Current Projects
In Afghanistan, Putin Courts China In Search of ‘Another Syria’
A Russia-led initiative involving China and Pakistan that seeks a political settlement to Afghanistan’s civil war has the makings of a diplomatic alliance that could supplant the United States as the leading power in Central Asia. The grouping was unveiled after a third meeting in Moscow late last month and may be expanded to include regional powers Iran and Turkey, which formed a separate tripartite grouping on Syria with Russia in talks preceding the parleys on Afghanistan. The Afghan government reacted angrily to the Moscow meeting, to which it had not been invited, because the meeting proposed the relaxation of UN restrictions on the movement of key Taliban figures involved in pre-dialogue negotiations. This contradicted Kabul’s call in November for the UN to blacklist Taliban chief Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada because of his refusal to enter peace talks. Instead, the tripartite talks in Moscow echoed one of two Taliban preconditions for dialogue with Kabul, reiterated by spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid earlier in December. The other condition is the withdrawal of US-led Nato forces from Afghanistan. “This is a focused attempt to deal with the aftermath of Western withdrawal from Afghanistan and an opportunity that Russia senses might have opened up for itself in Central Asia. After West Asia, it’s Central Asia where [Russian President Vladimir] Putin feels he can reassert Russian authority and China is happy to provide a helping hand,” said Harsh V. Pant, a professor of international relations at King’s College London. “However, if we take the Indo-Pacific strategic landscape, there China is the leader and Russia will have to follow China’s lead.” The emerging quid pro quo between Moscow and Beijing comes amid uncertainty over whether US president-elect Donald Trump will endorse an agreement reached last July by leaders of the Atlantic alliance to extend financial and military support to the Afghan security forces until the end of 2020. Since Trump’s election...
The Rise of Religious Extremism in Balochistan
Religious extremism is on the rise in Balochistan. Several factors are driving this, but undoubtedly one concerns Balochistan’s northern regions, specifically Zhob district, which adjoins the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Following Operation Zarb-i-Azb in Fata, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) fighters and other banned religious outfits penetrated deep inside Balochistan, where they are reportedly regrouping. As a result, Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan, has been witnessing deadly assaults. A case in point is the August bombing at Quetta Civil Hospital, which killed more than 70 people, the majority of them lawyers. This was followed in October by an attack on the Police Training College (PTC), involving heavily armed militants. More than 60 police cadets were killed. ISIS has claimed credit for both attacks. Yet another act of terrorism took place the following month in Khuzdar District of Balochistan at Sufi Shrine of Shah Norani, where more than 50 pilgrims were killed. Again, ISIS claimed responsibility. This marked the third major attack carried out by ISIS in Balochistan in three months. It was an ominous development for Pakistan, and one that sent shockwaves around the world. In the past, Pakistani authorities have flatly denied ISIS had a presence in their country, and in Balochistan in particular. While working on a piece for The Diplomat, “Can ISIS Gain a Foothold in Balochistan?” I still remember how a senior Quetta based senior police official airily dismissed a question I put to him about whether ISIS could gain a foothold in Balochistan. However, as I argued in my piece, “there is growing evidence that it is trying to do just that.” Government officials have claimed that the assault on the Police Training College was carried out by the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) Al Alami, an offshoot of the banned LeJ. According to Balochistan Home Minister Mir Sarfaraz Bugti, “The attack was carried out by LeJ AL Almai originally, despite...
CHINA WATCH [JANUARY 3-9] CHINA-PAKISTAN ECONOMIC CORRIDOR (CPEC) PROJECTS
Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms, Ahsan Iqbal, has said that energy projects under CPEC would be operational by 2017 and 2018. Chief Minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pervez Khattak expressed his satisfaction with the outcome of deliberations at the Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) meeting in Beijing. China has responded to India’s criticism of Beijing’s blocking of UN Security Council’s move against Masood Azhar and warned that it will not ‘sit still’ if India goes too far in its arms race against Pakistan. The group of three chambers of commerce and industry termed as “golden industrial triangle” has expressed serious reservations against the plans of setting up industrial units along the CPEC route. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has urged that the fruits of CPEC should be equitably distributed among all the federating units. CPEC Projects: Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms, Ahsan Iqbal, has said that energy projects with cumulative capacity of about 5,000 megawatts under CPEC would be operational by 2018.[1] Under the CPEC agreement, it was agreed between China and Pakistan that 8,810 MW of electricity would be produced by 2017 and 2018 through thermal, wind and solar power projects. But the minister noted that inter-ministerial disputes and inclusion of financially unviable projects in CPEC have retarded the achievement of this target. On the other hand, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif asked the officials concerned to include in the CPEC non-controversial hydro-electric power projects to be set up on the Indus.[2] Energy-related projects sits at the core of CPEC and are intended to help Pakistan overcome its acute energy shortages. Provincial Consensus: Chief Minister of KP, Pervez Khattak has said that he was satisfied with the outcome of deliberations at the last JCC meeting in Beijing.[3] He also noted that three major development projects will be launched in the province under CPEC. These projects include generation of 1,700...
2017 Afghanistan Humanitarian Needs Overview
Afghanistan remains one of the most dangerous, and most violent, crisis ridden countries in the world. The continued deepening and geographic spread of the conflict has prompted a 13% increase in the number of people in need of humanitarian assistance in 2017, now 9.3 million. Violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law (HRL) occur regularly - including, targeted killings, forced recruitment and attacks on health and education facilities. The 8,397 civilian casualties in the first nine months of 2016 is the highest recorded, and included a 15% increase in child casualties compared to 2015. In 2016 increasingly frequent ground engagements continued to be the main cause of civilian casualties, while also limiting freedom of movement for civilians and contaminating areas with explosive remnants of war (ERW) which disproportionally affect children. Health partners reported 57,346 weapon wounded cases between January and September alone, compared to 19,749 in 2011, representing almost a three-fold increase. The country is facing increasing numbers of people on the move. In 2016 the conflict has led to unprecedented levels of displacement, reaching half a million in November - the highest number recorded to date. 56% of the displaced are children and face particular risk of abuse, and exploitation, as well as interrupted school attendance and harmful child labour. Multiple forms of GBV, particularly early and forced marriage, domestic, psychological, and sexual abuse are reported, affecting individuals in hosting and displaced communities alike. Further, a lack, or loss of civil documentation, with difficulties in obtaining documents outside of the province of origin, regularly results in hindered access to services for considerable numbers of affected individuals. Recent estimates suggest over 9 million people have limited or no access to essential health services. Rates of infant and maternal mortality remain among the highest in the world...
Thousands Of Marines Fought In Southern Afghanistan. Now, The Service Is Going Back
The Marine Corps will send a new task force of military advisers to southern Afghanistan’s restive Helmand province this spring, returning to a region where tens of thousands of Marines fought during the Obama administration and hundreds were killed. About 300 Marines with a unit called Task Force Southwest will deploy, advising the Afghan army’s 215th Corps and Afghan national police with the 505th Zone. The forces will work in part from a large Afghan installation known during earlier Marine operations as Camp Leatherneck, but will be based in other locations and could face combat, senior Marine officers said Friday. “We’re viewing this as a high-risk mission that really requires training that is going to ensure that our Marines are capable of countering a full-spectrum threat,” said Brig. Gen. Roger B. Turner Jr., who will lead the mission. “We’re not in any way viewing this as a noncombat mission or anything to take lightly.” Army Gen. John W. Nicholson Jr., the senior U.S. commander in Afghanistan, asked the Marines to replace a similarly sized Army unit called Task Force Forge as it rotates home, Turner said. Marines were pulled from Helmand in October 2014 as part of President Obama’s planned withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Afghanistan, but Afghan forces have struggled mightily there to maintain security against a resilient Taliban. Turner said the Marines who will deploy are a seasoned, senior force, about half of whom have deployed to Helmand at least once before. The senior ranks of those involved reflect the mission, which primarily calls for advising senior Afghan army and police officials. “We had to pull very senior Marines in all functional areas to match up with their counterparts and really provide a level of expertise,” Turner said. “Because the Afghans have made some good progress on a lot of these areas. . . . It’s not a simplistic mission. They’ve really gotten to a point where our level of advising needs to be pretty sophisticated to...
Obama's Toughest Decision? 30,000-Troop Afghanistan 'Surge'
What was President Barack Obama's hardest decision during his two terms in office? A massive troop surge in Afghanistan, he said in an interview aired Sunday. "Toughest decision was early in my presidency when I ordered 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan," Obama, who leaves office in less than two weeks, told ABC's "This Week." After a protracted debate inside the administration that pitted US military commanders against White House advisers, Obama announced the 30,000-trooop "surge" in December 2009. The decision would bring the US contingent in Afghanistan to nearly 100,000 troops along with almost 50,000 allied troops. "I think it was the right decision because the Taliban at that point had gotten a lot of momentum before I'd gotten into office, partly because we hadn't been paying attention as much as we needed to Afghanistan," Obama said in the interview taped Friday. The president had hoped to withdraw most US military forces from Afghanistan by now, leaving behind just a small force. But the United States still has some 8,400 military personnel in the country, and announced Friday it is sending some 300 Marines to Helmand province in the coming months. Meanwhile in Iraq, more than 5,000 US soldiers are still on the ground providing critical support to the country's army, which is unable to man a war alone against the Islamic State group's extremist fighters. Asked whether he found it disappointing that so many troops remain in both countries, Obama said the United States is "not going to get the kind of decisive, permanent victories in this fight against terrorism that we would get from fighting another country." "But we don't have this huge footprint, we are less likely to be targeted as, you know, occupiers," he added about the reduced number of troops. Even after decimating Al-Qaeda in Pakistan's tribal areas and killing the jihadist group's leader Osama bin Laden, groups in the region still "have both the interest and the capacity if we don't maintain...
Obama’s Toughest Decision? 30,000-Troop Afghanistan ‘Surge’
What was President Barack Obama's hardest decision during his two terms in office? A massive troop surge in Afghanistan, he said in an interview aired Sunday. "Toughest decision was early in my presidency when I ordered 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan," Obama, who leaves office in less than two weeks, told ABC's "This Week." After a protracted debate inside the administration that pitted US military commanders against White House advisers, Obama announced the 30,000-trooop "surge" in December 2009. The decision would bring the US contingent in Afghanistan to nearly 100,000 troops along with almost 50,000 allied troops. "I think it was the right decision because the Taliban at that point had gotten a lot of momentum before I'd gotten into office, partly because we hadn't been paying attention as much as we needed to Afghanistan," Obama said in the interview taped Friday. The president had hoped to withdraw most US military forces from Afghanistan by now, leaving behind just a small force. But the United States still has some 8,400 military personnel in the country, and announced Friday it is sending some 300 Marines to Helmand province in the coming months. Meanwhile in Iraq, more than 5,000 US soldiers are still on the ground providing critical support to the country's army, which is unable to man a war alone against the Islamic State group's extremist fighters. Asked whether he found it disappointing that so many troops remain in both countries, Obama said the United States is "not going to get the kind of decisive, permanent victories in this fight against terrorism that we would get from fighting another country." "But we don't have this huge footprint, we are less likely to be targeted as, you know, occupiers," he added about the reduced number of troops. Even after decimating Al-Qaeda in Pakistan's tribal areas and killing the jihadist group's leader Osama bin Laden, groups in the region still "have both the interest and the capacity if we don't maintain...
US Bombings in Pakistan Drop To Record Low
US bombings in Pakistan dropped to a record low – three – in 2016, compared to more than 24,000 bombs it dropped in Iraq and Syria last year, says a study by a US think-tank, Council on Foreign Relations. The statistics indicate a change in situation on the ground in Pakistan’s tribal areas, which US defence experts say are used for launching attacks at American and Afghan troops in Afghanistan. In the past, a major terrorist attack on targets inside Afghanistan or the increase in terrorist activities inside Pakistan’s tribal areas led to US bombings inside Pakistan. Since June 2014, when Pakistan launched a comprehensive military operation against terrorist hideouts in Fata, the terrorist attacks have decreased and as have US bombings. The statistics also show that the United States has shifted its focus away from the Pak-Afghan region and is now targeting terrorist strongholds in Iraq and Syria. Most of the bombings conducted in 2016 sought to destroy the militant Islamic State group (IS) positions in these two countries. The increase in bombings in these two countries also indicate the Obama administration’s determination to lessen US ground combat operations in foreign wars, except in Afghanistan where US troops still participate in combats. The administration argues that ground operations not only put lives of Americans at stake but also stir anti-America feelings in those areas. The bombings, however, are more precise and are often carried out to help local authorities in their fight against the terrorists. But the Council on Foreign Relations noted that the administration’s claim that bombing “reduces the threat posed by extremists operating from those countries and improves overall security and governance on the ground -- is highly contested”. In President Barack Obama’s last year in office, the US dropped 26,171 bombs in seven countries. This estimate is undoubtedly low, considering reliable data is only available for airstrikes in Pakistan, Yemen,...
Will India’s Lobbying Change U.S. Policy Toward Pakistan?
At a time when India-Pakistan tensions are high, New Delhi has once again ramped up its efforts to get Washington on its side. Hopes are high that that a new foreign policy team under the Trump administration might possess the key to curb the asymmetric warfare India faces from its western neighbor. In this context, it will be important to note how the relationship between the two countries’ national security advisors develops and to what extent National Security Advisor Michael Flynn may be able to influence U.S. policies on Pakistan. New Delhi has every reason to believe that engaging with the new NSA offers a golden opportunity to break the long-standing Pakistan paradox. There’s no doubt that U.S.-India defense ties have soared under the Obama administration, but there has always been a feeling in New Delhi that Washington has not done enough to rein in the anti-India non-state actors operating from Pakistan — despite U.S. attacks having taken out both Osama bin Laden and, more recently, Taliban leader Mullah Akhtar Mansour on Pakistani territory. Under a Trump administration, collaboration between the U.S. and Indian NSAs (who share intelligence backgrounds as well hawkish traits on Pakistan) may potentially define U.S. policies toward Pakistan. Unsurprisingly, Indian NSA Ajit Doval has a strong background on the Pakistan issue. He spent much of his career in intelligence, where he is even said to have secretly stayed in Pakistan for seven years as an undercover spy. The so-called ‘Doval doctrine’ of “Defensive Offense,” according to which the terrorists targeting India should be bought over and used against the enemy, has unnerved Islamabad. In his earlier career with the Indian Police Service, Doval’s handling of high-risk assignments, a number of them dealing with threats emanating from Pakistan, played an important role in getting him considered for the NSA position under the Modi administration. Meanwhile, Flynn has an apt understanding of the role...
Afghan Weekly (Dec 31 – Jan 05, 2016-17)
Pak-Afghan relations seem to have experienced a slight thaw in bilateral tensions as Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa telephoned Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah and his counterpart General Qadam Shah Shahim last week on 31st December felicitating them on the beginning of another year. This was announced in a statement tweeted by Pakistan’s military media wing’s Chief Major General Asif Ghafoor which said that the Chief of Army Staff pledged to work together in the coming year with Afghanistan for peace in the region, adding that “peace in both countries is in the greater interest of the region”. The Afghan civil and military leadership reciprocated by extending an invitation to the Chief of Army Staff to visit Kabul, the tweet said.[1] Amid promises for peace in Afghanistan, on the other hand, while skepticism surrounded regarding the viability of the Russia-China-Pakistan strategic talks, due to the absence of United States which has thousands of troops still based in the war-torn country, and Afghan government itself, the United States, on its part, has hoped the meeting would lead to peace. At a news briefing in Washington on January 03, State Department spokesman John Kirby stated that while the United States recognizes Afghanistan’s right to hold all negotiations with other nations on issues that concerns the country and its people, “what we welcome is any international effort to help Afghanistan become secure and more prosperous. And we continue to support, as we always have, an Afghan-led reconciliation process.” The United Sates welcomes any talks held to discuss “the same secure, safe, prosperous Afghanistan that we all want to see”, he added, stating that such talks could be constructive if they came up with “ideas to pursue that, in keeping with mandates from the international community and in particular NATO,” he said.[2] Below follow other updates on the security, internal politics,...
TOP STORIES
TESTIMONIALS
“
I am also a member of National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Information and Broadcasting. Recently, we held a meeting with the Director General of Radio Pakistan and we told them to initiate such local programs (like Constituency Hour) in regional languages to educate and inform people. Even Indian Radio can be heard in FATA which is being used for propaganda purposes and must be closed. Therefore, we should launch some standard and quality programs like CRSS that will change the taste of the listeners.