9/11 and its aftermath

THE tragedy of 9/11 would have been unpardonable and lamented for long had not US president George W. Bush, with his conduct and utterances, given rise to complaints of foul against the Americans. By causing rivers of innocent blood to flow in Afghanistan and Iraq, entirely without cause or justification, he has seriously mitigated the disaster of 9/11.

He told the world that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attack, he could run but not hide, although even after the passage of two years Osama is certainly not running but hiding. However, in retaliation for the claimed three thousand deaths on 9/11 the unsuspecting and innocent people of Afghanistan have been made targets of merciless bombardment, against which they were known to have no defence whatsoever. While we are repeatedly reminded of the three thousand casualties, there is no mention of the number that have been slaughtered in Afghanistan. The country has been reduced to rubble and it is safe to estimate that many hundreds of thousands have perished and their homeland colonized.

Similarly, Bush breathed fire against President Saddam Hussein, saying that he and his weapons of mass destruction were dangerous for the world and must be eliminated. And who was to save the world? None other than George W. Bush himself. But again he has failed: Saddam is alive and there is no discovery of the weapons of mass destruction. Nevertheless, like Afghanistan Iraq has been decimated with uncountable dead and the country colonized.

While Bush has had to swallow his pride about not being able to kill Osama and Saddam, he bulldozes on in violation of international law, UN decisions and opposition of the citizens of the world, expressed in no uncertain terms by mass protests, in what he calls war against terrorism. What is terrorism and who is a terrorist is a matter in which Bush has usurped the sole authority to be the judge, jury and executioner, who is not hampered by mundane requirements such as proof.

Nor does he comprehend that when a mighty force uses its push-button technological power to launch wars against small, poor and defenceless states and demolishes them with bombs and rockets rained from the skies, the victims of such attacks have no choice but to devise ways and means to survive to fight another day. Thus guerilla warfare, or what those who provoke it call terrorism, becomes the only answer.

Freedom fighters all over the world have inherited this method of combat from the American Red Indians and such great warriors as Jeranimo and Chiefs sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, Cochiese and others who fought to the end against the colonization of their land by the Americans. Of course in Bush’s reckoning they were terrorists and by the same token all those who fight for their homeland, freedom and justice are terrorists unless they act under American patronage.

Then even brutal military dictators, of the calibre of Ziaul Haq became acceptable. Even Saddam was an angel as long as he fought against Iran at America’s instance. Such volte face by American governments has earlier been witnessed in Nicaragua, and even more glaringly in the case of the Taliban, who were nurtured, trained and armed by the Americans but massacred after they had served their purpose.

Of course, the current practice of so-called terrorism is the consequence of settling Jews of the world on the land of the Palestinians by the Americans and British after the Second World War. While the Palestinians were made homeless and denied justice and fair play, the Israelis were not only financed and armed but also protected by the West. The Palestinians were thus forced to strike as and when and where they could with their activities extending to suicide bombing by brave men and women who gave up their lives for their cause.

This has now become the modus operandi in conflicts against superior forces. George Bush continues to harangue the American people about his great conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq, conveniently concealing the fact that war on both fronts are being waged at the cost of over six billion dollars a month to the American people and his declarations of victory are hollow.

The aggressors/occupiers are now the targets and the situation on the ground is a testimony to the fact that Osama, Saddam and the Taliban have indeed lived to fight another day. These are not just fanatical groups striking in frustration but it seems that they are trained and equipped and have been saved from futile confrontation against bombs, rockets and tanks and are now fighting back on their own terms at places of their choice with crippling effect.

The hawks in the American government are rattled to their roots and while Bush continues to rave and rant, obviously in an attempt to conceal the consequences of his folly, the effort goes on to drag other countries of the world into the quagmire of Afghanistan and Iraq. With what face the American government is appealing to the world for help, when not long ago it ignored worldwide protest, against war only George W. Bush can tell.

Even more brazen is the resort to the UN for cover when the memory is yet fresh as to how the American government rejected its entity as a peace-keeping authority and reduced it to being another League of Nations. Why anyone should now come forth to rescue Bush from stewing in his own juice is a question which has no answers. The situation in Afghanistan and Iraq has become that Afghanistan would be the graveyard of conquerors, that its people are relentless fighters who, helped by the terrain, have shattered the dreams of many adventurers, lately of the Russians and before them of the British in the 18th century.

As for Iraq, Saddam has not been playing marbles while the Americans were trumpeting their war achievements. He was, we now see, preparing to fight the war on his own terms. On both fronts the Americans are trapped very badly and surely the echoes of their hasty retreat from Somalia and the defeat in Vietnam are resounding in their ears. Power drunk and goaded on by wrong assumptions and bad intelligence, he have landed himself in a heap of mess. While Blair of Britain, Bush’s wagging tail, has already met his Waterloo and it is only his thick skin that keeps him going, Bush is also visibly destined to have no better fate.

The lesson learnt is simply this: that even the mightiest power on earth cannot label other leaders as murderers and despots, and then go into their countries to murder indiscriminately and occupy, and that with name of bringing freedom and justice they cannot bring the peace and desolation of the graveyard wherever they like.

Here mention must be made of the American pressure on North Korea and Iran on the matter of the nuclear arms. Bush has assumed the authority to tell the world who can do or not do what is incomprehensible. But the truth is that American has the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and, what is more, it is the only power on earth that has ever used them. Thus it is hardly in a position to pontificate on this issue.

The people of the world are angry at the Americans for using brute force against states that are relatively poor and powerless. Such adventure stems from ambitious that cannot be achieved in this day and age. The times of the mighty conquerors and empires are over. The carnage in a prison near Mazar-i-Sharif, together with the inhumanity against prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, who have not yet been found guilty of any crime, the butchery of the two sons of Saddam Hussein by a huge contingent of American soldiers, are constant reminders of a kind of savagery not known since the much condemned Nazi genocide. The fall-out of all this is having detrimental consequences not only for America but also for the world at large. The arena of terrorism has widened. No one is safe anywhere.

The injustice against Iraq and Afghanistan has created sympathy for them which seems to be taking the shape of retaliation. Volunteers, including suicide bombers, are pouring in to take on the Americans. The very people that Bush claims to have liberated are on the warpath against him. Both the occupied countries are in a state of total anarchy which the harassed Americans cannot control. World economies have been damaged and the mighty dollar is at its lowest ebb even against the rupee. But the worst result of all is that there is panic in America itself. The American does not feel safe in his home, which he is too scared to leave. His days as the affluent tourist of the world are over.

Osama, Saddam and Omer have become heroes and their feats of taking on the American might from some caves in the deserts or the mountains are considered formidable for which they are admired, while George Bush is being laughed at. At the beginning of his wars against two Muslim countries he said this was not a crusade. Now he is calling the conflict a war against Christians. This is a very desperate and dangerous approach to adopt. After the collapse of Communism the American government seems to have targeted the Muslim world for destruction. Not in the least because Islam is rapidly taking a hold in America and that too among the African-Americans.

Supporting the Jews against the Palestinians, bombing and blockading Libya, bombing Sudan and hostility towards Iran are all manifestations of extreme prejudice against Muslims. Bush must see that his plans are becoming counter-productive for him. The state of disunity among the Muslim nations is disappearing under American pressure, and religious extremism is finding a good argument in support. The call for jihad against the infidel and laying down of life for one’s faith have become attractive slogan for the youth and if the over one billion Muslims of the world unite face the US, the blame for the consequences will have to be faced entirely by George W. Bush.

The writer is chairman Sindh national Front.

The culture of incompetence

THE quixotic handling of the Tasman Spirit saga is perhaps amply illustrated by Lewis Carol’s charming characters, the Walrus and the Carpenter discussing sand in the fairytale “Alice in Wonderland”.

“If seven maids and seven mops swept it for a year, do you suppose” the Walrus said, “that they could get it clear?” “I doubt it” said the Carpenter and shed a bitter tear.

Many a bitter tear have already been shed and more will undoubtedly be shed in the future as the grave realization sinks in of the magnitude of the disaster off Karachi which cannot be ‘mopped’ away.

Never in history have 15 million people been so seriously exposed as have been the citizens of Karachi to the health hazards of 28,000 tons of oil at their doorstep. Other oil spills were invariably further away from dense population areas, where risk to health was far less serious. As for ecological damage, even on deserted coasts in countries where excellent management and technical support were available, it has often taken more than 10 years to clear the coast from harmful chemicals completely. Karachi’s tragedy is one of a totally lackadaisical approach to the biggest man-made disaster confronting the nation today.

The sorry saga of Tasman Spirit started even before the ill-fated voyage began. The vessel is registered in Malta, de facto owned by the Greeks, operated from Piraeus, insured in London, with its P and I cover in the US. A typical decrepit flag of convenience vessel, it is an old, single hulled tanker, a category of ship effectively banned by the world’s maritime community, as by law they have to be removed from the world’s oceans in just over a year’s time.

Such ships currently trade solely in Third World countries which specialize in circumventing international law to save a few dollars, irrespective of the consequences of their acts. A substandard ship should never have been chartered by the government and the PNSC in the first place.

Seven weeks into its grounding two things are now beginning to be generally understood. The owner and his team are responsible solely for the safety of their vessel and not for our coast. The Pakistan government — federal and provincial — and various coastal authorities are responsible for the protection of our shores. One ship, the Endeavour II, was chartered by the owners to lighten the grounded Tasman Spirit so that it could be refloated. When it arrived after many days unbelievably it was found unsuitable for lighterage, the job for which it was hired! It was then designated for storage. A new search began for another ship while the Tasman Spirit continued to be pounded constantly by the ferocious and unrelenting monsoon waves. After several more days the Fair Jolley arrived, which took off some oil before it itself collided with the Tasman Spirit and damaged its own hull. It will now remain on hire and its repairs will be carried out, all of which will end up earning its owners well over half a million dollars.

To replace the damaged Fair Jolley, the owners of Tasman Spirit found a third ship, the Sea Angel, which has finally removed the last few thousand tons of oil which remained on board after 28,000 tons had escaped into the sea. Alas, by then two weeks having been totally wasted, the pounding monsoon waves took their toll and the Tasman Sea began to break up, never to float or sail again. The owners had also brought in two powerful tugs to pull the Tasman Spirit free after it was lightened. They have already been paid over a million dollars, though they never got to even starting to tow the ship. And an aircraft came all the way from Singapore to spray some chemicals, something several aircraft in Pakistan could easily have done.

Between the two tugs, three ships and one aircraft brought in by the Greek owners several million dollars have been distributed already, much of it going into the pockets of the team in Piraeus and their associates. In such calamities they are experts at making money. Pakistani authorities, through ignorance, naivete or incompetence lent them their full support. And permitted the ship to slowly die away.

The Tasman Spirit could easily have been lightered and saved within a couple of days of grounding. Why the Greeks failed to use the scores of craft available in Karachi for lighterage and immediate re-floating of the vessel, instead of waiting for two weeks to start the work with ships from distant ports, remains a mystery.

The loss of the ship could have been avoided had the Greeks so desired and taken the correct action. In that the Pakistani side cannot be totally faulted. But they are at fault for having done nothing to avert the inevitable oil spill from a grounded tanker. Seven weeks earlier, alarm bells should have rung.

In the prevailing culture of incompetence, everyone shirked responsibility. A spirit of deja vu abounded. Complacency set in, compounded by the usual bravado, shouted hurrahs and breast thumping —- never mind if it is as simple as losing a cricket match, as complex as losing East Pakistan or as unfortunate as losing a ship. Outrageous and irresponsible statements came from several government quarters downplaying the risk to millions of citizens exposed to toxic fumes, while distancing themselves from responsibility and passing the buck.

Even after the ship broke up and toxic fumes from thousands of tons of oil enveloped Karachi there was little effective action. Dead fish, turtles and birds by the hundreds littered the beaches while thousands of Karachi’s citizens suffered respiratory problems. Whereas the media constantly highlighted the inept response of government agencies, cleaning work continued to be totally unsatisfactory.

Ten miles of beach were closed off and a rather dismal clean-up operation begun. The sight of workers on the beach is pathetic. They wear totally inadequate cotton overalls and use shovels to put contaminated sand into plastic buckets, for burying it in other parts of Karachi where the ground water will get contaminated as well, causing even more damage. This is the 21st century. Ample equipment is available, within Pakistan and elsewhere, to separate oil from water in the ocean, as well as to remove oil from sand and restore the beaches to their earlier condition. Sadly, it is not being used even today.

Where do we go from here? As far as the ship is concerned that is already history. Over the months and years ahead its skeleton will be removed from the harbour entrance, perhaps after much wrangling and disputes. The Greeks and their group will leave with several million dollars.

Clean-up work is essentially covered by three organizations. The KPT, under the federal communications ministry, will clean the port and KPT’s coastland. The Defence Housing Authority is looking after its own sea-front. Here residents of Sea-view Apartments are amongst the worst hit and the highly ambitious Creek City Project is in the doldrums.

All these three organizations meet collectively with other bureaucrats as part of the inevitable “coordination committee” where there is a great deal of talk and very little action. Its proceedings are not recorded. No meaningful decisions are taken. There is a slight glimmer of hope, as KPT and DHA have initiated their own action in a more responsible manner than has the Sindh government so far.

Such clean-ups always cost a fortune, which could run into billion of dollars. Based on experience of past accidents, the international community created the Civil Liability Convention and the International Pollution Compensation Fund in 1992 as a safety net. Hundreds of millions are immediately and easily available but only to participating states. Membership does not cost the states any money, because of which most countries of the world are members. Pakistan is not a member, solely because of the prevailing culture of incompetence and complacency, and therefore cannot benefit from this safety net.

There are other means of accessing hundreds of millions, both under Pakistani law and under international maritime law, but only if the claims are taken up forcefully, professionally and expeditiously. It will cost money to pursue the cases, but that is a pittance in comparison to what can be collected.

The culture of incompetence has already reduced our proud fleet of a hundred ships to a dozen decrepit old vessels and our main port from the best in the region to the one now most avoided. Will that same culture cause our coastline to be destroyed as well?

The writer is a former naval officer, a Master Mariner and an international shipowner.

Poverty reduction: two views

FOR the last few years, as poverty has continued to persist with about a third of the population living below the poverty line, the government of Pakistan has become an active proponent of finding ways of alleviating or reducing poverty in the country.

In this regard, two official documents — one by the ministry of finance, and the other by the planning commission — have been made public which reveal two very contrasting and indeed, conflicting analyses, opinions and strategies, for poverty reduction in Pakistan.

The ministry of finance document is, of course, the poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP) still in its draft form, which should be finalized before the end of this year. The PRSP document lays out the poverty alleviation strategy of the government which has been followed since October 1999 and formalizes key elements of that strategy.

The key elements of the PRSP focus on accelerating growth with macro-economic stability, investing in human capital, expanding social safety nets and emphasize better governance. Private sector growth is seen as one of the most critical elements of Pakistan’s poverty reduction strategy, as is the generation of productive employment at a time when the PRSP document acknowledges that the rate of unemployment exceeds 10 per cent in the country. Since the rise in unemployment has been seen largely as a consequence of lower growth, an increase in growth is said to have an employment enhancing effect.

The PRSP document acknowledges that nearly two-thirds of Pakistan’s poor live in rural areas and that more than fifty per cent of the rural population is landless. Since poverty in Pakistan has a largely rural dimension, rural development will be needed to help reduce poverty, for which agricultural infrastructure and programmes will be required. There is also a passing reference to the distribution of state-owned land to small farmers, though oddly, not to the fifty per cent landless rural population.

While the PRSP claims that it is ‘home grown’, as do all government policies no matter where they originate from, the other document, the Pakistan participatory poverty assessment (PPA), is in many ways just that, and is a rather different document compared to most other official publications. The PPA is based on in-depth surveys in 51 sites in very poor areas across the country and has had the active involvement and support from the planning and development division of the federal government, as well as in each of the provinces and in the Northern Areas and FATA.

Unlike the PRSP, the participatory poverty assessment is based on interviews and opinions of the poor as to why they are poor and how they see their way out of poverty. Hence, unlike the findings of the PRSP, those of the PPA differ markedly.

For a start, one of the main findings of the PPA was regarding the lack of access to land by the poor. The poor want far greater access to land and water and protection of the natural resource base. The concentration of land holdings is found to be impoverishing not just because it means that the poor have few assets on which to depend on, but ultra-exploitation and abuse, a familiar feature of inequitable land distribution in rural Pakistan, is also rampant. Land was seen by the poor as an important source of power, much of it being misused.

The poor, as a consequence, demand access to land as an income earning asset, and access to justice and protection and security so that they can live relatively free lives. Clearly, only with active and extensive land reforms, where land is distributed not just to small farmers but to the landless, and where the power of landlords is broken down, can one hope to see poverty reduced amongst the two-thirds of the poor.

Other findings which show government failure relate to the demand for basic services, especially health care. The poor identified health care related institutions as the most important to them. The poor are far more vulnerable to disease, yet do not have access to government facilities. Moreover, there is a wide gap between what the government is supposed to provide and what poor communities actually receive. The highly inadequate level in investment in basic services was cited as a key reason for the failure of health and education facilities. A crucial requirement to get people out of poverty is to substantially raise public expenditure on services and infrastructure. However, with public expenditure on development falling or not rising in line with need, the condition of the poor regarding access to health, education, water and infrastructure, will probably deteriorate.

The need for jobs was another key need identified by the poor as unemployment is a major cause of poverty. Unfortunately, with lower growth, increased privatization, and an inhospitable economic environment, opportunities for employment continue to stagnate while the number of people looking for jobs grows each year.

The documents reveal very contrasting approaches to the poverty issue in Pakistan. The PRSP strategy of the ministry of finance, which is the actual current economic policy of the government, is based primarily on macro-economic stabilization which does not directly help reduce poverty. Moreover, stabilization has occurred without sufficient growth, a key requirement for poverty reduction. Clearly, the government’s current strategy, reflected in the PRSP, is highly insufficient to make a significant dent in the level of poverty in Pakistan.

The PPA document, on the other hand, focuses very sharply on the issue of the access and ownership of land in rural areas where poverty is particularly acute. With the prime minister having declared that there will be no more land reforms, poverty in Pakistan is here to stay, and all other attempts at poverty reduction or alleviation, are likely to remain far from adequate. If there is any sincerity in the government’s desire to reduce poverty, it will have to push land reforms to the top of its poverty reduction strategy. There is no other alternative.

Living longer

HAVE you missed seeing Mars last month when it was closer to Earth than it had been in recorded history? Don’t worry. It’ll be back in 284 years, and, if a new article in the respected journal Nature is anything to go by, medical researchers are getting closer to discovering the fountain of youth.

Modest red wine consumption already was linked to lower cholesterol and healthier hearts. Now, researchers at Harvard Medical School and a Pennsylvania laboratory have identified a chemical called resveratrol in red wines, particularly those grown in colder, wetter climates. It has the effect of pushing into overdrive the enzymes that slow aging. New York, Oregon and Washington state vintners are of course ecstatic. The long-term result, however, could be more boring: medications that let humans live longer.

Multiplying the sin-and-be-healthy effect, a German study in this week’s Journal of the American Medical Association suggests that dark chocolate contains plant substances called polyphenols that can lower blood pressure. —Los Angeles Times

Where is the Muslim world heading for?: Pakistan and global terrorism-II

Said General Anthony Zinni, a former Chief of the US Central Command: “I’m extremely concerned, Al Qaeda’s desperate, and it will create havoc wherever it can in order to portray any crisis — whether it be Kashmir or the Middle East — an issue of Islam versus the West. And this is one of the reasons why it’s so important that we work with Musharraf not so much because of what Musharraf is or is not, but because what would come after him would be a disaster ... He’s trying to clean up the government, he’s trying not to antagonize the extremists, and the economic problems he faces continue to be huge. He really wants to cooperate with the United States in the war against terror, but he’s worried about his western front with Afghanistan: he’s worried about India; he’s worried about Central Asia.”

—Pakistan in The Shadow of Jihad and Afghanistan by Mary Anne Weaver

TWO factors stood out in Pakistan’s progressive entrapment in global terrorism. These were: the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan (1995-2002) and the Kargil episode (February-July 1999). The Taliban, as the legacy of the US-sponsored, Pakistan-aided Afghan jihad; and Kargil for the deployment of para-militaries and regulars by Pakistan in a planned military operation beyond sporadic and largely haphazard clashes along the LoC.

The emotionally-driven idiom and tactics coming into use through the Kargil conflict denoted a paradigm shift from the predominantly military professionalism of the 1965 and 1971 wars to a guerilla type ‘jihad’. Non-state actors under a sort of international brigade assumed operational command and control of the Kashmir jihad. Kargil stood as the high point both of their triumph and failure.

In a statement to New Delhi Television (NDTV) in June, General Pervez Musharraf admitted that the Kargil operation was ‘a decision’ taken by the mujahideen. (And that) we got involved because of the (retaliatory) action taken by the Indian troops. In the post-Kargil stages of the Kashmir war, the mujahideen came into prominence as front-rank fighters in Kashmir.

Some of the most noted mujahideen ‘tanzimat’ are as follows: Hizbul Mujahideen led by Muhammad Yusuf Shah of Srinagar, popularly known as Syed Salahuddin; (ii) Lashkar-i-Taiba, the armed wing of the Muridke-based Markaz-i-Dawa’ wal Irshad led by Hafiz Muhammad Saeed; (iii) Al-Badar — a remnant of the Afghan jihad under the dual command of Naseer Ahmad as the leader and Bakht Zaman as the supreme commander; (iv) Jamiatul Mujahideen, a breakaway faction of the Hizbul Mujahideen split between one Ahsan Dar and Hilal Ahmad Mir (dead in an armed encounter); (v) Jaish-i-Muhammad led by Maulana Azhar Masood; (vi) Sipah-i-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) led by Maulana Azam Tariq and (vii) the best known group variously known as Harkatul Jihad Islami, Harkatul Ansar and Harkatul Mujahideen under Maulana Fazalur Rahman Khalil.

The last named came into prominence for its role in the hijacking of Indian airlines Flight IC 814 from Kathmandu to New Delhi in December 1999. The hijack was one of the longest lasting of its type in airline history. It involved a good fortnight of intense talks between Indian negotiators and the hijackers. The hijackers had demanded the release of their leaders, including Maulana Azhar Masood and Omar Sheikh, in Indian captivity.

Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh himself flew into Kandahar where the aircraft was parked to hand over Maulana Azhar Masood, Omar Sheikh and others. The role of the Taliban authority throughout the episode was most commendable. However, no sooner would Mr Jaswant Singh fly out of Kabul then the Indian government and media launch a two-pronged diplomatic and propaganda offensive both against the Taliban and Pakistan as their main supporter and source of terrorism.

Indian intelligence agencies named Azhar Masood, the Harkatul Ansar (later Jaish-i-Muhammad) commander and Maulana Fazalur Rahman Khalil as the two top leaders of al Qaeda. From Afghanistan they were said to have moved on to Sudan and Somalia before making Pakistan the hub of their ‘global terrorism’ focussing on Kashmir. Of some two dozen Kashmiri mujahideen groups ‘active’ in Kashmir through the 1990’s Al Qaeda is said to have ‘penetrated several’, in particular Harkatul Mujahideen, Jaish-i-Muhammad, Hizbul Mujahideen and the Lashkar-i-Taiba.

“... Al Qaeda influenced their strategy by encouraging and assisting them to strike at the heart of India — New Delhi — and the major cities rather than in the periphery, Jammu and Kashmir. Intelligence agencies also reveal that Al Qaeda is working with organized crime groups including that led by Dawood Ibrahim suspected of involvement in a series of simultaneous bomb blasts in Mumbai on March 12, 1993...” (Inside Al Qaeda — global network of terror by Rohan Gunaratna — pp-206-7).

Al Qaeda and its supremo Osama bin Laden were also accused of the attack on the US embassies in Kenya and Darus Salam in August 1998; the kidnapping of six western tourists in Kashmir on July 4, 1995; the daring raid of India’s 15 Corps area on April 19, 2000; the attack on USS Cole; murder of the American journalist Daniel Pearl by Omar Sheikh in Karachi soon after 9/11, the grisly bombing of the Bali tourist resort in October 2002; and a whole lot of such other episodes worldwide.

It could be hardly denied that Pakistan had had a lot to thank itself for gaining worldwide notoriety as a hub of terrorism due to its active support to the Kashmiri Mujahideen and the Taliban regime. President General Musharraf, more than once, went public in his praise for the Taliban regime and called them a ‘success story’. Kargil, widely recognized as his brain-child, revived Pakistan’s direct military involvement in Kashmir, practically suspended since the 1971 war, and the demarcation of the Line of Control (LoC) under the Shimla Agreement.

While Osama’s own concept and interpretation of the Islami ‘jihad’ remains the sheet anchor of Al Qaeda’s political faith, a Malaysian cleric and Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI) founder Emir Shiekh Abdullah Sungkar has neatly encapsulated Al Qaeda in a three-fold credo as follows:

(i) Quwwatul Aqidah (faith’s strength), Quwwatul Ukhwwah (brotherhood’s strength), and Quwwatul Musallaha (armed or military strength). Sungkar regarded these ‘strengths’ as essential to establishing Dawlalah Islamiyya (Islamic state) by means of jihad. “These, among others, form points deemed vital by Jama’s Islammiyah, whereas other Jammiah (groups) ignore and generally disregard the strengths.” “(Nid’ul Islam, Sydney, February-March 1997, as quoted by Gunaratna).”

However, to identify and draw upon one’s perceived sources of strength without either anticipating or identifying the retaliatory response could be dangerously insufficient and self deluding. It could at best be a doctrinaire exercise unrelated to stark ground realities without a second serious thought to spare about the adverse reaction from the real world of challenge and response.

Such an ostrich-like attitude could be only at the cost of our own national security, sovereignty and honour. Afghanistan and Iraq should leave no doubt as to the deadly wages of emotionally-driven ‘jihadism’ against the awesome brute force of the world’s sole superpower and its will to act in its supreme interest as and where it may so choose. The 9/11 episode, though an act of unerring and meticulous planning and unparalleled courage, will still go down in the annals of contemporary history as a definitive example of militant terrorist Islam. The question for us in Pakistan and the entire Muslim world to answer it: What are we truly driving at? What do we hope to achieve by such stray acts of violence across the globe as the devastating WTC and Pentagon raids?

These could at best be described as stray battles outside a calibrated war plan based on an objective assessment of the high risks involved in armed encounters / conflict against a deadly enemy impossible to beat physically. Motivation, no matter how strong, losses much of its mettle in the face of firepower. On top of multiple geopolitical threats from Afghanistan, India and the strife in Kashmir, Pakistan is also thrown into the narcotics-producing regime of South-West Asia known as the ‘Golden Crescent’ — the ‘traditional’ producer of opium. According to a book recently published (“Kashmir and neighbours — Tale, Terror, Truce” by Turkkaya Atov), the ‘heroinization’ of Pakistan reads like a horror story especially in Pakistan, where the task of the drug traffickers was made easy during the Afghan war.

“The proliferation of illicit drugs in many parts of the country, including Azad Kashmir, brought havoc to that society as the number of addicts reportedly increased.” The author estimates as many as 100 refineries in our tribal areas to make Pakistan possibly the world’s “largest heroin supplier.” The narco-mafia in Afghanistan is reportedly casting its nest far and wide, gaining both in strength and the size of its operation. British intelligence sources estimate about 95 per cent of heroin in the London market as coming from Afghanistan.

Thus Islam is being inexorably drawn into the sinister dragnet of vagrant ‘jihadism’ and narco free trade placed and identified under the single sobriquet of ‘Islamic terrorism’.

(Concluded)

The writer is a retired brigadier of the Pakistan Army.