The latest casualty of the deadly India-Afghanistan-Pakistan contest in the region were nearly five dozen innocent non-combatants at Quetta on August 8. Only two weeks ago, on July 23, at least 80 innocent people fell victim to a terrorist attack in Kabul. At the same time, over seven dozen Kashmiris have lost their lives and or eyes to pellet bullets fired by the brutal state machinery in the Indian-administered Kashmir since July 8. And this is just a glimpse. Hundreds of lives lost to terrorists every month in Pakistan and Afghanistan are just one dimension of the embittered relationship between these two neighbours. Allegations, rooted in mistrust as well as trans-border alliances, keep flying across the Durand Line, at times reducing this to a juvenile contest of egos. Kabul, Islamabad and New Delhi are caught in a spiral of allegations and counter-allegations. During the August 9 corps commanders conference at the General Headquarters (GHQ), the military top brass reportedly concurred that the terrorist threat is transforming because of a growing nexus between hostile actors in the neighbourhood and ‘facilitators’ within the country. The attending generals “were told that threat was emanating from Afghan soil, which was being managed by Indian intelligence agencies. However, at the same time there was an acknowledgment that a network of ‘facilitators’ within the country provided an enabling environment for the external enemy,” according to the daily Dawn. It was a field day for rumor-mongers In Kabul, all those who matter point fingers at Pakistan as the lynchpin for all the ills that are currently afflicting Afghanistan. They refer to the support for Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani Network. Most Afghan media drew on statements by ex-senator Afrasiab Khattak and Maulana Sherani to reinforce their view on Pakistan. “It is also public knowledge that non-state actors find no obstacles to their agenda,” Khattak was quoted as saying in a report by Gandhara/RFERL....

In Solidarity with Pakistan’s Minorities’ On the global day of minorities, Pakistan’s religious minorities too are observing the day. In a largely Muslim population of nearly 200 million, minorities are estimated to be about three percent.  According to the last census conducted in 1998, the population of Christians stood at 2.5 Million followed by Hindus, Sikhs and Parsis.  Moreover, Shia and Ismaili Muslims, which may be some 20 percent of the total population, are often referred to as minorities, particularly by radical extremist Sunni sects. The International Day reminds Pakistanis of the commitment that the founding father Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah had made on 11th August, 1947 in his speech to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan: “You are free, you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or any other place of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or cast or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the State ... Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time, Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State,” Jinnah had said  while outlining his vision on the rights of minorities in new Pakistan as equal citizens. Unfortunately, contrary to the Quaid’s vision, the current state of minorities in Pakistan is far from what the founding father had envisioned.  Between 2012- 2016, for instance, the minorities have remained victims of blasphemy accusations, sexual assaults, forced conversions, forced marriages. In the first half of 2016, for example, four incidents of violence against minorities were reported from the northwestern province Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and eight from the southern Sindh.[1] In one instance, a policeman stormed into the Church and beat up the pastor in Lahore...

During the Cold War epoch, divergent priorities and self-interests, the Indo-Russian partnership and geo-political realities could not allow a breathing space for Pak-Russia relations to grow and strengthen. The geopolitical scalar did not change after the USSR’s collapse either. It is only now, after a quarter of a century, that Moscow is looking to reinvigorate bilateral relations. Moreover, traditional Indo-Russian military exclusivity, which has a history of bilateral cooperation, has been under strain for a while — due to strong Indo-US defence ties — and cracks are opening up, indicating that new opportunities for defence cooperation between Pakistan and Russia are in ferment. Taking advantage of India’s blossoming economy still remains a priority for Russia’s foreign policy. But lately, it has also been seeking diversification in its foreign policy options and is looking for improved multidimensional ties with Pakistan. The Russian renaissance in global political affairs, with a strategic motif of balancing of force in the Putin era, has been shaping new contours in international politics that could provide a favourable environment for improving Russia’s overall relations with Pakistan. A Russian-Pakistani rapprochement started with a milestone military cooperation pact when the Russian defence minister, after 45 years, paid an official visit to Pakistan in December 2014. Another landmark was achieved with a $2 billion inter-governmental deal between the two countries for the construction of a gas pipeline from Lahore to Karachi in October 2015. In the same year, Moscow agreed to sell four Mi-35M helicopters to Pakistan and welcomed Islamabad when it joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). This year, already, Russian Army Commander-in-Chief Oleg Salyukov has announced the first-ever “mutual special drills in mountainous terrain” and Khawaja Asif, Pakistan’s defence minister, visited Moscow to enhance further cooperation. These recent engagements...

A chorus of confused responses followed the Quetta carnage on August 8, that left over 70 dead and dozens maimed. The top civil and military leadership called it an attempt by the “enemies of the country” to sabotage the ongoing China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. The CPEC began only in 2015 but Pakistan has been reeling from terrorism of this scale since July 2007. Several parliamentarians and analysts declared the attack a result of “non-effective” implementation of the National Acton Plan (NAP). Syed Naveed Qamar, the parliamentary leader of the PPP, demanded that parliament be explained why incidents of such magnitude continue to occur after all parties had given a mandate to the federal government under the NAP to go after terrorists. The question is: can NAP really prevent such well-planned attacks? There is also the view that Quetta witnessed a bloodbath because terrorists had been defeated in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and they were shifting their focus to Balochistan now. Explaining this attack as a consequence of Operation Zarb-e-Azb? What about the enmass killings of minorities and other Balochistan citizens between 2009 and 2013? Who was involved in those atrocities then? As usual, Maulana Sheerani of the JUI-F, reiterated the religious right’s narrative that the security establishment brought this bloodbath to the country by joining the US-led anti-terror war. The arms received from America under the Coalition Support Fund were being used “to fight our own people and that’s why we have to face such incidents,” insinuated the Maulana. But excuse me! Are the masterminds of the TTP/Jamaatul Ahrar or members of other terrorist outfits “our own people”? For people like Maulana Sheerani, the narrative refuses to change. Ghulam Ahmad Bilour of the Awami National Party offered some wisdom, though still mixed with a possibly inaccurate diagnosis — the country is facing such problems because decision-making authority has been taken from politicians, he...

A chorus of confused responses followed the Quetta carnage on August 8, that left over 70 dead and dozens maimed. The top civil and military leadership called it an attempt by the “enemies of the country” to sabotage the ongoing China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. The CPEC began only in 2015 but Pakistan has been reeling from terrorism of this scale since July 2007. Several parliamentarians and analysts declared the attack a result of “non-effective” implementation of the National Acton Plan (NAP). Syed Naveed Qamar, the parliamentary leader of the PPP, demanded that parliament be explained why incidents of such magnitude continue to occur after all parties had given a mandate to the federal government under the NAP to go after terrorists. The question is: can NAP really prevent such well-planned attacks? There is also the view that Quetta witnessed a bloodbath because terrorists had been defeated in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and they were shifting their focus to Balochistan now. Explaining this attack as a consequence of Operation Zarb-e-Azb? What about the enmass killings of minorities and other Balochistan citizens between 2009 and 2013? Who was involved in those atrocities then? As usual, Maulana Sheerani of the JUI-F, reiterated the religious right’s narrative that the security establishment brought this bloodbath to the country by joining the US-led anti-terror war. The arms received from America under the Coalition Support Fund were being used “to fight our own people and that’s why we have to face such incidents,” insinuated the Maulana. But excuse me! Are the masterminds of the TTP/Jamaatul Ahrar or members of other terrorist outfits “our own people”? For people like Maulana Sheerani, the narrative refuses to change. Ghulam Ahmad Bilour of the Awami National Party offered some wisdom, though still mixed with a possibly inaccurate diagnosis — the country is facing such problems because decision-making authority has been taken from politicians, he...

Context Gender-based violence (GBV) and violence against women are terms commonly used in Pakistan by the media. They denote intellectual poverty, or worse so, intentional ignorance of the basic human rights and status awarded to women by the Women’s Protection Bill (2006) and the long awaited Protection of Women Against Violence Bill (2015). Though the law claims to ensure women’s security, actual enforcement and execution remains a huge challenge in a conservative society, pockets of which is still governed by a tribal mindset. Legislation challenging the patriarchal/religiously motivated values of Pakistan has met stiff resistance from a very vocal right wing and conservative members of the parliament. This article, alongside identifying acts of violence against women, clarifies the distinction between the terms GBV and violence against women. GBV is derived from unequal power distribution and the resultant power struggle between men and women, in which the female usually yields first or, generally speaking, is forced to do so. State of GBV in Pakistan Analysis of the 2011 data was quite alarming. Out of the 2,718 cases of GBV, 687 women were abducted, 22 were victims of acid attacks, 14 were burnt alive, 9 were tortured by wild dogs, 8 were subjected to karo kari (honor killing) in addition to another 124 victims of honor killing. 82 were murdered over love marriages, 259 were murdered over domestic disputes, 13 succumbed to police violence and torture, 2 were victims of panchayat verdicts, 286 females’ dignity was forcibly violated, 8 were sexually harassed by police, 589 women committed suicide over family disputes, 538 were victims of domestic violence, 12 women were married off as vani while 6 were victims of the exchange of brides custom (watta satta). Bear in mind, that these are reported incidents. Another 3,100 cases were reported in 2012. This count of GBV increased threefold in 2014 as a total of 13,183 women were oppressed in Punjab, out of which...

After more than a decade of unchallenged deployment of Predator drones to kill suspected enemies, US President Barack Obama recently signed off an executive order to address civilian casualties in US operations involving the use of force. “The [policy] is based on our national interests, our values and our legal obligations,” says the executive order issued on July 1. “This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person”, it says however. Through the order, Obama has tried to provide a legal cover and justification for drone strikes, which have largely been considered illegal by international human rights activists. The US administration has also tried to address the issue of civilian casualties caused by the drone strikes meant for targeting terrorists. There has been widespread criticism of the killing of innocent civilians in such strikes, and the policy suffers from several inherent flaws and legal implications. Firstly, these attacks constitute blatant violation of the sovereignty of other countries. Secondly, the acts also violate the international humanitarian law. Thirdly, you cannot hold the operators of drones responsible for innocent victims. At least 256 identified civilians have been killed in strikes in Pakistan In many cases, nobody really knows whether those killed were terrorists or innocent non-combatants. That is why a number of countries including China, Russia, the UN, and human rights organizations have demanded of the US to make public the details of its covert operations in Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Somalia. Fourthly, the executive order only mentions the inherent right of self-defense, with no care for international rule of law, human rights, social and political consequences and sovereignty of other countries. Fifthly,...