Pakistan is gradually coming out of a cold war era mindset. A lot of analysis on the current day Pakistan, particularly by American, Indian and Afghan commentators, continues to be rooted in the past. Much of the argument is a one-way ostracization of Pakistan based on the baggage which is undeniable but which cannot and should not be used to judge a constantly evolving situation. Such analysis, while embracing their respective countries’ geopolitical alignments as “unavoidable necessity,” blatantly ignores the compulsions that geopolitics place on Pakistan. Let us dissect some of the factors that require a closer and sympathetic scrutiny by foreign commentators, most of whom would project anything relating to Pakistan as “linear and black and white,” disregarding the fact that geo-politics is mostly gray and is non-linear because of the competing political and commercial interests of nations. Commentators, firstly, need to note the difference between September 19, 2001, when General Pervez Musharraf simply announced to join the US-led anti-terror war, and March 2015, when Nawaz Sharif had to back-peddle on his commitment of all-out support to Saudi Arabia. Although financially and politically indebted, Pakistan seems to have weathered the storm. Geo-politics is mostly gray and non-linear Secondly, commentators misleadingly project Pakistan as the only big roadblock to reconciliation as well as an “unreasonable opponent” to the overland transit trade rights for India, without explaining the Pakistani reservations about it. They point to the Afghan president Ashraf Ghani’s frustration with Pakistan too. During his recent India visit, Ghani warned Islamabad (according to The Hindu newspaper) that if it does not open the Wagah land transit for Afghan imports from India, his country could take counter measures. “We will not provide equal transit access to Central Asia [for Pakistani trucks],” he said. Ghani said it was a question of “sovereign equality”, and Pakistan...

The Al-Qaeda core  operating from tribal areas of Pakistan is keen to compete with its splinter, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS/ISIL) at all levels. To match the magnitude and ferocity of ISIS terrorist attacks, Al-Qaeda operatives in Pakistan even attempted to hijack a Pakistan Navy frigate PNS Zulfiqar in September 2014[1]. Just one week before that failed incident the then Al-Qaeda Emir Ayman al-Zawahiri announced the establishment of Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, led by Asim Umar a veteran jihadi on September 4, 2014 in a 55-minute video[2]. Since Al-Qaeda wants to spread the tentacles of its Pakistani franchise in the Indian Subcontinent, the most recent Al-Qaeda endeavour in this regard is the launching of its women wing: Al-Qaeda Shaheen (falcon) Force. According to the statement this force would be led by Afinda Bint-e-Ayesha under the tutelage of Umaima Hassan Ahmed Muhammad Hassan[3], wife of Ayman al-Zawahiri[4]. Mrs Zawahiri has remained instrumental alongside her husband, the chief of Al-Qaeda, in mobilizing jihadi women. Time and again she has urged Muslim women to raise children for jihad. While addressing jihadi women inspiring them to participate in active jihad at a web-based jihadi forum, she said: “I advise you to raise your children in the cult of jihad and martyrdom and to instil in them a love for religion and death. Each woman would raise her child to be a new Saladin by telling him that it is you who will restore the grandeur of the Islamic nation and you will liberate Jerusalem.”[5] The newly created Shaheen Force appears to work under Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) and has plans to train 500 female suicide bombers for striking civil and military installations in Pakistan[6]. The Shaheen Force seems to be just another Al-Qaeda effort to compete with the growing influence of ISIS in Pakistan’s jihadi circles. Scores of jihadi leaders from Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) have defected to ISIS. The ISIS has...

Ayaan’s case is a classic example of how collusion of legal experts on both sides of the fence can blatantly obfuscate crime and delay trials. Taking advantage of the dated criminal procedure code (CrPC), lawyers camouflage their delaying tactics with walls of objections, reservations and at times frivolous arguments. It took the Customs Intelligence and Investigation several weeks to prepare a charge sheet, despite the fact that she was caught with $500,000 in her possession while she was on her way out of the country. The charge sheet is based on her statement which states that she “had purchased files of plots worth Rs5 million from a housing society and sold it for Rs50 million and that the housing society had paid her Rs50 million in the shape of over $0.5 million”. The figures mentioned are the same, i.e., Rs50 million, and the dollar-rupee parity, or the difference of sale-purchase value didn’t affect it at all. The charge-sheet doesn’t mention whether people named by Ayaan, i.e., the housing society manager and the currency dealer, were interrogated. The State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) regulations allow a passenger to carry not more than $10,000, or the equivalent of notes of another currency, out of the country. The same regulations are noted in most other countries, which make the possession of over $10,000 an offence. That is why people are asking whether Pakistan’s Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance 2007 and Anti-Money Laundering Regulations 2008 cover the undeclared money that Ayaan was carrying? Strangely, this case most probably represents only the tip of the iceberg; a former SBP governor, Anwar Yasin, had, for instance, told a parliamentary committee in 2013 that some $25 million were being siphoned out of the country every day in “briefcases through airports”. One of my acquaintances had an encounter with a nephew of a sitting prime minister on board a London-bound PIA flight in 2011. Protocol officers escorted the young man carrying a large briefcase...

Ayaan’s case is a classic example of how collusion of legal experts on both sides of the fence can blatantly obfuscate crime and delay trials. Taking advantage of the dated criminal procedure code (CrPC), lawyers camouflage their delaying tactics with walls of objections, reservations and at times frivolous arguments. It took the Customs Intelligence and Investigation several weeks to prepare a charge sheet, despite the fact that she was caught with $500,000 in her possession while she was on her way out of the country. The charge sheet is based on her statement which states that she “had purchased files of plots worth Rs5 million from a housing society and sold it for Rs50 million and that the housing society had paid her Rs50 million in the shape of over $0.5 million”. The figures mentioned are the same, i.e., Rs50 million, and the dollar-rupee parity, or the difference of sale-purchase value didn’t affect it at all. The charge-sheet doesn’t mention whether people named by Ayaan, i.e., the housing society manager and the currency dealer, were interrogated. The State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) regulations allow a passenger to carry not more than $10,000, or the equivalent of notes of another currency, out of the country. The same regulations are noted in most other countries, which make the possession of over $10,000 an offence. That is why people are asking whether Pakistan’s Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance 2007 and Anti-Money Laundering Regulations 2008 cover the undeclared money that Ayaan was carrying? Strangely, this case most probably represents only the tip of the iceberg; a former SBP governor, Anwar Yasin, had, for instance, told a parliamentary committee in 2013 that some $25 million were being siphoned out of the country every day in “briefcases through airports”. One of my acquaintances had an encounter with a nephew of a sitting prime minister on board a London-bound PIA flight in 2011. Protocol officers escorted the young man carrying a large briefcase...

Ayaan’s case is a classic example of how collusion of legal experts on both sides of the fence can blatantly obfuscate crime and delay trials. Taking advantage of the dated criminal procedure code (CrPC), lawyers camouflage their delaying tactics with walls of objections, reservations and at times frivolous arguments. It took the Customs Intelligence and Investigation several weeks to prepare a charge sheet, despite the fact that she was caught with $500,000 in her possession while she was on her way out of the country. The charge sheet is based on her statement which states that she “had purchased files of plots worth Rs5 million from a housing society and sold it for Rs50 million and that the housing society had paid her Rs50 million in the shape of over $0.5 million”. The figures mentioned are the same, i.e., Rs50 million, and the dollar-rupee parity, or the difference of sale-purchase value didn’t affect it at all. The charge-sheet doesn’t mention whether people named by Ayaan, i.e., the housing society manager and the currency dealer, were interrogated. The State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) regulations allow a passenger to carry not more than $10,000, or the equivalent of notes of another currency, out of the country. The same regulations are noted in most other countries, which make the possession of over $10,000 an offence. That is why people are asking whether Pakistan’s Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance 2007 and Anti-Money Laundering Regulations 2008 cover the undeclared money that Ayaan was carrying? Strangely, this case most probably represents only the tip of the iceberg; a former SBP governor, Anwar Yasin, had, for instance, told a parliamentary committee in 2013 that some $25 million were being siphoned out of the country every day in “briefcases through airports”. One of my acquaintances had an encounter with a nephew of a sitting prime minister on board a London-bound PIA flight in 2011. Protocol officers escorted the young man carrying a large briefcase...