Current Projects
Afghan Forces Suffered 15,000 Casualties In First 8 Months Of 2016
Afghanistan’s security forces battling the resurgent Taliban have suffered around 15,000 casualties, including 5,523 fatalities in the first eight months of 2016, says a U.S. government monitoring agency. The agency has also warned of eroding gains the war-shattered country has made with the help of the international community. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) in its quarterly report published Sunday noted the Afghan government lost 2.2 percent territorial control during this year’s fighting. “Of Afghanistan's 407 districts, 258 districts were under government control or influence, 33 districts were under insurgent control or influence, and 116 districts were “contested.” There were 101 insider attacks from January 1, 2015 through August 19, 2016 in which Afghan National Defense and Security Force (ANDSF) personnel turned on fellow security forces, killing 257 and wounding 125 others. “The ANDSF lacks a risk-management system and therefore relies heavily on U.S. forces to prevent strategic failure.” The Taliban has intensified battlefield and other attacks since August and came close to recapturing the northern city of Kunduz and the capital of southern Helmand province this month. The insurgents continue to stage assaults on these two key urban centers and several other provincial capitals, inflicting heavy casualties on Afghan forces. The conflict-related incidents have caused more than 8,000 civilian casualties in Afghanistan, including more than 2,500 deaths in the first nine months of 2016, according to the United Nations. SIGAR reported that the United States has committed at least $1 billion for projects intended to improve conditions for Afghan women, but support for woman having equal access to education and equal representation in political leadership has fallen since 2006. “Fifteen years after the United States ousted the Taliban regime, Afghanistan remains one of the worst places in the world to be a woman.” Poverty,...
Analysing The Trade Relationship Between Pakistan and India
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) consists of eight South Asian nations, namely Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Founded in 1985, the major goal of SAARC has been to promote economic and regional integration of the member states. However, political tensions between two of the largest members, Pakistan and India, have plagued SAARC ever since its inception. Recent events on the Pakistan-India border have forced the cancellation of the 19th SAARC Summit scheduled to be held in Islamabad in November. With recently imposed restrictions on cross-border exchange of artists, exhibition of movies and participation in cultural activities, other economic activities such as import and export of goods between the two countries risk being curtailed as well. Political tensions and uncertainties have economic consequences. The article will investigate what trade relations the two countries have enjoyed thus far to gain an insight into what possible effects derailment of their relations will have. Going back to 2004, when political tensions had receded, Pakistan and India embarked upon initiatives to increase trade and consequently improve regional integration. The following analysis is conducted using data from Trademap.org and COMTRADE. Before 2004, there was minimal movement of goods between Pakistan and India. Although, India had awarded Pakistan the Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) status in 1996, the exports from Pakistan to India remained almost negligible for a number of years. Pakistan’s exports to India were $84 million in 2003 and even at their peak in 2013, managed a modest $403 million, after which they receded to $312 million in 2015. On the other hand, the imports increased rapidly in absolute terms as trade relations moved towards normalisation. It increased from $184 million in 2003 to $2.18 billion in 2013. It was at $1.96 billion in 2015. The trade deficit for Pakistan – the difference between...
CPEC Security Worries China
Misgivings about Pakistan’s ability to provide adequate security to Chinese workers employed in China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects are still weighing heavily on policy makers despite reassurances publicly conveyed by Pakistan. However, the Chinese government remains committed that CPEC projects would be completed to realize the dream of building a China-Pakistan Community of Shared Destiny. Also, Chinese are concerned over the simmering controversy between Pakistan’s Federal and two provincial governments regarding distribution of projects under CPEC. They are displaying extra sensitivity over any valid or flimsy criticism of CPEC by Pakistan’s smaller provinces. Pakistani scholars made it clear that CPEC enjoyed support across all political parties among Pakistanis. Nevertheless, the umbrella project should be seen generating employment, establishing economic zones and not becoming a conduit for trading Chinese goods and commodities alone. It was hoped that the Chinese state companies would use their experiences in Africa, the Kyrgyz Republic and Kazakhstan to recruit Pakistani engineers and technicians in line with their qualifications. Projects should benefit wider sections of population, beyond the political and business elites. Pakistani delegates to the Beijing and Islamabad dialogue pointed out that the strength of bilateral ties comes from mutuality of strategic interests, tested interdependency in moment of despair and needs, mutual willingness to transform relations to meet new and emerging challenges and finally unstinting public support in both countries for each other at regional and international levels. For commonality of interests and mutual respect, any change in government or leadership in either of the two countries, or the demise of the Cold War era and its associated alliances or subsequent readjustments could not affect their relationship. Chinese Concerns Chinese officials and academia are reluctant to assume that CPEC...
CHINA WATCH [OCTOBER 22-28] FRIENDSHIP RALLY
China-Pakistan friendship car rally dominated the news this week. That Pakistan and China successfully conducted joint military exercises was overshadowed by the atrocious attack in Quetta. Politicians from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), once again, expressed their resentment about the negligence of western route in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Sale of Chinese products in India saw a sudden slump after calls for boycott. Finally, Pakistan and China started an art exhibition in Islamabad. Balochistan; a trouble spot: Balochistan came under horrifying terror attack. On Tuesday night, three heavily armed suicide attackers assailed a police academy in Quetta and killed 61 people and wounded 117 at least.[1] The government was quick to blame cross-border elements once again. While conveying the concerns of Pakistan to the US, National Security Advisor Lt Gen (Retd) Naseer Khan Janjua told the American ambassador, David Hale, “[T]here is a need to break the nexus of Afghanistan-based terrorist who are operating under the patronage of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and National Directorate of Security (NDS).[2] Before this heinous attack, two coast guards were gunned down on Sunday in the vicinity of Gwadar district.[3] Recurrent attack like these will cast serious doubts over Pakistan’s ability to maintain even a modicum of law and order so that CPEC can be secured against both the internal and external security threats. Western Route: It seems that differences regarding the western route are going nowhere. Parliamentary Committee on CPEC held a session on Wednesday to inform the members about progress on different facets of CPEC. The government’s response could not mollify opposition concerns. They complained that second part of route, i.e. Dera Ismail Khan to Khunjerab, was being ignored by the central government. Qaumi Watan Party (QWP) chief, Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, told media that “[O]fficials concerned could not satisfy us as to why work has...
CRSS Report Records Sudden Increase in Violence-Related Casualties
A report issued by the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS) on Thursday shows a sudden increase in incidents of violence and casualties of civilians and law enforcement officials. However, the report – which focuses on the third quarter of this year – also found that militant casualties have fallen compared to the first two quarters. The head of CRSS, Imtiaz Gul told Dawn the increase in casualties is linked to relations with India and Afghanistan. “Whenever tension builds with India, it starts creating problems in Balochistan to build pressure on Pakistan. During the third quarter, we saw the incident of an attack on lawyers due to which casualties increased. In the fourth quarter, an attack was held on the police which will increase casualties in the fourth quarter,” he said. In response to a question, Mr Gul said once tensions with India normalise, casualties will also drop. The data shows that during the third quarter of 2016 from July to September, 1,092 casualties including 651 dead and 441 injured , were recorded. This is 19.4pc more than the previous quarter. In addition, 265 militants, criminals and insurgents, including foreigners , were killed and 386 non-combatants including security officials died in this period. The largest group of killed non-combatants was civilians at 287. Largest group of non-combatants killed in third quarter of 2016 were civilians In the previous quarter 172 civilians lost their lives, compared to this quarter’s 287. The number of militants, insurgents and criminals killed fell, from 475 in the last quarter to 265 in this quarter. Therefore, the report surmised that civilian deaths saw a sharp increase to 58pc, while the loss of life of militants, insurgents and criminals saw a sharp decrease of 56pc. Out of the total non-combatants killed, civilians accounted for 44pc, security officials for 11pc, political activists for 2pc, government officials for 1pc and religious party members, religious persons, foreign...
Interview: Muhammad Amin Karim: The role of HIG in Afghanistan
Following the peace deal with its leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the HIG's chief negotiator spoke to Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera: What motivated HIG to negotiate a peace deal with the Afghan government? Mohammad Amin Karim: The relationship between Afghans and the international community was a lose-lose situation. Thousands of people were killed by the American invasion. The invaders repeated slogans like the "fight against terrorism", build "good governance" and "bring democracy". But if you look at what the US actually did, the result was negative. So at that time we proposed that there should be a win-win situation for the Afghan people and the international community based on the interests of Afghans and the legitimate goals of the US and its allies, which is to fight against terrorism. Only Afghans can do it effectively. If Afghans in the villages decide that there shouldn't be any groups attacking other countries, they are the only ones who can do it. If you want to bring democracy and an elected government, you can't do it with Humvees, tanks and drones. You should work with the people. That was the beginning of these negotiations. First, in 2010, I brought the delegation of HIG to propose this solution to the government. But unfortunately at that time there was no real wish for peace. Then in 2014, Barack Obama announced that by the end of 2016 there would be no more American combatant soldiers in Afghanistan. That was the beginning of the new process of negotiations which I led. And after two years of hard discussions and negotiations, finally, we achieved this goal. Al Jazeera: Where is Hekmatyar now? How closely was he involved in these negotiations? Karim: He is in Afghanistan, like he has always been. He will return to Kabul as soon as possible, once all the sanctions are lifted and all the technical problems are solved. He was involved in the negotiations as closely as it was possible. Al Jazeera: In the 1990s, Hekmatyar was offered the position of prime...
Islamabad Offers Doha to Set Up Arms Production Facilities
Pakistan has offered Qatar all possible technical assistance for setting up military hardware production facilities on Transfer of Technology (ToT) basis as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said Pakistan, Qatar and Turkey can set up joint ventures for undertaking defence related manufacturing. The development came on Thursday as Qatar’s Minister of Defence Affairs Dr Khalid bin Mohammad al Attiyah held separate meetings with PM Nawaz, Army chief General Raheel Sharif and Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif. Talking to the minister at the PM House, Nawaz said: “Our relationship with Qatar means a lot to us and you can count on Pakistan as your closest ally and brotherly state. “The relations between the two nations will be further strengthened into sustained economic cooperation for the benefits of both the countries,” the PM said. “The trade volume between Qatar and Pakistan will multiply, especially after the import of LNG from Qatar”, Nawas added. He also extended his heartfelt condolences on the sad demise of Sheikh Khalifa bin Hamad Al-Thani, the grandfather of Emir of Qatar. Dr Khalid said Qatar sees Pakistan as a strategic partner and every effort would be made to make this relationship stronger. He said with the assistance and cooperation of Pakistan, Qatar wanted to improve its military hardware to be prepared for the uncertain threat of terrorism, prevailing in the region. “We are desirous of buying Super Mushshak and JF-17 Thunder aircraft from Pakistan and also want to set up military cooperation and production of equipment in Qatar with the assistance of Pakistan and Turkey,” he added. He said Qatar will also establish a training academy for countering the unconventional enemy of terrorism and will seek services and expertise of the Pakistani instructors. The defence minister also extended condolences to the prime minister on the loss of precious human lives in the terrorist attack on Police Training Centre in Quetta. Meanwhile, Defence Minister Khawaja...
Condemned Unheard
Terrorism is a global issue. It should be analyzed using the same standards. The 9/11 attacks were committed by Saudi and UAE citizens. The majority of terrorist attacks in Pakistan find their origin in Afghanistan. The recent acts of terrorism in France, Belgium and Germany were committed by individuals with North African origins. Fresh terrorism in the US is committed by individuals with origins in various Muslim countries. The countries of origin of the terrorists in the above cases were not declared sponsors of terrorism by default. Terrorism is a complex issue; the international community is aware that labeling the countries of origin of terrorists as sponsors of terrorism would lead nowhere. This position, however, dramatically changes when it comes to Pakistan. The state of Pakistan is explicitly accused of involvement in case a terrorist is traced back to Pakistan. Over the years, the tendency of accusing Pakistan for any wrong committed anywhere has grown. It has now become a norm. Interestingly, this trend was encouraged by none other than successive Pakistani governments which chose not to forcefully rebut such accusations. The tendency of Pakistani governments of either completely ignoring such accusations or denying them with single-liners casually issued by the Foreign Office has landed the country in a situation where Pakistan has now become the world’s favorite punching bag or scapegoat as it would not react to any charge, no matter how provocative. One classic example is that of the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh condemning Pakistan as the “epicenter of terrorism” in his address to the General Assembly of the UN in September 2013 while also noting that he would be meeting with the Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif the next day. India did not care that such remarks may jeopardize the holding of next day’s meeting. True to Indian expectations, instead of cancelling his meeting to show Pakistan’s strong resentment, the...
The Precarious Status of GB
IN view of objections raised by all the provinces save one on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor’s implementation, the federal government has launched a media campaign to highlight and defend the implementation strategy for this mega venture. In order to allay fears, a series of seminars have also been held in various locations. Gilgit-Baltistan, as CPEC’s only point of entry from China, has a special status and thus it was important to have a consultative seminar in GB to ascertain the people’s demands, provide answers as well as identify opportunities for bringing prosperity and development to this important region. Rather than determine the real issues, the federal and local governments instead chose to announce a long list of CPEC-related projects. This did little to satisfy local demands as, according to official documents, most are already part of the regular annual development plan. This further eroded the government’s credibility and perpetuated misgivings about its intentions. For local residents there are two major issues of concern: the constitutional status of GB and the need for a fair share in CPEC’s projects. Due to apprehensions born of historical neglect and broken promises, the aim of focusing on these two factors is to ensure the government precludes any negative consequences as a result of CPEC. The failure to grant constitutional status to Gilgit-Baltistan may complicate CPEC’s legality. The constitutional status of this region remains vague and fluid as it has been linked to the Kashmir dispute since it was geographically subsumed within Kashmir at the time of Independence. Although GB’s people had acceded to Pakistan after ousting the Dogra regular army, its status has since remained in limbo due to the infamous Karachi Agreement signed by the Kashmiri leadership, which did not represent GB, with the Pakistan government. Despite GB’s unanimous support for accession and integration with Pakistan, the federal government has moved at a...
The Civilian Casualties of The Wars
According to a documentation, at least 300 civilians have been killed in Syria during US led Anti-IS Coalition airstrikes - with the involvement of German soldiers. The human rights organization Amnesty International presented the documentation on eleven of these air raids yesterday. The total number of civilian casualties caused by the airstrikes since the war on IS was launched in September 2014, can be expected to be much higher - up to 1200, according to observers. And this does not even include the number of casualties from western raids on Iraq, or the casualties that can be expected during neither the recapture of Mosul that has recently been started nor the forthcoming recapture of Raqqa. The German military is involved in preparing these airstrikes with reconnaissance flights and in-flight refueling. Whereas German politicians are reacting with indignation to casualties in East Aleppo from Russian airstrikes and calling for sanctions, no such demands are raised regarding the western Anti-IS Coalition. Bombed and Shelled US-led Anti-IS Coalition airstrikes have killed at least 300 civilians in Syria alone, Amnesty International reported. In its report, published yesterday, the human rights organization documented eleven airstrikes between September 23, 2014 and July 28, 2016, which the US military claims killed only one civilian. In the airstrike on the al-Tukhar village, near Manbij, on July 19, 2016 alone, at least 73 civilians were killed, including 27 children. On July 28, 2016, airstrikes on a public market in al-Ghandoura near Manbij killed at least 28 civilians including seven children. A double-tap on the village of Ayn al-Khan in al-Hasaka governorate during the early hours of December 7, 2015, killed 40 civilians, including 19 children. Several survivors of the first airstrike were immediately mowed down by the crew of a helicopter gunship. The attack was carried out despite the fact that combatants of the Syrian Kurdish YPG had explicitly warned...
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.