Current Projects
Instead of trading bullets, try a truck full of walnuts
8 years of cross-LoC barter has been the strongest CBM despite hostilities If there was one thing that could be celebrated as an achievement in India and Pakistan relations on Jammu and Kashmir, it was the ceasefire announced on November 23, 2003. This landmark understanding paved the way for a new chapter in history with two major confidence-building measures rolled out across the Line of Control. Trade was one of them. In 2013, the ceasefire turned a decade old and thousands of people living along the 725 kilometer LoC were ecstatic about its success and longed for its sustainability. Though violations had interrupted it in between, the hope it would become permanent persisted. After all, it had brought an abrupt end to their sufferings as the guns and shells stopped raining from either side. Tens of thousands of people were able to return to home soon after Pervez Musharraf (the then Pakistan president) announced the ceasefire, immediately reciprocated by New Delhi. However, it has been derailed in the past three years and in the last few months the violations have surged, with civilians being killed in firing on both sides. The ceasefire is in tatters and the renewed levels of hostility have forced thousands of people from their homes. Since both New Delhi and Islamabad are refusing to return to normalcy, it may take longer to achieve it. The Pakistan Army has just acquired a new chief in Gen. Qamar Bajwa which is why it is perhaps too early to comment on the outlook on India. For the Modi government in Delhi, however, these levels of hostility might just be acceptable, given the public anger over demonetization and the mood ahead of the elections in Uttar Pradesh that are linked to a hyperbolic attitude towards Pakistan. Despite these seemingly difficult ground realities, there is something to cheer about. Cross-LoC trade—that completed eight years on October 21—has emerged as a successful confidence-building measure despite many challenges. This success was...
Brinkmanship there, restraint here?
Despite escalation at the LoC, the army is exuding confidence. Pakistan summoned the Indian deputy high commissioner yet once again on Nov 22 to protest “unprovoked firing” that has killed dozens in the last few months. It hardly mattered it seems because the next day, the ISPR claimed more Indian firing killed three soldiers and seven civilians, including young captain Taimoor Ali. India seems to be ratcheting up the pressure as Kashmiris endure incessant repression and a curfew for the fifth month, and guns continue to roar from across the Line of Control (LoC). Pakistan’s outgoing Army Chief General Raheel Sharif has been quite outspoken in condemning this “madness” but the civilian leadership has opted for muted responses such as summoning the Indian diplomats for demarches and protests. The army, we are told, has been responding “befittingly” to the hostilities from across the LoC yet its actions sofar indicate a conscious decision i.e. neither to initiate any aggressive act on its own nor allow aggression go unmet. Despite the escalation in the situation along the LoC, the army doesn’t seem to be alarmed, exuding a certain unusual degree of confidence. This stems from multiple reasons as far as Rawalpindi is concerned. The Pakistani leadership has refused to give up advocacy for hapless Kashmiris but it has not panicked or indulged in any action that might be construed as a declaration of war by the Indians. A big reason for Pakistan’s restrained conduct, probably is the nuclear tactical weapons it has developed in the last couple of years. This weapon has simply blunted the Indian cold start regime, says an army official. They know that the 60km radius capability of these weapons will make it very difficult for them to survive and retain control of a captured Pakistani territory. These weapons, it seems, represent a major deterrent even in the current circumstances and thus a tool to preclude the possibility of a full-fledged war. Another consciously...
Why Only the Bangladeshi or Indian Narrative on the 1971 Partition?
While the year 2016 is ending on a slightly positive note for Pakistan due to the lower number of terror-related casualties compared with 2015; yet there is one date that always affects Pakistanis aware of the 1971 partition of East (now Bangladesh) and West Pakistan: the 16th of December. The 16th of December is marked as a Victory Day in Bangladesh, signifying not only its independence from West Pakistan (now Pakistan) but also its apparent victory over the Pakistani military. On this day every year, social media, not only in Pakistan and Bangladesh, but also in neighbouring India is abuzz with different narratives, opinions, and sentiments. While some see the partition as an inevitable conclusion to a hasty and less practical division of the subcontinent, others blame the whole saga on the atrocities committed by the Pakistani establishment and the military. These massacres boiled down to the establishment of Mukti Bahini (Freedom Fighters) and, consequently, to the creation of an independent Bangladesh. A famous quote (attributed to Winston Churchill) notes, “History is written by the victors.” And in the case of Bangladesh and the 1971 war, history was mostly written – and dominated – by accounts of Indian and Bangladeshi writers. Anything written by Pakistani authors and academics was merely tagged as state-sponsored propaganda and, thus, completely rejected on this premise alone in regional and global academia. Reading Bangladeshi accounts of the 1971 war, mostly focused on mass murders and rape, gave me nothing but feelings of shame and embarrassment towards the security forces of Pakistan at the whelm of affairs during that time. So much so, that reading the local and “bipartisan” foreigner accounts, I, somehow, started believing that India was in its right to protect the Bangladeshi people against the Pakistani atrocities. It would be naïve to completely accept or reject accounts from both the sides, and also discount the incompetence of Pakistani...
Afghan Exodus: Notes from a Belgrade Squat
The number of migrants, many of them Afghan, in Serbia has been steadily growing in the second half of 2016. More people continue to arrive, while departures have largely stagnated due to Hungary and Croatia tightening their border controls. As a result, Serbia is faced with a growing number of people on its soil who do not want to stay, but are unable to leave – despite trying very hard. Some enter the asylum system (or indicate that they might do so in the future) and are housed in government-run centres, while others are camping out in central Belgrade. AAN’s Martine van Bijlert and Jelena Bjelica visited the main unofficial locations where well over a thousand people are trying to keep warm, dry and healthy, while winter is coming and the chances of continuing their journey to western Europe seem slim. The situation in Belgrade; a large squat in the middle of town In early November 2016, AAN spent a week in central Belgrade, speaking to aid workers and to migrants in the main location in Belgrade where they are now camping out – three rows of deserted buildings, which used to be the customs warehouses, located behind the central bus station. Living conditions in the buildings are dire. The main building is a large concrete shell with a leaking roof. The windows high up in the walls are broken and let in cold draughts, but not enough fresh air to counteract the thick smoke from the many small fires lit for cooking and to try to keep warm. It is difficult to breathe. Other people have found rooms in smaller buildings in the vicinity or have set up tents in the porches of the warehouses. Some even sleep outside to escape the smoke and noise at night, but with winter coming, they will not be able to do so for very much longer. At peak times, there are well over a thousand people (according to the Serbian Commissariat for Refugees, with the Serbian acronym KIRS) living, sleeping and passing through this small patch of the city that is only a stone’s throw away from...
Afghanistan: From Land Lock to Land Link
The railway running 85 km from Atamyrat, Turkmenistan to the Ymamnazar border crossing point and 3 km towards Afghanistan’s border facilities at Akina was officially opened by Turkmenistan’s President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov and President Ashraf Ghani in a ceremony on November 28, 2016. Berdymukhamedov said: “the project is written in golden letters in the history of our brotherly nations.” He added that the terminal could hold up to 500 tons of commodities and could play a key role for oil traders. But if the link is completed, both Kyrgyzstan and China have expressed interest in connecting to the railway, which could have a powerful influence on a landlocked region that has little transport infrastructure. President Ashraf Ghani thanked Turkmenistan for its support in promoting stability in the country. He said Turkmenistan had given "the gift of trust in the future of Afghanistan". "In the past two years, the esteemed president of Turkmenistan decided to make investments of millions and billions of dollars in a stable Afghanistan,” He added, the opening of the railway is an important step in strengthening relations between the two nations, and in promoting regional economic co-operation in Asian countries. Initial discussions for the railway project began in 2008, and a framework agreement was signed when Afghanistan’s former President Hamid Karzai had visited Ashgabat in May 2011. As located in heart of Asian Countries, Afghanistan has indigenous capabilities for railway construction, and Turkmenistan agreed to take on responsibility for surveying, designing and constructing the entire route, with the section within Afghanistan to be considered as a donation to the country. Construction was launched by the presidents of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan with an elaborate ceremony in Atamyrat on June 05, 2013. The project weighed down with concerns about security in Afghanistan that prompted key backer the Asian Development Bank to suspend support for...
Taliban Facing Financial Crisis As Civilian Deaths Deter Donors
The Afghan Taliban are facing a cash crisis with donors unwilling to bankroll an insurgency whose victims are increasingly civilians rather than foreign troops, according to several members of the movement. Mullah Rahmatullah Kakazada, a senior diplomat under the Taliban regime, told the Guardian that the Taliban was in an increasingly precarious financial position despite chalking up several dramatic battlefield successes in the last year. “The war is becoming unpopular because of all the bad publicity on civilian casualties,” he said. “These people who give money don’t want to spend it on mines that kill children.” The Taliban have long collected donations from sympathisers around the region, including wealthy Afghan and Arab businessmen in the Gulf. But now the movement’s finances are so weakened that some of its most seriously injured fighters are no longer welcome at Pakistan’s private hospitals because they cannot settle their bills, according to Taliban sources. Kakazada said the departure of most foreign combat troops since 2014, and the outbreak of bloody infighting between rival Taliban groups, had weakened the legitimacy of a war the Taliban still portray as a struggle against “foreign occupation”. Although not a participant in the 15-year insurgency, Kakazada remains close to the movement’s leaders. His views echo those of active Taliban officials who spoke to the Guardian. One senior figure in the Taliban’s leadership said donations had first slumped after the announcement in July last year that the founder of the Taliban, Mullah Omar, had died years previously. The death in a US drone attack of his successor, Mullah Akhtar Mansoor, this year further damaged the movement’s fundraising efforts because Mansoor, a well-connected businessman, personally dealt with many of the donors. The Taliban’s other main source of funds, the taxing of economic activity in areas they control – especially the massive opium economy of southern Afghanistan – has also been...
Pak-Afghan Relations: Why Not?
Is the Pakistan-Afghan relationship hostage only to the motivated approaches of the political establishments and bureaucracies or does it also suffer because of our deficiencies? Most probably a combination of both Let us consider this; the Jinnah Hospital that is under construction in Kabul is a bitter comment on Pakistan's outdated Planning Commission; the ground breaking ceremony of this facility took place in 2007 and it is still way off completion. One of the reasons is local security conditions and non-cooperation by the Afghan authorities. They have been reluctant in exempting critical equipment being imported for installation at the hospital from customs duties. The same has been the case with the hardware for the Rehman Baba School and Hostel. Following a meeting with a Pakistani Track 11 delegation in mid-November chief executive Dr. Abdullah Abdullah promised to take up this issue. The other major reason lies this side of the Durand line and relates to the involvement of several Pakistan government and army-related institutions. Petty audit objections by the ministry of finance , bloated bureaucratic egos, preference for institutional interests (instead of national image) and the pretext onega requirements continue to stonewall accelerated execution of these projects. Payments to the contractors of the Jinnah Hospital have been held up for over two years. We have not been able to complete a project in nearly a decade in a country that has become so critical to Pakistan's existence. The Kidney Hospital in Jalalabad is another example of bureaucratic egos and political motivations. Its physical structure was competed five years ago but it remains a ghost house. In another case, Pakistani authorities are waiting for the Afghan government security to complete a 25km stretch on the Torkham-Jalalabad highway, despite the fact that the Afghan government itself is hamstrung by security crisis in that region; instead of finding a way to hire private security out...
Communities’ Role Key for Crime Prevention, Crime Detection, and Law and Order Maintenance
The KP Police reforms have three main dimensions including reformation of ‘Thana Culture’, capacity building and community policing. Behavioral and attitudinal changes were crucial for reforming the ‘Thana Culture’ of KP Police. Six specialized schools are playing a key role in the capacity building of KP police. The trainings in these specialized schools are provided in a focused way where case studies are also used to meet the participants’ needs. The School of Intelligence has significantly improved the intelligence gathering and spot analysis skills of KP police and has thus addressed the issues hampering counter-terrorism and crime-control roles of police. The citizens who have interacted with the police after reforms so far have found visible changes and are all-praise for the reformation. These were the remarks made by participating police officials during a consultative meeting of working groups on police reforms in Charsadda. The meeting was a part of the project “Ulasi Police”, which is an awareness and advocacy campaign undertaken by the Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS) – as part of USAID Small Grants and Ambassadors’ Fund Program – to strengthen the rule of law in KP province by promoting and disseminating the significant police reforms aimed at incorporating local communities’ policing needs and international human rights standards. The endeavor aims to tackle the trust deficit between the public and police, help KP police become an accountable and community-focused police force. Mr. Nazir Khan, DSP City, Charsadda said that the policing could be successful only if it was inclusive of the communities. With the services like Police Access Service (PAS) and Police Assistance Lines (PAL), the citizens can easily avail access to justice and seek help from the highest possible police authorities. Public Liaison Councils (PLCs) are also instrumental in building linkages between the public and police. He also said that the recruitment...
India and NATO: Partners in Arms?
Since the end of Cold War, India and NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) have been on trajectories that will likely converge in the not-too-distant future. Scholars and strategists, like Michael Rühle, Robert Helbig, M.K. Bhadrakumar, David Scott, and a few others argue for India and NATO to come out of their respective shells and openly partner to deal with issues of common interest and concern. This article looks into the present undercurrents relating to an India-NATO partnership, and argues that the process has already begun but needs to come out in the open. Recent Turnaround Events On March 22, 2016, U.S. Congressman George Holding, co-chair of the House India Caucus, introduced the U.S.-India Defense Technology and Partnership Act (HR 4825). The bill proposes to amend the Arms Export Control Action in order to formalize India’s position a major partner, on par with America’s NATO allies and closest partners. Holding told the House, “The legislation will cement the process that has already been made and will lay a foundation for future cooperation and growth.” The bill has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and is currently under consideration for being passed into a law. Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month. On May 20, 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorisation Act (NDAA)-2017, which in principle has elevated U.S. defense ties with India. This bipartisan legislative move aims to bring India on par with NATO allies in terms of defense equipment sales and technology transfers. The two countries are now at an advanced stage of negotiation over the transfer of Predator combat drones, which India formally asked the United States for during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the country in June this year. Moreover, Washington leaned on the other member countries of Missile Technology Control Regime to include India as its...
Opportunity for Afghan Peace
An interesting peace initiative for Afghanistan is in the making. If it clicks the new American administration could be more than happy to hand over this open ended conflict back to Russians or to the SCO and wash its hands off it. Taliban and Al-qaeda received much less attention from the president-elect during his campaign, even though he pledged to fight Daesh with all ‘Trumpish’ ferocity. Russia, China and Pakistan are contemplating a trilateral on Afghanistan in December. This will be another addition, but with a difference, to an already existing multitude of bilateral, trilateral, quadrilateral and multilateral clusters ostensibly looking for peace in Afghanistan while ensuring, through their cross-purposed actions, that peace does not return to Afghanistan. The common fixture in existing arrangements is an over bearing American presence in all such entities. Anything that bears an American signature-tune doesn’t sell well amongst the leadership and the rank and file of Taliban—the real holders of politico-military power in Afghanistan. Although there have been indications that Trump is not in favour of peace talks with the Taliban, there is little other public information about Trump’s Afghanistan policy. Trump’s ignorance of the Taliban could feed the “deep state” in Afghanistan—the illicit parallel economy and security architecture run by warlords, drug-lords, and the Taliban. America’s leadership role in general, or its abdication of this role in particular, remains pivotal to mitigate, if not end, violent Afghan conflict. America is embroiled in plentiful foreign crises and Afghanistan is certainly not a high priority item. Trump’s America-first approach promised to withdraw the United States into Fortress America, build walls around it, both conceptual and real. This indicates a mindset of American policy for, at least, next four years. And if so, this fits well into the concept and opportunity of American disengagement from Afghanistan. Already, the...
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.