopal has not known in a quarter of a century. A pesticide tank at the plant leaked deadly gas shortly after midnight of December 3, 1984, devastating the central Indian city.

Officials and their retinues, who visit the site several times a day and animatedly inspect the work in the wasteland, are following directions from state authorities to open the premises for public viewing on the 25th anniversary.

But victims of the disaster are outraged, saying the exhibition of the “death factory” highlights the abject indifference they face from the government.

It is a bitter irony that the catastrophe is to be showcased amid continued neglect and injustice meted out to victims, many dying due to lack of medical care, as accused officials go unpunished and damaged babies are still being born.

Revelations years after the tragedy showed the US company also dumped chemical waste around the plant that contaminated groundwater supplies.

As wisps of glass wool play move in the wind, time stands still at the pesticide-producing unit, a 35-metre-high block of rusting pipes, towers and gantries.

Creepers grow over storage tank 610, which spewed 40 tons of highly poisonous methyl isocyanate over densely populated slums, killing 3,800 almost immediately, many in their sleep.

More than 15,250 people were officially confirmed to have died in the weeks that followed, although activists claim a death toll of about 25,000.

Gas leaks being damped in trying to prevent pollution

Some 100,000 of the 574,000 people exposed to the gas were affected permanently, suffering from illnesses including respiratory and psychiatric problems, cancer and tuberculosis.

“Two and a half decades later, the truth is not known. There is no official word on how the disaster took place. No one has been held responsible, which shows officials and companies are hand in glove,” says T.R. Chouhan, a former engineer at the plant and now considered an expert on the disaster.

“There is evidence to prove that the management neglected safety standards for cost-cutting even though they knew the hazardous nature of the chemicals,” he said.

The company blamed the disaster on sabotage by workers, alleging that they introduced water into the tank that triggered a chemical reaction causing the gas leak.

Bhopal remains the subject of several legal cases in India and the US. Dow Chemical, which took over Carbide in 1999, says all the liabilities were settled when Carbide paid 470 million dollars compensation in a Supreme Court-brokered settlement.

But survivors continue to fight for just compensation and economic rehabilitation, as 300,000 people still need treatment, many of whom lost their capacity to earn a livelihood.

“More than compensation, people want justice and dignity of life,” says Rachna Dhingra, one of the leaders of the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, an activist coalition.

She said former Carbide chief Warren Anderson – declared a fugitive for absconding from Indian courts after being charged with manslaughter in 1991 – should be brought to book.

“The government should immediately establish an empowered commission to look into long-term relief and rehabilitation measures of gas victims, their proper medical care, pensions to families with children requiring special care,” she said.

Children are being born with cleft palates or webbed feet. The water the families drink remains contaminated. Around the factory, the disability rate among children is almost 10 times the national average.

The pungent smell of chemicals hits the nose as cattle graze the area where some 20 toxic dumps continue to release the poisons.

“The disaster didn’t end in 1984,” said Ratan Lal, father of 20-year old Mamata, who suffers stunted growth and did not attend school because children used to tease her.

“Damaged babies are still being born. People get skin rashes and stomache aches because of the water,” said the labourer who lives in nearby Garibnagar slum.

But gas relief minister Babulal Gaur denies any danger and insists the plant is opened to help people get rid of misconceptions and apprehension that the factory’s chemical wastes pollute the city.

“The chemical waste is confined to a room and it is not polluting water. By visiting the site people will be able to see for themselves that the government is not hiding anything from them. It would ensure transparency,” he said.

Activists view the move as another effort by the government to give the issue a quiet burial. More than 10 governmental and non-governmental studies have confirmed the presence of highly toxic chemicals in the soil and environment of the site, Dhingra said.

“The site should be preserved as a memorial but the government is using the occasion to absolve Dow of its responsibilities,” Syed Irfan, a leader of the Bhopal campaign, said. “If justice is not done, many Bhopals will happen elsewhere. Companies will come, pollute, kill and leave without liability.”

From http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/296385,bhopal-25-years-on-a-legacy-of-poison-trials-and.html

Afghanistan : 30,000 troops from Obama, increased pressure on NATO for a “Rumsfield extension”

• Obama decides : 30,000 more American troops to Afghanistan
• Obama wants : 5,000 to 10,000 additional troops from NATO allies
• Obama accepts : deteriorating military environment, but “Afghanistan is not lost.”
• Pentagon sources : 849 Americans killed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and neighboring Uzbekistan, in past 08 years.
• New build up : cost for first year alone is US $ 30 billion
• New Gallup poll : 55 % Americans think Obama handles war badly

Declaring “our security is at stake,” President Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force he inherited as commander in chief. He promised an impatient public he would begin bringing units home in 18 months.

The buildup to about 100,000 troops will begin almost immediately — the first Marines will be in place by Christmas — and will cost $30 billion for the first year alone.

In a prime-time speech at the U.S. Military Academy, the president told the nation his new policy was designed to “bring this war to a successful conclusion,” though he made no mention of defeating Taliban insurgents or capturing al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.

“We must deny al-Qaeda a safe haven,” Obama said in spelling out U.S. military goals for a war that has dragged on for eight years. “We must reverse the Taliban’s momentum. … And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan’s security forces and government.”

The president said the additional forces would be deployed at “the fastest pace possible so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers.”

Their destination: “the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaeda.”

“It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak,” the president said.

When he became president last January, there were about 34,000 troops on the ground; there now are 71,000.

Obama’s announcement drew less-wholehearted support from congressional Democrats. Many of them favor a quick withdrawal, but others have already proposed higher taxes to pay for the fighting.

Republicans reacted warily, as well. Officials said Sen. John McCain, who was Obama’s Republican opponent in last year’s presidential campaign, told Obama at an early evening meeting attended by numerous lawmakers that declaring a timetable for a withdrawal would merely send the Taliban underground until the Americans began to leave.

A new survey by the Gallup organization, released Tuesday, showed only 35 percent of Americans now approve of Obama’s handling of the war; 55 percent disapprove.

“After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home,” he said flatly.

In eight years of war, 849 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and neighboring Uzbekistan, according to the Pentagon.

In addition to beefing up the U.S. presence, Obama has asked NATO allies to commit between 5,000 and 10,000 additional troops. NATO allies and other countries currently have about 40,000 troops on the ground.

As for neighboring Pakistan, the president said that country and the United States “share a common enemy” in Islamic terrorists. “We are in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That is why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.”

The speech was still under way when General McChrystal issued a statement Wednesday morning from Kabul. “The Afghanistan-Pakistan review led by the president has provided me with a clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task,” it said.

“Our Afghan partners need the support of Coalition forces while we grow and develop the capacity of the Afghan army and police, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan, the statement added. “That will be the main focus of our campaign in the months ahead.”

McChrystal is expected to testify before congressional committees in the next several days.

Obama referred to a deteriorating military environment, but said, “Afghanistan is not lost.”

Officials said the additional 30,000 troops included about 5,000 dedicated trainers, underscoring the president’s emphasis on preparing Afghans to take over their own security.

These aides said that by announcing a date for beginning a withdrawal, the president was not setting an end date for the war.

But that was a point on which McCain chose to engage the president at a pre-speech meeting with lawmakers before Obama departed for West Point. “The way that you win wars is to break the enemy’s will, not to announce dates that you are leaving,” McCain said later.

Obama’s address represents the beginning of a sales job to restore support for the war effort among an American public grown increasingly pessimistic about success — and among some fellow Democrats in Congress wary of or even opposed to spending billions more dollars and putting tens of thousands more U.S. soldiers and Marines in harm’s way.

American military officials believe that more NATO troops will buy it time to grow the number of Afghan security forces able to hold their own against insurgents.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already asked France for an additional 1,500 troops to add to the 3,750 already in the country.

Earlier this week, the United Kingdom announced it was adding 500 soldiers to its contingent.

With Canada’s army already stretched to the limit, the pressure on Ottawa will be to extend its existing commitments beyond the scheduled 2011 end to the military mission. NATO just expanded Canada’s area of responsibility, placing American and Afghan troops based in the Arghandab district, North of Kandahar city, under Canadian command.

And while Canada is slated to begin a military pullout in 2011, some say it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Obama’s plan could influence the popular perception of the Afghan mission in Canada.

“I would suggest that if Obama had a strategy that Canadians would be at ease with, it’s not inconceivable the government would change its direction,” said Maj. Gen. (ret.) Terry Liston, a former chief of planning and development with the Canadian Armed Forces.

With insufficient force levels, Obama would be hard-pressed to distinguish his military approach from his predecessor, George W. Bush, who focused on the counter-terrorism dimension.

“The extent that it seems to be a continuation of the Rumsfield (former U.S. secretary of defence Donald Rumsfield) approach, it’s not going to cause a rethink in Canada,” Liston said.

Edited from news reports

by

Darlene Superville & Steven Hurst

The Associated Press- NY

&

Jonathan Montpetit (CP) – Kandahar, Afghanistan —

Sri Lankan IDPs Given Passes and NGOs Told Not to Complain to UN

By Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press

Tamil civilians leaving camp in Vavuniya - photo / TamilOnline

Sri Lanka’a Rajapaksa administration, facing a challenge from military leader Sarath Fonseka, announced “freedom of movement” for those interned in the Vavuniya camps, starting December 1, in the run up to snap elections now set for January.

The UN’s Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on November 21 immediately issued a statement praising the government’s announcement, and on November 23 his top humanitarian envoy John Holmes came to the UN briefing room to in essence add to the praise.

Despite reports to the contrary from non governmental organizations on the ground, Holmes said there’s no ban on movement except for safety, “physical safety.” Inner City Press asked about statements by Oxfam in Sri Lanka that even “freedom of movement” will involve a system of passes and only limited numbers of days outside the camps.

Holmes replied that people will be able to leave for “days at a time,” saying this “looks like freedom of movement as most would define it.” But signing in and out of a camp surrounded by barbed wire, with any limitation on the number of days out, is not how many define freedom of movement.

Inner City Press asked Holmes about a letter from the government agent of Mannar to NGOs, telling them to suspend any operation not approved by the Presidential Task Force headed by presidential brother Basil Rajapaksa. Holmes shrugged that the PTF is in charge.

A large international NGO working in Sri Lanka was told by Basil Rajapaksa to deal only with the government, and to stop complaining to the UN. Inner City Press asked Holmes about this, and he said he is “not sure that is a hugely important point.”

But to some, a government telling NGOs not to complain to the UN is not a small thing.

It was the UN’s quiet pull out from Kilinochchi that presaged the killing of civilians that would occur. So for the UN to be less than concerned with the government tries to cut off the flow of information to the outside world is not a good sign.

United Nations, November 23 ————

Sri Lanka Defends Land Mine Use as UN Says Nothing, of “Victim Activated” IEDs

By Matthew Russell Lee

The UN and its Secretary General are said to be strong advocates for countries to become parties to the Mine-Ban Convention. But when it comes to Sri Lanka, which has refused to join the Convention and which states openly that it uses land mines, it is unclear what the UN is doing to urge the country to stop using mines.

The UN is paying for removal of mines laid by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Meanwhile, in a debate in the UN General Assembly’s Fourth Committee on October 30, Samantha Jayasuriya of the Sri Lankan Mission argued that “for legitimate national security concerns, Sri Lanka had not become a party to the Mine-Ban Convention… Land mines were used by security forces ‘always for defensive purposes’ and mainly to demarcate the limits of their military installations.”

This statement, more than five months after the Rajapaksa government declared final victory over the LTTE or Tamil Tigers, went uncommented on by the UN. At a press conference on November 17, Inner City Press asked Dmitry Titov of UN Peacekeeping and Maxwell Kerley, Director of the UN Mine Action Service, about Sri Lanka’s statement and continued use of land mines.

Mr. Titov replied that the Secretary General is in strong support of the Mine Ban Treaty. But when Inner City Press asked if Ban Ki-moon, in his many bilateral talks this year with President Mahinda Rajapaksa, has ever directly asked that Sri Lanka join the Mine Ban Convention, Mr. Titov passed the question to Mr. Kerley, who described UNDP’s work removing LTTE mines.

With the LTTE defeated, the Sri Lankan government’s justification for using land mines is gone. But it was repeated on October 30 at the UN.

United Nations, November 17 –

Official link – http://www.innercitypress.com/lanka1sri1elections112309.html

Don’t say you missed this Indian masala version !

This is a wonderful and a very satirical rendition of an old, very popular Sinhala Baila, “Suranganeeta Maalu Genawa” given a totally new international message by a few human rights and media groups in Delhi…….

You got to watch and listen to this. A must it is !!!

Sindh people’s march for their Rights, a success

By Raja Jee

On 22^nd November, Quomi Awami Long March led by Rasool Bux Palijo has reached Karachi, and thousands of Men, women and children marched from Mazar-e-Quid to “Imprest Market”, the historical place from where Sindh played his role in 1857 war against British. Main leadership of Muslim League (N), Jamait-e-Islami, Sindh Taraqi Pasand Party, Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaf, Muslim League (Q) and civil society showed absolute solidarity and participated in this Grand Peaceful Public Gathering of more than two hundred thousand Sindhis including about fifty thousand women. Participation and unanimous support of leaders of various political parties indicates that they are united over the issues and all called this event as most exceptional, mammoth, unique and longest protest march in Indo-Pak history and congratulated Awami Tahreek and Rasool Bux Palijo for this heart-awakening march. First time a march of a Sindhi Nationalist political party was the big head line evening news for all English, Urdu and Sindhi TV channels and named as a remarkable and unprecedented massive show of strength of indigenous local people.

This march started from Kandh Kot, upper end of Sindh on 8^th of October 2009 and by walking 20 to 25 kilometers daily thousands of marchers including men, women and children crossed Shikarpur, Sukkur, Khairpur, Gambat, Kandiaro, Noshehro Feroz, Moro, Qazi Ahmed, Sakrand, Hala, Bhit Shah, Hyderabad, Tando Mohammad Khan, Shah Karim Bulri, Mirpur Bathoro, Sijawal, Thatto, Dabeji, Ghaghar phattak, Quidabad, Malir, Bhitai Abad, Gulistan-e-Johar, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Guru Mander to reach Destination. This distance became around 1000 kilometers which was covered in 46 days as scheduled. The main route of March touched from one end to other end (North to South)of Sindh province where to cover the breadth/ other sides of Sindh merging short marches have also joined the main march which includes as (1). Ratodero to Shikarpur (2). Dadu to Moro (3). Nawabshah to Sakrand (4). Tando Allahyar to Hyderabad (5). Matli to Tando Mohammad Khan (6). Daro to Mirpur Bathoro. In this way this tree shaped march touched every district of Sindh.

Distributed pamphlet tells the following aim and objectives:

• Right of governance with complete autonomy as per 1940 resolution instead of rule of imperial forces and their agents.

• Hold back the right over natural resources, oil, coal, gas, islands, and coastline.
• Right of water of River Indus as per Sindh – Punjab Pact 1945
• Stoppage of controversial water projects i.e. Dams on river Indus and Thal canal.
• Stop alleged settlements of outsiders in Sindh to convert indigenous population in minority.

• Reject allotment of million acres of provincial land to non Sindhi population and multinational companies for illegal possession over cities.

• Restrain Sindhi students from admission in educational institutions of Karachi and preserving Institution from copy, weapon, Bhata culture.

• Uproot all forms of Terrorism as state, urban, tribal, and religious in cities and lawlessness in rural areas by so called urban rulers and feudal lords.

• Protest against Continuous unemployment and non observance of due share in jobs for Sindhis in judiciary, military, financial institutions, autonomous authorities and other departments.

• Protest against Jirga system, Honour killing, Karo Kari, immature marriages and other violence against women and minorities.

It is the fifth long march by Awami Tahreek first in December 1991 from Sukkur to Karachi, second in 1994 from Hyderabad to Karachi, third in 2001 from Bhitshah to Karachi, forth is from Sukkur to Karachi in 2005 and this is longest fifth one. There is no doubt in saying that Awami Tahreek always gained huge support from publics and their struggle remained peaceful and non-violent.  No scratch on any vehicle or any damage to property or misbehave to any persons on any basis of sect, language or creed were reported so far. On the other hand in 2001, they faced baton charge, injuries, bloodshed, lockups, and tear gas shells each day by police in a bid to foil the long march and they set new example of bravery ahead the government blockade, torture, brutality and aggression and succeeded to reach Karachi peacefully.

Awami Tahreek was formed on 1970 aiming to establish a welfare state with participation of renowned Marxist-Leninist-Maoist writers, political activists and intellectuals under leading theoretician Rasool Bux Palijo. Besides contribution in all democratic and human right struggles in Pakistan, the active role of Awami Tahreek is largely recognized in Anti One- Unit, MRD, Anti Kalabagh Dam, anti urban terrorism, restoration of judiciary , violence in educational institutions and violence against women and peasant in all over Pakistan.

Founder of Awami Tahreek Rasool Bux Palijo (80) is a well-known politician of Pakistan and he earned the fame in struggling against feudalisms, marshal-laws, establishment, colonialism and imperialism. Besides top constitutional and criminal lawyer, he is an authority over world history, philosophy, science, religion and political theories and also wrote more than 40 books on numerous subjects. He remained about 11 years in jail and declared as Prisoner of Conscience by Amnesty International in 1981. Organizing women and Hindu scheduled Castes are his more remarkable and revolutionary traits. His continuous love, affection and guide uplifted them as first class citizens and He has broken the walls of untouchability and chains of women slavery very practically.

During passing through no-go area of Saradars in Kadh Kot, Rasool Bux Palijo expressed his views as “Through planned conspiracy, big cities of Sindh are handed over to terrorists while the rurals areas have been distributed to tribal chiefs and Jagidars and both are the agents of imperial forces. Feudalism and urban terrorism are being nourished by dictators and imperial agencies to maintain status quo. Criminal negligence of present government over the urban terrorism on Sindhi and tribal terrorism over women and Hindus are very shameful. However, the sons and daughters of Sindh without any discrimination of caste, tribe, creed and religion are ready to play their role in struggle to get back sovereignty of Sindh and the resources of Sindh”.

Averagely 500 men, women and children have walked in changing weather from hot to cold in the entire province on foot and when crossed through towns and cities the caravan turned into huge public gatherings. Leaders spoke there to highlight the issue and purposes. Caravan received warm welcome by local organizations, political parties, civil societies, bar associations at every stop along National Highway. There were singers who kept the participants energized with revolutionary songs of Shah Latif, Faiz Amed Faiz, Shaikh Ayaz, Habib Jalib, Ustad Bukhari, Sahir Ludhiyanvi, and Bhagat Kabir and also the well-worded poetic slogans were loudly chanted with pleasant rhythms as;

• Jo America jo yaar aa                       -      Ghadaar aa Ghadar aa.
• Qudarati waseela                               -      Awam ji hawaley kario.
• Karo-kari ain jirga system                -     Na manzoor no manzoor.
• Daryan ji Aabadgari                         -      Band Kario band kario
• 12 May ain 18 October Ja qatil       -     Girftar kario Girftar kario
• Jagia Jagia                                         -     Sindhi Jagia.
• Sindhu te ko b dam                           -    Na khapey Na khapey
• Rahbar Sindhi Quom jo                   –     Rasool Bux Palijo
• Kery-lugar ain NRO                         -     Na manzoor Na manzoor
• Dahishat garidi  ain Gunda Gardi   -     Band Kario band kario

Besides the frequent appearances of Rasool Bux Palijo (Cardiac Patient), Advocate Ayaz Lalif Palijo, Sayed Aalam Shah, Mohammad Khan Bhurgri, Qadir Ranto, Hakeem Halepoto, Mazhar Rahujo of Awami Tahreek and Umrah Samo, Zahida Shaikh, Nazir Qureshi, Husna Rahujo, Marium Gopang, Kalavanti Raja, Fahmaida Soomro, Azmat Halepoto of Sindhiyani Tahreek are leading the March.

Ayaz Latif Palijo (44), Awami Tahreek’s current president possessing moving and shaking personality and having very vast knowledge and grip over the issue of Sindh told that “Today Sindh is passing famine like situation. People are committing suicide and selling their children due allegedly made price hike and corruption. Broad day-light dacoity is made on water, finances, employment and resources of coming generations.  How long the rulers embroil the people of Sindh in concocted stories?  People are full of hatred and warmly contributing their part in struggle. Hugely participation of public and political groups irrespective of socio-political and religious affiliations proved that Sindh is united”.

Mohammad Khan Bhurgri, General Secretary AT expressed the significance of march as “It’s a mammoth demonstration and protest ever held in Pakistan. Main theme of this protest is restoration of all rights of Sindh and establishment of democratic republic welfare state. We are not against any group or nation but we oppose those who perpetuate atrocities on Sindhis and other working classes of Pakistan. This march is organized against ongoing unemployment, price hike, terrorism, lawlessness, corruption and shortage of water for which we have received tremendous response from masses, people are hosting break fasts, Lunches, dinners and night stays voluntarily. ”

Ms. Umrah Samo, President of Sindhiyani Tahreek, replied when asked about hot weather, hard journey, as “It is tiring at instant but energizing and interesting ahead public enthusiasm, supportive attitude, hospitality, walking along, showering of rose petals, offering of foods, juices, sweets, snakes, tea and milks by common people in thousands. At start some were fairer but now we all are of same colour and complexions. Our refreshed health and fitness is just the byproduct of 46 days long march”.

Many surprising and emotional scenes were observed; some memories shared by Mr. Riaz Ahmed Pechuho, a 46 days marcher, are as under:

1). During passing through Ghauspur hundreds of Hindu Bagri women appeared and joined march singing songs in their own language.

2). In Kumb city Menghwar Community welcome the long march with many baskets of sweets and celebrated Deevali Festival with Caravan.

3). Huge group of Young Shaikh Community leading by Latif Shaikh received the long march like traditional Barat in Gambat and all danced for hours in the tunes of barati band-baja and drums.

4). Parents arranged the marriage of Sakina Maganhar but she joined March till the first ceremony of ‘wanwah’ and all marching women left her with placing ‘Mendi’ on her hand palms and marriage songs.

5). Two old age (above 75 years) persons Ahmed Laghari and Ali Ghulam Nizamani are determined to walk for 46 days and many youngster of 7-10 years are in the walk. Women with infants are surprising entries.

6). A man near Sakrand stopped his car and left his wife and three daughters in long march and come back at evening and repeated thrice.

7). Many Small tea hotel owners at rural side stopped the caravan and forcibly offered the tea to all persons free. Ended all milk and tea and started walking.

8). All Gadi Nahins of Dargahs as came across like Hazrat Sachal Sarmast, Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, Shah Inayat Shaheed Of Jhok Sharif have warmly and culturally welcomed with presenting Ajraks and singing sufi songs and showed complete solidarity with march objectives.

9). Feet of participants were wounded and swelled but the glow of their eyes were very shining and they kept the victorious smile on their faces.

10). Many women carried their milk feeding babies on their waists and continued 46 days march with a military discipline.

Bravo! Awami Tahreek have played well its role with befitting courage and sacrifice to aware, protest and project the cause and demands of Sindh in democratic, disciplined and peaceful ways towards Government and all well wishers of Pakistan and stressed to resolve the issues and make the country go on in well and honoured manner.

(Writer is a social worker and civil society activist. You can reach him at raja.jee.khi@gmail.com. )