Amidst conflicting global interests in the region, economy and security are Pakistan key challenges this year The two most pressing challenges that Pakistan faces in 2014 relate to worsening security and an unstable economy, reeling from more than a decade of insecurity. The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) recently forecast Pakistan economy to grow by 4.1 percent in 2014. It also warned about a double-digit consumer price inflation (circa 11 percent in 2014), likely to be the highest inflation rate among the 17 developing Asia-Pacific economies selected for the survey. Consequently, poor and vulnerable households will be disproportionately affected as they spend a larger part of their income on food purchases, the ESCAP warned. That is bad news for millions of poor Pakistanis, and would look even worse if the survey were grounded in the reality of suburban and rural life in Pakistan, continuously conflated by rising energy prices, and a relentless manipulation of food prices by powerful cartels. While millions suffer from the crippling effects of indirect taxation and the arbitrariness of the food and fuel cartels in determining prices, economists also wonder as to whether and how the government ´ which represents powerful businessmen, industrialists and agriculturalists ´ will be able to turn around the situation for the common man as far as inflation and employment generation are concerned. The Sharifs may succeed in roping in foreign investments in Punjab, but will they adopt a whole-of-Pakistan approach and address these issues in a national framework? That is where their test lies. Will they, as national leaders, let the PPP in Sindh, the National Party and the PKMAP in Balochistan, and the PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa benefit from a holistic approach, or focus on turning Punjab into a thriving commercial hub in 2014 and beyond? Well, they can–t expect Punjab to permanently prosper while its vicinity sulks in...

Mutual suspicions, acrimony, allegations, and brinkmanship marked the Pakistan-Afghan relations during 2013. Pakistan 'released' Mulla Baradar and some three dozen Taliban prisoners. This year, bilateral trade hovered around two billion as compared to $ 2.5B in 2012. Pakistan not only extended the deadline for Afghan refugees living in Pakistan but also facilitated Taliban leaders– travel to the meanwhile dead and dysfunctional Qatar office. A seemingly erratic President Hamid Karzai, despite blowing hot and cold on Pakistan, visited Islamabad in August, demanded more cooperation and promised reciprocity. Eventually, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif traveled to Kabul in November, while members of Afghanistan High Peace Council were given access to Mulla Baradar secretly (the Taliban claim that Baradar is still under detention and is, therefore, irrelevant to peace negotiations). In early 2013, Pakistan, like many other countries including India, the US and Germany, also offered a strategic partnership agreement to Kabul. However, the Afghans dithered and never responded to the offer. Later on, on the 20th of December, 2013, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said that Pakistan, Afghanistan and India had no option other than becoming good friends. He also added that the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, had agreed not to let his country to be used against Pakistan. Such pleasantries, however, hardly change realities of an acrimonious relationship that is clouded by several geo-political factors. Pakistan links to, and alleged support for, Mulla Omar and Haqqani Taliban remain at the heart of this vacillating and rancorous relationship that keeps resonating in Kabul, with Afghan leaders putting the blame of all of their problems on Pakistan. Let us look up a few of such statements which illustrate the deep-rooted mistrust and the propensity among most Afghans to hold Pakistan responsible for all that plays out in their country. Dr Rangin Dadfar Spanta, National Security Advisor...

The Generalised System of Preferences Plus (GSP Plus) that the European Parliament recently granted to Pakistan for three years underscores an unusual level of goodwill for the conflict-hit country. The status has evoked considerable optimism, embedded in the potential of increased partially zero tariff exports to Europe. It also prompted Minister for Finance Ishaq Dar to speculate that theoretically the GSP Plus could add up to $2 billion to Pakistan exports to the EU, which are currently valued at about $5.6 billion a year, with textiles accounting for the majority of it. The duty on textile exports will be reduced to zero from the existing level of 9.6 percent. Realistically, most economists argue, even if the GSP allowed up to 20 percent additional exports, it would amount to about $1 billion of additional revenue. Some of them reckon that the country exports will go up to $400 million to $500 million per annum while others speak of the potential of up to $1.6 billion, depending upon Islamabad ability to gain maximum benefits, and whether the supply-side bottlenecks such as electricity shortage can be removed. Another equally important prerequisite is the readiness of the textile industry for encashing this opportunity without looking up to the government for concessions. For securing the GSP Plus, Pakistan had to continue with the moratorium on death penalty. It has meanwhile alsosigned or ratified 27 conventions on human rights including those that relate to torture, illegal confinement and protecting human rights. Let us look at the issue a little closely and dispassionately, in both the political and economic context, particularly keeping in view how Pakistan practically squandered the goodwill that had accompanied the creation of the Friends of Pakistan (FoP) club in Tokyo in April 2010. Members of the FoP had then committed a whopping $5.5 billion in project assistance in recognition of the sacrifices Pakistan had rendered in the war on terror. The GSP...

CRSS Role in Anti-Drone Campaign December 18, 2013 marked an important day in the life of the 193-member strong United Nations General Assembly. On this day, the world body unanimously spoke out against the controversial US drone campaign in foreign territories. The resolution to this effect underlines the culmination of an enquiry that Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson had launched in Pakistan and Africa a year ago. Mr. Emmerson submitted his report on drones in October 2013. The comprehensive 28-paragraph resolution, entitled 'Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism' calls on the United States to comply with international law, and underscores the 'urgent and imperative' need for an agreement among member states on legal questions about drone operations. The unanimous call for regulating the use of remotely piloted aircraft against suspected terrorists was also accompanied by the demand that the US ensure that any measures taken or means employed to counter-terrorism, including the use of remotely piloted aircraft, complied with international law. This includes Charter of the United Nations, human rights law and international humanitarian law. The text also calls for taking into account relevant UN resolutions and decisions on human rights and giving due consideration to recommendations of special procedures and mechanisms of the Human Rights Council, and relevant comments and views of UN human rights treaty bodies. The US administration had always made the point that its combat drone campaign inside Pakistan is in line with the rules and regulations of warfare, and that it fully abides by the international treaties governing the use of force. It had based its arguments on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution 1373, adopted in the immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001. The resolution called upon all states to cooperate in bringing to justice those responsible for these acts of terrorism. However, a...

(The new army chief will have to deal with five major problems) The new army chief Gen Raheel Sharif has been called ¿professional–, ¿laid back–, ¿quiet–, ¿politically safe– and ¿low profile–. Most observers, politicians and ex-servicemen tend to believe, or argue that his professional credentials discount any military adventurism. In the first place, it is a combination of professional and political considerations that elevates a soldier to the three-star status. Secondly, most of generals hardly open their mouth in public ´ unless their position so demands. The first challenge staring Gen Sharif in the face is whether and how to divorce the so-called Kayani doctrine. Former army chief Gen (r) Ashfaq Kayani personified experience in various key capacities, the last three being director general of military operations, director general of ISI, chief of army staff. Nobody can lecture me on the pitfalls of the army involvement in political governance and that is why I had explained to President Asif Ali Zardari and his coalition partners immediately after the February 2008 elections that for any anti-terror war and improvement in the security situation, the civilians will have to take the ownership of the process and the army will follow. 'Let us not involve the army in the political governance again because once it moves in it has its own SOPs (standard operation procedures),' he had said in January 2009. And he stuck to it until his departure ´ including the tantrums that Premier Gilani had thrown at him at the height of the infamous Memogate (¿We cannot allow a state within a state,– Gilani had said). One would hope that Gen Sharif keeps the army as far away from politics as possible. Kayani also instituted new compensation and incentives schemes for soldiers who died or were hurt in the line of the duty. On several occasions, Kayani defended these measures (including the yearly Martyrs Day at the GHQ) as essential to lift the sagging morale of his troops in the...

(The new army chief will have to deal with five major problems) The new army chief Gen Raheel Sharif has been called ¿professional–, ¿laid back–, ¿quiet–, ¿politically safe– and ¿low profile–. Most observers, politicians and ex-servicemen tend to believe, or argue that his professional credentials discount any military adventurism. In the first place, it is a combination of professional and political considerations that elevates a soldier to the three-star status. Secondly, most of generals hardly open their mouth in public ´ unless their position so demands. The first challenge staring Gen Sharif in the face is whether and how to divorce the so-called Kayani doctrine. Former army chief Gen (r) Ashfaq Kayani personified experience in various key capacities, the last three being director general of military operations, director general of ISI, chief of army staff. Nobody can lecture me on the pitfalls of the army involvement in political governance and that is why I had explained to President Asif Ali Zardari and his coalition partners immediately after the February 2008 elections that for any anti-terror war and improvement in the security situation, the civilians will have to take the ownership of the process and the army will follow. 'Let us not involve the army in the political governance again because once it moves in it has its own SOPs (standard operation procedures),' he had said in January 2009. And he stuck to it until his departure ´ including the tantrums that Premier Gilani had thrown at him at the height of the infamous Memogate (¿We cannot allow a state within a state,– Gilani had said). One would hope that Gen Sharif keeps the army as far away from politics as possible. Kayani also instituted new compensation and incentives schemes for soldiers who died or were hurt in the line of the duty. On several occasions, Kayani defended these measures (including the yearly Martyrs Day at the GHQ) as essential to lift the sagging morale of his troops in the...