(To be read in continuation of my article of October 27,2010, titled "Arundhati Roy Vs the State" at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers42/paper4128.html)
Dr.Binayak Sen, a paediatrician who is the Vice-President of the People's Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL), an alleged Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal and a Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha were sentenced to life imprisonment on December 24,2010, after having been found guilty by Shri B.P.Verma, a sessions judge of Raipur in the State of Chattisgarh, of the charge of sedition by colluding with Maoists to establish a network to fight the state. Dr.Sen had been accused by the police of acting as a courier for Sanyal, who was in jail, by carrying his messages and letters to the underground Maoists.
2.The "Hindu" of December 27 has reported the following police version based on the testimny of a witness by name Anil Kumar Singh: " Anil Kumar Singh claimed that on May 6,2007, he saw Town Inspector B.S.Jagrit detain Mr.Guha near the Raipur railway station. According to Mr.Singh's court testimony, the police searched Mr.Guha's black and blue shoulder bag and found pamphlets supporting the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist), a mobile phone, a rail ticket dated May 6,2007, Rs.40,000 in cash and three letters which, Mr.Guha said, were written by the jailed Narayan Sanyal, an alleged Maoist, and handed over to him by physician and human rights activist Binayak Sen."
3. The judge found the statements of Inspector Jagrit regarding the circumstances under which Guha was arrested and Anil Kumar Singh regarding what he saw and heard on May 6,2007, credible enough to sentence Binayak Sen, Sanyal and Guha to life imprisonment for supporting the CPI (Maoist) and conspiring to commit sedition. The "Hindu" has reported as follows: " Despite holding Mr.Guha in prison for nearly four years and producing 97 witnesses, the Chattisgarh Police have been unable to explain how Mr.Guha was arrested, how he got hold of the letters written by Mr.Sanyal and how they relied on Mr.Anil Singh's testimony that he heard Mr.Guha tell the police that Dr.Sen gave him the letters."
4.Expressing shock over the awarding of the life sentence to Binayak Sen on charges of sedition, over 80 intellectuals including Noam Chomsky demanded on December 27 that his appeal be heard 'expeditiously' with 'enlightened reason' and sought his immediate release on bail. They claimed that Sen never resorted to violence or incited anyone else to do so. On the contrary, according to them,as a doctor and a human rights activist, he stood up in defence of the rights of the downtrodden."Yet he has been handed down this sentence whose savagery is unbelievable. Such an action on the part of the State in the name of preserving the Constitutional order will only serve to undermine that Constitutional order itself.It will inevitably raise the thought in the minds of many that an order within which the activities of a person like Dr Sen can be held to be seditious is not worth defending."
5. Dr.Sen's supporters have started an online campaign for his release by posting a petition on the Internet. It alleges: "The charges against Dr Sen, of allegedly aiding outlawed Maoist rebels in Chhattisgarh, have not been corroborated by any of the witnesses or evidence produced in court so far.On the contrary, there have been numerous instances of the prosecution resorting to the use of fabricated documents and contradictory testimonies to press its case."
6.The conviction and sentencing of Dr.Sen and two others have been questioned by the critics on grounds of the reliability of the facts as adduced before the court and the interpretation of the laws relating to sedition. The police version regarding the date of the arrest of Guha and the circumstances under which he was arrested has been questioned. It has been alleged that he was already in the informal custody of the police for five days before the police officially showed his arrest. There is apparently no independent corroboration of Guha's statements that the documents allegedly written by Sanyal had been brought out of jail by Sen after one of his meetings with Sanyal and handed over to Guha. The conviction of Sen seems to have been based largely on the uncorroborated testimony of Anil Kumar Singh who claims to have heard Guha tell the police that Sen gave him the letters from Sanyal.
7. The awarding of the extreme penalty of life sentence on the basis of an independently uncorroborated testimony of a single witness has shocked the critics of the judgement. Questions have also been raised regarding the interpretation of the laws relating to sedition. To prove a charge of sedition, it is necessary to show that Sen---even if he had received the letters from Sanyal as alleged by the police--- had intended to cause disaffection against the State and promote acts of violence.
8. Certain mitigating circumstances should have been taken into consideration while awarding the punishment.Among such circumstances, one could mention, firstly, the benign personality of Dr.Sen as a human rights activist and as a humanitarian medical worker; secondly, the fact that he had not come to notice in the past for indulging in or advocating acts of violence; and, thirdly, the fact that the prosecution case was largely based on circumstantial evidence as narrated by the police without credible corroboration. In many terrorism-related cases in other countries, it has been held that convictions can be awarded purely on the basis of circumstantial evidence provided there was a continuous chain of such evidence. In the case of Sen, a continuous chain would mean evidence to connect his visit to the jail to meet Sanyal, his receiving the letters, his smuggling them out and handing them over to Guha.The only facts in the chain which the police has apparently been able to establish are that the letters were recovered from the possession of Guha who stated that he got them from Sen.
9. A careful identification of the missing links in the chain and an examination of the evidence regarding the benign personality of Sen might have led to the mitigating circumstances being given greater weight than they apparently were. One would find it difficult to avoid the conclusion that the prosecution and the court had adopted a narrowly legalistic approach to the case without seeing it in the broader context of the benign personality of Sen. Available reports indicate that he might be a peripheral sympathiser of the Maoists, but he definitely was a not a hard-core Maoist.
10. It has been reported that one of the reasons the Judge awarded the extreme penalty of life sentence is the fact that the Maoists in the area have been indulging in savage acts of violence directed against the security forces and innocent civilians. This fact could have been a valid ground for awarding a deterrent punishment to those involved in acts of violence when they are arrested and prosecuted, but not to those like Sen who had no previous proven history of indulging in or advocating violence.
11. Our counter-insurgency operations against the Maoists should be more nuanced than they are at present----marked by strong action against those in the hard core indulging in or advocating violence and a more sympathetic approach to those like Sen, who do not belong to the hard core and do not advocate violence. By treating both as no different from each other who deserve deterrent punishment, we will be driving more people who are now merely in the periphery into the arms of the hard core. The police should not unwittingly become a source of aggravation of the problem. ( 28-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Monday, December 27, 2010
Sunday, December 26, 2010
THREE YEARS AFTER BENAZIR'S MURDER: THE COVER-UP CONTINUES
B.RAMAN
Three years after the assassination of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's former Prime Minister, at Rawalpindi on December 27,2007, the cover-up of her assassination not only by the intelligence and investigating agencies, but by even her own Pakistan People's Party (PPP) continues.
2.Her party is in power at the head of a coalition at Islamabad. Her husband Asif Ali Zardari is the President of Pakistan. Yousef Raza Gilani, one of her close confidants when she was alive, is the Prime Minister. Rehman Malik, a former Police officer, who was responsible for her physical security when she was living in political exile, is the Interior Minister responsible for co-ordinating the investigation. The US, which played a role in bringing about a political reconciliation between her and Gen.Pervez Musharraf thereby paving the way for her return from exile, has very close relations with the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). All these factors should have led to a successful investigation by now, but they have not.
3. The investigation should have had two objectives. Firstly, to find out why there was no effective physical security for her despite the failed attempt by unidentified elements to kill her on her arrival in Karachi on October 18,2007.Musharraf, who as the then President had the over-all responsibility for ensuring her security, was allowed to leave Pakistan and take up residence in London without being questioned by the Police. Rehman Malik, who co-ordinated her security on behalf of the PPP, was appointed the Interior Minister without being questioned as to why why he left the scene of occurrence before she was killed. Secondly, to establish the details of the conspiracy to kill her, identify and prosecute those responsible. There has been no progress in this either.
4. In an editorial titled "Benazir Bhutto: ‘tis tough to say goodbye" published on December 27, the "Daily Times" of Lahore says: " It seems as if her ‘deal’ with Musharraf began to unravel as soon as she landed in Karachi and was received by millions of people. The power of the masses brought fear into the hearts of those who masterminded her assassination. Ms Bhutto survived a terror attack on October 18 but she could not defeat death on December 27 when another attempt was made on her life. Her killers have still not been brought to justice. It is a travesty of fate that even though Ms Bhutto’s party is in power and her widower the President of Pakistan, there is no closure regarding her assassination. Those men who have been caught are not the masterminds of BB’s murder plot. It would be a disservice to Ms Bhutto if the PPP is unable to bring the real culprits to book as soon as possible."
5.The Executive Committee of the PPP was to meet on December 26 to review the progress of the investigation so far, Rehman Malik had announced that a detailed progress report would be submitted by him to the Executive Committee. Gilani had announced that the progress report after consideration by the Executive Committee would be released to the public.
6. The Executive Committee met at Naudero as scheduled on December 26, but no progress report was submitted to it. There was no discussion on the progress on the ground that Bilawal Bhutto, Benazir's son who is the party chairman, could not make it to the meeting. It was decided to postpone a review of the progress of the investigation to an unspecified future date when Bilawal could also be present. It was decided that in the meanwhile the scope of the investigation should be further expanded in order to cover all aspects of the case. It was not stated what aspects had remained uncovered so far.
7.On December 24, three days before the Executive Committee met, the "Dawn" of Karachi had reported as follows: "The investigation into the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is likely to be expanded to unveil some faces, who have so far been out of picture, after two arrested former police officers have told investigators that some intelligence officials were in contact with them on Dec 27, 2007.In a related development, the Interior Ministry has sent a questionnaire to former president Pervez Musharraf currently living in London to record his statement. The Federal Investigation Agency obtained on Thursday (December 23) six days’ physical custody of former chief of Rawalpindi city police Saud Aziz and SP Khurram Shahzad to recover the cellphones they were using on the day the former prime minister was assassinated in a gun-and-bomb attack outside Rawalpindi’s Liaquat Bagh. The agency had sought a 12-day remand, but the special judge of Anti-Terrorism Court-III granted six days. The two former police officers were taken into custody on Wednesday after a trial court hearing the case cancelled their pre-arrest bail. Special Public Prosecutor Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali told reporters after the court proceedings that arrested officers had informed the investigators that four officers of the Inter-Services Intelligence and Military Intelligence had been in contact with them. But he said that their names could not be disclosed now because it was yet to be ascertained in what context they were in contact with the accused. If concrete evidence was found against the intelligence officers they would be included in the investigation.
The FIA investigators said in the court that forensic tests of the cellphones were needed to ascertain who had been in contact with the two police officers on the day of Benazir’s assassination."
8. The "Dawn" report further added: " Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani had a few months ago formed a three-member committee, headed by Cabinet Secretary Chaudhry Abdul Rauf, which excluded from inquiry some top military officials who allegedly ordered the hosing down of the assassination site. The inquiry report, however, has not been made public. The UN commission on Benazir’s assassination had accused MI’s former director general Maj-Gen Nadeem Ijaz and some top police officials of being behind the hosing down of the site. The joint investigation team has prepared the 32-point questionnaire for the former President. Interior ministry sources said the document contained questions relating to security lapse and asked the former president why he did not provide adequate security to Ms Bhutto although she had expressed fears about threats to her life. Gen (retd) Musharraf’s spokesman Fawad Chaudhry said the former president had nothing to do with the security of Ms Bhutto. He termed the government’s move to send the questionnaire to Gen Musharraf an attempt to politicise the case and damage him politically."
9. Earlier, on December 2, the Pakistani media had carried the following report on the contents of some of the cables sent by Anne Patterson, the then US Ambassador in Pakistan, to the US State Department, which are among those leaked by WikiLeaks: " Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan after getting ‘clearance’ from the US. President Asif Ali Zardari told this to the then US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson after the assassination of BB, US embassy cables revealed. According to the US embassy cables, Zardari held meeting with Patterson on 25th January 2008 in which he opened his remarks by saying that the US is “our safety blanket” and recounted how Benazir had returned despite the threats against her because of support and “clearance” from the US.... He said that he opposed to launch a FIR (First Information Report) over Benazir’s death because Pakistan could not afford any more chaos. US embassy cables revealed that Zardari was not much interested in who the sniper was or exactly how Benazir was killed. This was not as important as finding out who financed the killing, who were the "hands behind" it. Ambassador said that we believed Baitullah Mehsud was responsible; Zardari dismissed this by saying that Mehsud was just a pawn in the process."
10. It is evident from this that Zardari was not interested in a proper investigation into the assassination by the Pakistani agencies lest their conclusions prove embarrassing to the Government. He wanted to have the responsibility for the investigation transferred to the United Nations, but the UN was prepared, after considerable persuasion, to enquire into only the physical security aspects of the case and not into the criminal conspiracy behind the assassination. Thus, three years after the assassination, the criminal conspiracy angle has not been thoroughly investigated. The PPP is not prepared to accept the contention of the ISI that the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, then headed by Baitullah Mehsud, had mounted the conspiracy in retaliation for Benazir's support for the army raid into the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July 2007.
11. Benazir herself had feared an attempt to have her killed by military elements in the ISI and the Intelligence Bureau with the help of Qari Saifullah Akhtar of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) with which Ilyas Kashmiri of the so-called 313 Brigade, with close contacts with Al Qaeda, was associated. Her suspicions regarding the role of these elements in the conspiracy against her have not been properly investigated so far.
12. In the meanwhile, the Army and the ISI struck back with anger when the UN enquiry sought to pin the blame on the Military Intelligence for the poor physical security provided to her and corroborated the allegations regarding the involvement of the Army and the intelligence agencies in terrorism. The UN report gave rise to strong suspicion that the military intelligence agencies were using the terrorists raised by them not only in India and Afghanistan, but also against their own political leaders whom they found inconvenient.
13. In an interesting report carried on December 25, the "Dawn" of Karachi has stated as follows: "The military establishment reacted strongly to the United Nations Commission report on Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, issued in April this year, and forced the government to write a letter to the UN to reopen the inquiry. Official sources said on Friday (December 24) that the army had termed the report a “bid to malign the national institution” and prepared a detailed reply addressing all aspects of the report. The reply was presented to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani who was asked to send it to the UN to record the country’s protest. The inquiry was financed by the government which paid $5 million to the United Nations. The report was opposed not only by the military establishment but also by sections in the civil side of the government. The then foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan had rejected the UN findings. ISPR (Inter-Services Press Relations) Director-General Maj-Gen Athar Abbas agreed that the military had some reservations on the report because it went beyond the mandate of the UN commission. “We have conveyed our reservations with special reference to security related issues to the government and asked it to record protest with the UN,” Gen Abbas said. "
14. The "Dawn" added : "The military believes that the UN Commission had touched some issues which had nothing to do with the assassination. During several visits of the three-member UN commission to Pakistan, its members called on top military, civil officials and politicians, including Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and ISI Director-General Lt-Gen Shuja Pasha and recorded their statements. The sources said there was hesitation in the military over the demand of the commission to meet top ranking officials of services but it was accepted to avert a negative impression that the military had some concerns over such meetings. While convincing the government to register a protest with the UN on the report, the army said the world body went beyond its mandate by accusing ISI of conducting covert operations in India and Afghanistan. The commission also accused former director-general of Military Intelligence, Maj-Gen Nadeem Ijaz, and some top police officials of being involved in hosing down the assassination site within 40 minutes after the killing. The issue of hosing down the site and alleged involvement of some top military officials remained a topic of intense discussion for many weeks and Prime Minister Gilani formed a three-member committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Chaudhry Abdul Rauf to look into the matter."
15. The "Dawn" said further: "The committee (headed by the Cabinet Secretary) in its report, which has not been made public, gave a clean chit to top military and police officials. Some other findings opposed by the military are: “General Musharraf also had the full support of what is known in Pakistan as the ‘establishment’, the de facto power structure that has as its permanent core the military high command and intelligence agencies, in particular, the powerful, military-run ISI as well as Military Intelligence (MI) and the Intelligence Bureau (IB).
The capability of the establishment to exercise power in Pakistan is based in large part on the central role played by the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies in the country’s political life, with the military ruling the country directly for 32 of its 62 years as an independent state. General Musharraf finally stepped down as Chief of Army Staff (COAS) on November 28, 2007, handing the post over to his hand-picked successor, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. This did not, however, change the military nature of the regime.The UN in its response to the letter sent by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi ruled out the reopening of the inquiry and set aside Islamabad’s objection. Mr Qureshi’s letter said the UN commission’s observations about the Pakistan Army and the ISI were not based on evidence. He said the UN report had a serious flaw because the commission had failed to approach third party states or to provide some reliable information to unearth, if any, international linkages perpetrating, planning, financing and abetting Bhutto’s assassination. A Joint Investigation Team formed to investigate the Benazir case had issued its report earlier this month again blaming the slain chief of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud, of masterminding the murder. However, the UN Commission had said that blaming the TTP leader for the assassination was a bid to divert the investigation from the right direction."
16. Thus, three years after the assassination of Benazir, the conspiracy to have her killed has been followed by a fresh conspiracy to prevent the real facts of the case from coming out. No one in Pakistan is interested in finding out the truth--- neither the PPP, not the civilian Government, nor the Army, nor the military intelligence agencies nor the Federal Investigation Agency nor the judiciary.
17. Such being the state of affairs in Pakistan, we will be living in a fool's paradise if we think that the Pakistani investigating agencies are going to properly investigate the conspiracy behind the terrorist strike by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Mumbai from November 26 to 28,2008, and successfully prosecute those responsible. A question often posed to analysts on Pakistan is: Is there any danger of the Pakistan State being captured by the jihadi terrorists one day? The terrorists may not as yet be in de jure control of the State, but they are already in a de facto position to see that the State does not take any action which could prove detrimental to the terrorists. The judiciary may be increasingly bold in acting against the political executive and even the Army, but it is afraid of acting against the terrorists. There are five centres of power in Pakistan today: The Executive, the legislature, the judiciary, the Army and the terrorists inspired and led by Al Qaeda. That is the reality confronting the world. (27-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Three years after the assassination of Mrs.Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's former Prime Minister, at Rawalpindi on December 27,2007, the cover-up of her assassination not only by the intelligence and investigating agencies, but by even her own Pakistan People's Party (PPP) continues.
2.Her party is in power at the head of a coalition at Islamabad. Her husband Asif Ali Zardari is the President of Pakistan. Yousef Raza Gilani, one of her close confidants when she was alive, is the Prime Minister. Rehman Malik, a former Police officer, who was responsible for her physical security when she was living in political exile, is the Interior Minister responsible for co-ordinating the investigation. The US, which played a role in bringing about a political reconciliation between her and Gen.Pervez Musharraf thereby paving the way for her return from exile, has very close relations with the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). All these factors should have led to a successful investigation by now, but they have not.
3. The investigation should have had two objectives. Firstly, to find out why there was no effective physical security for her despite the failed attempt by unidentified elements to kill her on her arrival in Karachi on October 18,2007.Musharraf, who as the then President had the over-all responsibility for ensuring her security, was allowed to leave Pakistan and take up residence in London without being questioned by the Police. Rehman Malik, who co-ordinated her security on behalf of the PPP, was appointed the Interior Minister without being questioned as to why why he left the scene of occurrence before she was killed. Secondly, to establish the details of the conspiracy to kill her, identify and prosecute those responsible. There has been no progress in this either.
4. In an editorial titled "Benazir Bhutto: ‘tis tough to say goodbye" published on December 27, the "Daily Times" of Lahore says: " It seems as if her ‘deal’ with Musharraf began to unravel as soon as she landed in Karachi and was received by millions of people. The power of the masses brought fear into the hearts of those who masterminded her assassination. Ms Bhutto survived a terror attack on October 18 but she could not defeat death on December 27 when another attempt was made on her life. Her killers have still not been brought to justice. It is a travesty of fate that even though Ms Bhutto’s party is in power and her widower the President of Pakistan, there is no closure regarding her assassination. Those men who have been caught are not the masterminds of BB’s murder plot. It would be a disservice to Ms Bhutto if the PPP is unable to bring the real culprits to book as soon as possible."
5.The Executive Committee of the PPP was to meet on December 26 to review the progress of the investigation so far, Rehman Malik had announced that a detailed progress report would be submitted by him to the Executive Committee. Gilani had announced that the progress report after consideration by the Executive Committee would be released to the public.
6. The Executive Committee met at Naudero as scheduled on December 26, but no progress report was submitted to it. There was no discussion on the progress on the ground that Bilawal Bhutto, Benazir's son who is the party chairman, could not make it to the meeting. It was decided to postpone a review of the progress of the investigation to an unspecified future date when Bilawal could also be present. It was decided that in the meanwhile the scope of the investigation should be further expanded in order to cover all aspects of the case. It was not stated what aspects had remained uncovered so far.
7.On December 24, three days before the Executive Committee met, the "Dawn" of Karachi had reported as follows: "The investigation into the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is likely to be expanded to unveil some faces, who have so far been out of picture, after two arrested former police officers have told investigators that some intelligence officials were in contact with them on Dec 27, 2007.In a related development, the Interior Ministry has sent a questionnaire to former president Pervez Musharraf currently living in London to record his statement. The Federal Investigation Agency obtained on Thursday (December 23) six days’ physical custody of former chief of Rawalpindi city police Saud Aziz and SP Khurram Shahzad to recover the cellphones they were using on the day the former prime minister was assassinated in a gun-and-bomb attack outside Rawalpindi’s Liaquat Bagh. The agency had sought a 12-day remand, but the special judge of Anti-Terrorism Court-III granted six days. The two former police officers were taken into custody on Wednesday after a trial court hearing the case cancelled their pre-arrest bail. Special Public Prosecutor Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali told reporters after the court proceedings that arrested officers had informed the investigators that four officers of the Inter-Services Intelligence and Military Intelligence had been in contact with them. But he said that their names could not be disclosed now because it was yet to be ascertained in what context they were in contact with the accused. If concrete evidence was found against the intelligence officers they would be included in the investigation.
The FIA investigators said in the court that forensic tests of the cellphones were needed to ascertain who had been in contact with the two police officers on the day of Benazir’s assassination."
8. The "Dawn" report further added: " Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani had a few months ago formed a three-member committee, headed by Cabinet Secretary Chaudhry Abdul Rauf, which excluded from inquiry some top military officials who allegedly ordered the hosing down of the assassination site. The inquiry report, however, has not been made public. The UN commission on Benazir’s assassination had accused MI’s former director general Maj-Gen Nadeem Ijaz and some top police officials of being behind the hosing down of the site. The joint investigation team has prepared the 32-point questionnaire for the former President. Interior ministry sources said the document contained questions relating to security lapse and asked the former president why he did not provide adequate security to Ms Bhutto although she had expressed fears about threats to her life. Gen (retd) Musharraf’s spokesman Fawad Chaudhry said the former president had nothing to do with the security of Ms Bhutto. He termed the government’s move to send the questionnaire to Gen Musharraf an attempt to politicise the case and damage him politically."
9. Earlier, on December 2, the Pakistani media had carried the following report on the contents of some of the cables sent by Anne Patterson, the then US Ambassador in Pakistan, to the US State Department, which are among those leaked by WikiLeaks: " Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan after getting ‘clearance’ from the US. President Asif Ali Zardari told this to the then US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson after the assassination of BB, US embassy cables revealed. According to the US embassy cables, Zardari held meeting with Patterson on 25th January 2008 in which he opened his remarks by saying that the US is “our safety blanket” and recounted how Benazir had returned despite the threats against her because of support and “clearance” from the US.... He said that he opposed to launch a FIR (First Information Report) over Benazir’s death because Pakistan could not afford any more chaos. US embassy cables revealed that Zardari was not much interested in who the sniper was or exactly how Benazir was killed. This was not as important as finding out who financed the killing, who were the "hands behind" it. Ambassador said that we believed Baitullah Mehsud was responsible; Zardari dismissed this by saying that Mehsud was just a pawn in the process."
10. It is evident from this that Zardari was not interested in a proper investigation into the assassination by the Pakistani agencies lest their conclusions prove embarrassing to the Government. He wanted to have the responsibility for the investigation transferred to the United Nations, but the UN was prepared, after considerable persuasion, to enquire into only the physical security aspects of the case and not into the criminal conspiracy behind the assassination. Thus, three years after the assassination, the criminal conspiracy angle has not been thoroughly investigated. The PPP is not prepared to accept the contention of the ISI that the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, then headed by Baitullah Mehsud, had mounted the conspiracy in retaliation for Benazir's support for the army raid into the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July 2007.
11. Benazir herself had feared an attempt to have her killed by military elements in the ISI and the Intelligence Bureau with the help of Qari Saifullah Akhtar of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI) with which Ilyas Kashmiri of the so-called 313 Brigade, with close contacts with Al Qaeda, was associated. Her suspicions regarding the role of these elements in the conspiracy against her have not been properly investigated so far.
12. In the meanwhile, the Army and the ISI struck back with anger when the UN enquiry sought to pin the blame on the Military Intelligence for the poor physical security provided to her and corroborated the allegations regarding the involvement of the Army and the intelligence agencies in terrorism. The UN report gave rise to strong suspicion that the military intelligence agencies were using the terrorists raised by them not only in India and Afghanistan, but also against their own political leaders whom they found inconvenient.
13. In an interesting report carried on December 25, the "Dawn" of Karachi has stated as follows: "The military establishment reacted strongly to the United Nations Commission report on Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, issued in April this year, and forced the government to write a letter to the UN to reopen the inquiry. Official sources said on Friday (December 24) that the army had termed the report a “bid to malign the national institution” and prepared a detailed reply addressing all aspects of the report. The reply was presented to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani who was asked to send it to the UN to record the country’s protest. The inquiry was financed by the government which paid $5 million to the United Nations. The report was opposed not only by the military establishment but also by sections in the civil side of the government. The then foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan had rejected the UN findings. ISPR (Inter-Services Press Relations) Director-General Maj-Gen Athar Abbas agreed that the military had some reservations on the report because it went beyond the mandate of the UN commission. “We have conveyed our reservations with special reference to security related issues to the government and asked it to record protest with the UN,” Gen Abbas said. "
14. The "Dawn" added : "The military believes that the UN Commission had touched some issues which had nothing to do with the assassination. During several visits of the three-member UN commission to Pakistan, its members called on top military, civil officials and politicians, including Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and ISI Director-General Lt-Gen Shuja Pasha and recorded their statements. The sources said there was hesitation in the military over the demand of the commission to meet top ranking officials of services but it was accepted to avert a negative impression that the military had some concerns over such meetings. While convincing the government to register a protest with the UN on the report, the army said the world body went beyond its mandate by accusing ISI of conducting covert operations in India and Afghanistan. The commission also accused former director-general of Military Intelligence, Maj-Gen Nadeem Ijaz, and some top police officials of being involved in hosing down the assassination site within 40 minutes after the killing. The issue of hosing down the site and alleged involvement of some top military officials remained a topic of intense discussion for many weeks and Prime Minister Gilani formed a three-member committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Chaudhry Abdul Rauf to look into the matter."
15. The "Dawn" said further: "The committee (headed by the Cabinet Secretary) in its report, which has not been made public, gave a clean chit to top military and police officials. Some other findings opposed by the military are: “General Musharraf also had the full support of what is known in Pakistan as the ‘establishment’, the de facto power structure that has as its permanent core the military high command and intelligence agencies, in particular, the powerful, military-run ISI as well as Military Intelligence (MI) and the Intelligence Bureau (IB).
The capability of the establishment to exercise power in Pakistan is based in large part on the central role played by the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies in the country’s political life, with the military ruling the country directly for 32 of its 62 years as an independent state. General Musharraf finally stepped down as Chief of Army Staff (COAS) on November 28, 2007, handing the post over to his hand-picked successor, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. This did not, however, change the military nature of the regime.The UN in its response to the letter sent by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi ruled out the reopening of the inquiry and set aside Islamabad’s objection. Mr Qureshi’s letter said the UN commission’s observations about the Pakistan Army and the ISI were not based on evidence. He said the UN report had a serious flaw because the commission had failed to approach third party states or to provide some reliable information to unearth, if any, international linkages perpetrating, planning, financing and abetting Bhutto’s assassination. A Joint Investigation Team formed to investigate the Benazir case had issued its report earlier this month again blaming the slain chief of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud, of masterminding the murder. However, the UN Commission had said that blaming the TTP leader for the assassination was a bid to divert the investigation from the right direction."
16. Thus, three years after the assassination of Benazir, the conspiracy to have her killed has been followed by a fresh conspiracy to prevent the real facts of the case from coming out. No one in Pakistan is interested in finding out the truth--- neither the PPP, not the civilian Government, nor the Army, nor the military intelligence agencies nor the Federal Investigation Agency nor the judiciary.
17. Such being the state of affairs in Pakistan, we will be living in a fool's paradise if we think that the Pakistani investigating agencies are going to properly investigate the conspiracy behind the terrorist strike by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Mumbai from November 26 to 28,2008, and successfully prosecute those responsible. A question often posed to analysts on Pakistan is: Is there any danger of the Pakistan State being captured by the jihadi terrorists one day? The terrorists may not as yet be in de jure control of the State, but they are already in a de facto position to see that the State does not take any action which could prove detrimental to the terrorists. The judiciary may be increasingly bold in acting against the political executive and even the Army, but it is afraid of acting against the terrorists. There are five centres of power in Pakistan today: The Executive, the legislature, the judiciary, the Army and the terrorists inspired and led by Al Qaeda. That is the reality confronting the world. (27-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Saturday, December 25, 2010
IS LETTING PAKISTAN COLLAPSE AN OPTION?
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR—PAPER NO. 699
B.RAMAN
“The News”, a daily of Pakistan, has carried on December 24, 2010, an analysis by Amir Mir, the well-known Pakistani journalist, of acts of suicide terrorism in Pakistan during 2010.It covers data up to December 23.
2. According to this analysis, till December 23, there were 52 acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 1224 fatalities as against 80 acts in 2009 with 1217 fatalities. Though the number of suicide attacks came down from 80 in 2009 to 52, the lethality of the attacks increased with the largest number of fatalities in a year since the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and their associates such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), another Uzbek group, stepped up their acts of suicide terrorism after the Army raid in the Lal Masjid of Islamabade in July,2007.
3.According to Amir Mir, the number of fatalities due to suicide terrorism rose from 837 in 2007 to 965 in 2008. It went up to 1217 in 2009 and 1224 till December 23,2010. During 2010, the largest number of attacks were in the Khyber Pakhtunkwa province (KP) with 25 attacks resulting in 416 fatalities. There were 12 suicide attacks in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with 381 fatalities followed by Punjab with seven acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 312 fatalities. There were four incidents in Balochistan with 81 deaths, two in Sindh with 28 deaths and another two in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) with six deaths.
4.The Pashtun belt in KP and the FATA continued to be the worst affected. Thirty-seven of the 52 attacks were in the Pashtun belt with 797 deaths. There were 15 attacks in the non-Pashtun areas with 427 deaths. Muslims killing Muslims and Pashtuns killing Pashtuns has become the defining characteristic of the the Pashtun Taliban. As against this, the Punjabi Taliban has concentrated its attacks in Pakistani territory on non-Deobandi and non-Wahabi Muslims consisting of the Shias, the Barelvis and the Ahmadiyas. The expression Punjabi Taliban is applied in Pakistan to the LEJ, the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). Of these, the LET, which is the closest to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), did not indulge in any act of terrorism in Pakistani territory. Its main focus was on India and Afghanistan.
5.Of the 1224 fatalities till December 23,2010, 1055 were civilians as against 863 out of 1217 in 2009 and 169 belonged to the security forces. Of those from the security forces killed,62 belonged to the police, 48 to the armed forces, 26 to the Frontier Constabulary, 24 to other para-military units and nine to the ISI. Of the civilians killed, 151 were Shias and 103 were Ahmediyas. Three American nationals were among those killed in 2010. On an average, suicide bombers killed 102 persons per month in 2010, compared with 2009’s average of 101 killings a month.
6. Earlier on August 5,2010, the “Dawn” of Karachi had carried an analysis of suicide terrorism in Pakistan by Manzar Zaidi, a strategic affairs analyst. His analysis covered all suicide terrorism before and after the Lal Masjid raid. It brought out two facts. Firstly, before the Lal Masjid raid, suicide terrorism in Pakistan was largely a Punjabi phenomenon confined to Sindh and Punjab. There were no acts of suicide terrorism in the Pashtun belt. After the Lal Masjid raid, it has become a largely Pashtun phenomenon with the Pashtun belt being the worst affected. Secondly, there has been an increase in attacks on military-connected targets after the Lal Masjid raid.
7. The analyses carried by the “News” and the “Dawn” covered only acts of suicide terrorism. They did not cover other acts of terrorism such as the targeted attacks on Shias by the LEJ in Karachi and in the cities of Pakistani Punjab and acts of ethnic terrorism involving the Mohajirs and the the Pashtuns in Karachi. Interestingly, there have been no acts of suicide or suicidal terrorism involving the Afghan Taliban in the non-Pashtun belt. The attacks of the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani group, headed by Jalalludin Haqqani, have been confined to the Kurram Agency in the FATA where there are a large number of Shia Pashtuns, who have become the victims of frequent attacks by the Pakistani as well as the Afghan Taliban as well as by the LEJ.
8. Neither the intensified operations of the Pakistan Army in the Malakand Division of KP and in South Waziristan, Bajaur and Mohmand agencies of the FATA nor the intensified Drone (unmanned planes carrying missiles) strikes by the US in the FATA have dented the motivation of the Pashtuns----Pakistani and Afghan--- taking to suicide acts of terrorism directed against the civilians and suicidal attacks (fedayeen attacks) against the Pakistani security forces.
9. The insincere counter-terrorism policies of the Pakistan Army come in the way of the restoration of law and order in the Pashtun belt. The worsening internal security situation and the persistent US criticism of its inaction against the Talibans and Al Qaeda demand that the Pakistan Army act firmly at least against the Pakistani Taliban. But,its interest in recovering its strategic depth in Afghanistan dictate that it avoid firm action against Pashtun terrorism. Its continued use of Punjabi terrorism against India demands that its support to the Punjabi terrorist organizations remain undiminished. The Pashtun terrorists are its strategic assets in Afghanistan. The Punjabi terrorists are its strategic assets against India.
10.Unless there is an end to these contradictory and insincere policies, the US-led NATO forces are not going to prevail in Afghanistan. Nor is the US going to prevail against Al Qaeda in North Waziristan. Despite two years of intensified Drone strikes, the US is nowhere near victory against either Al Qaeda or the Talibans. Ground operations in Pakistani territory could lead to a disruption of NATO’s logistic supplies to its troops in Afghanistan through Pakistani territory. They are, therefore, unlikely. Deniable covert actions with the help of Pakistani assets well-disposed to the US could be an alternative, but the US has avoided building up a covert action capability which can be tried on the ground.
11.The fear of Pakistan becoming a failed State prevents the US from acting tough against it. Soft options have failed to nudge Pakistan into acting against the terrorists. Hard options such as the denial of military and economic assistance are avoided lest there be a collapse of the State of Pakistan. The time has come to examine whether the collapse of Pakistan is something to be dreaded. A collapse could lead to a spell of sectarian anarchy, but not necessarily to the triumph of Al Qaeda and the Talibans. The very fact that the international community is prepared to let Pakistan collapse could induce some good sense in the thinking of its army and intelligence establishment. The army thinks that the world cannot afford to let Pakistan collapse. It has to be told that the world is prepared to let it collapse if it does not act against terrorism emanating from its territory effectively. (26-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Srudies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
B.RAMAN
“The News”, a daily of Pakistan, has carried on December 24, 2010, an analysis by Amir Mir, the well-known Pakistani journalist, of acts of suicide terrorism in Pakistan during 2010.It covers data up to December 23.
2. According to this analysis, till December 23, there were 52 acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 1224 fatalities as against 80 acts in 2009 with 1217 fatalities. Though the number of suicide attacks came down from 80 in 2009 to 52, the lethality of the attacks increased with the largest number of fatalities in a year since the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and their associates such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), another Uzbek group, stepped up their acts of suicide terrorism after the Army raid in the Lal Masjid of Islamabade in July,2007.
3.According to Amir Mir, the number of fatalities due to suicide terrorism rose from 837 in 2007 to 965 in 2008. It went up to 1217 in 2009 and 1224 till December 23,2010. During 2010, the largest number of attacks were in the Khyber Pakhtunkwa province (KP) with 25 attacks resulting in 416 fatalities. There were 12 suicide attacks in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with 381 fatalities followed by Punjab with seven acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 312 fatalities. There were four incidents in Balochistan with 81 deaths, two in Sindh with 28 deaths and another two in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) with six deaths.
4.The Pashtun belt in KP and the FATA continued to be the worst affected. Thirty-seven of the 52 attacks were in the Pashtun belt with 797 deaths. There were 15 attacks in the non-Pashtun areas with 427 deaths. Muslims killing Muslims and Pashtuns killing Pashtuns has become the defining characteristic of the the Pashtun Taliban. As against this, the Punjabi Taliban has concentrated its attacks in Pakistani territory on non-Deobandi and non-Wahabi Muslims consisting of the Shias, the Barelvis and the Ahmadiyas. The expression Punjabi Taliban is applied in Pakistan to the LEJ, the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). Of these, the LET, which is the closest to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), did not indulge in any act of terrorism in Pakistani territory. Its main focus was on India and Afghanistan.
5.Of the 1224 fatalities till December 23,2010, 1055 were civilians as against 863 out of 1217 in 2009 and 169 belonged to the security forces. Of those from the security forces killed,62 belonged to the police, 48 to the armed forces, 26 to the Frontier Constabulary, 24 to other para-military units and nine to the ISI. Of the civilians killed, 151 were Shias and 103 were Ahmediyas. Three American nationals were among those killed in 2010. On an average, suicide bombers killed 102 persons per month in 2010, compared with 2009’s average of 101 killings a month.
6. Earlier on August 5,2010, the “Dawn” of Karachi had carried an analysis of suicide terrorism in Pakistan by Manzar Zaidi, a strategic affairs analyst. His analysis covered all suicide terrorism before and after the Lal Masjid raid. It brought out two facts. Firstly, before the Lal Masjid raid, suicide terrorism in Pakistan was largely a Punjabi phenomenon confined to Sindh and Punjab. There were no acts of suicide terrorism in the Pashtun belt. After the Lal Masjid raid, it has become a largely Pashtun phenomenon with the Pashtun belt being the worst affected. Secondly, there has been an increase in attacks on military-connected targets after the Lal Masjid raid.
7. The analyses carried by the “News” and the “Dawn” covered only acts of suicide terrorism. They did not cover other acts of terrorism such as the targeted attacks on Shias by the LEJ in Karachi and in the cities of Pakistani Punjab and acts of ethnic terrorism involving the Mohajirs and the the Pashtuns in Karachi. Interestingly, there have been no acts of suicide or suicidal terrorism involving the Afghan Taliban in the non-Pashtun belt. The attacks of the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani group, headed by Jalalludin Haqqani, have been confined to the Kurram Agency in the FATA where there are a large number of Shia Pashtuns, who have become the victims of frequent attacks by the Pakistani as well as the Afghan Taliban as well as by the LEJ.
8. Neither the intensified operations of the Pakistan Army in the Malakand Division of KP and in South Waziristan, Bajaur and Mohmand agencies of the FATA nor the intensified Drone (unmanned planes carrying missiles) strikes by the US in the FATA have dented the motivation of the Pashtuns----Pakistani and Afghan--- taking to suicide acts of terrorism directed against the civilians and suicidal attacks (fedayeen attacks) against the Pakistani security forces.
9. The insincere counter-terrorism policies of the Pakistan Army come in the way of the restoration of law and order in the Pashtun belt. The worsening internal security situation and the persistent US criticism of its inaction against the Talibans and Al Qaeda demand that the Pakistan Army act firmly at least against the Pakistani Taliban. But,its interest in recovering its strategic depth in Afghanistan dictate that it avoid firm action against Pashtun terrorism. Its continued use of Punjabi terrorism against India demands that its support to the Punjabi terrorist organizations remain undiminished. The Pashtun terrorists are its strategic assets in Afghanistan. The Punjabi terrorists are its strategic assets against India.
10.Unless there is an end to these contradictory and insincere policies, the US-led NATO forces are not going to prevail in Afghanistan. Nor is the US going to prevail against Al Qaeda in North Waziristan. Despite two years of intensified Drone strikes, the US is nowhere near victory against either Al Qaeda or the Talibans. Ground operations in Pakistani territory could lead to a disruption of NATO’s logistic supplies to its troops in Afghanistan through Pakistani territory. They are, therefore, unlikely. Deniable covert actions with the help of Pakistani assets well-disposed to the US could be an alternative, but the US has avoided building up a covert action capability which can be tried on the ground.
11.The fear of Pakistan becoming a failed State prevents the US from acting tough against it. Soft options have failed to nudge Pakistan into acting against the terrorists. Hard options such as the denial of military and economic assistance are avoided lest there be a collapse of the State of Pakistan. The time has come to examine whether the collapse of Pakistan is something to be dreaded. A collapse could lead to a spell of sectarian anarchy, but not necessarily to the triumph of Al Qaeda and the Talibans. The very fact that the international community is prepared to let Pakistan collapse could induce some good sense in the thinking of its army and intelligence establishment. The army thinks that the world cannot afford to let Pakistan collapse. It has to be told that the world is prepared to let it collapse if it does not act against terrorism emanating from its territory effectively. (26-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Srudies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Thursday, December 23, 2010
A MORE ASSERTIVE PLA
B.RAMAN
( To be read in continuation of my article of June 29,2010, titled “ Hu Proposes, PLA Disposes” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers39%5Cpaper3896.html
A new breed of analysts with military background has been seeking to influence strategic analysis in China in a direction that justifies Beijing’s military assertiveness in matters impinging upon its core interests. Whereas a growing number of analysts with no military background has been advising caution in following a policy of enhanced assertiveness lest it add to the fears of China in its neighbourhood thereby benefiting the US, a small, but articulate group of analysts who had served in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and who continue to retain their links with the PLA after their retirement, has been not only justifying the new assertiveness, but even calling for more of it in order to maintain China’s national self-respect.
2.Prominent among them is Maj.Gen. (retd) Luo Yuan, a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and Deputy Secretary-General of the Society of China Military Sciences, which is a supposedly non-governmental think-tank with close links to the PLA.
The Society set up on November 24,2003, an International Military Branch , which was described by the Party-controlled “People’s Daily” as follows: “The branch, consisting of experts and scholars from institutes specializing in international military security, foreign military study, scientific research units and military colleges, is a component part of the China Military Science Society. The establishment marks a new phase of the development of the PLA research in foreign military affairs, contributing a great deal to the system of military sciences with Chinese characteristics.”
3. Research scholars from the International Military Branch of the Society not only write regularly in the Chinese media and appear on State-controlled TV channels to discuss strategic matters, but also brief the media on military-related matters during sessions of the Party Central Committee and the National People’s Congress. Their views tend to be more forthright than those of civilian analysts and more combative.
4.The forthright and combative nature of their views and analyses often gives rise to the question as to whether they speak with the approval of the party and the Government. Their views and the language in which they express them are often so different from the more nuanced articulation of serving and retired diplomats that they create an impression as if the PLA and the Foreign Office are not on the same page in matters relating to Chinese policies with regard to its core interests.
5.These analysts have become particularly active in advocating a more robust response by China ever since the US and the South Korean navies started holding a series of joint exercises in the vicinity of the Yellow Sea following the alleged sinking of a South Korean naval vessel by the North Korean Navy in March last. In an article titled “America is Engaging in Gunboat Diplomacy Against China. Unilateral Confrontation and Showing Off of Hard Power", which was carried by the “People’s Daily” online on August 13 last, Major General Luo wrote:
”The United States is never willing to communicate and consult with other countries, let alone think from others' point of views. Since Obama came into power, he has claimed to have broken clearly with former President Bush's unilateralist policies and pursued "smart power" diplomacy. However, judging from the United States and South Korea's insistence on holding joint military drills around the waters of the Korean Peninsula, we see neither multilateral security cooperation nor the display of smart power. What we see is only unilateral confrontation and showing off of hard power. The Chinese are peace-loving people, and China is now taking a peaceful development road different from when the imperialist powers rose. We do not want to be against any country, but we are not fearful if other countries ignore our solemn positions and core interests. A country must have the dignity and its army must have deterrence power. China adheres to the principle "We will not attack unless we are attacked, and we must retaliate only if we are attacked," which is definitely not a joke to the Chinese people and the army. Doesn’t the United States proclaim itself to be the most democratic country? Then, they should know in the 21st century, they ought to learn to respect others and listen to the public opinions of other countries, using wisdom but not gunboats to solve problems.”
6. In another article carried by the party-controlled “Global Times” on December 14, Major-Gen Luo made hawkish observations which should be of concern to countries such as India, Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines which have unresolved territorial disputes with China. He wrote: “Just being rich is not enough to make China a strong nation. A powerful army is also needed. The future society should be not only extremely abundant in material riches, but also have a very healthy legal system, and a prevailing toughness and militaristic spirit. I told some foreign friends that I won't deny it when you call us hawkish because we are soldiers. If soldiers don't talk about war, who will? "If all soldiers become dovish, what is the point for ordinary people to pay so much money to keep the army? Why don't we save the money to improve the livelihood of people and change the name of the army to the Peace Association. A militaristic spirit is not meant to provoke war, but to shore up defences and prevent others from starting wars. The neighbouring area is not peaceful, and we have outside threats. The motherland is not unified yet and separatist forces are still posing threats to us. China has been dreaming of becoming a powerful nation for generations and the dream would finally be fulfilled in the next two generations. China's gross domestic product is close to the second in the world, but we have not even solved the issue of national unification, and we have not recovered the land looted by our neighbours, so how can we boast of being a strong nation?" Luo said the educational system should promote a sense of fearless confidence and revolutionary heroism as part of the curriculum.
7.In an editorial titled “The meaning of PLA General’s tirade” carried on August 14, the “Taipei Times” wrote: “ Luo has come to prominence over the past decade as one of the leading beaters of the war drum, threatening both the US and Taiwan’s leaders over their perceived lack of respect for the Middle Kingdom. He lashed out in February after Washington announced its latest arms package for Taiwan, urging his government to take diplomatic, military and economic measures to punish the US, including dumping US Treasury bonds. He also defended the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) outsized budget increases in recent years as necessary because of the “threat in the Taiwan Strait.”In November last year, the General, who works at the Academy of Military Sciences in Beijing, slammed President Ma Ying-jeou , accusing him of promoting a policy of “peaceful secession”. Luo had been one of the more prominent proponents back in 2004 of Beijing’s drive to enact its “Anti-Secession” Law. While academics and analysts repeatedly note that Luo and others like him do not officially speak for either the PLA or Beijing, the fact that Luo’s latest outburst was published in the PLA’s official mouthpiece speaks for itself.”
8.It added : “China’s Central Military Commission does use military officials, both serving and retired, to float ideas and suggestions, as a means of testing reactions and as a way to let the more rabid vent some steam. However, if Luo were not voicing ideas backed by Beijing, wouldn’t he be at risk of the same kind of treatment meted out to writers, bloggers and others who dare to speak out of turn? Luo’s status as a retired PLA General would not even protect him if Beijing were unhappy with his comments. Look at the travails of retired PLA surgeon Jiang Yanyong , who first alerted the world to Beijing’s cover-up of the SARS outbreak in 2003. Hailed as a hero both in China and around the world for speaking out, his willingness to speak his mind got him into trouble just a year later when he pressed for a review of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. Neither his age nor prestige could save him from detention and house arrest. Luo has been hectoring the US and its allies for too long to think that his comments do not represent the mainstream view both in the PLA and at Zhongnanhai. We would be unwise to dismiss him out of hand.”
9. Two books on the Army published in the beginning of this year have added to the welter of voices calling for a strong and robust Army, which can uphold China’s prestige. In a book titled “The China Dream”, Senior Colonel Liu Mingfu has said that China should build the world’s strongest military. He added :"China's big goal in the 21st century is to become the world's No 1, top power." In another book, Colonel Dai Xu wrote: "I'm very pessimistic about the future. China is largely surrounded by hostile or wary countries beholden to the US. I believe that China cannot escape the calamity of war and this calamity may come in the not-too-distant future, at most in 10 to 20 years."
10. At the same time, it is apparent that there are other PLA officers who do not feel comfortable with the hawkish talk indulged in by officers like Luo. An article carried by the “China Daily” on March 4 quoted an unnamed PLA officer as saying as follows: "China has all the necessary sophisticated weapons, but we cannot compare with the US in terms of quantity. Personally, I do not agree with big talks by some scholars, (which) could only misdirect China's national image. We should do more, but speak less."
11. One should take note of the debate on the pros and cons of a militaristic approach to policy-making going on in the community of military analysts in China. This indicates that there are elements in the PLA which feel that there is no need for China to feel apologetic about its policy of military assertiveness. In their view, this assertiveness has two objectives---- to regain territory lost (according to them ) by China in the past in order to complete the process of national unification and to establish China’s pre-eminence as a military power, which would not hesitate to use its newly-acquired military strength should it become necessary.
12. The political leadership, while maintaining a distance from this debate, has not been discouraging such expression of hawkish views. Does this indicate a possible weakening of political control over the PLA? Not necessarily. However, it definitely indicates increasing expectations from certain sections in the PLA that their views on strategic policy-making deserve greater attention----particularly in matters relating to China’s national unification, which these officers see as still incomplete. (23-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
( To be read in continuation of my article of June 29,2010, titled “ Hu Proposes, PLA Disposes” at http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers39%5Cpaper3896.html
A new breed of analysts with military background has been seeking to influence strategic analysis in China in a direction that justifies Beijing’s military assertiveness in matters impinging upon its core interests. Whereas a growing number of analysts with no military background has been advising caution in following a policy of enhanced assertiveness lest it add to the fears of China in its neighbourhood thereby benefiting the US, a small, but articulate group of analysts who had served in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and who continue to retain their links with the PLA after their retirement, has been not only justifying the new assertiveness, but even calling for more of it in order to maintain China’s national self-respect.
2.Prominent among them is Maj.Gen. (retd) Luo Yuan, a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and Deputy Secretary-General of the Society of China Military Sciences, which is a supposedly non-governmental think-tank with close links to the PLA.
The Society set up on November 24,2003, an International Military Branch , which was described by the Party-controlled “People’s Daily” as follows: “The branch, consisting of experts and scholars from institutes specializing in international military security, foreign military study, scientific research units and military colleges, is a component part of the China Military Science Society. The establishment marks a new phase of the development of the PLA research in foreign military affairs, contributing a great deal to the system of military sciences with Chinese characteristics.”
3. Research scholars from the International Military Branch of the Society not only write regularly in the Chinese media and appear on State-controlled TV channels to discuss strategic matters, but also brief the media on military-related matters during sessions of the Party Central Committee and the National People’s Congress. Their views tend to be more forthright than those of civilian analysts and more combative.
4.The forthright and combative nature of their views and analyses often gives rise to the question as to whether they speak with the approval of the party and the Government. Their views and the language in which they express them are often so different from the more nuanced articulation of serving and retired diplomats that they create an impression as if the PLA and the Foreign Office are not on the same page in matters relating to Chinese policies with regard to its core interests.
5.These analysts have become particularly active in advocating a more robust response by China ever since the US and the South Korean navies started holding a series of joint exercises in the vicinity of the Yellow Sea following the alleged sinking of a South Korean naval vessel by the North Korean Navy in March last. In an article titled “America is Engaging in Gunboat Diplomacy Against China. Unilateral Confrontation and Showing Off of Hard Power", which was carried by the “People’s Daily” online on August 13 last, Major General Luo wrote:
”The United States is never willing to communicate and consult with other countries, let alone think from others' point of views. Since Obama came into power, he has claimed to have broken clearly with former President Bush's unilateralist policies and pursued "smart power" diplomacy. However, judging from the United States and South Korea's insistence on holding joint military drills around the waters of the Korean Peninsula, we see neither multilateral security cooperation nor the display of smart power. What we see is only unilateral confrontation and showing off of hard power. The Chinese are peace-loving people, and China is now taking a peaceful development road different from when the imperialist powers rose. We do not want to be against any country, but we are not fearful if other countries ignore our solemn positions and core interests. A country must have the dignity and its army must have deterrence power. China adheres to the principle "We will not attack unless we are attacked, and we must retaliate only if we are attacked," which is definitely not a joke to the Chinese people and the army. Doesn’t the United States proclaim itself to be the most democratic country? Then, they should know in the 21st century, they ought to learn to respect others and listen to the public opinions of other countries, using wisdom but not gunboats to solve problems.”
6. In another article carried by the party-controlled “Global Times” on December 14, Major-Gen Luo made hawkish observations which should be of concern to countries such as India, Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines which have unresolved territorial disputes with China. He wrote: “Just being rich is not enough to make China a strong nation. A powerful army is also needed. The future society should be not only extremely abundant in material riches, but also have a very healthy legal system, and a prevailing toughness and militaristic spirit. I told some foreign friends that I won't deny it when you call us hawkish because we are soldiers. If soldiers don't talk about war, who will? "If all soldiers become dovish, what is the point for ordinary people to pay so much money to keep the army? Why don't we save the money to improve the livelihood of people and change the name of the army to the Peace Association. A militaristic spirit is not meant to provoke war, but to shore up defences and prevent others from starting wars. The neighbouring area is not peaceful, and we have outside threats. The motherland is not unified yet and separatist forces are still posing threats to us. China has been dreaming of becoming a powerful nation for generations and the dream would finally be fulfilled in the next two generations. China's gross domestic product is close to the second in the world, but we have not even solved the issue of national unification, and we have not recovered the land looted by our neighbours, so how can we boast of being a strong nation?" Luo said the educational system should promote a sense of fearless confidence and revolutionary heroism as part of the curriculum.
7.In an editorial titled “The meaning of PLA General’s tirade” carried on August 14, the “Taipei Times” wrote: “ Luo has come to prominence over the past decade as one of the leading beaters of the war drum, threatening both the US and Taiwan’s leaders over their perceived lack of respect for the Middle Kingdom. He lashed out in February after Washington announced its latest arms package for Taiwan, urging his government to take diplomatic, military and economic measures to punish the US, including dumping US Treasury bonds. He also defended the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) outsized budget increases in recent years as necessary because of the “threat in the Taiwan Strait.”In November last year, the General, who works at the Academy of Military Sciences in Beijing, slammed President Ma Ying-jeou , accusing him of promoting a policy of “peaceful secession”. Luo had been one of the more prominent proponents back in 2004 of Beijing’s drive to enact its “Anti-Secession” Law. While academics and analysts repeatedly note that Luo and others like him do not officially speak for either the PLA or Beijing, the fact that Luo’s latest outburst was published in the PLA’s official mouthpiece speaks for itself.”
8.It added : “China’s Central Military Commission does use military officials, both serving and retired, to float ideas and suggestions, as a means of testing reactions and as a way to let the more rabid vent some steam. However, if Luo were not voicing ideas backed by Beijing, wouldn’t he be at risk of the same kind of treatment meted out to writers, bloggers and others who dare to speak out of turn? Luo’s status as a retired PLA General would not even protect him if Beijing were unhappy with his comments. Look at the travails of retired PLA surgeon Jiang Yanyong , who first alerted the world to Beijing’s cover-up of the SARS outbreak in 2003. Hailed as a hero both in China and around the world for speaking out, his willingness to speak his mind got him into trouble just a year later when he pressed for a review of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. Neither his age nor prestige could save him from detention and house arrest. Luo has been hectoring the US and its allies for too long to think that his comments do not represent the mainstream view both in the PLA and at Zhongnanhai. We would be unwise to dismiss him out of hand.”
9. Two books on the Army published in the beginning of this year have added to the welter of voices calling for a strong and robust Army, which can uphold China’s prestige. In a book titled “The China Dream”, Senior Colonel Liu Mingfu has said that China should build the world’s strongest military. He added :"China's big goal in the 21st century is to become the world's No 1, top power." In another book, Colonel Dai Xu wrote: "I'm very pessimistic about the future. China is largely surrounded by hostile or wary countries beholden to the US. I believe that China cannot escape the calamity of war and this calamity may come in the not-too-distant future, at most in 10 to 20 years."
10. At the same time, it is apparent that there are other PLA officers who do not feel comfortable with the hawkish talk indulged in by officers like Luo. An article carried by the “China Daily” on March 4 quoted an unnamed PLA officer as saying as follows: "China has all the necessary sophisticated weapons, but we cannot compare with the US in terms of quantity. Personally, I do not agree with big talks by some scholars, (which) could only misdirect China's national image. We should do more, but speak less."
11. One should take note of the debate on the pros and cons of a militaristic approach to policy-making going on in the community of military analysts in China. This indicates that there are elements in the PLA which feel that there is no need for China to feel apologetic about its policy of military assertiveness. In their view, this assertiveness has two objectives---- to regain territory lost (according to them ) by China in the past in order to complete the process of national unification and to establish China’s pre-eminence as a military power, which would not hesitate to use its newly-acquired military strength should it become necessary.
12. The political leadership, while maintaining a distance from this debate, has not been discouraging such expression of hawkish views. Does this indicate a possible weakening of political control over the PLA? Not necessarily. However, it definitely indicates increasing expectations from certain sections in the PLA that their views on strategic policy-making deserve greater attention----particularly in matters relating to China’s national unification, which these officers see as still incomplete. (23-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
CONGRESS (I): DEMONISATION OF THE RSS
B.RAMAN
The exercise initiated by Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the President of the Congress (I), and her cohorts at the just concluded 83rd plenary of the Congress (I) to have the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) projected and demonised as a Hindu terrorist organisation comparable to the Nazi groups of World War II vintage and the more recent Islamic terrorist organisations speaks of the mental confusion that prevails at the senior levels of her party. It also highlights the total bankruptcy of thinking and the total indifference to sensitive issues that have become the defining characteristics of the party under her leadership in recent months.
2. It is a fact that some members of the Hindu community had during the last three or four years taken to acts of reprisal terrorism against the Muslim community at Malegaon, Hyderabad and Ajmer. It also seems to be a fact that the Hindus suspected to have been involved in these acts of reprisal terrorism were ideologically close to some of the Hindutva groups, including the RSS. The suspected role of some regional office-bearers of the RSS in motivating those Hindus, who had taken to anti-Muslim terrorism, is presently under investigation.
3. But there has been no evidence so far that the RSS as an organisation had any role in encouraging acts of reprisal against the Muslims or in motivating those who had taken to terrorism. The RSS and its leaders seem to have been as much surprised and embarrassed by the activities of these Hindu elements as other sections of the Hindu society.In the past, there had been instances of some Hindus indulging in acts of sporadic violence against Muslims in moments of public anger, but there were no instances of any Hindu or group of Hindus taking to deliberately planned acts of anti-Muslim terrorism.
4.Such deliberate and pre-planned acts of terrorism by elements in the Hindu community, including one or two officers of the armed forces, have been a recent phenomenon triggered off by a growing anger in sections of the Hindu community over what they perceived as inaction or inadequate action of the Congress (I) controlled Governments in dealing with acts of terrorism by some members of the Indian Muslim community and by Pakistani jihadi organisations sponsored by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
5. These acts of reprisal terrorism by some members of the Hindu community called for two pronged action by the Government. Firstly, the arrest and prosecution of those involved. Secondly, action to address the causes of anger in the Hindu community . Instead of doing so, the Congress (I), by launching an unwise and virulent campaign against the RSS, is going to add to the anger in the Hindu community, large sections of which look upon the RSS as an organisation which has been serving the cause of Hinduism in the land of its origin through its religious, social, cultural and humanitarian work.
6. The Hindus are in an overwhelming majority in this country and they have a right to have organisations such as the RSS to preserve the heritage of their religion and to protect and nourish their religious roots. By demonising the RSS as a terrorist and Nazi-like organisation, the Congress (I) under the leadership of Mrs.Sonia Gandhi seeks to insult millions of Hindus in this country who serve the cause of the RSS and discredit their heritage in the eyes of the rest of the world.
7. The anti-RSS campaign of the Congress (I) will not only add to the already existing anger in sections of the Hindu community,but will also play into the hands of the jihadi terrorists by facilitating their objective of aggravating the divide between the Hindu and Muslim communities. Before this campaign starts further damaging the relations between the two communities, the Congress (I) should stop its demonisation of the RSS, which would prove counter-productive. ( 22-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The exercise initiated by Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the President of the Congress (I), and her cohorts at the just concluded 83rd plenary of the Congress (I) to have the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) projected and demonised as a Hindu terrorist organisation comparable to the Nazi groups of World War II vintage and the more recent Islamic terrorist organisations speaks of the mental confusion that prevails at the senior levels of her party. It also highlights the total bankruptcy of thinking and the total indifference to sensitive issues that have become the defining characteristics of the party under her leadership in recent months.
2. It is a fact that some members of the Hindu community had during the last three or four years taken to acts of reprisal terrorism against the Muslim community at Malegaon, Hyderabad and Ajmer. It also seems to be a fact that the Hindus suspected to have been involved in these acts of reprisal terrorism were ideologically close to some of the Hindutva groups, including the RSS. The suspected role of some regional office-bearers of the RSS in motivating those Hindus, who had taken to anti-Muslim terrorism, is presently under investigation.
3. But there has been no evidence so far that the RSS as an organisation had any role in encouraging acts of reprisal against the Muslims or in motivating those who had taken to terrorism. The RSS and its leaders seem to have been as much surprised and embarrassed by the activities of these Hindu elements as other sections of the Hindu society.In the past, there had been instances of some Hindus indulging in acts of sporadic violence against Muslims in moments of public anger, but there were no instances of any Hindu or group of Hindus taking to deliberately planned acts of anti-Muslim terrorism.
4.Such deliberate and pre-planned acts of terrorism by elements in the Hindu community, including one or two officers of the armed forces, have been a recent phenomenon triggered off by a growing anger in sections of the Hindu community over what they perceived as inaction or inadequate action of the Congress (I) controlled Governments in dealing with acts of terrorism by some members of the Indian Muslim community and by Pakistani jihadi organisations sponsored by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
5. These acts of reprisal terrorism by some members of the Hindu community called for two pronged action by the Government. Firstly, the arrest and prosecution of those involved. Secondly, action to address the causes of anger in the Hindu community . Instead of doing so, the Congress (I), by launching an unwise and virulent campaign against the RSS, is going to add to the anger in the Hindu community, large sections of which look upon the RSS as an organisation which has been serving the cause of Hinduism in the land of its origin through its religious, social, cultural and humanitarian work.
6. The Hindus are in an overwhelming majority in this country and they have a right to have organisations such as the RSS to preserve the heritage of their religion and to protect and nourish their religious roots. By demonising the RSS as a terrorist and Nazi-like organisation, the Congress (I) under the leadership of Mrs.Sonia Gandhi seeks to insult millions of Hindus in this country who serve the cause of the RSS and discredit their heritage in the eyes of the rest of the world.
7. The anti-RSS campaign of the Congress (I) will not only add to the already existing anger in sections of the Hindu community,but will also play into the hands of the jihadi terrorists by facilitating their objective of aggravating the divide between the Hindu and Muslim communities. Before this campaign starts further damaging the relations between the two communities, the Congress (I) should stop its demonisation of the RSS, which would prove counter-productive. ( 22-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
THE 2G SPECTRUM SCAM: A DIVERSIONARY TACTICS
B.RAMAN
Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the President of the Congress (I), and Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh have been living in a make-believe world of their own totally cut off from reality. This became apparent from their speeches at the just concluded 83rd plenary session of the Congress (I).
2. The reality is the plethora of serious corruption cases that have come to the fore one after the other for more than a year now--- in the Government of India as well as in the State of Maharashtra. These cases demanded prompt action for their investigation and prosecution of those involved in the cases----either at the political level or at the level of bureaucrats or both. Instead of initiating prompt action in a manner that would satisfy the public, attempts have been made to drag their feet in order to avoid having to take action while pretending to act. Instead of acting against the wrong-doers through the investigative agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), these agencies were kept away from the wrong-doers in a blatant manner in an attempt to protect them from the legal consequences of their wrong-doing.
3.Whenever the CBI takes up a case of suspected corruption for preliminary enquiry or investigation, it is expected to initiate three steps immediately after taking cognizance of the complaint---firstly, seize documents that could have a bearing on the enquiry or investigation to prevent their being tampered with or destroyed; secondly, identify and freeze bank accounts that could be connected with the wrong-doing in order to prevent the money-trail from being destroyed; and thirdly, seize the passports and other travel documents of the suspects under enquiry or investigation in order to prevent them from fleeing the country. Arrests follow later for custodial interrogation before prosecution.
4.None of these steps was taken----particularly in the case relating to the so-called 2G spectrum scam in the Ministry of Telecommunications in which the principal suspect is A.Raja, who had to resign as Minister following the submission of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India drawing attention to the massive irregularities allegedly committed by him during his tenure as the Minister. He allegedly committed these irregularities not clandestinely, but blatantly in a manner that was widely known in the Ministry.
5. No attempt seems to have been made for months by senior officials of the Prime Minister’s Office and the Cabinet Secretariat to prevent Raja from misusing his office and, if they did not succeed in doing so, to draw the attention of the Prime Minister to his misdeeds and seek his intervention. If they had not done so, it was dereliction of duty of a serious nature on their part. On the contrary, if they had done so, but if the Prime Minister had not acted on their caution, it was dereliction of duty by the Prime Minister for which he cannot escape responsibility.
6. There have been derelictions of duty at various levels----political and bureaucratic--- probably going up to the Prime Minister. The question is not just whether Dr.Manmohan Singh is an honest man of tremendous integrity. The question is whether Dr.Manmohan Singh was effective as the head of the Cabinet and the Government in rooting out such instances of corruption. There was a colossal failure of leadership by the Prime Minister who showed poor reflexes in dealing with the allegations and in failing to act against Raja and others involved.
7. A CBI enquiry---even if it be under the supervision of the Supreme Court---- can only go into the criminal ramifications of the case. It cannot go into the administrative and policy ramifications. Nor can it identify leadership deficiencies at various levels, which made this scam possible. Only a comprehensive enquiry by a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) into the various aspects of the scam---- political, administrative and criminal--- can throw light on what happened, how it happened, who were the dramatis personae and how it remained undetected. Only a JPC can identify and zero in on lapses at the Cabinet level.
8. By opposing such a comprehensive enquiry by a JPC, the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi are apparently trying to keep the enquiry confined to the criminal aspects of the case without going into the other aspects which could create embarrassment for the Government in general and the Prime Minister in particular.
9. In their speeches at the Congress plenary, Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh have used diversionary tactics by announcing a series of measures for preventing corruption in future without explaining what they intended doing to deal with the corruption that has already taken place and to punish those responsible so that there is a deterrent effect on future temptations. The Prime Minister’s offer to subject himself to questioning by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament is part of this diversionary tactics. The Prime Minister is yet to explain to the people why he is so doggedly opposing a JPC. The fact that past JPCs did not produce results is no excuse for not having one to enquire into the 2G spectrum scam.
10. Sonia Gandhi and the Prime Minister seem to be calculating that if they continue to stonewall the demand for a JPC and avoid a comprehensive enquiry, there could be a backlash against the opposition and public memory will start forgetting the scams. This should not be allowed to happen. (21-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and , presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, the President of the Congress (I), and Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh have been living in a make-believe world of their own totally cut off from reality. This became apparent from their speeches at the just concluded 83rd plenary session of the Congress (I).
2. The reality is the plethora of serious corruption cases that have come to the fore one after the other for more than a year now--- in the Government of India as well as in the State of Maharashtra. These cases demanded prompt action for their investigation and prosecution of those involved in the cases----either at the political level or at the level of bureaucrats or both. Instead of initiating prompt action in a manner that would satisfy the public, attempts have been made to drag their feet in order to avoid having to take action while pretending to act. Instead of acting against the wrong-doers through the investigative agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), these agencies were kept away from the wrong-doers in a blatant manner in an attempt to protect them from the legal consequences of their wrong-doing.
3.Whenever the CBI takes up a case of suspected corruption for preliminary enquiry or investigation, it is expected to initiate three steps immediately after taking cognizance of the complaint---firstly, seize documents that could have a bearing on the enquiry or investigation to prevent their being tampered with or destroyed; secondly, identify and freeze bank accounts that could be connected with the wrong-doing in order to prevent the money-trail from being destroyed; and thirdly, seize the passports and other travel documents of the suspects under enquiry or investigation in order to prevent them from fleeing the country. Arrests follow later for custodial interrogation before prosecution.
4.None of these steps was taken----particularly in the case relating to the so-called 2G spectrum scam in the Ministry of Telecommunications in which the principal suspect is A.Raja, who had to resign as Minister following the submission of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India drawing attention to the massive irregularities allegedly committed by him during his tenure as the Minister. He allegedly committed these irregularities not clandestinely, but blatantly in a manner that was widely known in the Ministry.
5. No attempt seems to have been made for months by senior officials of the Prime Minister’s Office and the Cabinet Secretariat to prevent Raja from misusing his office and, if they did not succeed in doing so, to draw the attention of the Prime Minister to his misdeeds and seek his intervention. If they had not done so, it was dereliction of duty of a serious nature on their part. On the contrary, if they had done so, but if the Prime Minister had not acted on their caution, it was dereliction of duty by the Prime Minister for which he cannot escape responsibility.
6. There have been derelictions of duty at various levels----political and bureaucratic--- probably going up to the Prime Minister. The question is not just whether Dr.Manmohan Singh is an honest man of tremendous integrity. The question is whether Dr.Manmohan Singh was effective as the head of the Cabinet and the Government in rooting out such instances of corruption. There was a colossal failure of leadership by the Prime Minister who showed poor reflexes in dealing with the allegations and in failing to act against Raja and others involved.
7. A CBI enquiry---even if it be under the supervision of the Supreme Court---- can only go into the criminal ramifications of the case. It cannot go into the administrative and policy ramifications. Nor can it identify leadership deficiencies at various levels, which made this scam possible. Only a comprehensive enquiry by a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) into the various aspects of the scam---- political, administrative and criminal--- can throw light on what happened, how it happened, who were the dramatis personae and how it remained undetected. Only a JPC can identify and zero in on lapses at the Cabinet level.
8. By opposing such a comprehensive enquiry by a JPC, the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi are apparently trying to keep the enquiry confined to the criminal aspects of the case without going into the other aspects which could create embarrassment for the Government in general and the Prime Minister in particular.
9. In their speeches at the Congress plenary, Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh have used diversionary tactics by announcing a series of measures for preventing corruption in future without explaining what they intended doing to deal with the corruption that has already taken place and to punish those responsible so that there is a deterrent effect on future temptations. The Prime Minister’s offer to subject himself to questioning by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament is part of this diversionary tactics. The Prime Minister is yet to explain to the people why he is so doggedly opposing a JPC. The fact that past JPCs did not produce results is no excuse for not having one to enquire into the 2G spectrum scam.
10. Sonia Gandhi and the Prime Minister seem to be calculating that if they continue to stonewall the demand for a JPC and avoid a comprehensive enquiry, there could be a backlash against the opposition and public memory will start forgetting the scams. This should not be allowed to happen. (21-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and , presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Monday, December 20, 2010
WEN JIABAO: PAKISTAN, A VALUABLE ASSET FOR CHINA
B.RAMAN
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China visited Pakistan from December 17 to 19,2010, after having completed a three-day visit to India from December 15 to 17. During his stay in Pakistan, he inaugurated a one-year celebration of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Wen and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani jointly inaugurated on December 18 the Pakistan-China Friendship Center, which is a Chinese-aided cultural complex built in Islamabad by China to promote exchanges among students, media and academic circles from the two countries. Wen had laid the foundation for the center during his earlier visit to Pakistan in April 2005.
2.There were three important events during the visit. The first in order of significance was a joint courtesy call on him on December 18 by Gen.Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff, Admiral Noman Bashir, the Chief of the Naval Staff, and Air Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman, the Chief of the Air Staff. According to the Xinhua news agency, during his meeting with the heads of the Pakistani Armed Forces, Wen called for enhanced military exchanges and cooperation between China and Pakistan so as to cement the bilateral strategic partnership of cooperation. He said: “The Pakistani military is a steadfast supporter and vindicator of the China-Pakistan friendship, and has played an important role in consolidating and developing their strategic partnership of cooperation."He applauded the close exchanges between the two militaries in the areas of anti-terrorism and disaster relief, and hoped to further enhance the military links to contribute to the development of bilateral ties.
3. According to the Xinhua, the Pakistani military chiefs described China as an all-weather strategic partner of Pakistan and said the bilateral friendship had withstood severe challenges. The Pakistani military was ready to work jointly with China to play a positive role in developing their strategic partnership of cooperation. According to well-informed Pakistani sources, the initiative for the joint courtesy call came from the Pakistani military leaders. The meeting underlined the important role which the Pakistani Armed Forces have been playing in the development of Pakistan’s strategic partnership with China. Reports from Islamabad indicate that no Chinese military officer of comparable seniority and importance was present with Wen when he received the heads of the Pakistani Armed Forces to reassure them of China’s continued support for Pakistan.
4. The second in order of significance was Wen’s discussions with President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani. Xinhua quoted Wen as telling Gilani on December 17 as follows: "China and Pakistan were, are and will always be good neighbors, good friends, good partners and good brothers. China appreciates the strong support Pakistan has long been offering on issues concerning China's core interests, and will continue backing Pakistan's efforts in defending national sovereignty, maintaining social stability and achieving independent and sustainable economic development.” Noting that Pakistan has made huge sacrifices for and important contributions to the global counterterrorism campaign, Wen said his country is ready to work together with Pakistan to promote regional peace and stability. Speaking at a banquet hosted by Zardari, Wen said: “For decades, the two countries have been treating each other with sincerity and supporting each other on all international fora. Our friendship is a valuable asset.”
5.The third in order of significance was Wen’s address to a joint session of the two Houses of the Pakistan Parliament on December 19 before he left for China. In his address, Wen underlined the importance of China’s relations with Pakistan in the context of China’s policies in the region. He said inter alia: “To cement and advance the all-weather strategic partnership of cooperation between China and Pakistan is our common strategic choice. It serves the fundamental interests of both countries and peoples and contributes to peace, stability and development of the region and beyond. The two neighboring countries are brothers for ever. China-Pakistan friendship is full of vigor and vitality, like a lush tree with deep roots and thick foliage. China-Pakistan relationship is strong and solid, like a rock standing firm despite the passage of time. Pakistan has sacrificed greatly and made great efforts in the fight against terrorism. It is a reality ... and the international community should respect Pakistan’s efforts.” Recalling Pakistan's consistent and full support to China in the past at some crucial junctures and on various issues, including issues concerning Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang, Wen said that China received valuable help from Pakistan.
6. Talking to the media after Wen’s address to the Parliament, Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik described it as a strong message to the enemies of Pakistan. He said that Wen’s address reflected the emotional attachment of the people and Government of China with the Government and the people of Pakistan and added: “The Premier’s speech must have rung alarm bells to the enemies of Pakistan, which cast covetous eyes on its peace, stability, progress and prosperity. It’s a strong message to the enemies (of Pakistan).”
7. Following are the salient points of the joint statement issued by Gilani and Wen at the end of their talks:
* “China-Pakistan relationship has gone beyond the bilateral scope, with broader regional and international influence.”
* “The Pakistani side stressed that the friendship with China is the cornerstone of Pakistan’s foreign policy.”
* “The Chinese side reiterated its respect for Pakistan’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. The Pakistan side reiterated its adherence to the one-China policy.”
* “The two sides agreed to focus on strengthening infrastructure, energy and agricultural cooperation. The Chinese side is willing to upgrade the Karakoram Highway. An energy cooperation mechanism has been established to promote co-operation in the development of conventional energy, renewable energy and civilian nuclear cooperation.”
* The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has decided to open branches in Islamabad and Karachi.
* The two sides have decided to strengthen the implementation of the framework agreement on co-operation between the China National Space Administration and the Pakistan Space and Atmosphere Research Commission.
* “China believes that in the fight against terrorism, Pakistan has made great efforts and sacrifices. It reaffirmed its respect for Pakistan’s efforts to develop and implement its own national conditions under its anti-terrorism strategy. Pakistan reiterated its firm determination to combat terrorism.”
* “China believes that Pakistan is an important country in the region, which should play an important role for the maintenance of regional peace, security and stability. The two countries support the unity and the territorial integrity of Afghanistan. “
8. Wen’s visit came at a time when the Pakistani economy is going through a difficult period due to the recent floods and when Pakistan has been under increasing criticism from the US for not doing enough in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Apart from highlighting the growing strategic partnership between the two countries and their military-military relationship, Wen missed no opportunity to underline China’s economic solidarity with Pakistan and its appreciation of Islamabad’s contribution to the fight against terrorism. He was reported to have promised to Pakistan low-interest loans amounting to US $ one billion for various projects and export credits amounting to US $ 300 million.
9. There has been some confusion regarding the total economic benefits to Pakistan as a result of the Wen visit. The “Global Times” of China estimated the total value of the various agreements signed as about US $ 10 billion, but the Pakistani media, briefed by Pakistani officials, has given the figure as US $ 35 billion. After going through the welter of confusing reports from Pakistan on the economic benefits to Pakistan, one can assess as follows:
* Immediately after the floods, China had pledged US $ 250 million as grants as flood relief. Wen has pledged another US $ 400 million as low-interest loans for the reconstruction of the flood-ravaged infrastructure.
* Among the infrastructure reconstruction projects to be given priority is the repair, upgradation and recommissioning of the Karakoram Highway from Xinjiang. The National Highway Authority (NHA) of Pakistan and the China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) signed an agreement for the reconstruction/rehabilitation of a portion of the Karakoram Highway (KKH) which had been damaged at a cost of $275 million. NHA Chairman Altaf Ahmed Chaudhry and CRBC President Wen Gang signed the agreement on behalf of their respective organisations. While talking to reporters, Chaudhry said that heavy landsliding at Attaabad on the Karakoram Highway had blocked the flow of the River Hunza, which resulted in the formation of a lake at the site. The lake submerged a 25 kilometre-long section of KKH, resulting in suspension of traffic and all other activities in the area. The CRBC was already engaged in widening and rehabilitation of the Raikot-Khunjerab section of the KKH. Following a survey, the CRBC has said that a section of the road could be reclaimed by bringing down the water level in the lake by 30 metres. A new alignment will have to be made for the rest of the portion. Chaudhry said that a 17-kilometer-long road will be constructed on a new alignment while a 7 kilometre-long section will be rehabilitated. The project will be completed in two years. He said the project includes construction of two tunnels having a length of 4,485 metres and 1,225 metres. He added that seven large and two bridges and 70 culverts will also be built. ( From the “Daily Times” of Lahore)
* According to a list of Chinese-aided projects handed out to journalists by Pakistani officials, the biggest deal to receive Chinese assistance would be worth $6.5 billion to develop wind and solar power. There was no specific reference to the Chinese assistance for the construction of three more nuclear power stations. The Chinese proposal in this regard is still to be approved by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group. Despite this, the Chinese suppliers of the new power stations are going ahead with their preparatory work such as preparation of designs.
* Pakistani officials told their media that Pakistan and China have agreed in principle to constitute a consortium for seeking a soft loan from international institutions for laying a railway line between the two countries through the Khunjerab Pass. It is not clear why China is not providing the funds for this as it has done in the case of the railway lines being constructed by it in Myanmar. China had strongly opposed in the Asian Development Bank a proposal for a soft loan for some Indian hydel power stations in Arunachal Pradesh. India should strongly oppose any proposal for financial assistance to the proposed railway line from any international or regional institution.
* There was no reference during Wen’s visit to the Pakistani proposal for the construction of oil/gas pipelines from the Chinese-constructed Gwadar port to Xinjiang. The Chinese continue to be hesitant to make fresh commitments in Balochistan due to the security problems in the area.
10. The relatives of 350 Pakistani nationals languishing in jails in China held a demonstration in Peshawar on December 18 to demand the release of their relatives by the Chinese authorities. They have been arrested and jailed by the Chinese authorities for illegally entering Xinjiang and for indulging in narcotics smuggling. Many of those arrested for narcotics smuggling have been sentenced to death by Chinese courts. (21-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China visited Pakistan from December 17 to 19,2010, after having completed a three-day visit to India from December 15 to 17. During his stay in Pakistan, he inaugurated a one-year celebration of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Wen and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani jointly inaugurated on December 18 the Pakistan-China Friendship Center, which is a Chinese-aided cultural complex built in Islamabad by China to promote exchanges among students, media and academic circles from the two countries. Wen had laid the foundation for the center during his earlier visit to Pakistan in April 2005.
2.There were three important events during the visit. The first in order of significance was a joint courtesy call on him on December 18 by Gen.Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Gen.Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, the Chief of the Army Staff, Admiral Noman Bashir, the Chief of the Naval Staff, and Air Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman, the Chief of the Air Staff. According to the Xinhua news agency, during his meeting with the heads of the Pakistani Armed Forces, Wen called for enhanced military exchanges and cooperation between China and Pakistan so as to cement the bilateral strategic partnership of cooperation. He said: “The Pakistani military is a steadfast supporter and vindicator of the China-Pakistan friendship, and has played an important role in consolidating and developing their strategic partnership of cooperation."He applauded the close exchanges between the two militaries in the areas of anti-terrorism and disaster relief, and hoped to further enhance the military links to contribute to the development of bilateral ties.
3. According to the Xinhua, the Pakistani military chiefs described China as an all-weather strategic partner of Pakistan and said the bilateral friendship had withstood severe challenges. The Pakistani military was ready to work jointly with China to play a positive role in developing their strategic partnership of cooperation. According to well-informed Pakistani sources, the initiative for the joint courtesy call came from the Pakistani military leaders. The meeting underlined the important role which the Pakistani Armed Forces have been playing in the development of Pakistan’s strategic partnership with China. Reports from Islamabad indicate that no Chinese military officer of comparable seniority and importance was present with Wen when he received the heads of the Pakistani Armed Forces to reassure them of China’s continued support for Pakistan.
4. The second in order of significance was Wen’s discussions with President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani. Xinhua quoted Wen as telling Gilani on December 17 as follows: "China and Pakistan were, are and will always be good neighbors, good friends, good partners and good brothers. China appreciates the strong support Pakistan has long been offering on issues concerning China's core interests, and will continue backing Pakistan's efforts in defending national sovereignty, maintaining social stability and achieving independent and sustainable economic development.” Noting that Pakistan has made huge sacrifices for and important contributions to the global counterterrorism campaign, Wen said his country is ready to work together with Pakistan to promote regional peace and stability. Speaking at a banquet hosted by Zardari, Wen said: “For decades, the two countries have been treating each other with sincerity and supporting each other on all international fora. Our friendship is a valuable asset.”
5.The third in order of significance was Wen’s address to a joint session of the two Houses of the Pakistan Parliament on December 19 before he left for China. In his address, Wen underlined the importance of China’s relations with Pakistan in the context of China’s policies in the region. He said inter alia: “To cement and advance the all-weather strategic partnership of cooperation between China and Pakistan is our common strategic choice. It serves the fundamental interests of both countries and peoples and contributes to peace, stability and development of the region and beyond. The two neighboring countries are brothers for ever. China-Pakistan friendship is full of vigor and vitality, like a lush tree with deep roots and thick foliage. China-Pakistan relationship is strong and solid, like a rock standing firm despite the passage of time. Pakistan has sacrificed greatly and made great efforts in the fight against terrorism. It is a reality ... and the international community should respect Pakistan’s efforts.” Recalling Pakistan's consistent and full support to China in the past at some crucial junctures and on various issues, including issues concerning Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang, Wen said that China received valuable help from Pakistan.
6. Talking to the media after Wen’s address to the Parliament, Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik described it as a strong message to the enemies of Pakistan. He said that Wen’s address reflected the emotional attachment of the people and Government of China with the Government and the people of Pakistan and added: “The Premier’s speech must have rung alarm bells to the enemies of Pakistan, which cast covetous eyes on its peace, stability, progress and prosperity. It’s a strong message to the enemies (of Pakistan).”
7. Following are the salient points of the joint statement issued by Gilani and Wen at the end of their talks:
* “China-Pakistan relationship has gone beyond the bilateral scope, with broader regional and international influence.”
* “The Pakistani side stressed that the friendship with China is the cornerstone of Pakistan’s foreign policy.”
* “The Chinese side reiterated its respect for Pakistan’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. The Pakistan side reiterated its adherence to the one-China policy.”
* “The two sides agreed to focus on strengthening infrastructure, energy and agricultural cooperation. The Chinese side is willing to upgrade the Karakoram Highway. An energy cooperation mechanism has been established to promote co-operation in the development of conventional energy, renewable energy and civilian nuclear cooperation.”
* The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has decided to open branches in Islamabad and Karachi.
* The two sides have decided to strengthen the implementation of the framework agreement on co-operation between the China National Space Administration and the Pakistan Space and Atmosphere Research Commission.
* “China believes that in the fight against terrorism, Pakistan has made great efforts and sacrifices. It reaffirmed its respect for Pakistan’s efforts to develop and implement its own national conditions under its anti-terrorism strategy. Pakistan reiterated its firm determination to combat terrorism.”
* “China believes that Pakistan is an important country in the region, which should play an important role for the maintenance of regional peace, security and stability. The two countries support the unity and the territorial integrity of Afghanistan. “
8. Wen’s visit came at a time when the Pakistani economy is going through a difficult period due to the recent floods and when Pakistan has been under increasing criticism from the US for not doing enough in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Apart from highlighting the growing strategic partnership between the two countries and their military-military relationship, Wen missed no opportunity to underline China’s economic solidarity with Pakistan and its appreciation of Islamabad’s contribution to the fight against terrorism. He was reported to have promised to Pakistan low-interest loans amounting to US $ one billion for various projects and export credits amounting to US $ 300 million.
9. There has been some confusion regarding the total economic benefits to Pakistan as a result of the Wen visit. The “Global Times” of China estimated the total value of the various agreements signed as about US $ 10 billion, but the Pakistani media, briefed by Pakistani officials, has given the figure as US $ 35 billion. After going through the welter of confusing reports from Pakistan on the economic benefits to Pakistan, one can assess as follows:
* Immediately after the floods, China had pledged US $ 250 million as grants as flood relief. Wen has pledged another US $ 400 million as low-interest loans for the reconstruction of the flood-ravaged infrastructure.
* Among the infrastructure reconstruction projects to be given priority is the repair, upgradation and recommissioning of the Karakoram Highway from Xinjiang. The National Highway Authority (NHA) of Pakistan and the China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) signed an agreement for the reconstruction/rehabilitation of a portion of the Karakoram Highway (KKH) which had been damaged at a cost of $275 million. NHA Chairman Altaf Ahmed Chaudhry and CRBC President Wen Gang signed the agreement on behalf of their respective organisations. While talking to reporters, Chaudhry said that heavy landsliding at Attaabad on the Karakoram Highway had blocked the flow of the River Hunza, which resulted in the formation of a lake at the site. The lake submerged a 25 kilometre-long section of KKH, resulting in suspension of traffic and all other activities in the area. The CRBC was already engaged in widening and rehabilitation of the Raikot-Khunjerab section of the KKH. Following a survey, the CRBC has said that a section of the road could be reclaimed by bringing down the water level in the lake by 30 metres. A new alignment will have to be made for the rest of the portion. Chaudhry said that a 17-kilometer-long road will be constructed on a new alignment while a 7 kilometre-long section will be rehabilitated. The project will be completed in two years. He said the project includes construction of two tunnels having a length of 4,485 metres and 1,225 metres. He added that seven large and two bridges and 70 culverts will also be built. ( From the “Daily Times” of Lahore)
* According to a list of Chinese-aided projects handed out to journalists by Pakistani officials, the biggest deal to receive Chinese assistance would be worth $6.5 billion to develop wind and solar power. There was no specific reference to the Chinese assistance for the construction of three more nuclear power stations. The Chinese proposal in this regard is still to be approved by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group. Despite this, the Chinese suppliers of the new power stations are going ahead with their preparatory work such as preparation of designs.
* Pakistani officials told their media that Pakistan and China have agreed in principle to constitute a consortium for seeking a soft loan from international institutions for laying a railway line between the two countries through the Khunjerab Pass. It is not clear why China is not providing the funds for this as it has done in the case of the railway lines being constructed by it in Myanmar. China had strongly opposed in the Asian Development Bank a proposal for a soft loan for some Indian hydel power stations in Arunachal Pradesh. India should strongly oppose any proposal for financial assistance to the proposed railway line from any international or regional institution.
* There was no reference during Wen’s visit to the Pakistani proposal for the construction of oil/gas pipelines from the Chinese-constructed Gwadar port to Xinjiang. The Chinese continue to be hesitant to make fresh commitments in Balochistan due to the security problems in the area.
10. The relatives of 350 Pakistani nationals languishing in jails in China held a demonstration in Peshawar on December 18 to demand the release of their relatives by the Chinese authorities. They have been arrested and jailed by the Chinese authorities for illegally entering Xinjiang and for indulging in narcotics smuggling. Many of those arrested for narcotics smuggling have been sentenced to death by Chinese courts. (21-12-10)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)