Featured Post

Wake up Now ! جاگو ، جاگو ، جاگو

Wake up Pakistan ! Presently the Muslim societies are in a state of ideological confusion and flux. Materialism, terrorism,...

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Being a Nation

National movements and patriotic ideas developed during the French Revolution (1789), which was a period of radical, social and political upheaval not only in France but throughout Europe.

The French were united in the revolution against feudal and aristocratic authorities. They marched towards the battlefield singing “La Marseillaise”, the national song and fought bravely to save their country in the true spirit of nationalism.

In 1862, the theory of nationalism was used to awaken national pride among the Italian people to fight against the occupying foreign forces. Italy which was previously a mere geographical expression became a united country by assimilating different ethnic groups.

In the third phase, nationalism helped unite Germany which earlier comprised more than 300 independent states. The German philosophers, Herder and Fichte, radicalised the German thought process and infused nationalism while the Grimm brothers collected folk literature to impart a sense of linguistic homogeneity among Germans.

In Asia and Africa, nationalism was used to get rid of colonial masters. In some countries territorial nationalism was used to fight against colonial powers, while in others nationalism bore linguistic or religious undertones.

With Gandhi’s advent in 1919, nationalism in the subcontinent acquired religious undertones, although previously the subcontinent was secular. Secular nationalism suited the elite, the Western-educated class that dominated the Congress party whereas religious nationalism appealed to the masses who were deeply rooted in religious traditions and values.

Gandhi raised the slogan of Ram Rajiya, the legendary rule of Ram which was the golden period of Indian history. The common people understood this language and became attracted to politics.

As a result, the Muslim community was now excluded from Gandhi’s religious nationalism. They began a quest for a different type of nationalism to protect their rights.
The agenda of Gandhi’s nationalism was to struggle against the colonial power while the social and political structure of society remained unaltered. Gandhi did not favour abolishing the caste system, the liberation of women, eradication of poverty nor introduction of land reform. Which is why, even after Independence, the caste system remained intact, women continued to be exploited and poverty could not be eliminated.

Gandhi avoided confrontation. He wanted to maintain traditional relations between peasants, landlords, workers and industrialists as well as the domination of upper castes over the lower ones.

Therefore, his nationalism failed to change the Indian society even after the British left.

In the case of the Pakistan Movement, the two-nation theory played an important role. Since the Hindus and the Muslims were pronounced separate nations because of their religious, social and cultural differences, Muslim nationalism based on religion was created.

The All India Muslim League struggled for a homeland on the basis of Muslim nationalism which lacked a social, economic, and cultural agenda. There was no planning for introduction of land reforms, equal status of women, or economic opportunities to all its citizens.

The result was that after Independence, colonial institutions continued without any social change. Feudal lords monopolised politics, bureaucrats controlled the administration, and industrialists exploited the workers. The masses sacrificed their homes and livelihoods in the name of nationalism but their socio-economic condition hardly improved.

Presently in Sindh and Balochistan, nationalist movements are gaining strength.

What is the agenda of these nationalist movements? Are they against their landlords and tribal leaders? Are they in favour of eradicating outdated traditions and customs?

In order to make them effective, there is a need to broaden the scope of these movements. Sindhi nationalism should include peasants, Kolis, Bhils, and other lower caste tribes. The marginal communities will only become a part of it when the movement appeals to them in regard to protection of their rights.

In case of the national movement in Balochistan, those living in the province must not be excluded. Nationalist movements that lack a pro-people agenda have no space for masses.

History teaches us that nationalism fulfils the interest of the elite and middle classes while ignoring common people. It is used to mobilise the emotions of people but after accomplishing its objectives, the elite class abandons the common people whose problems and issues remain unsolved.
By Mubarak Ali: http://dawn.com/2012/11/11/past-present-being-a-nation/

Friday, November 9, 2012

Army should disassociate itself from Corrupt Generals , rulers & politicians

Its true that young officers and soldiers of Pak Army render great sacrifices so that "We can live at peace". But few generals commit a heinous and un-pardonable crime by indulging in any type of corruption or misuse of authority, when caught try to take shelter behind the blood of martyrs, sacrifices of innocent military men. They should be ashamed of their deeds, a retired Lt.Gen gives an affidevet to get ambassadorial job in Germany. What a shame, this  country gives sufficient facilities to all officers to live a respectable life after retirement. Why these people sell themselves for petty gains. What Lt Gen Durrani did was purely for greed, no one has ever gone to the extent of committing his follies in writing to get a job. Can nation trust such people for sensitive assignments? Gen Keyani is himself party to the NRO and deal while he was DG ISI of Gen Musharaf. Now what haunts him is that next will be his turn when after his retirement some one will question his role. Keyani sahib has done many good things. However he should display his sinceririty, should take those Generals to task who plundered Army lands and resources while he is COAS. There are many internal scams in Amy like DHA Lahore, DHA Islamabad, well known to public. He has left all those rascals to getaway with their loot and closed his eyes. There are rumors all around about flourishing business of his brothers, which need to be investigated to crush the rumors with facts. He is right when he says that mere allegations should not become source of humiliation in media. But this is what is the norm, media does not spare any holy cow, it will take some time to get mature. We should put our own house in order, let the fair legal actions against corrupts be visible to people. Actions speak louder than hollow words. The rule of law and constitutionalism should prevail. Army should not seem to be protecting some corrupt generals or politicians

Gen Waheed Kakar set an example when he sent home a Maj Gen involved in moral corruption, within 24 hours. A clean person can do it without any fear. He is respected by civilians and soldiers alike.
We stand with Army but not few black sheeps. 
Pak Fauj Zindabad, Corruption Murdabad

Kayani’s words: myths and facts

Myth: The November 5 press release by the ISPR was a veiled warning to a targeted audience.

Fact: It had parts that were differently intended. The first three paragraphs addressed the serving military audience of the army chief’s talk and explained the evolutionary process of an attempt to seek a national consensus in a wide debate in the media that at times appeared scathing for the military. It emphasised the importance of such a process to create space in order to re-define Pakistan even as it struggles through a great transformative moment in its future direction, both as a state and as a society. This is particularly important in the background of terrorism and religious extremism, which threaten to tear the national fabric apart unless consensual re-direction is sought through honest introspection and readjustment of the fundamentals that have governed policy formulation in the decades since independence.

To the wider public it was an intimation of a recognition that institutions, including the military, have indeed made mistakes in the past and followed policies that have landed the country into dire straits. It also intimated that, while a process of reorientation of policies may appear slower than intended, such reorientation to meet the needs of a 21st century Pakistan is indeed in place. And that no more shall such a definition be the claim of just one institution, traditionally the military, but a composite and collaborative public effort evolved through discourse and debate.

Myth: The November 6 rebuttal by the chief justice in his remarks, while reviewing another case, indicates that the message was indeed intended for the Supreme Court in the wake of the trial and indictment of retired generals.

Fact: This couldn’t be further from the truth, since the statement by the ISPR quotes the army chief emphasising to his officers a national commitment to uphold the rule of law and to function within the parameters of the constitution. What might appear distasteful in the short run (such as seeing some retired senior officers of the army undergoing the ignominy of public trials), augurs well for the nation in the long run, when institutions are strengthened through the inimitable tradition of following the constitution and working within their constitutional domains. The chief justice’s remarks were a response to an overzealous attorney intending to clear the air of misperception between the court and the military, while pursuing an entirely unrelated case in the court – and hence misplaced.

Myth: If not the judiciary, the media for sure was under the spotlight.

Fact: There is significant truth in that, and it emerges from some ill-considered formulations in the debate in the media that are unable to correctly ascertain where must lie the limit on freedom of expression and where from begins the slippery slope of damaging the integrity of the institutions. The army chief, when referring to the gulf that wittingly or unwittingly is intended between the generals and the soldiers by remarks that own the army of the soldiers but ridicule the generals of the same army, indicates it as an insidious attempt to rupture institutional integrity. In legal parlance such an attempt is considered seditious. Also, such repeated insinuations against institutions – borne out of individual conduct – are firstly misplaced, and secondly yet to stand the test of trial and due process. Indictments must still become convictions before guilt is established through due process of law, which includes the right of defence. Broad-brush discolouration of an institution such as the military, which is critically dependent on favourable perceptions for public support, countervails the entire edifice on which such institutions are based. Our discourse must then be wary of such pitfalls as we learn to exercise the freedom of expression as a fundamental human right with a self imposed sense of fair responsibility. An attempt at weakening institutions is counter-intuitive to nation building.

Myth: The press release was intended to shelter the indicted retired generals from further process of trial and conviction.

Fact: In asking the question at the end of the statement, “have we not promoted law and the constitution?” the army chief suggests that, when so directed, the military brass has presented itself before the parliament and the Supreme Court in various cases. Retired generals, when asked, presented themselves before the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), and Generals Aslam Baig and Asad Durrani have fought their legal battles in the courts without assistance or cover by the army. When the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) established mala fide in the National Logistics Cell case, the army proceeded to act against the three generals through a court martial. There is absolutely no indication in cases of the eight generals that the army was seen to interfere with the process of law. This is reiterated by the army chief in the initial paragraphs of his address to the officers where he reinforces the primacy of law and the need to establish the tradition of respect for law.

In the question above and the following, “are we strengthening or weakening the institutions?” he indicates the huge distance that the military has covered in changing ‘mindsets’ for renewed credentials as an institution that has provided unquestioned support to the political process and other institutions, including the higher judiciary.

Myth: In mentioning ‘haste’, the army chief suggests desisting from hasty and frequent trial of the army generals.

Fact: While recognising mistakes that institutions (read army) have made over the years, the army chief implicitly suggests that time would be needed to turn around the huge ‘aircraft-carrier’ that the institution is, even as the change is already in place. In the meantime, however, if we continue to restrict the ambit of functioning of the traditional arms of governance as well as law enforcement, through court injunctions – as was done for Balochistan and Karachi – we may just find that we do not have any government agency to administer these critical regions.

As much as it is an honest admission of the errors in policy and the recognition of a need for reorientation in policy formulation, the army chief’s statement also identifies the need to keep the larger national interest of keeping the state and societal structures intact as Pakistan transforms through such a critical juncture.

The writer is a retired air-vice marshal of the Pakistan Air Force and served as its deputy chief of staff. Email: shhzdchdhry@yahoo.com

Read more: Free-Books  <<Click here>>>

Obama wins, goodbye to Neocons

Dan Senor has no more influence in the White House today than he did yesterday.That's the key foreign policy takeaway from the US reelection of President Barack Obama last night. Mitt Romney had surrounded himself with Neocons and other hawkish advisers, eager to regain the influence they lost when John McCain fell to Mr. Obama in 2008. Now, it looks like four more years in the wilderness for them.
Neocons  is a variant of the political ideology of conservatism which combines features of traditional (paleo) conservatismmilitary interventionismsocial conservatismnationalism, and a qualified endorsement of free markets. The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush, with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine. The term neocon is often used as pejorative in this context.
The chance that the US will start a new war has decreased, and Obama and like-minded officials will continue to put their realist stamp on US foreign relations as they wind down the Afghanistan war and try to use sanctions, rather than combat, to slow Iran's nuclear program. The dreams of transforming the world with US troops and tanks that inflamed so many of President Bush's advisers at the start of the Iraq war, will now be dreamt a long way from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Mr. Senor was a key political player for the Bush administration in Iraq after the 2003 invasion, advising Paul Bremer on how to run the country in 2003 and 2004. The frequent Fox News commentator emerged as Mr. Romney's main adviser for the Middle East, squiring him on visits to the UK and IsraelJohn Bolton, the Bush-Cheney ambassador to the UN (who is famous for hating the UN, among other things), also had Romney's ear and was rumored to be under consideration for Secretary of State in a Romney cabinet. Mr. Bolton has openly mused about going to war with Iran and Syria, and continues to insist the Iraq invasion and occupation was the right course of action. 
In all, 17 of Romney's 24 foreign policy advisers served under President Bush,according to Democratic Congressman Adam Smith, and the US approach to both war and peace abroad would have taken on a decidedly more Bushian cast if Romney had won.  While Americans mostly voted on pocketbook issues, the fact that most American voters dislike the Bush approach certainly didn't help Romney at the polls. Among the small number of voters who said they cared deeply about foreign policy, Obama had a 56-33 edge over Romney.
That more hawkish orientation was the reason that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was so eager for a Romney victory, since he expected the a Romney White House could be easier to talk into going to war with Iran than an Obama one.
It will be interesting to watch how Obama handles the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the years ahead, given his chilly relations with the Israeli prime minister. While it is unlikely that Obama will make any dramatic overtures to change the nature of US-Israeli relations, Mr. Netanyahu may find an administration that isn't as wholehearted, for instance, in arguing Israel's case at the United Nations. 
But in the broad strokes we'll be getting more of the same, with Obama promising to end the Afghanistan war by the end of 2014. The president was reluctant to get directly involved in the civil war in Syria before the election, and that reluctance is likely to persist.
But while there will be fewer boots on the ground, that doesn't mean Obama doesn't have an aggressive foreign policy of his own. It's just of a different style. The president seems as fond of using drones to kill America's alleged enemies abroad as ever, for instance. Obama has ordered alleged Al Qaeda-style militants killed by the hundreds on his watch in Pakistan and Yemen.
This undeclared drone war probably won't abate, with reports from Washington that Obama officials have been working on ways to justify the killings as legal, even when they involve the assassination of American citizens. There is simply no constituency in Washington against it. And the neocons, as they retreat back to their think-tanks and analyst positions on cable news shows, certainly won't complain.

Obama: The world's joy, Israel's Disappointment

While Barack Obama's victory was lauded across the world, there was uneasiness in the Israeli establishment and concerns in the media over whether the US President would try to extract 'revenge' on Premier Benjamin Netanyahu for his tacit backing of Mitt Romney. 
Though Netanyahu congratulated Obama on his victory and expressed hopes that they "will continue to work together", other leaders of the ruling parties had a difficult time hiding their disappointment, some openly saying that Obama was not trustworthy. 
"The strategic alliance between Israel and the US is stronger than ever. I will continue to work with President Obama in order to assure the interests that are vital to the security of the citizens of Israel," Netanyahu said in his congratulatory message. 
Despite the gesture, Knesset members from the Prime Minister's Likud party expressed their disappointment over Obama's re-election, expressing their hope that Israel would now be pressured into making political concessions. 
"Obama is not good for Israel and we're concerned that he will try to pressure Israel into making concessions because of his chilled relationship with Netanyahu," a Likud lawmaker was quoted by Ynetnews as saying. 

Another Knesset member, who had expressed his support for Republican candidate Romney noted that the Israeli Prime Minister would have no choice but to come to terms with Obama's re-election. 
"In the end we will have to work with him, and that's what will happen. In spite of the disappointment over this re-election, I believe that Netanyahu and Obama will eventually work together," he was quoted as saying. 
Knesset member Danny Danon too expressed his disappointment saying that "Obama cannot be trusted". 
"The State of Israel will not surrender to Obama. We have no one to rely on but ourselves," he argued. 
The frosty relations between Netanyahu and Obama were highlighted throughout the US election campaign in the Israeli media and the Israeli Premiere's tacit backing of Romney was amply visible. 
This led some to believe that the US President would work against Netanyahu in the forthcoming Israeli elections, if elected a second time. 
Romney also re-iterated his support for Israel in no uncertain terms accusing Obama of throwing the close ally under the bus and declaring that the Jewish state will be his first stop on the international map. 
The ties between Obama and Netanyahu have soured over Israel's policies of continuing building settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The us, under Obama, has also resisted Israel's calls for laying down clear "red lines" to stop Iran's nuclear programme. 

Read more: Free-Books  <<Click here>>>

Cure Corruption Eradicate Terrorism

Pakistani Nation cries and bleeds at hands of corrupt practices which effects majority of society. Few benefit and successfully make others hostage to this corrupt culture. These few play with emotions of majority from rich as well as poor segments of society and use tools and techniques to convince that progress only lies in moving in line with the corrupt culture. The proposal of declaration of assets by the politicians and government employees and empowering organizations like FIA and NAB are all efforts in same direction but they all stop short of finality showing clear absence of will to do. Even the constitutional amendment to decrease the number of cabinet members was passed to be effective from next assembly. Unfortunately the continuation of this system keeps filtering out the honest who stand up and show that Pakistan can progress its institutions can grow and its citizens can prosper and glow.
 An amazing article in one of the national dailies uncovered the facts from the railway scam when it said,  “Keeping aside the rough and rude behaviour of ex-army general after their recent appearance in NAB, if facts of the case are analysed objectively and without any emotions, the Railways Palm Golf Course was a wonderful deal”.  Most successful projects of Pakistan Railways’ history went into  scrutiny of standing committees who never visited the site which is indicative of the true objectives behind such inquiries. A Senate standing committee however did visit the site and declared it a good deal. Public Accounts Committee also took up the matter in 2005 and all issues were settled after detailed briefing by the then secretary Railways, Shakil Durrani. Re-Emergence of this case has once again refreshed the  blurring memories of Pakistan railway success in early part of this century which seem diminishing under burden of  a miserable state of present railways . The Railway pamphlet showing data of year 2002 says that railways earned Rs 13033 million and paid back Rs 5.50 billion back to the State Bank in 2002. The over draft from State Bank was decreased from 39% in 1999 to minus 10% in 2002 when the repayment to State Bank started. The passenger trains reaching in time, neat and clean railway stations and luggage trains boom registering increase in passenger and freight revenues  now seem like a dream was once a reality not very far in past. However, the investigations must still be done, evidence processed and completed, charges tried as it goes in interest of even the accused. If again found innocent will emerge even purer and if found otherwise deserve punishment. The only cost may be that few will again succeed in diverting attention of the majority.
Pakistan’s  main problem is not the existence of corruption. The fertile culture which help breeds and flourish  corruption and terrorism is the most lucrative and profitable activity in Pakistan. An environment leading towards lax government and more mafia control is the real worry. Till such time we attack the basics of this culture of corruption in Pakistan and provide a culture of deterrence to culprits , no positive improvement should be expected in any sphere of life. We must be aware of the fact that corruption is a bigger menace than terrorism. Presently the corrupt, land grabbers, ransom kidnappers and Bhatta mafia move hand in glove with the terrorists. Karachi stands as a live example where the corrupt and terrorist use the political parties to implement their culture and the entire country suffers. Country like India which also faces corruption challenges show a visible desire to overcome this problem. After signing agreements with 48 countries, India will shortly ink pacts with 42 more nations to bring back black money. Union minister of state for parliamentary affairs Harish Rawat told that once these agreements are signed, India will be in a position to bring back black money stashed in different banks abroad. The beauty of institutional decision which carry sincerity and a vision into future can be gauged by the control which you relegate to others who can impose a check on to your own decisions if they fall contrary to a corruption and terror free culture.
There is no dearth of ideas and suggestions and most of them have cogent reasoning and  plausible explanations. The  lack of implementation strategy and will to do under short term personal and party objectives dictated by corrupt and terror mafia seems to be the main hurdle. This culture formed by corrupt and terrorists is a parasite on long term National objectives . Most of the cases start and end in media without seeing day light of any worthwhile conclusion. The redefining of role for institutions like army by some intellectuals in  the media is injurious . Army has primary role to safe guard borders, it can only support internal security forces.The steps leading to weakening of institutions in Pakistan must be checked as we move towards more MAFIA and less STATE control and fail to Cure Corruption and Eradicate Terrorism.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

اوباما کا انتخاب دنیا کے لیے کیا معنی رکھتا ہے؟

اب جبکہ براک اوباما دوسری مدت کے لیے صدر منتخب ہو گئے ہیں دیکھنا یہ ہے کہ ان کا دوسرا دور دنیا کے لیے کیا معنی رکھتا ہے؟


بی بی سی کے کرس مورس برسلز سے لکھتے ہیں: یورپ آج عام طور پر یک گونہ اطمینان کی سانس لے کر جی رہا ہوگا۔ پورے براعظم میں رائے عامہ کے جائزوں میں ہمیشہ ہی براک اوبامہ کو مٹ رومنی کے مقابلے زیادہ مقبول رہنما کے طور پر پیش کیا گیا ہے۔ اس کے ساتھ ہی زیادہ تر حکومتیں بھی واشنگٹن میں تبدیلی کے بجائے تسلسل کی خواہش مند نظر آئی ہیں۔
امریکی وزیر خارجہ ٹم گیتھنر اور خود صدر اوباما یورو زون کے مباحثے میں قریب سے شامل رہے ہیں۔ یورپین یونین اپنے یورو زون بحران کے مباحثے میں اس قدر منہمک ہے کہ وہ کوئی بیرونی خلفشار نہیں چاہتا۔
اس کے علاوہ یورپین یونین اوباما انتظامیہ کے ساتھ خارجہ پالیسی کے متعدد معاملات میں مل کر کام کر رہا ہے جن میں بطور خاص ایران کا مسئلہ شامل ہے۔ اگرچہ چند اہم لوگوں میں تبدیلی ہو سکتی ہے لیکن اوباما کی جیت کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ یورپ کو اپنے معاملے میں ڈرامائی تبدیلی کی ضروت نہیں ہے۔


ہمارے نامہ نگار ایم الیاس خان اسلام آباد سے لکھتے ہیں: پاکستان کی فوج جو ملک کی سلامتی کی پالیسی پر اختیار رکھتی ہے اس کے لیے روایتی طور پر ری پبلکن حکومت زیادہ اچھی رہی ہے۔ ڈیموکریٹک رہنما عام طور پر اپنی سول لبرٹی، جمہوریت اور جوہری ہتھیار کی پالیسی کی وجہ سے پاکستان کے تئیں سرد رویہ رکھتے ہیں۔
صدر اوباما کے پہلے صدارتی دور میں امریکہ اور پاکستان کا رشتہ سب سے نچلی سطح پر رہے ہیں۔ امریکہ شدت پسند گروہوں کو پاکستان کے مبینہ تعاون پر اپنے خدشات کا اظہار کرتا رہا ہے۔ پاکستان اپنی سرزمین پر ڈرون حملوں، ایک خفیہ آپریشن میں اسامہ بن لادن اور پاکستانی سرحدوں پر نیٹوں حملوں پر ناراض رہا ہے۔
لیکن اوباما کی جیت کا مطلب ہے افغانستان میں مجوزہ ’کھیل کا خاتمہ‘ اور اس کے تحت پاکستان کے تعلق کی ایک واضح صورت سامنے آئے گی۔ پاکستان کی یہ شکایت رہی ہے کہ افغانستان میں امریکہ کی حکمت عملی مبہم رہی ہے اور افغانستان میں قیام امن میں اس کے اہم کردار کو نظر انداز کیا گیا ہے۔
پاکستان کے تجزیہ نگاروں کا خیال ہے کہ اوباما کی جیت کا مطلب افغانستان میں امریکی اہداف کے حصول کے لیے پاکستان پر مزید دباؤ ہے


کابل سے ہمارے نامہ نگار کوانٹم سمرویل لکھتے ہیں: افغانستان میں ہر چیز اب امریکی قیادت میں جنگی مشن کے خاتمے کے عینک سے دیکھی جا رہی ہے اور کمانڈر ان چیف میں کوئی تبدیلی افغان کے تئیں امریکی پالیسی میں زیادہ تبدیلی کا باعث نہیں ہوتی کیونکہ دونوں امیدوار میں اس معاملے میں کوئی فرق نہیں تھا سوائے اس کے کہ مٹ رومنی نے کہا تھا کہ وہ میدان جنگ میں موجود جرنیلوں کی زیادہ سنتے۔
اوباما کے سامنے یہ سوال ہے کہ وہ کتنی جلدی فوج کو واپس بلاتے ہیں اور دوہزار چودہ کے بعد وہاں کتنی فوج رہے گی۔ ملٹری کمانڈر چاہیں گے کہ انخلاء رفتہ رفتہ ہو اور دس ہزار سے زیادہ تعداد میں فوج یہاں رہے۔ لیکن نئے انتخاب کے بعد وائٹ ہاؤس مزید سریع انخلاء پر زور دے گا اور دوہزار چودہ کے بعد وہاں کم فوجی رہ جائیں۔


بی بی سی کے محسن اصغری تہران سے لکھتے ہیں: ایران میں کئی لوگوں کو خدشہ تھا کہ ریپبلکن کی جیت کا مطلب جنگ ہے اور براک اوباما کی جیت کا مطلب ہے لوگوں کی جان کی حفاظت کیونکہ امریکہ ایران کے جوہری ارادوں کے بارے میں بات چیت کا ایک نیا دور شروع کرے گا۔
بہرحال چند ایرانی سیاسی کارکنوں کا کہنا ہے کہ اوباما کی جیت سے ایران پر زیادہ دباؤ بڑھے گا۔
تہران یونیورسٹی کے سیاسیات کے پروفیسر ناصر ہادیان نے کہا ’عالمی برادری میں براک اوباما کو زیادہ مقبولیت حاصل ہے جوکہ رومنی کو نہیں ہےاور بہ ایں سبب وہ ایران کے خلاف اتحاد کو مضبوط کر سکیں گے اور ایران پر زیادہ دباؤ ڈال سکیں گے‘۔
ایران کے لیے کون زیادہ قابل قبول ہوگا؟ یورنیم کی افزائش پر پابندی لگانے والا اسرائیل کا حلیف مٹ رومنی یا اوباما جو شاید ایران کو پرامن جوہری حق دے سکے؟ اس طرح ہم کہ سکتے ہیں کہ اوباما کو وائٹ ہاؤس میں دوبارہ دیکھ کر ایران کے لوگ زیادہ خوش ہیں۔۔

میکسیکو اور لاطینی امریکہ

میکسیکو سٹی سے ہمارے نامہ نگار ول گرانٹ لکھتے ہیں کہ میکسیکو میں لوگوں نے اس قدر اطمینان کا سانس لیا جسے محسوس کیا جا سکتا تھا۔ میکسیکو اور اس پورے علاقے میں یہ تاثر پایا جاتا ہے کہ ریپبلکن امریکہ میں رہنے والے لاطینیوں کو نہیں سمجھتے ہیں۔ بہرحال انیس سو پچاس کی دہائی سے لے کر اب تک اوباما کے دور میں بغیر دستاویز کے پناہ گزینوں کو سب سے زیادہ تعداد میں واپس کیا گیا ہے۔
اس کے باوجود لاطینی امریکہ میں یہ عام خیال ہے کہ اوباما کی دوسری مدت امریکہ کے پڑوسیوں کے لیے بہتر رہے گی۔ وہاں یہ محسوس کیا جاتا ہے کہ وینزویلا کے ساتھ رشتہ ہو یا کیوبا پر تجارتی پابندیاں ہوں یا پھر میکسیکو میں جاری ڈرگ کی پرتششد جنگ پر اوبامہ نے اپنے وعدے کے مطابق کام نہیں کیا ہے۔

افریقہجوہنسبرگ سے اینڈریو ہارڈنج لکھتے ہیں: صدر اوباما نے اپنے پہلی صدارتی مدت میں سب صحارا علاقے کا ایک ہی دورہ کیا اور وہ بھی کافی مختصر تو اوباما کے دوسرے دور میں کتنی تبدیلی ہو سکتی ہے؟ یہ سوال پورے انتخابی مہم کے دوران ایک ہی بار سامنے آیا کیونکہ پوری مہم عرب میں جاری بغاوت اور ملکی مسائل پر مرکوز تھی۔

اس میں کوئی شک نہیں کہ پردے کے پیچھے امریکہ کی سفارت کی کافی مانگ رہے گی۔ دوسرے دور میں توجہ مالی کے شمال سے القاعدہ سے منسلک گروہ کے خاتمے پر ہوگا۔ اس میں طاقت کا استعمال ہو یا پھر سفارت کے ذریعے یہ کام ہو۔ اور اس دور میں یہ خیال رکھا جائے گا کہ زمبابوے اور کینیا میں تشدد نہ ہوں جو وہاں کے انتخابات میں ہوئے۔
ابھی تک افریقہ کے لیے کسی عظیم ’اوباما نظریہ‘ کی کوئی امید نہیں ہے اور اس عظیم براعظم کے تنوع اور رنگارنگی کے پیش نظر یہ اچھی بات بھی ہ

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Will Obama's reelection change the US-Pakistan relationship?

Some Pakistani officials are quietly hoping Obama's reelection will help relations between the two countries, particularly if Sen. John Kerry replaces Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.
As news of President Obama's victory reaches Pakistan, many say they do not expect any substantial change in US foreign policy toward the country.
But some Pakistani officials and politicians are quietly hoping that perhaps a cabinet reshuffle and a strengthened mandate, now that reelection pressures are eased, could soften an otherwise tense relationship between the two countries.
And rumors that Sen. John Kerry (D) from Massachusetts could replace Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has some officials hoping that the former's many-year relationship with Pakistan could pave the way for an even smoother cooperation.

“It is of course up to the US president to appoint the Secretary of State. However, if speculations about Kerry become true, then that would be a positive development – and a lot easier. Kerry has many friends in Pakistan. He obviously knows the region, and the ins and outs of our relationship,” says Fawad Chaudhury, a special assistant to Pakistan's prime minister.
Kerry was one of the US senators who sponsored the $1.5 billion annual Kerry-Lugar-Berman aid package to Pakistan, and is known for his relationship with the country. He paid visits to Afghanistan and Pakistan following the Navy Seal raid that killed Osama bin Laden, in an effort to save the rocky partnership.
Some within the security establishment agree. “I think he is more soft and understanding toward Pakistan. There may be a better relationship between the two as a result,” says a security official who preferred to remain unnamed.
The official also predicts that Obama's reelection could have given him a strengthened mandate to pursue the foreign policy line – and vision – that he laid out during his first presidential campaign.
“This time he might be more bold, and have more space to make his own decisions. In the first term, the CIA and Pentagon were calling the shots. Now Obama is less worried about reelection, and can ensure that the State Department sets the line,” says the official.
In an interview before the election, cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan said he tentatively agreed that an Obama win would benefit Pakistan. “Obama's instincts are basically right. Let's hope if he wins the second term, we see a different Obama,” he said.
Even Pakistan's right-wing Islamist political party Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) appears hopeful. “Less pressure on Obama could create some space for small changes in their policy. Perhaps Obama could move closer toward the message he gave the Muslim world in his Cairo speech. But time will tell,” says Fareed Ahmed Paracha, JI's deputy secretary general.
But Dr. Paracha also echoed the broader apparent disinterest of the Pakistani public in Obama's victory. “The bottom line is that we need to get our own house in order,” he says. "The US, as such, does not matter."

Obama & Pakistan

AS a country that has been the focus of world attention for reasons more than one, Pakistan will watch with hope and concern how the foreign policy of President Barack Obama during his second term will affect it in the years to come. Will the new Obama administration reassess some controversial aspects of its foreign policy, like the unceasing drone attacks in the northwest, or will the new mandate serve to reinforce its belief in the righteousness of its policies and stay the course? Since 2008, the US-Pakistan relationship has gone through unprecedented turmoil. Three events last year aggravated tensions between the two — the Raymond Davis affair, the American commando raid that killed Osama bin Laden and the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers at Salala in a US-led Nato  attack. In anger, Pakistan boycotted the Bonn conference and suspended the Nato supply line, insisting on an apology. The damage-control exercise took nearly a year to succeed; but it still remains to be seen to what extent the frosty rapprochement can remove the mistrust. The task before the two governments now is to strengthen bilateral ties and cooperate to achieve common objectives.

The obvious goal is to give peace and stability to Afghanistan during and after the Nato forces’ withdrawal by the end of 2014. There are some harsh realities: the Afghan Taliban have not been defeated; the peace talks stand frozen, or if at all there has been progress, America has kept its cards close to its chest; and the beleaguered Karzai regime seems to be in no position to maintain security after 2014. It is here — and not because of the 100 nuclear warheads Mitt Romney spoke of — that America needs Pakistan. Given the bonds of history, culture, economy and geography that unite Pakistan and Afghanistan, the transition to a long-lasting peace west of the Durand Line would not be possible without engaging Islamabad and addressing its legitimate concerns. More important, it is in Washington’s interest to de-velop a long-term relationship with Islamabad instead of ‘returning’ to Pakistan only when a crisis beckons.
As for its policy towards the Muslim heartland, President Obama should re-read his Cairo speech and judge whether America under him has achieved any of its goals. Iran continues to be under harsh American sanctions, and Israel builds settlements in utter disregard of President Obama’s warnings, toothless as they have been. His commitment to the two-state solution has become academic, because Israel has blocked the peace process, and Washington is at the Likud government’s beck and call to deny state status to Palestine at the UN.


Secular or Islamic Pakistan سید الانبیا اور قائد اعظم کا پاکستان

Also read: >>> http://takfiritaliban.blogspot.com/2012/11/blog-post.html

Read more: Free-Books  <<Click here>>>

Democracy for Feudals

Read more: Free-Books  <<Click here>>>