Current Projects
Thinking China-Pakistan Economic Corridor beyond Pakistan
While broaching his "One Belt One Road" initiative in a speech to Pakistani Parliament, President Xi Jinping had said in April 2015 that "South Asia is where the land and maritime Silk Roads meet." He added that therefore "[A] peaceful and stable South Asia that enjoys development and prosperity serves China's interest." The first observation stands right. Pakistan, a South Asian country, is home to China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). China has started investing billions of dollars ($46billion-$51 billion) in various projects across the country. CPEC is proclaimed as the "flagship project" of OBOR and is envisaged to play the role of a bridge between the land and maritime routes of modern Silk Road. It is the second proposition from Presidents Xi's speech about stability in South Asia that is far from reality. Since the very idea of OBOR is based on cooperation and development for the purpose of economic gains through trade, countries and regions encompassing this grand design are required to be trouble free. After all, economic ties can hardly flourish in a politically hostile environment. OBOR is no exception to this rule. In this regard, the fact that Pakistan is going through troubled relations with neighboring countries does not bode well for the future of this project. It's fraying relations, specifically with India and Afghanistan in recent times, and in general with Iran, are anything but conducive to stability in South Asia. Indo-Pakistani relations have been in the doldrums since the Uri attack in which at least 18 Indian soldiers were killed by assailants in Indian-held Kashmir. India pinned the blame on Islamabad and claimed that "Pakistan is a terrorist state and should be identified and isolated as such." Bilateral relations have spiraled for worse. In addition to the expulsion of diplomatic personnel of each other, scores of civilians and soldiers have been killed in an exchange of shelling between the armies of two countries. So much so that...
CHINA WATCH [NOVEMBER 29- DECEMBER 5] RUSSIA’S REBUTTAL
In a blunt statement, Russia rejected the veracity of reports by Pakistani media that Moscow was going to become part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said that CPEC is the symbol friendship between China and Pakistan and the project has earned Pakistan a good reputation. China launched the first trade activity on rail and sea link between Kunming (China) and Karachi (Pakistan). Federal Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms Ahsan Iqbal has compared the significance of CPEC for Pakistan to that of its atomic program. He also said that interest rate over CPEC loans is two percent. Baloch leader Abdul Hayee has shown reservations in CPEC. Russia’s Rebuttal: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation has categorically rejected the reports of Pakistani media about ‘secret negotiations’ between the two countries regarding cooperation on CPEC.[1] Last week, some media reports claimed that the Russian Spy Chief Alexander Bogdanov paid a secret visit to Gwadar port to assess Moscow’s possible access to the port in future. It was further said by the reports that Pakistan has formally allowed Russia to become part of the CPEC project. In an explicit statement, Russian Foreign Ministry said that “Moscow is not discussing the possibility of joining this project (CPEC) with Islamabad.”[2] At the same time the statement acknowledged the “inherent value” of trade and economic cooperation between Pakistan and Russia. Moscow’s joining of CPEC could strengthen Pakistan’s position at regional level to the disadvantage of India. New Delhi has on the one hand showed reservations about CPEC and on the other, vowed to isolate Pakistan. Regardless of the above, the value of CPEC cannot be underplayed by regional players, including Moscow, which cannot see itself as dependent on a project from Pakistan. PM on CPEC and China: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said that CPEC had attracted attention of the world for good reasons....
Russia Rejects Indian, Afghan Criticism on Pakistan
Russia on Sunday lauded Pakistan's stance at the Heart of Asia conference and said the agenda of the conference has not been hijacked. Addressing the Heart of Asia Conference in Amritsar on Sunday, Russian envoy Zamir Kabulov rejected the Indian and Afghan criticism on Pakistan and said that Sartaj Aziz's speech at the conference was friendly and constructive. He said it is wrong to criticise Pakistan. The Russian envoy said that Afghanistan is the pivot of Heart of Asia conference and the agenda of the conference has not been hijacked. He said being friends and supporters, we should avoid the blame game and work together.He said all parties involved in the war-torn country's reconstruction must work together and that the Heart of Asia was not the platform for India and Pakistan to score brownie points. Downplaying Russia's military exercise with Pakistan held two months ago, Zamir Kabulov, who overseas Russia's engagement in Afghanistan, referred to India's increasing cooperation with the US. “The HoA should not be used by India and Pakistan for scoring points,” he told reporters. He said bilateral issues should not cloud forums like the Heart of Asia. Kabulov represented Russia in the Heart of Asia conference where he articulated Moscow's position on Afghanistan's transition. He said all the major players must extend all possible support to Afghanistan in its transition. “India has close cooperation with the US, does Moscow complain? Then why complain about much lower level of cooperation with Pakistan,” he asked when referred to the Russia-Pakistan military exercise. India has a strategic partnership with Afghanistan and is implementing projects worth $2 billion to help rebuild the country's infrastructure. The Heart of Asia-Istanbul Process was launched in 2011 and the participating countries include Pakistan, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan and the United Arab...
Elephants In Afghanistan: The Military’s Counterinsurgency Failure
Earlier this year, several former ISAF commanders and diplomats wrote President Barack Obama, imploring him to freeze troop levels in Afghanistan until the next administration takes office. Obama ultimately agreed to keep 8,400 troops in country, but while President-elect Donald Trump said many things about many foreign policy during the election season, he gave few hints as to how he would handle the conflict. As the transition is underway, U.S. military planners are still grappling with building effective Afghan security forces — an effort that could take many more years, if not decades. Such an extended endeavor may be in order to secure U.S. interests in Afghanistan, but Trump would do well to ask a few questions of our military leadership before writing another blank check. After all, our collective efforts under the leadership of those who signed the letter to Obama have left us, after 15 years of war, with muddled results at best. We have expended $64 billion to create a massive security force that shows an incredible willingness to fight but cannot hold off the Taliban, a force with a fraction of the resources. We have also plowed $113 billion into development projects with only reports of endemic corruption, waste, and inefficiency to show for it. Much has been written — some of it even commissioned by the military — about the larger failures of our post-9/11 strategy. Yet very little has been said about how the military’s approach to Afghanistan shaped, and ultimately limited, our overall strategy. Having deployed to Afghanistan in a tactical role in 2009, from 2012 to 2013 as an advisor to the Afghan Border Police, and again briefly in 2014 to assess the advisory mission, I saw firsthand the futility of our approach. In a previous article at Tom Ricks’ Best Defense, I outlined how the American military failed to make counterinsurgency a priority, despite publicly saying that it was the key to success in Iraq and Afghanistan. But beyond the shortcomings...
Reality Check: No Justice for Women In Ghor Province
Ghor province, in western Afghanistan,has been in the headlines in the past few years. Not only was the appointment of its first female provincial governor overturned, there has also been a series of extreme cases of violence against its women. In this unsettling provincial case study, AAN’s Salima Ahmadi takes a closer look at how conservative attitudes and customary practices, combined with insecurity and a failing justice system, result in an environment of near-constant violence against Afghan girls and women, where perpetrators literally get away with murder. (Written in cooperation with Ehsan Qaane and Sari Kouvo). Women’s leadership: too soon for Ghor? On 28 June 2015, Sima Joyenda (1) was appointed governor of Ghor province. Joyenda was one of two female governors introduced by the National Unity Government (the other one being Masuma Muradi, governor of Daikundi). On 4 July 2016, a week after Joyenda’s appointment, the Ulema Council in Ghor sent an official letter demanding her resignation. The letter was written and signed by Ghor’s former Ulema Council Head, Mawlavi Esmatullah Nadim, and stated: “Considering Sharia provisions, the current chaotic situation in Ghor and the will and opinion of the people, the governor of Ghor should step down from her position and respect the will of Ulema. The Ulema will not be obedient to a female governor.” .The council’s spokesman, Mawlavi Haidari, on his social media account, called women “incomplete” .Tolo News quoted another of the Ulema Council members, Mawlavi Muhammad, saying: “We expect the government to introduce a male governor, noting that a woman cannot be a prayer leader for men,” from which he concluded that neither could women govern a province. Senator Muhammad Dawud Ghafari from Ghor province also opposed her appointment and said that: “A woman cannot manage one million people. There is conflict in Ghor; no one listens to a man, much less to a woman.” In response to these positions, there was also...
Afghan Weekly (Nov 25 – Dec 02, 2016)
Recent surges in casualties among children and women caused by Taliban’s militant attacks, as well as the group’s willingness to consider peace negotiation talks, seems to have dampened the generosity of Taliban’s financial backers. Where the Taliban had previously expressed satisfaction over their gains on the battlefield, a senior member of the insurgent group Mullah Rahmatullah Kakazada revealed to The Guardian this week that Taliban backers are no longer willing to provide the group with funding. As a result, the group is facing a financial crisis.[1] On the other hand, figures reported by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs revealed a shocking number of more than 500,000 Afghans internally displaced by conflict in 2016 this week; the highest number on record so far.[2] In the development sector, the Afghan and Turkmen governments inaugurated the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan railway which is expected to boost exports of fuel and reduce Afghanistan’s dependence on China and Russia.[3] Other such updates on the security, internal politics, international engagements and socio-economic situation in Afghanistan follow below. A Security Overview 5 killed, 27 wounded in three back to back explosions in Jalalabad city – November 25, 2016 At least 5 people were killed and 27 others were wounded in a series of explosions in in the 2nd police district of Jalalabad city, the provincial capital of eastern Nangarhar province. According to Provincial governor’s spokesman Ataullah Khogyani, the target of the explosion was the chief of the detention center of the provincial jail who was killed along with his son in the first attack. The second blast targeted the convoy of the security forces as they were on their way to the blast site while the third blast occurred in the same area after the security forces had gathered and cordoned off the area.[4] Taliban leader among 4 killed in Nangarhar province – November 25, 2016 The provincial police...
Book Launch: Book on Democratic Transition In Pakistan Launched
For a country with conflict-orientation, it is natural to have a civil-military convergence and for the establishment to be actively involved in public policy and play its role. The power structure in Pakistan has changed. Several drivers of change including external environment, domestic security and economic situation, and the challenges in its major relationships, Dr. Ishtiaq Ahmad, Director of the School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad said, back the recent democratic transition and transformation in Pakistan. He was speaking at the launching ceremony of United Kingdom's Routledge Publications book ‘Pakistan’s Democratic Transition: Change and Persistence', which he co-edited with Adnan Rafiq, hosted at Hill View Hotel Islamabad by Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), on Saturday December 3, 2016. The book brings together 13 prominent scholars and experts on politics in Pakistan and South Asia. “There are 13 different perspectives from various scholars around the themes of political economy, democratic transition, foreign policy, and a bit about media with a structural level analysis” said the editor while introducing his book. He also said that there is a popular image attached to Pakistani politics about military domination so this book has been able to go beyond the popular discourse, explore history, linkages between facts, and come up with factual analysis with variable that are more influential in shaping realities. He introduced chapters from other contributors of the book. Leading Pakistani columnist, diplomat and government advisor Mosharraf Zaidi who was also a keynote speaker at the launch and a contributor to the book, said that to strengthen human capital there is a need to refine democracy because democracy helps human capital formation. If there was a competition between democracies and non-democracies, democracies are slightly ahead in comparison to other systems when it comes to human...
It’s Time for America To Get Out Of Afghanistan
After 15 years and $115 billion of taxpayer dollars spent on failed “nation-building,” it’s time for the U.S. to let go of Afghanistan. (The actual “total cost of war and reconstruction” which includes all U.S. military spending, has been estimated at $783 billion by the Cost of War project at Brown University.) The situation in 2016 has been described by one senior U.S. government official as an “eroding stalemate.” That’s optimistic. We are losing whatever has been achieved there and the Afghan government is slowly collapsing under the Taliban onslaught and its own ineptitude driven by corruption. The Taliban control more territory now than at any time since their overthrow by the U.S. in 2001 with the Afghan government controlling only two-thirds of the country — during daylight hours. Since January 2016, the Taliban have contested five provincial capitals, carried out some of the largest terrorist attacks in the capital city of Kabul, and have pressed attacks in all 34 provinces of the country, with an average of 68 attacks a day. As a result, the Afghan army and police forces have incurred about 15,000 casualties so far this year, with civilians suffering more than 5,000 casualties, the highest levels ever recorded. An estimated 1.2 million Afghans have been displaced because of the fighting and are living as refugees in their own country, with another 85,000 opting to leave the country in the first six months of 2016 alone for the migrant trail to Europe. Adding to the Taliban threat, ISIS has now established itself in two eastern Afghan provinces and Al Qaida operatives are active in seven provinces, according to a recent report in “The Guardian.” With opium production also up by 43 percent in the country, there is no shortage of funds to fuel the insurgency and corruption. According to a 2016 World Bank report, the social and economic gains achieved with international assistance over the last 15 years are also quickly eroding due to war and...
It's Time for America To Get Out Of Afghanistan
After 15 years and $115 billion of taxpayer dollars spent on failed “nation-building,” it’s time for the U.S. to let go of Afghanistan. (The actual “total cost of war and reconstruction” which includes all U.S. military spending, has been estimated at $783 billion by the Cost of War project at Brown University.) The situation in 2016 has been described by one senior U.S. government official as an “eroding stalemate.” That’s optimistic. We are losing whatever has been achieved there and the Afghan government is slowly collapsing under the Taliban onslaught and its own ineptitude driven by corruption. The Taliban control more territory now than at any time since their overthrow by the U.S. in 2001 with the Afghan government controlling only two-thirds of the country — during daylight hours. Since January 2016, the Taliban have contested five provincial capitals, carried out some of the largest terrorist attacks in the capital city of Kabul, and have pressed attacks in all 34 provinces of the country, with an average of 68 attacks a day. As a result, the Afghan army and police forces have incurred about 15,000 casualties so far this year, with civilians suffering more than 5,000 casualties, the highest levels ever recorded. An estimated 1.2 million Afghans have been displaced because of the fighting and are living as refugees in their own country, with another 85,000 opting to leave the country in the first six months of 2016 alone for the migrant trail to Europe. Adding to the Taliban threat, ISIS has now established itself in two eastern Afghan provinces and Al Qaida operatives are active in seven provinces, according to a recent report in “The Guardian.” With opium production also up by 43 percent in the country, there is no shortage of funds to fuel the insurgency and corruption. According to a 2016 World Bank report, the social and economic gains achieved with international assistance over the last 15 years are also quickly eroding due to war and...
Afghan Security Crisis Sets Stage for Terrorists’ Resurgence
Afghanistan’s security crisis is fueling new opportunities for Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and other extremist groups, Afghan and American officials say, voicing concerns that the original American mission in the country — removing its use as a terrorist haven — is at risk. As intense Taliban offensives have taken large portions of territory out of the Afghan government’s hands, those spaces have become the stage for a resurgence of regional and international militant groups. That is despite the extended presence of nearly 10,000 American troops in the country, tasked with performing counterterrorism operations and supporting the Afghan forces who are bearing the brunt of the fighting. Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the chief of the United States Central Command, said the Afghan government now controls only about 60 percent of the country, the Taliban hold sway over about 10 percent, and the remainder is contested. Which group or groups fill those voids of increasing ungoverned territory in Afghanistan “is something we’ll have to contend with,” he said. “We have to be concerned about this — about the Taliban pulling together and cooperating and collaborating with other terrorist organizations,” General Votel said at a security forum in Washington this week. Over all, Western and Afghan officials estimate that 40,000 to 45,000 militants are active across Afghanistan. The Taliban are estimated at 30,000 fighters, some of them seasonal. But the rest are foreign militants of different — and often fluid — allegiances, at times competing but mostly on the same side against the Afghan government and its American allies. “Of the 98 U.S.- or U.N.-designated terrorist organizations around the globe, 20 of them are in the Af-Pak region,” Gen. John W. Nicholson, the commander of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said recently. “This is the highest concentration of the numbers of different groups in any area in the world.” It is that situation that President-elect Donald...
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.