Home Minister and Finance Minister need to learn a lesson or two on "War on Terror" from the Americans!
Insider Trading: What Else Did McKinsey Tipster Kumar Tell Rajaratnam?
By AGUSTINO FONTEVECCHIA- Forbes
"Greedy" Rajaratnam had info on AMD, says the prosecution
The first round of wire-taps were played in a Manhattan law court on Thursday, revealing what will be the prosecution’s modus operandi in the mega-trial for insider trading where former Forbes 400 member Raj Rajaratnam is accused of reaping $45 million in illegal profits. Jurors heard recordings of Anil Kumar, former senior partner at McKinsey, giving Rajaratnam tips on deals involving American Micro Systems, a McKinsey client. Considered the prosecution’s star witness by the NYPost, Kumar gave Raj a few other tips, revealed when he plead guilty to insider trading earlier this year. Here’s what he knows.
As a senior partner at McKinsey, Kumar had insider information and a fiduciary duty not to disclose his knowledge. Pressured by Rajaratnam, Kumar finally broke down and accepted an initial $250,000 to act individually as a consultant for Raj, against McKinsey policy. Finally accepting the money, which had to be deposited in a Swiss account under his domestic worker’s name. United States Attorney General for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara, estimated Kumar pocketed about $2.6 million, including profits from reinvestments in Galleon itself, and has been charged with conspiracy to commit securities fraud and securities fraud.
The tape played on Thursday showed Kumar and Rajaratnam having a friendly conversation on August 15, 2008 about some deals AMD was involved in. More specifically, Kumar claims that “yesterday they agreed on, at least they’ve shaken hands, and said they’re going ahead with the deal.” When Raj asks how much is being invested, Kumar puts the figure in the $6 to $8 billion range.
In his guilty plea, Kumar reveals that he informed Rajaratnam of AMD’s intention to spin-off its loss-making manufacturing arm and enter into agreement with Abu Dhabi investment facility Mubadala Development, which would inject a substantial amount of cash. From the release:
During August, September, and October of 2008, the Galleon Technology Funds invested tens of millions of dollars in AMD securities. On October 7, 2008, AMD publicly announced plans to spin off its manufacturing operations and to receive an investment from another entity in Abu Dhabi. That same day, AMD’s stock opened up approximately 25 percent over the prior day’s closing price.
Paradoxically enough, a bad performance by the tech sector in the coming months erased all of Galleon’s gains, according to Preet Bharara.
The Post stresses that “Kumar’s testimony is central to the government’s case against” and that he will continue to be questioned on Monday. So what else does he know?
Kumar told Rajaratnam confidential information on two other market moving events, apart what was stated above. All in all, these tips helped Galleon make $19.7 million in illegal profits. The first deal Kumar disclosed was AMD’s intention to acquire ATI Technologies. Kumar heard about AMD’s negotiations and informed Raj, whose Galleon fund began accumulating ATI stock over the course of the next several months. When the deal was finalized and publically announced, on July 24, 2006, ATI’s stock “rose significantly on the news,” and, as Galleon sold all of its holdings in ATI, Rajaratnam made a hefty $19.2 million profit.
The other deal the Attorney General’s office disclosed involved lay-offs at eBay. On October 2, 2008, Kumar found out from a client, and eBay subsidiary, that substantial layoffs would be announced that Monday, October 6, at the e-commerce giant. Kumar called Raj the next day, on October 3, and on that same day, Galleon began to short eBay stock. As had been anticipated, eBay announced the layoffs, the stock dropped precipitously, and Raj’s Galleon took in a nice $500,000 in profits, after closing their short positions.
If the post is right, and Kumar is one of the star witnesses, then this will be what comes up next week in the super trial that is shocking Wall Street.
Insider Trading: What Else Did McKinsey Tipster Kumar Tell Rajaratnam?
World Financial Fraudsters
Rajat Gupta takes 'leave of absence' from New Silk Route- sample of corporate governance globally
Former Intel Exec Rajiv Goel Pleads Guilty in Insider Trading Case
In Contrast Sample India
We have Spectrum of Secret Swiss Bank Account Holders- like Hasan Ali- who defy the rule of law!
Showing posts with label Al-Qaeda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Al-Qaeda. Show all posts
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Jihad against India: Is Al- Qaeda messing up POK?
04/11/2010
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps: Report
London: Hundreds of university students, including foreigners are being trained in militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which have become active again, to wage 'jihad' against India.
After a lull, several militant outfits have now again raised their heads and increased their activities in and around Muzaffarabad, capital of PoK, and pro-Jihad slogans can be seen on the walls of the city, BBC Urdu Service reported.
A 25-year-old engineering student from Lahore, fresh from a training stint in one of camps told BBC from PoK capital Muzzaffarabad, said:"A large number of youths from Pakistani universities and abroad are undergoing training in PoK under supervision of a militant group to wage jihad against India."
The student, who identified himself as a Kashmiri, said he received two-month training in PoK after finishing his engineering course this year.
"Around 20 per cent youths in the training camps are from Kashmir and 10 per cent are from other countries... Majority of those receiving training are from Pakistan's Punjab province," he claimed.
He also said that many other students from his university have joined the militant training programme run by a tanzeem (group) located near Lahore, an apparent reference to Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is headquartered at Murdike on the outskirts of the city.
He said a decision to send them to Kashmir will be taken by the Tanzeem's Amir.
"We could be sent to Kashmir or we could be stationed in Pakistan itself for propagating Islam," he said in response to a question.
He claimed that his family approved his association with the jihadi group. However, when contacted his mother was upset over her son's decision.
"My son asked permission for propagating Islam which I gave him. But I was not aware that he associated himself with the jihadi group," she said.
"After returning home, he told me that he has received militant training and wants to join jihad. I was disappointed and i told him you cannot go to Kashmir to fight till I'm alive," she said.
The claims made by the student contradicts Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik who had recently denied reports of existence of militant camps in PoK. Source: PTI
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps: Report
London: Hundreds of university students, including foreigners are being trained in militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which have become active again, to wage 'jihad' against India.
After a lull, several militant outfits have now again raised their heads and increased their activities in and around Muzaffarabad, capital of PoK, and pro-Jihad slogans can be seen on the walls of the city, BBC Urdu Service reported. A 25-year-old engineering student from Lahore, fresh from a training stint in one of camps told BBC from PoK capital Muzzaffarabad, said:"A large number of youths from Pakistani universities and abroad are undergoing training in PoK under supervision of a militant group to wage jihad against India."
The student, who identified himself as a Kashmiri, said he received two-month training in PoK after finishing his engineering course this year.
"Around 20 per cent youths in the training camps are from Kashmir and 10 per cent are from other countries... Majority of those receiving training are from Pakistan's Punjab province," he claimed.
He also said that many other students from his university have joined the militant training programme run by a tanzeem (group) located near Lahore, an apparent reference to Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is headquartered at Murdike on the outskirts of the city.
He said a decision to send them to Kashmir will be taken by the Tanzeem's Amir.
"We could be sent to Kashmir or we could be stationed in Pakistan itself for propagating Islam," he said in response to a question.
He claimed that his family approved his association with the jihadi group. However, when contacted his mother was upset over her son's decision.
"My son asked permission for propagating Islam which I gave him. But I was not aware that he associated himself with the jihadi group," she said.
"After returning home, he told me that he has received militant training and wants to join jihad. I was disappointed and i told him you cannot go to Kashmir to fight till I'm alive," she said.
The claims made by the student contradicts Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik who had recently denied reports of existence of militant camps in PoK. Source: PTI
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps
Thursday, September 9, 2010
South Asia's Geography of Conflict
Center for a New American Security
Washington, D.C., September 8, 2010 – Ahead of the Southeast Asian Summit later this month in New York and President Obama’s trip to Asia in November, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) released a report today by acclaimed author and CNAS Senior Fellow Robert D. Kaplan. In South Asia’s Geography of Conflict, Kaplan provides a detailed analysis of South Asia's history and geography including the broad arc of territory from Afghanistan southeastward into northern India and highlights India’s pivotal role in the region. Kaplan writes, “As the U.S. and China become great power rivals, the direction in which India tilts could determine the course of geopolitics in Eurasia in the 21st century."
South Asia’s Geography of Conflict is a must-read for American policy makers. Kaplan writes, "If Americans do not come to grasp with India’s age-old, highly unstable geopolitics, especially as it concerns Pakistan, Afghanistan and China, they will badly mishandle the relationship." Kaplan writes, "If Americans do not come to grasp with India’s age-old, highly unstable geopolitics, especially as it concerns Pakistan, Afghanistan and China, they will badly mishandle the relationship."
In South Asia’s Geography of Conflict, CNAS Senior Fellow and acclaimed author Robert D. Kaplan provides a detailed analysis of South Asia's history and geography including the broad arc of territory from Afghanistan southeastward into northern India and highlights India’s pivotal role in the region. Kaplan writes, “As the U.S. and China become great power rivals, the direction in which India tilts could determine the course of geopolitics in Eurasia in the 21st century." South Asia’s Geography of Conflict is a must-read for American policy makers. Kaplan writes, "If Americans do not come to grasp with India’s age-old, highly unstable geopolitics, especially as it concerns Pakistan, Afghanistan and China, they will badly mishandle the relationship."
South Asias Geography of Conflict by Robert D Kaplan
Watch a CNAS exclusive interview with Kaplan on South Asia’s Geography of Conflict here.
Friday, August 27, 2010
‘Operation Samosa’ unearths Indian link to terror plot in Canada
26/08/2010
Toronto: An al-Qaeda-linked terror plot was unearthed by Canadian security agencies on Wednesday, with one of the suspects reportedly hailing from India.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) force. Photo Courtesy: Reuters
Under what is curiously called "Operation Samosa", the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) arrested two suspects early Wednesday. One of them said to be named Misbahuddin Ahmed who reportedly comes from India. Search for more suspects is on.
It is the second al-Qaeda-linked terror plot to be unearthed in Canada after the Toronto-18 plot of 2006 in which 18 Toronto area Muslims were arrested for plotting to blow up Canadian targets, storm Parliament, take leaders hostage and behead the Prime Minister. Eleven of these plotters were convicted.
Terror suspects arrested on Wednesday were under watch of the national security task force of the RCMP for months. Authorities said the ringleader of the terror plot had travelled to the region between Pakistan and Afghanistan for training in weapons. Arrests were made when one of the suspects was about to travel abroad as part of the alleged plot, they said.
Though police didn't name the suspects, one of them is said to be 36-year-old Misbahuddin Ahmed who worked as an X-ray technologist at an Ottawa hospital. Reports quoted sources as saying that Mr. Ahmed comes from India.
Robert Farrell, a former Canadian diplomat who rented his place to Mr. Ahmed, told the Ottawa Citizen newspaper that the suspect told him that he was born in India but had lived for a time in Saudi Arabia.
"We met his wife at the time (of renting). She seemed quite nice. She wore an Iranian-style head covering (hijab). They seemed to be more of a traditional Muslim family," Mr. Farrell said.
Five kilometre away from Ahmed's residence, police arrested another suspect who has been named Ahmed Ehsan in the media. Reacting to the unearthing of the terror plot, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said, "It is clear that Canada is not immune from international or home grown radicalisation. The government continues to participate in activities to better understand extremism throughout the world and the motivations of individuals who engage in terrorism."
According to security experts here, home grown terrorist cells are plotting to target Canadian power plants and transmission lines which carry electricity to the U.S.
"There are ways of attacking the U.S. through Canada. The whole energy for New York comes from Quebec (province), for example," security research expert Anthony Seaboyer was quoted as saying.
In fact, the famous Millennium Bomber Ahmed Ressam, an al-Qaeda-linked Algerian who lived illegally in Canada and had plotted to blow up Los Angeles in December 199, had entered the U.S. from Vancouver.
Though Canada has tightened anti-terror laws after 9/11, Americans still find the response of its northern neighbour inadequate.
Source: IANS
‘Operation Samosa’ unearths Indian link to terror plot in Canada
Toronto: An al-Qaeda-linked terror plot was unearthed by Canadian security agencies on Wednesday, with one of the suspects reportedly hailing from India.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) force. Photo Courtesy: Reuters
Under what is curiously called "Operation Samosa", the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) arrested two suspects early Wednesday. One of them said to be named Misbahuddin Ahmed who reportedly comes from India. Search for more suspects is on.
It is the second al-Qaeda-linked terror plot to be unearthed in Canada after the Toronto-18 plot of 2006 in which 18 Toronto area Muslims were arrested for plotting to blow up Canadian targets, storm Parliament, take leaders hostage and behead the Prime Minister. Eleven of these plotters were convicted.
Terror suspects arrested on Wednesday were under watch of the national security task force of the RCMP for months. Authorities said the ringleader of the terror plot had travelled to the region between Pakistan and Afghanistan for training in weapons. Arrests were made when one of the suspects was about to travel abroad as part of the alleged plot, they said.
Though police didn't name the suspects, one of them is said to be 36-year-old Misbahuddin Ahmed who worked as an X-ray technologist at an Ottawa hospital. Reports quoted sources as saying that Mr. Ahmed comes from India.
Robert Farrell, a former Canadian diplomat who rented his place to Mr. Ahmed, told the Ottawa Citizen newspaper that the suspect told him that he was born in India but had lived for a time in Saudi Arabia.
"We met his wife at the time (of renting). She seemed quite nice. She wore an Iranian-style head covering (hijab). They seemed to be more of a traditional Muslim family," Mr. Farrell said.
Five kilometre away from Ahmed's residence, police arrested another suspect who has been named Ahmed Ehsan in the media. Reacting to the unearthing of the terror plot, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said, "It is clear that Canada is not immune from international or home grown radicalisation. The government continues to participate in activities to better understand extremism throughout the world and the motivations of individuals who engage in terrorism."
According to security experts here, home grown terrorist cells are plotting to target Canadian power plants and transmission lines which carry electricity to the U.S.
"There are ways of attacking the U.S. through Canada. The whole energy for New York comes from Quebec (province), for example," security research expert Anthony Seaboyer was quoted as saying.
In fact, the famous Millennium Bomber Ahmed Ressam, an al-Qaeda-linked Algerian who lived illegally in Canada and had plotted to blow up Los Angeles in December 199, had entered the U.S. from Vancouver.
Though Canada has tightened anti-terror laws after 9/11, Americans still find the response of its northern neighbour inadequate.
Source: IANS
‘Operation Samosa’ unearths Indian link to terror plot in Canada
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Consequences of Pakistan racing towards a failed state
Murder on the Khyber Pass express
President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.
The released papers - described as one of the biggest leaks in US military history - detail military operations between 2004 and 2009.
The "everybody" involved in this case seems to exclude whomever actually leaked the documents, presumably some element of the US military, which has to absorb the effect of Pakistan's double game in the region in the form of body bags for enlisted men and shattered reputations for commanders. Like the Rolling Stone magazine interviews that led to the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, the America commander in Afghanistan, the WikiLeaks documents suggest a degree of disaffection of the American military with civilian leaders deeper than anything in living memory.
To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.
India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations - including Kashmiri irredentists - openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.
China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.
Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.
With 170 million people - more than Russia - and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences - a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite - as well as ethnic ones.
Read more:
Murder on the Khyber Pass express: courtesy Asia Times Online
By Spengler
President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.
The released papers - described as one of the biggest leaks in US military history - detail military operations between 2004 and 2009.
The "everybody" involved in this case seems to exclude whomever actually leaked the documents, presumably some element of the US military, which has to absorb the effect of Pakistan's double game in the region in the form of body bags for enlisted men and shattered reputations for commanders. Like the Rolling Stone magazine interviews that led to the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, the America commander in Afghanistan, the WikiLeaks documents suggest a degree of disaffection of the American military with civilian leaders deeper than anything in living memory.
To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.
India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations - including Kashmiri irredentists - openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.
China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.
Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.
With 170 million people - more than Russia - and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences - a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite - as well as ethnic ones.
Read more:
Murder on the Khyber Pass express: courtesy Asia Times Online
By Spengler
Monday, July 26, 2010
Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command
Chief’s Choreography– Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by
Hamid Hussain
‘A general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing the disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service to his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.’ Sun Tzu
The Pakistani army is the dominant institution of the country and it has significant control over the decision making process despite the installation of a democratic set up. In the last two years of General Pervez Mussharraf’s rule, the army’s reputation hit rock bottom. General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani was appointed Chief of Army Staff (COAS) in October 2007 and over the last two years he has worked quietly to reassert the control of military high command over all-important areas.
The Army as an institution has always preferred to have a veto power on key policy decisions while not having the responsibility to directly manage a fragile and complex state and society.
Kiyani was faced with three challenging tasks when he took control of Pakistan army. First and foremost was getting control of the army itself by promoting, appointing and posting senior officers to key positions (details of these changes are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Balancing Act – Change of Guard at Pakistan Army, January 2008 and Hamid Hussain. Careful Choreography - Next Round of Senior Officer Promotions & Postings in Pakistan Army, September 2008).
He moved out several senior officers put in place at key positions by General Pervez Mussharraf prior to handing over charge of the army to Kiyani (details of these changes by General Mussharraf prior to elevation of General Kiyani are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Shuffling the Deck, September 2007). When Kiyani completed the process, Mussharraf was an isolated man and was pushed out of President House by the new civilian set up once a signal was given from army’s General Headquarter (GHQ) that they would not come to the rescue of Mussharraf.
It was reminiscent of a previous episode when in 1969 Field Marshal Ayub Khan faced with popular resentment was asked to leave President House by his own protégé Commander-in- Chief General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan once he got his own team in place.
The second challenging task for Kiyani was to shift the balance back to the army in dealing with United States. Traditionally, the U.S. Democratic Party favours working with the political forces of a country rather than relying solely on military leaders. When the Democrats with a majority in the U.S. Congress also got their man in the White House, there was a shift towards more constructive engagement with the political leaders of Pakistan.
The Kerry-Lugar bill was the outcome of this shift whereby future U.S. aid was geared more towards civilian sector. In addition, more direct funding was to be provided for strengthening of police and paramilitary forces of the country. The ultimate snub was a clause, which warned the Pakistani Army to keep its hands away from all levers of power and not to subvert political process. Some Pakistanis especially military officers allege that this clause was inserted at the request of the Pakistani political leadership in an effort to strengthen their hand against an omnipresent military. Outraged military brass publicly snubbed United States as well as Pakistan’s political leaders for committing this blasphemous act. In private conversations with visiting military and civilian leaders of United States, Kiyani made this point very clear. The ace card, which the military uses during its independent negotiations with foreign countries, and especially with the United States, is its complete control of country’s nuclear assets.
Washington’s main interaction with Islamabad is in the context of rise of extremism in Pakistan, conflict in Afghanistan and concern about security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. All these areas are exclusively handled by the military therefore it was no surprise that Washington gave in quite easily accepting the dominant role of military in all affairs. This was a forgone conclusion in view of the nature of the history of U.S.-Pakistan relations. Similar understanding was reached with previous Pakistani military leaders including Field Marshal Ayub Khan (1958-69), General Muhammad Zia–ul-Haq (1977-88) and General Pervez Mussharraf (1999-2008).
The third task of General Kiyani was to work with political leaders in a way to get their support for ongoing military operations in tribal areas and Swat, but not allowing them to encroach on military’s domain. Kiyani has performed all these tasks deftly securing the military’s institutional interests without showing his hand. No wonder that in some circles he is dubbed as ‘master manipulator’ and a master of ‘poker face’. Many people interacting with him admit that it is very hard to guess what is on his mind as he shows no emotions and chooses very few words to express himself.
Kiyani will be retiring in November 2010 and now his main focus is on the coming change in the army’s top cadres. It is in this context that President Asif Ali Zardari comes into the picture. It is quite clear by now that the president will not likely win any popularity contest in Pakistan. The Army in general has no respect for him either. This is the main reason that president is not invited to visit any military installation. However, in the present set up with the president as supreme commander of armed forces holds the authority to appoint service chiefs. The Army does not want him to appoint the next army chief and this factor is contributing to increased pressure on the president from all quarters. The Army wants that the authority to appoint the army chief should revert back to the prime minister.
Recently, pressure was exerted on president to give back the chairmanship of National Command Authority (NCA); a body responsible for nuclear and missile assets to the prime minister. The military has the keys to Pakistan’s ‘crown jewels’ and no civilian leader is allowed in this privileged club. The prime minister may chair the NCA but has no real say about country’s nuclear and missile program. These programs are under the firm control of the military with the Strategic Planning Division (SPD).
For his part, President Zardari believes that current campaign against him has the tacit blessing of the GHQ. This mutual mistrust and suspicion is aggravating relations between two important pillars of the state and in my view both parties have missed the narrow window of opportunity by their own ill thought actions. To some extent President Zardari has kept his side of the bargain by fully supporting the army in its operations against militants. The military could have used the good offices of the president to de-escalate the alarming situation in Baluchistan in view of good relations between the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Baluch nationalist leadership.
The ultimate loser in case of continuing strained relations between army and president will be the state of Pakistan.
In view of the peculiar circumstances, General Kiyani with his three-year tenure will end up promoting and posting a record number of senior officers. The first round of promotions and postings was done in 2008 when a number of key positions at lieutenant general and major general ranks were shuffled. In the fall of 2008, six officers were promoted to lieutenant general rank and in the fall of 2009, four additional officers were promoted to the same rank (prior to announcement of these promotions, an analysis of coming promotions was done in Hamid Hussain. Chief’s Call - Next Round of Promotions in Pakistan Army, July 2009) In early April 2010, five lieutenant generals will be retiring after completing their tenures thus opening five additional slots. In addition, due to an unprecedented situation his year, four additional lieutenant generals will be retiring as they will be reaching the age limit of 58 years although they have at least 2-3 years left as far as tenure is concerned. These officers are currently holding important posts including Chief of General Staff (CGS), Quarter Master General (QMG), DGISI and Karachi Corps Commander.
In the next few months, the whole senior brass of the Pakistan army will be changed. Newly promoted officers will be posted to key positions. In the last few months, new corps commanders have already taken command of Bahawalpur and Multan corps. New corps commanders will be appointed to important Mangla, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar corps. In addition, we will also see a new batch of Principal Staff Officers (PSOs) at GHQ including Military Secretary (MS), CGS and QMG. Most of these promotions and postings are a routine matter in any army including Pakistan army, but in view of the extraordinary powers of the military in all spheres as well as entitlements which come with these ranks, these changes become topic of speculation as well as lobbying and intense rivalry and competition among contending officers. Most of the time, it leaves a lot of bitterness and strained personal relations among senior officers (a cursory look at the memoirs and recent disclosures on electronic media by several senior officers provides ample proof of this conclusion).
In my view this is the single most important factor responsible for hampering professional development of senior officer corps of Pakistan army. The majority of senior officers are busy in this lobbying effort and engage in too much of socialization with the right group taking away the precious time, which could be used, for professional development and reading serious military affairs.
The most important event of 2010 will be the appointment of the army chief in the winter of 2010. Beleaguered President Zardari knows very well that he has only one card left in his hand and that is the authority to appoint the army chief. If he gives back this authority to prime minister, he will be a lame duck president. Currently, the army is happy to see the judiciary and media taking on the president thus keeping its own hands clean. The Army high command feels that an isolated president busy fighting his own battles against media, judiciary and political opponents will have less desire and time to interfere with military matters.
The Army is in complete control of president’s security and essentially controls all movements of the president as well as access of people to him. They feel this step is essential to prevent the president from making direct contacts with senior military officers. There is lot of competition and rivalry among senior officers for the important post of army chief and president being a shrewd person can play this game quite well.
The military hierarchy wants to continue with the current system and has working relations with prime minister and other political parties as long as long as the president is kept at a safe distance or preferably removed. Someone is busy doing the homework and it is no surprise that in January 2010, parliament’s constitutional reforms committee agreed to transfer the authority of appointing the service chiefs from the head of state to the head of government by amending article 243 of the constitution. If this change goes through then the president will bound to consult the prime minister before appointing the chiefs of the army, the navy and the air force. The decision was taken unanimously which means that all political parties were on board. The committee rejected two suggestions; first one dealing with the issue that the service chiefs should be appointed after parliamentary approval and second that the service chiefs should not be given extensions and should be retired after completing their term in office.
Despite all his shortcomings, the elections were a fair process and gave Pakistanis an unprecedented opportunity to elect the president and it would be unwise to try to remove him by unconstitutional means. The only way president can be removed is by impeachment and if that cannot be done then he is bound to react if he is provoked beyond certain limits. He may not be the smartest chap in the room but he can surely do a lot of damage in view of some powers in his hands.
The military has probably war gamed all the likely scenarios and also covered some administrative bases. The Secretary of the Ministry of Defence usually signs off the final official notification issued by the president in the appointment of the army chief. The current defence secretary is retired lieutenant general Syed Athar Ali and in the worst case scenario is that he maybe the last stumbling block (in 1999 coup, then defence secretary retired lieutenant general Iftikhar Ali Khan was given the file of prime minister’s orders of replacing General Pervez Mussharraf for his signature and official notification. Iftikhar played safely and went to his office with the file but didn’t sign it. He was no fool and was expecting some reaction from the senior brass. He waited to see which way things settle. This point was also not lost on officers involved in the coup. A military intelligence officer was sent to pick up the Defence Secretary and he was taken to the military operations directorate, which was the centre from where the coup was being coordinated. )
General Kiyani has two possible options. First option is that he reaches an understanding with President Zardari where he gets a one-year extension as army chief. If Kiyani is not considering this option then he will try to arrange the cards in such a way that his choice for army chief’s post has the best chance in the winter of 2010. Most likely his choice is current DGISI Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. The problem is that in the normal course of action Pasha will be retiring in March 2010 (the tenure for a lieutenant general is three years in the rank or reaching the age of 58 whichever comes first). Pasha has less than a year in the rank but will be reaching the age limit in March 2010, eight months before the retirement of General Kiyani. This impediment can be overcome if Pasha is given one-year extension of service, which will make him leading contender for chief’s post in coming winter.
Kiyani may be thinking on these lines as retirement date of current corps commander of Peshawar based XI Corps Lieutenant General Masood Aslam was in September 2009 but he has been asked to continue in view of ongoing operations in North West Frontier Province (N.W.F.P.) under his command. This may have been done to set the precedent so that no one objects if extension is given to Pasha. If Pasha is given an extension of service in the next 2-3 weeks then this will clearly indicate that Kiyani wants him to be the next chief. The other reason to allow Aslam to continue may be the fact that Kiyani has already selected the individual to command Peshawar corps but the officer is waiting in the wings at major general rank. In early April 2010, in the next round of promotions this desired officer maybe promoted to lieutenant general rank and then posted to command Peshawar Corps.
In my view, two possible contenders for this post are Major General Tariq Khan (if he survives internal fights and pass medical fitness) and Major General Waheed Arshad. In my view, Tariq will be a better choice as he has been in the thick of the battle for the last few years; first as General Officer Commanding (GOC) of a division which operated in Waziristan and then as Inspector General of Frontier Corps (IGFC) of N.W.F.P.; paramilitary force operating against militants in tribal areas along with regular troops. There is room for criticism for some of his operational plans but he deserves some credit for handling an extremely difficult situation in N.W.F.P. in 2008-09 and pushing back militants from major centres.
Serious contenders for army chief post are now only three officers; Lt. General Khalid Shamim Wayen (Quetta corps commander), Lt. General Nadeem Taj (Gujranwala corps commander) and Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha (if he gets an extension prior to his retirement. Another thing going against Pasha is that he has not commanded a corps; usually a pre-requisite for army chief post contender. Kiyani after giving him extension can transfer him to the command of a corps for few months thus fulfilling this criteria but this aberration will be quite obvious and may not sit well with many officers). Lt. General Muhammad Yusuf is also a senior officer but in my view he is out of the race when Kiyani recently brought him in as president of National Defence University from Bahawalpur Corps.
If Kiyani is thinking that after handing over the charge to next man he will hit the golf course then I see no problem. However, if he is thinking about some role for himself then there is potential for conflict even if Kiyani’s own hand picked man is selected. To prove this point one need to look at two exhibits. Exhibit A is of General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan; groomed and selected by Field Marshal Ayub Khan who sent Ayub packing in a matter of hours and Exhibit B is how General Kiyani; groomed and hand picked by General Pervez Mussharraf facilitated the departure of the later out of President House when he became a liability to military’s institutional interests.
If Kiyani is thinking about some continuing role for himself then his only choice is to get himself selected as Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) prior to his retirement. There is no problem in pursuing this course, as current CJCSC General Tariq Majid will be retiring in October 2010, few weeks before Kiyani’s retirement. CJCSC is essentially a ceremonial post with no real power. Kiyani knows very well that once appointed, the army chief is the boss and everyone looks to him and who can understand this better than Kiyani in view of his special relations with former army chief General Mussharraf over the last several years?
If Kiyani is looking at this option then he will definitely want to increase the power of CJCSC. One choice could be to have CJCSC sit on the promotion board of senior officers of all three services arguing that being the senior most officers overseeing all three services it is quite natural for him to have these powers. Senior officers in addition to army chief have to look towards CJCSC also thus increasing his influence. If CJCSC is given a say in selection of service chiefs and promotion of senior officers then he can swing things in his favour at two important forums; the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and NCA thus directly influencing the decision making process with some weight behind him. This will invariably dilute the power of army chief.
In my view this is a bad option because it will inevitably result in clash between army chief and CJCSC. Once a new army chief is selected, he should be in charge of running his own organization. However, this power should not be arbitrary and absolute but tempered with restraint and geared towards institutional rather than personal interests. It is important to focus on working relations between different centres of power inside the military i.e. corps commanders and heads of military’s intelligence organizations as well as balance of power between military and civilian authority. Swinging from one extreme to the other will add instability to an already precarious situation.
The senior ranks of the army are not monolithic and there are personal, service arms, ethnic and social groupings inside the army. These differences need to be taken into account when important decisions are being considered as far as army is concerned. People can have different perspectives as well as preferences and this is an accepted factor as far as selection of senior officers is concerned. However, institutional interests must be held above personal wishes. Lieutenant General Masood Aslam should have retired on his due date and allowing him to continue at current post will cause resentment among officers down the line. He has performed to the best of his abilities in a difficult time and military operations under his command should be evaluated carefully. In some areas he has done well while in others things could have been better. In addition, he has gone through a personal tragedy when his young son was killed in attack on the mosque in Rawalpindi in December 2009. He has kept his composure and continued the task but we are all humans and this was one more reason that he should have been given farewell on time.
On the same note, I am of the view that no extension should be given to any officer. In the past, this issue caused resentment and breakdown of even professional relations between senior officers. It gives the impression of favouritism and tinkering with the accepted norms to push a particular officer and creates resentment among officer corps.
The playing field should be level as far as promotion to senior ranks and selection of army chief is concerned. In my view normal institutional process should be allowed to function and it is not appropriate to tinker with extensions, promotions and postings to push favourites. We all know very well that modern armies are large bureaucracies, which encourage conformation for smooth function of the organization.
The only test for a general is war and nothing else. No one expects a Rommel or Guderian emerging from Pakistan army ranks. To date, all heads of the Pakistani Army were average officers who rose to higher ranks after going through normal command, staff and instructional appointments. Most senior officers are average and one can choose from among the available lot without sacrificing much. The appointing authority can choose anyone among the top three or four senior lieutenant generals and he will be no better or worse than the others. The new chief will work to secure Pakistan’s as well as military’s interests. Every senior officer including the chief has the right to select his own team as long as he adheres to prevalent professional standards and accepted norms. Once, the chief starts to play with rules to favour one over the other then there are bound to be repercussions. In the past allegations of such foul play caused resentment and estrangement among senior officers, which is not good for the smooth functioning of the institution. Pakistani Army officers usually accuse civilians of interfering with army affairs but it is the unfair tactics of senior officers for career advancement, which caused the greatest harm.
Unfortunately the ‘indispensability syndrome’ is quite prevalent in Pakistan. All major political parties are run as personal and family business. They cry hoarse about democracy but nominate lifetime chairpersons and leaders groom their children to inherit not only the personal wealth but also the political party.
Senior military officers also get grandiose ideas in their heads and sometimes suffer from the disease of ‘infallibility’ . The only antidote for such ideas is frequent visits to the nearest graveyard, which will confirm to the visitor that every graveyard is filled with the ‘indispensable’ folks. There is no denying the fact that military is the dominant institution in Pakistan completely controlling not only military but also nuclear, missile, foreign policy and domestic arenas. The army as an institution should understand and respect spheres of influence of other organs of the state and try not to interfere in smooth functioning of other institutions. It is an accepted norm that internal matters of the army should be dealt through army chief but it is also important that army chief should clearly understand his own limitations and not extend himself resulting in the imbalance which can not only threaten the current delicate set up but can also cause serious fissures in the military. In current difficult times more transparency in decision-making process is the need of the hour rather than engaging in intrigues fuelled by mistrust and suspicion among decision makers. A working relationship between army, parliament, prime minister, president and judiciary is must to avoid further polarization of society.
'War is won outside the borders of the state, but the general’s merit is established within it'. Tai Kung’s advice to King Wu, 11th century B.C.
Dr. Hamid Hussain is an independent analyst based in New York.
Chief’s Choreography –Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by Hamid Hussain
Hamid Hussain
‘A general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing the disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service to his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.’ Sun Tzu
The Pakistani army is the dominant institution of the country and it has significant control over the decision making process despite the installation of a democratic set up. In the last two years of General Pervez Mussharraf’s rule, the army’s reputation hit rock bottom. General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani was appointed Chief of Army Staff (COAS) in October 2007 and over the last two years he has worked quietly to reassert the control of military high command over all-important areas.
The Army as an institution has always preferred to have a veto power on key policy decisions while not having the responsibility to directly manage a fragile and complex state and society.
Kiyani was faced with three challenging tasks when he took control of Pakistan army. First and foremost was getting control of the army itself by promoting, appointing and posting senior officers to key positions (details of these changes are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Balancing Act – Change of Guard at Pakistan Army, January 2008 and Hamid Hussain. Careful Choreography - Next Round of Senior Officer Promotions & Postings in Pakistan Army, September 2008).
He moved out several senior officers put in place at key positions by General Pervez Mussharraf prior to handing over charge of the army to Kiyani (details of these changes by General Mussharraf prior to elevation of General Kiyani are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Shuffling the Deck, September 2007). When Kiyani completed the process, Mussharraf was an isolated man and was pushed out of President House by the new civilian set up once a signal was given from army’s General Headquarter (GHQ) that they would not come to the rescue of Mussharraf.
It was reminiscent of a previous episode when in 1969 Field Marshal Ayub Khan faced with popular resentment was asked to leave President House by his own protégé Commander-in- Chief General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan once he got his own team in place.
The second challenging task for Kiyani was to shift the balance back to the army in dealing with United States. Traditionally, the U.S. Democratic Party favours working with the political forces of a country rather than relying solely on military leaders. When the Democrats with a majority in the U.S. Congress also got their man in the White House, there was a shift towards more constructive engagement with the political leaders of Pakistan.
The Kerry-Lugar bill was the outcome of this shift whereby future U.S. aid was geared more towards civilian sector. In addition, more direct funding was to be provided for strengthening of police and paramilitary forces of the country. The ultimate snub was a clause, which warned the Pakistani Army to keep its hands away from all levers of power and not to subvert political process. Some Pakistanis especially military officers allege that this clause was inserted at the request of the Pakistani political leadership in an effort to strengthen their hand against an omnipresent military. Outraged military brass publicly snubbed United States as well as Pakistan’s political leaders for committing this blasphemous act. In private conversations with visiting military and civilian leaders of United States, Kiyani made this point very clear. The ace card, which the military uses during its independent negotiations with foreign countries, and especially with the United States, is its complete control of country’s nuclear assets.
Washington’s main interaction with Islamabad is in the context of rise of extremism in Pakistan, conflict in Afghanistan and concern about security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. All these areas are exclusively handled by the military therefore it was no surprise that Washington gave in quite easily accepting the dominant role of military in all affairs. This was a forgone conclusion in view of the nature of the history of U.S.-Pakistan relations. Similar understanding was reached with previous Pakistani military leaders including Field Marshal Ayub Khan (1958-69), General Muhammad Zia–ul-Haq (1977-88) and General Pervez Mussharraf (1999-2008).
The third task of General Kiyani was to work with political leaders in a way to get their support for ongoing military operations in tribal areas and Swat, but not allowing them to encroach on military’s domain. Kiyani has performed all these tasks deftly securing the military’s institutional interests without showing his hand. No wonder that in some circles he is dubbed as ‘master manipulator’ and a master of ‘poker face’. Many people interacting with him admit that it is very hard to guess what is on his mind as he shows no emotions and chooses very few words to express himself.
Kiyani will be retiring in November 2010 and now his main focus is on the coming change in the army’s top cadres. It is in this context that President Asif Ali Zardari comes into the picture. It is quite clear by now that the president will not likely win any popularity contest in Pakistan. The Army in general has no respect for him either. This is the main reason that president is not invited to visit any military installation. However, in the present set up with the president as supreme commander of armed forces holds the authority to appoint service chiefs. The Army does not want him to appoint the next army chief and this factor is contributing to increased pressure on the president from all quarters. The Army wants that the authority to appoint the army chief should revert back to the prime minister.
Recently, pressure was exerted on president to give back the chairmanship of National Command Authority (NCA); a body responsible for nuclear and missile assets to the prime minister. The military has the keys to Pakistan’s ‘crown jewels’ and no civilian leader is allowed in this privileged club. The prime minister may chair the NCA but has no real say about country’s nuclear and missile program. These programs are under the firm control of the military with the Strategic Planning Division (SPD).
For his part, President Zardari believes that current campaign against him has the tacit blessing of the GHQ. This mutual mistrust and suspicion is aggravating relations between two important pillars of the state and in my view both parties have missed the narrow window of opportunity by their own ill thought actions. To some extent President Zardari has kept his side of the bargain by fully supporting the army in its operations against militants. The military could have used the good offices of the president to de-escalate the alarming situation in Baluchistan in view of good relations between the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Baluch nationalist leadership.
The ultimate loser in case of continuing strained relations between army and president will be the state of Pakistan.
In view of the peculiar circumstances, General Kiyani with his three-year tenure will end up promoting and posting a record number of senior officers. The first round of promotions and postings was done in 2008 when a number of key positions at lieutenant general and major general ranks were shuffled. In the fall of 2008, six officers were promoted to lieutenant general rank and in the fall of 2009, four additional officers were promoted to the same rank (prior to announcement of these promotions, an analysis of coming promotions was done in Hamid Hussain. Chief’s Call - Next Round of Promotions in Pakistan Army, July 2009) In early April 2010, five lieutenant generals will be retiring after completing their tenures thus opening five additional slots. In addition, due to an unprecedented situation his year, four additional lieutenant generals will be retiring as they will be reaching the age limit of 58 years although they have at least 2-3 years left as far as tenure is concerned. These officers are currently holding important posts including Chief of General Staff (CGS), Quarter Master General (QMG), DGISI and Karachi Corps Commander.
In the next few months, the whole senior brass of the Pakistan army will be changed. Newly promoted officers will be posted to key positions. In the last few months, new corps commanders have already taken command of Bahawalpur and Multan corps. New corps commanders will be appointed to important Mangla, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar corps. In addition, we will also see a new batch of Principal Staff Officers (PSOs) at GHQ including Military Secretary (MS), CGS and QMG. Most of these promotions and postings are a routine matter in any army including Pakistan army, but in view of the extraordinary powers of the military in all spheres as well as entitlements which come with these ranks, these changes become topic of speculation as well as lobbying and intense rivalry and competition among contending officers. Most of the time, it leaves a lot of bitterness and strained personal relations among senior officers (a cursory look at the memoirs and recent disclosures on electronic media by several senior officers provides ample proof of this conclusion).
In my view this is the single most important factor responsible for hampering professional development of senior officer corps of Pakistan army. The majority of senior officers are busy in this lobbying effort and engage in too much of socialization with the right group taking away the precious time, which could be used, for professional development and reading serious military affairs.
The most important event of 2010 will be the appointment of the army chief in the winter of 2010. Beleaguered President Zardari knows very well that he has only one card left in his hand and that is the authority to appoint the army chief. If he gives back this authority to prime minister, he will be a lame duck president. Currently, the army is happy to see the judiciary and media taking on the president thus keeping its own hands clean. The Army high command feels that an isolated president busy fighting his own battles against media, judiciary and political opponents will have less desire and time to interfere with military matters.
The Army is in complete control of president’s security and essentially controls all movements of the president as well as access of people to him. They feel this step is essential to prevent the president from making direct contacts with senior military officers. There is lot of competition and rivalry among senior officers for the important post of army chief and president being a shrewd person can play this game quite well.
The military hierarchy wants to continue with the current system and has working relations with prime minister and other political parties as long as long as the president is kept at a safe distance or preferably removed. Someone is busy doing the homework and it is no surprise that in January 2010, parliament’s constitutional reforms committee agreed to transfer the authority of appointing the service chiefs from the head of state to the head of government by amending article 243 of the constitution. If this change goes through then the president will bound to consult the prime minister before appointing the chiefs of the army, the navy and the air force. The decision was taken unanimously which means that all political parties were on board. The committee rejected two suggestions; first one dealing with the issue that the service chiefs should be appointed after parliamentary approval and second that the service chiefs should not be given extensions and should be retired after completing their term in office.
Despite all his shortcomings, the elections were a fair process and gave Pakistanis an unprecedented opportunity to elect the president and it would be unwise to try to remove him by unconstitutional means. The only way president can be removed is by impeachment and if that cannot be done then he is bound to react if he is provoked beyond certain limits. He may not be the smartest chap in the room but he can surely do a lot of damage in view of some powers in his hands.
The military has probably war gamed all the likely scenarios and also covered some administrative bases. The Secretary of the Ministry of Defence usually signs off the final official notification issued by the president in the appointment of the army chief. The current defence secretary is retired lieutenant general Syed Athar Ali and in the worst case scenario is that he maybe the last stumbling block (in 1999 coup, then defence secretary retired lieutenant general Iftikhar Ali Khan was given the file of prime minister’s orders of replacing General Pervez Mussharraf for his signature and official notification. Iftikhar played safely and went to his office with the file but didn’t sign it. He was no fool and was expecting some reaction from the senior brass. He waited to see which way things settle. This point was also not lost on officers involved in the coup. A military intelligence officer was sent to pick up the Defence Secretary and he was taken to the military operations directorate, which was the centre from where the coup was being coordinated. )
General Kiyani has two possible options. First option is that he reaches an understanding with President Zardari where he gets a one-year extension as army chief. If Kiyani is not considering this option then he will try to arrange the cards in such a way that his choice for army chief’s post has the best chance in the winter of 2010. Most likely his choice is current DGISI Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. The problem is that in the normal course of action Pasha will be retiring in March 2010 (the tenure for a lieutenant general is three years in the rank or reaching the age of 58 whichever comes first). Pasha has less than a year in the rank but will be reaching the age limit in March 2010, eight months before the retirement of General Kiyani. This impediment can be overcome if Pasha is given one-year extension of service, which will make him leading contender for chief’s post in coming winter.
Kiyani may be thinking on these lines as retirement date of current corps commander of Peshawar based XI Corps Lieutenant General Masood Aslam was in September 2009 but he has been asked to continue in view of ongoing operations in North West Frontier Province (N.W.F.P.) under his command. This may have been done to set the precedent so that no one objects if extension is given to Pasha. If Pasha is given an extension of service in the next 2-3 weeks then this will clearly indicate that Kiyani wants him to be the next chief. The other reason to allow Aslam to continue may be the fact that Kiyani has already selected the individual to command Peshawar corps but the officer is waiting in the wings at major general rank. In early April 2010, in the next round of promotions this desired officer maybe promoted to lieutenant general rank and then posted to command Peshawar Corps.
In my view, two possible contenders for this post are Major General Tariq Khan (if he survives internal fights and pass medical fitness) and Major General Waheed Arshad. In my view, Tariq will be a better choice as he has been in the thick of the battle for the last few years; first as General Officer Commanding (GOC) of a division which operated in Waziristan and then as Inspector General of Frontier Corps (IGFC) of N.W.F.P.; paramilitary force operating against militants in tribal areas along with regular troops. There is room for criticism for some of his operational plans but he deserves some credit for handling an extremely difficult situation in N.W.F.P. in 2008-09 and pushing back militants from major centres.
Serious contenders for army chief post are now only three officers; Lt. General Khalid Shamim Wayen (Quetta corps commander), Lt. General Nadeem Taj (Gujranwala corps commander) and Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha (if he gets an extension prior to his retirement. Another thing going against Pasha is that he has not commanded a corps; usually a pre-requisite for army chief post contender. Kiyani after giving him extension can transfer him to the command of a corps for few months thus fulfilling this criteria but this aberration will be quite obvious and may not sit well with many officers). Lt. General Muhammad Yusuf is also a senior officer but in my view he is out of the race when Kiyani recently brought him in as president of National Defence University from Bahawalpur Corps.
If Kiyani is thinking that after handing over the charge to next man he will hit the golf course then I see no problem. However, if he is thinking about some role for himself then there is potential for conflict even if Kiyani’s own hand picked man is selected. To prove this point one need to look at two exhibits. Exhibit A is of General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan; groomed and selected by Field Marshal Ayub Khan who sent Ayub packing in a matter of hours and Exhibit B is how General Kiyani; groomed and hand picked by General Pervez Mussharraf facilitated the departure of the later out of President House when he became a liability to military’s institutional interests.
If Kiyani is thinking about some continuing role for himself then his only choice is to get himself selected as Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) prior to his retirement. There is no problem in pursuing this course, as current CJCSC General Tariq Majid will be retiring in October 2010, few weeks before Kiyani’s retirement. CJCSC is essentially a ceremonial post with no real power. Kiyani knows very well that once appointed, the army chief is the boss and everyone looks to him and who can understand this better than Kiyani in view of his special relations with former army chief General Mussharraf over the last several years?
If Kiyani is looking at this option then he will definitely want to increase the power of CJCSC. One choice could be to have CJCSC sit on the promotion board of senior officers of all three services arguing that being the senior most officers overseeing all three services it is quite natural for him to have these powers. Senior officers in addition to army chief have to look towards CJCSC also thus increasing his influence. If CJCSC is given a say in selection of service chiefs and promotion of senior officers then he can swing things in his favour at two important forums; the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and NCA thus directly influencing the decision making process with some weight behind him. This will invariably dilute the power of army chief.
In my view this is a bad option because it will inevitably result in clash between army chief and CJCSC. Once a new army chief is selected, he should be in charge of running his own organization. However, this power should not be arbitrary and absolute but tempered with restraint and geared towards institutional rather than personal interests. It is important to focus on working relations between different centres of power inside the military i.e. corps commanders and heads of military’s intelligence organizations as well as balance of power between military and civilian authority. Swinging from one extreme to the other will add instability to an already precarious situation.
The senior ranks of the army are not monolithic and there are personal, service arms, ethnic and social groupings inside the army. These differences need to be taken into account when important decisions are being considered as far as army is concerned. People can have different perspectives as well as preferences and this is an accepted factor as far as selection of senior officers is concerned. However, institutional interests must be held above personal wishes. Lieutenant General Masood Aslam should have retired on his due date and allowing him to continue at current post will cause resentment among officers down the line. He has performed to the best of his abilities in a difficult time and military operations under his command should be evaluated carefully. In some areas he has done well while in others things could have been better. In addition, he has gone through a personal tragedy when his young son was killed in attack on the mosque in Rawalpindi in December 2009. He has kept his composure and continued the task but we are all humans and this was one more reason that he should have been given farewell on time.
On the same note, I am of the view that no extension should be given to any officer. In the past, this issue caused resentment and breakdown of even professional relations between senior officers. It gives the impression of favouritism and tinkering with the accepted norms to push a particular officer and creates resentment among officer corps.
The playing field should be level as far as promotion to senior ranks and selection of army chief is concerned. In my view normal institutional process should be allowed to function and it is not appropriate to tinker with extensions, promotions and postings to push favourites. We all know very well that modern armies are large bureaucracies, which encourage conformation for smooth function of the organization.
The only test for a general is war and nothing else. No one expects a Rommel or Guderian emerging from Pakistan army ranks. To date, all heads of the Pakistani Army were average officers who rose to higher ranks after going through normal command, staff and instructional appointments. Most senior officers are average and one can choose from among the available lot without sacrificing much. The appointing authority can choose anyone among the top three or four senior lieutenant generals and he will be no better or worse than the others. The new chief will work to secure Pakistan’s as well as military’s interests. Every senior officer including the chief has the right to select his own team as long as he adheres to prevalent professional standards and accepted norms. Once, the chief starts to play with rules to favour one over the other then there are bound to be repercussions. In the past allegations of such foul play caused resentment and estrangement among senior officers, which is not good for the smooth functioning of the institution. Pakistani Army officers usually accuse civilians of interfering with army affairs but it is the unfair tactics of senior officers for career advancement, which caused the greatest harm.
Unfortunately the ‘indispensability syndrome’ is quite prevalent in Pakistan. All major political parties are run as personal and family business. They cry hoarse about democracy but nominate lifetime chairpersons and leaders groom their children to inherit not only the personal wealth but also the political party.
Senior military officers also get grandiose ideas in their heads and sometimes suffer from the disease of ‘infallibility’ . The only antidote for such ideas is frequent visits to the nearest graveyard, which will confirm to the visitor that every graveyard is filled with the ‘indispensable’ folks. There is no denying the fact that military is the dominant institution in Pakistan completely controlling not only military but also nuclear, missile, foreign policy and domestic arenas. The army as an institution should understand and respect spheres of influence of other organs of the state and try not to interfere in smooth functioning of other institutions. It is an accepted norm that internal matters of the army should be dealt through army chief but it is also important that army chief should clearly understand his own limitations and not extend himself resulting in the imbalance which can not only threaten the current delicate set up but can also cause serious fissures in the military. In current difficult times more transparency in decision-making process is the need of the hour rather than engaging in intrigues fuelled by mistrust and suspicion among decision makers. A working relationship between army, parliament, prime minister, president and judiciary is must to avoid further polarization of society.
'War is won outside the borders of the state, but the general’s merit is established within it'. Tai Kung’s advice to King Wu, 11th century B.C.
Dr. Hamid Hussain is an independent analyst based in New York.
Chief’s Choreography –Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by Hamid Hussain
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Pakistan Army and ISI amply rewarded for support to Islamic extremism and terrorism
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
SHAUN GREGORY, Jul 18, 2010, 07.20am IST
The US strategy in Afghanistan is in deep trouble. President Obama's December announcement that US forces would begin to draw down from July 2011 is being widely read in South Asia as the beginning of the endgame for the US and Nato in Afghanistan. Regional states are beginning to jostle for influence. They will be left for the second time in less than 25 years to deal with the consequences of a strategic retreat by a major power from Afghanistan. The nature of America's problems and Islamabad's support for the Afghan Taliban has moved Pakistan into poll position to recover its "strategic depth" in Afghanistan. If it does so, the Pakistan Army and ISI will undoubtedly conclude that their support for Islamic extremism and terrorism has been rewarded.
All four strands of the US-led transition strategy are going badly. Efforts to create a powerful Afghan National Security Force to provide security across the country are faltering; the counterinsurgency or COIN strategy has backfired in Marjah and the Kandahar operation has been delayed; the peace and reconciliation process is failing because some of the main Afghan opposition parties have declined to participate and Taliban representatives have insisted they will not negotiate; and the efforts to legitimize the Karzai government have been undermined by fraudulent elections and ongoing allegations of corruption and incompetence. America's hand is being weakened further by the civil-military tensions exposed in the "Rolling Stone" article, which led to the sacking of General Stanley McChrystal. The United States has seen nothing like it since the 1971 publication of "The Pentagon Papers" foreshadowed the ignominious withdrawal from Vietnam.
The dilemma for the United States and the rest of Nato is that with so much blood in the soil of Afghanistan and so much money spent to resource the war, the Alliance needs a success story to provide the political fig-leaf for disengagement and persuade their respective publics that the price has been worth paying. For the leaders of many Nato members, political futures are at stake. Yet the scale of challenge in Afghanistan is so great, and the need to find a resolution to the residual question of al-Qaida so pressing, that neither the US nor Nato can achieve an exit strategy on their own terms.
The most plausible success story, and one which would allow forces to come home with political cover and the al-Qaida issue addressed, is that the US and Nato have achieved a stable transition in Afghanistan to an inclusive Afghan government, that the Taliban have given up support for al-Qaida and come into the political process, and that the US will retain a residual regional presence — as it has in Iraq — to maintain downward pressure on al-Qaida in the theatre. The United States has come to believe that the key to this entire narrative is Pakistan.
Pakistan has resolutely supported the Afghan Taliban since it was forced to flee Afghanistan in late 2001 and it is from Pakistani sanctuaries and the main leadership shuras in Quetta, Gerdi Jangal, Miram Shah, and Peshawar that the Afghan Taliban has staged its comeback. Backed by the Pakistan Army/ISI the Afghan Taliban is now once again in the ascendancy in Afghanistan and is thus key to any US/Nato disengagement. This is why Pakistan's Generals Kayani and Pasha have made a series of recent visits to Kabul in which they have offered to broker deals with the various Afghan Taliban groups and the Karzai regime; it is why Pakistan has now cleared the way for Mullah Baradar to be extradited to Kabul to participate in the process, and it is why secret meetings have been held with Sirajuddin Haqqani, and others to seek to engineer an endgame. Pakistan has simultaneously been pushing its erstwhile proxy Gulbuddin Hekmatyar into the process and quietly boosting militant strength in the Afghan-Pakistan border region by facilitating the movement of Punjabi Taliban into the theatre. Pakistan is also circulating the idea that the Afghan Taliban will give up al-Qaida to reach a deal, even though there are few reasons to believe this is so and no means to enforce any such offer the Taliban might make to ease the US/Nato withdrawal.
Pakistan's price for being helpful to the US is acceptance of Pakistan's primacy in Afghanistan and that it has a strong role in shaping US regional engagement going forward. It is a measure of the desperation of the US that they seem prepared to agree this deal, cede the lead to Pakistan, and condemn the people of Afghanistan to Taliban rule or to civil war.
Simply put, the United States seems ready to reward Pakistan's duplicitous support for militant Islamic extremism with the huge geostrategic prize of Afghanistan. The implications of this for India are grave indeed and it is difficult to believe that a White House friendlier to Delhi would ever have countenanced such a deal. India is emerging as a great power and with great power come commensurate obligations. India must take a stronger hand in Afghanistan and find a response which provides the United States and Nato with another way forward, which offers the people of Afghanistan an alternative to the Taliban or civil war, and which denies Pakistan a strategic victory which will surely resonate across the region for generations to come.
The writer is founder-director of the Pakistan Security Research Unit at the University of Bradford, UK
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
SHAUN GREGORY, Jul 18, 2010, 07.20am IST
The US strategy in Afghanistan is in deep trouble. President Obama's December announcement that US forces would begin to draw down from July 2011 is being widely read in South Asia as the beginning of the endgame for the US and Nato in Afghanistan. Regional states are beginning to jostle for influence. They will be left for the second time in less than 25 years to deal with the consequences of a strategic retreat by a major power from Afghanistan. The nature of America's problems and Islamabad's support for the Afghan Taliban has moved Pakistan into poll position to recover its "strategic depth" in Afghanistan. If it does so, the Pakistan Army and ISI will undoubtedly conclude that their support for Islamic extremism and terrorism has been rewarded.
All four strands of the US-led transition strategy are going badly. Efforts to create a powerful Afghan National Security Force to provide security across the country are faltering; the counterinsurgency or COIN strategy has backfired in Marjah and the Kandahar operation has been delayed; the peace and reconciliation process is failing because some of the main Afghan opposition parties have declined to participate and Taliban representatives have insisted they will not negotiate; and the efforts to legitimize the Karzai government have been undermined by fraudulent elections and ongoing allegations of corruption and incompetence. America's hand is being weakened further by the civil-military tensions exposed in the "Rolling Stone" article, which led to the sacking of General Stanley McChrystal. The United States has seen nothing like it since the 1971 publication of "The Pentagon Papers" foreshadowed the ignominious withdrawal from Vietnam.
The dilemma for the United States and the rest of Nato is that with so much blood in the soil of Afghanistan and so much money spent to resource the war, the Alliance needs a success story to provide the political fig-leaf for disengagement and persuade their respective publics that the price has been worth paying. For the leaders of many Nato members, political futures are at stake. Yet the scale of challenge in Afghanistan is so great, and the need to find a resolution to the residual question of al-Qaida so pressing, that neither the US nor Nato can achieve an exit strategy on their own terms.
The most plausible success story, and one which would allow forces to come home with political cover and the al-Qaida issue addressed, is that the US and Nato have achieved a stable transition in Afghanistan to an inclusive Afghan government, that the Taliban have given up support for al-Qaida and come into the political process, and that the US will retain a residual regional presence — as it has in Iraq — to maintain downward pressure on al-Qaida in the theatre. The United States has come to believe that the key to this entire narrative is Pakistan.
Pakistan has resolutely supported the Afghan Taliban since it was forced to flee Afghanistan in late 2001 and it is from Pakistani sanctuaries and the main leadership shuras in Quetta, Gerdi Jangal, Miram Shah, and Peshawar that the Afghan Taliban has staged its comeback. Backed by the Pakistan Army/ISI the Afghan Taliban is now once again in the ascendancy in Afghanistan and is thus key to any US/Nato disengagement. This is why Pakistan's Generals Kayani and Pasha have made a series of recent visits to Kabul in which they have offered to broker deals with the various Afghan Taliban groups and the Karzai regime; it is why Pakistan has now cleared the way for Mullah Baradar to be extradited to Kabul to participate in the process, and it is why secret meetings have been held with Sirajuddin Haqqani, and others to seek to engineer an endgame. Pakistan has simultaneously been pushing its erstwhile proxy Gulbuddin Hekmatyar into the process and quietly boosting militant strength in the Afghan-Pakistan border region by facilitating the movement of Punjabi Taliban into the theatre. Pakistan is also circulating the idea that the Afghan Taliban will give up al-Qaida to reach a deal, even though there are few reasons to believe this is so and no means to enforce any such offer the Taliban might make to ease the US/Nato withdrawal.
Pakistan's price for being helpful to the US is acceptance of Pakistan's primacy in Afghanistan and that it has a strong role in shaping US regional engagement going forward. It is a measure of the desperation of the US that they seem prepared to agree this deal, cede the lead to Pakistan, and condemn the people of Afghanistan to Taliban rule or to civil war.
Simply put, the United States seems ready to reward Pakistan's duplicitous support for militant Islamic extremism with the huge geostrategic prize of Afghanistan. The implications of this for India are grave indeed and it is difficult to believe that a White House friendlier to Delhi would ever have countenanced such a deal. India is emerging as a great power and with great power come commensurate obligations. India must take a stronger hand in Afghanistan and find a response which provides the United States and Nato with another way forward, which offers the people of Afghanistan an alternative to the Taliban or civil war, and which denies Pakistan a strategic victory which will surely resonate across the region for generations to come.
The writer is founder-director of the Pakistan Security Research Unit at the University of Bradford, UK
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
Friday, July 9, 2010
US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan
Friends,
Please do read the article in Boston Globe titled "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan". click here
Also comments below by Mr. Ram Narayan.
USA is fully aware of the proliferation of nuclear and missile know how by Pakistan to N Korea,Iran, Algeria etc.Pakistan may have also done the same with Saudi Arabia. It will not hesitate to facilitate making of a small dirty nuclear device by Islamist extremists/providing them such a device, which may be used against India based on its national interests. For example in an adverse war situation with India, Pakistan may use such a device as an act of terrorism rather than use nuclear weapons openly!!
USA also cannot be immune from such a covert attack by Alqaeda and any other Islamist extremist organisation, material for which would come from Pakistan.
Due to reasons best known to US authorities, Pakistan has escaped retribution for past serious acts of proliferation. It won't be an overstatement to say that Pakistan has been the epicenter not only of
terrorism but also of nuclear/missile proliferation. There is no way but to disinvest Pakistan of nuclear capability, since Pakistan has proved its intentions repeatedly to seek and provide nuclear and missile technology, covertly and deny proven acts in this matter blatantly, time and again. It
is just inconceivable that Nuclear Head Abdul Qadeer Khan could carry out all the nuclear and missile deals with countries named above on his own!!
How and when USA and its allies disable/take out Pak Nuclear assets is a
topic for separate discussion. USA also has to bring this subject head on with China and NATO. Continued Pussy footing is fraught with danger.
Harbhajan Singh
Lt Gen (Retd)
Dear General Harbhajan Singh,
Some days ago, I had sent the following Selig Harrison article titled, "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan," published in the Boston Globe of June 29th, to a select few. Harrison had highlighted several crucial and alarming scenarios for Pakistan, the U.S, India, and the global community.
His grim conclusion:
“Pakistan poses many dangers to the United States, notably its aid to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and the use of its territory for the training of would-be suicide bombers. But the greatest of all is that fissile material will be smuggled out of its nuclear facilities by undetected Islamist sympathizers and that a future leadership infiltrated by Islamists will risk a nuclear Armageddon in Mumbai or Washington.”
I did get some excellent feedback from the few who received my message. In view of the dire consequences of inaction pointed out by Harrison, friends have advised me that it should go to everyone on my list
The question is: What can – and MUST – be done urgently to mitigate, and avoid the frightful consequences of the conclusion of Harrison.
It is imperative that the governments, people, and strategic thinkers in America, Pakistan, India, and the world community immediately address this festering issue. There is general consensus – across all political ideologies, governmental leaderships, and the common women and men on the street in any city or town of the U.S., Pakistan, India and any corner of the globe that such a rogue situation may horrendously, truly face any of us in a not too far future.
Isn’t it incumbent on leading thinkers and influencers to share with wider and governmental machineries and help or influence them to coalesce to pragmatic action IMMEDIATELY?
May I request your views on this important matter? More importantly, I solicit your suggestions on what pragmatic steps must be taken IMMEDIATELY to help prevent this dangerous slide over the cliff?
My idea is to compile the suggestions received (you may choose to remain incognito, in case you wish – but please let me know how I should attribute your suggestions in the compiled report) and get a message out to you and to various authorites in the US and India.
Please go through Harrison’s article, and let me have your thoughts ASAP.
Sincerely,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/
Please do read the article in Boston Globe titled "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan". click here
Also comments below by Mr. Ram Narayan.
USA is fully aware of the proliferation of nuclear and missile know how by Pakistan to N Korea,Iran, Algeria etc.Pakistan may have also done the same with Saudi Arabia. It will not hesitate to facilitate making of a small dirty nuclear device by Islamist extremists/providing them such a device, which may be used against India based on its national interests. For example in an adverse war situation with India, Pakistan may use such a device as an act of terrorism rather than use nuclear weapons openly!!
USA also cannot be immune from such a covert attack by Alqaeda and any other Islamist extremist organisation, material for which would come from Pakistan.
Due to reasons best known to US authorities, Pakistan has escaped retribution for past serious acts of proliferation. It won't be an overstatement to say that Pakistan has been the epicenter not only of
terrorism but also of nuclear/missile proliferation. There is no way but to disinvest Pakistan of nuclear capability, since Pakistan has proved its intentions repeatedly to seek and provide nuclear and missile technology, covertly and deny proven acts in this matter blatantly, time and again. It
is just inconceivable that Nuclear Head Abdul Qadeer Khan could carry out all the nuclear and missile deals with countries named above on his own!!
How and when USA and its allies disable/take out Pak Nuclear assets is a
topic for separate discussion. USA also has to bring this subject head on with China and NATO. Continued Pussy footing is fraught with danger.
Harbhajan Singh
Lt Gen (Retd)
Dear General Harbhajan Singh,
Some days ago, I had sent the following Selig Harrison article titled, "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan," published in the Boston Globe of June 29th, to a select few. Harrison had highlighted several crucial and alarming scenarios for Pakistan, the U.S, India, and the global community.
His grim conclusion:
“Pakistan poses many dangers to the United States, notably its aid to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and the use of its territory for the training of would-be suicide bombers. But the greatest of all is that fissile material will be smuggled out of its nuclear facilities by undetected Islamist sympathizers and that a future leadership infiltrated by Islamists will risk a nuclear Armageddon in Mumbai or Washington.”
I did get some excellent feedback from the few who received my message. In view of the dire consequences of inaction pointed out by Harrison, friends have advised me that it should go to everyone on my list
The question is: What can – and MUST – be done urgently to mitigate, and avoid the frightful consequences of the conclusion of Harrison.
It is imperative that the governments, people, and strategic thinkers in America, Pakistan, India, and the world community immediately address this festering issue. There is general consensus – across all political ideologies, governmental leaderships, and the common women and men on the street in any city or town of the U.S., Pakistan, India and any corner of the globe that such a rogue situation may horrendously, truly face any of us in a not too far future.
Isn’t it incumbent on leading thinkers and influencers to share with wider and governmental machineries and help or influence them to coalesce to pragmatic action IMMEDIATELY?
May I request your views on this important matter? More importantly, I solicit your suggestions on what pragmatic steps must be taken IMMEDIATELY to help prevent this dangerous slide over the cliff?
My idea is to compile the suggestions received (you may choose to remain incognito, in case you wish – but please let me know how I should attribute your suggestions in the compiled report) and get a message out to you and to various authorites in the US and India.
Please go through Harrison’s article, and let me have your thoughts ASAP.
Sincerely,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/
Friday, June 4, 2010
For US, India is just a market
Daily Poineer Thursday, June 3, 2010 by Shobori Ganguli
Once feted as a “natural” and “strategic” partner of the United States, India must prepare to reconcile itself to the changed terms of relevance that the Americans have now laid out for this partnership. Even as External Affairs Minister SM Krishna and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meet in Washington for the inaugural session of their Strategic Dialogue through this week, media reports and opinion-makers in the US point to an element of mistrust and pessimism that has crept into Indo-US relations of late. This, largely owing to the Obama Administration’s disposition towards China and Pakistan — the former, India’s biggest challenge to the number one position in Asia; the latter, an imploding neighbourhood with a committed anti-India policy.
Indeed, India’s relevance to the US must be re-measured according to President Barack Obama’s priorities which, as things stand today, are somewhat different from those of his predecessor, Mr George W Bush. The first, of course, is Mr Obama’s AfPak policy. Having committed a complete withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan by 2011, Mr Obama envisions a Pakistani role in that country to be played purely to American direction. In this scenario, India seems a stumbling block to Mr Obama as it seeks a legitimate and rightful role in Afghanistan’s reconstruction, as much for strategic depth in the region as to contain Pakistan’s influence in that country. This is clearly not to Mr Obama’s liking as he would ideally wish Pakistan, after all a proxy state, to wield greater influence in Afghanistan once the Americans have technically vacated that theatre. Therefore, any attempt by India to enhance its relevance in Afghanistan would not be a truly welcome step for the US.
Another source of discomfort to Mr Obama, of course, is India’s attempt to paint Pakistan into a corner on the issue of terrorism. While New Delhi has done its share of protesting against Islamabad’s sponsorship of terror in India, Washington has remained largely unimpressed. The official US position is that terrorism is a “shared challenge that the United States, India, Pakistan, other countries have”. Such is Mr Obama’s compulsion to keep Pakistan in good humour on this so-called war against terror that he actually put pressure on India to cede ground after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and invite Pakistan for resumed negotiations on all issues, including Kashmir, as Islamabad so pointedly boasted about. Clearly, India is expected to de-prioritise its concerns about Pakistan and maintain peace on its western border only so that the latter is not distracted from its job — that of securing American interests in the AfPak arena.
Read more: For US, India is just a market
Readers Comment
This is the way the US Presidents operate. For Obama and the Democratic Party, the most important thing is his re election.
Also USA is so concerned about the economic, financial and military potential of China. India has made itself not so relevant in the critical schemes of things for the US President. The Americans also know that India is a paper elephant!!!
Pakistan is playing to the US tune and is critical for any stability in Afghanistan. Even though the US Authorities know the double game always played and being played by Pakistan, they need Pakistan.
Good Indo-US relations can help in keeping Pakistan under control. During the cold war US did not trust Indian leadership. Hence agreeing to US requests like starting dialogue with Pakistan is not too big a price to pay. Of course the Indian leadership has to always weigh, how much to go along!!
So India should take care of its own interests. We need tough leadership.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)
Once feted as a “natural” and “strategic” partner of the United States, India must prepare to reconcile itself to the changed terms of relevance that the Americans have now laid out for this partnership. Even as External Affairs Minister SM Krishna and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meet in Washington for the inaugural session of their Strategic Dialogue through this week, media reports and opinion-makers in the US point to an element of mistrust and pessimism that has crept into Indo-US relations of late. This, largely owing to the Obama Administration’s disposition towards China and Pakistan — the former, India’s biggest challenge to the number one position in Asia; the latter, an imploding neighbourhood with a committed anti-India policy.
Indeed, India’s relevance to the US must be re-measured according to President Barack Obama’s priorities which, as things stand today, are somewhat different from those of his predecessor, Mr George W Bush. The first, of course, is Mr Obama’s AfPak policy. Having committed a complete withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan by 2011, Mr Obama envisions a Pakistani role in that country to be played purely to American direction. In this scenario, India seems a stumbling block to Mr Obama as it seeks a legitimate and rightful role in Afghanistan’s reconstruction, as much for strategic depth in the region as to contain Pakistan’s influence in that country. This is clearly not to Mr Obama’s liking as he would ideally wish Pakistan, after all a proxy state, to wield greater influence in Afghanistan once the Americans have technically vacated that theatre. Therefore, any attempt by India to enhance its relevance in Afghanistan would not be a truly welcome step for the US.
Another source of discomfort to Mr Obama, of course, is India’s attempt to paint Pakistan into a corner on the issue of terrorism. While New Delhi has done its share of protesting against Islamabad’s sponsorship of terror in India, Washington has remained largely unimpressed. The official US position is that terrorism is a “shared challenge that the United States, India, Pakistan, other countries have”. Such is Mr Obama’s compulsion to keep Pakistan in good humour on this so-called war against terror that he actually put pressure on India to cede ground after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and invite Pakistan for resumed negotiations on all issues, including Kashmir, as Islamabad so pointedly boasted about. Clearly, India is expected to de-prioritise its concerns about Pakistan and maintain peace on its western border only so that the latter is not distracted from its job — that of securing American interests in the AfPak arena.
Read more: For US, India is just a market
Readers Comment
This is the way the US Presidents operate. For Obama and the Democratic Party, the most important thing is his re election.
Also USA is so concerned about the economic, financial and military potential of China. India has made itself not so relevant in the critical schemes of things for the US President. The Americans also know that India is a paper elephant!!!
Pakistan is playing to the US tune and is critical for any stability in Afghanistan. Even though the US Authorities know the double game always played and being played by Pakistan, they need Pakistan.
Good Indo-US relations can help in keeping Pakistan under control. During the cold war US did not trust Indian leadership. Hence agreeing to US requests like starting dialogue with Pakistan is not too big a price to pay. Of course the Indian leadership has to always weigh, how much to go along!!
So India should take care of its own interests. We need tough leadership.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to overtake India’s
03/06/2010
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to overtake India’s: SIPRI
"Our conservative estimates are that Pakistan has sixty warheads and could produce 100 nuclear weapons at short notice. In comparison India had also 60 to 70 nuclear warheads," the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said. Pakistan has 60 nuclear warheads and with two new plutonium reactors nearing completion in Khusab, its weapons grade plutonium production will jump seven-fold, according to latest figures released by Swedish institute.
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to overtake India’s
VAIDYANATHAN K IYER says:
Thursday, 03 June 2010 23:35:18
When on economic point of view Pak is like a begging country. The have not learnt any lesson from encouraging terrorism. As they sow they will reap is the proverb. It is eccentric that people are boasting about their capability to destructive weapons rather than constructive way of developing their nation. God alone should save their country which has got its own destruction on its head and exposing pompous living.
Nuclear Terrorism
Is Pakistan heading for Nuclear terrorism or is the country being taken over by Taliban type Terrorists alongwith the Nuclear assets. Pakistan style democracy is a fake and a farce. The world needs to see Pakistan's game plan in a holistic manner. The Chinese who are assisting them now are likely to see red soon!
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to overtake India’s: SIPRI
"Our conservative estimates are that Pakistan has sixty warheads and could produce 100 nuclear weapons at short notice. In comparison India had also 60 to 70 nuclear warheads," the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said. Pakistan has 60 nuclear warheads and with two new plutonium reactors nearing completion in Khusab, its weapons grade plutonium production will jump seven-fold, according to latest figures released by Swedish institute.
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to overtake India’s
VAIDYANATHAN K IYER says:
Thursday, 03 June 2010 23:35:18
When on economic point of view Pak is like a begging country. The have not learnt any lesson from encouraging terrorism. As they sow they will reap is the proverb. It is eccentric that people are boasting about their capability to destructive weapons rather than constructive way of developing their nation. God alone should save their country which has got its own destruction on its head and exposing pompous living.
Nuclear Terrorism
Is Pakistan heading for Nuclear terrorism or is the country being taken over by Taliban type Terrorists alongwith the Nuclear assets. Pakistan style democracy is a fake and a farce. The world needs to see Pakistan's game plan in a holistic manner. The Chinese who are assisting them now are likely to see red soon!
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Indo-Pak relations continue to frustrate the US agenda in Afghanistan
The Telegraph Monday , May 24 , 2010: An American dilemma by Ashok Mitra
Indians generally love the colour of money; whatever the shade of that colour. Americans are making huge outlays in Afghanistan aimed at setting up a solid defence infrastructure against the Taliban. They are building airstrips, helipads and army barracks, widening highways and laying new ones and installing sophisticated communications networks, apart from constructing structures for hospitals and schools. Technologists and technicians of diverse backgrounds, civil and mechanical engineers as well as skilled and unskilled workers from India have crowded in Kabul and sometimes fanned out from there, under military protection, to the outlying provinces to participate in such works in progress. When the Taliban strike, they have no particular programme to spare Indians; it would not be logistically possible to do so either. There is, of course, also the theory that whoever supports the heathen Americans deserve to perish along with the Americans. Casualties are therefore mounting among Indians, a development New Delhi cannot afford to ignore. India’s prime minister communicated his government’s sense of disquiet over the matter to the Afghan president, who in turn will, it is expected, convey the substance of it to the American authorities.
Read the full article:
An American dilemma- Indo-Pak relations continue to frustrate the US agenda in Afghanistan
Indians generally love the colour of money; whatever the shade of that colour. Americans are making huge outlays in Afghanistan aimed at setting up a solid defence infrastructure against the Taliban. They are building airstrips, helipads and army barracks, widening highways and laying new ones and installing sophisticated communications networks, apart from constructing structures for hospitals and schools. Technologists and technicians of diverse backgrounds, civil and mechanical engineers as well as skilled and unskilled workers from India have crowded in Kabul and sometimes fanned out from there, under military protection, to the outlying provinces to participate in such works in progress. When the Taliban strike, they have no particular programme to spare Indians; it would not be logistically possible to do so either. There is, of course, also the theory that whoever supports the heathen Americans deserve to perish along with the Americans. Casualties are therefore mounting among Indians, a development New Delhi cannot afford to ignore. India’s prime minister communicated his government’s sense of disquiet over the matter to the Afghan president, who in turn will, it is expected, convey the substance of it to the American authorities.
Read the full article:
An American dilemma- Indo-Pak relations continue to frustrate the US agenda in Afghanistan
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Afganistan: Dependency of failed state on drug trade
KABUL, 10 May 2010 (IRIN) - It is well known that the Taliban, local criminals and international drug cartels profit enormously from the drug trade; that corruption is rife; and that huge amounts of aid money are pouring into Afghanistan. Less clear is the effect of all this on government power and the rule of law on which humanitarian aid organizations depend to carry out their mandate.
The drugs trade and corruption generate more money than lawful economic activities in Afghanistan. Opium sales generated an estimated US$2.8 billion in 2009, while in the same year Afghans paid $2.5 billion in bribes to government officials, according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
The drug-cum-corruption economy of $5.3 billion in 2009 is more than the $4.4 billion earmarked in 2010 for running the government and financing the development budget.
The overwhelming victims of corruption and drug-induced insecurity are ordinary Afghans, according to the Ministry of Counter-Narcotics (MCN).
“It is almost impossible to obtain a public service in Afghanistan without greasing a palm: bribing the authorities is part of everyday life,” said a UNODC survey, which described corruption as “the biggest problem” in the eyes of Afghans. “Bribery not only robs the poor and causes misallocation of resources, it destroys trust in government.”
Jean-Luc Lemahieu, UNODC’s country representative, was skeptical of the notion of linking drug money with corruption “yet nobody can argue that drug money and corruption are one unholy alliance sharing the same sick bed,” he told IRIN.
International mafia to blame?
MCN officials blame a powerful international mafia for the drugs trade.
“The mafia kills our counter-narcotics forces, abuses our institutions and even threatens the minister of counter-narcotics,” said Zalmai Afzali, MCN’s spokesman.
Hamidullah Farooqi, a former minister and economist, said drug money had deep roots and involved powerful circles both within and outside government.
“Whether Afghans or foreign mafia are nurturing the drug trade is less important than why the problem is not being effectively addressed,” Farooqi told IRIN, adding that there was a lack of commitment in government to tackle the booming illegal economy.
Afghanistan is the world’s top opium producer, according to UNODC, and its government is the most corrupt in the world after Somalia, according to Transparency International.
The opium trade employs about 1.6 million people (6.4 percent of the population), according to the World Bank.
Backed by donors, the government has tried several counter-narcotics and anti-corruption strategies and approaches over the past eight years.
Too powerful
Tackling drugs and corruption, however, is risky as law enforcement institutions are weak and those with vested interests in the illicit economy powerful.
“The so-called elite that thrives on the illegal economy is so powerful that it can destabilize the country if revolutionary steps are taken to change the status quo,” said Saifuddin Saihoon, a professor of political economy at Kabul University.
“Corruption and drugs undermine the rule of law, erode peoples’ confidence in the government, fuel insecurity, contribute to poverty and derail development efforts,” said former minister Farooqi.
“We all eat corruption and drug money, albeit in different quantities,” said an official in the Finance Ministry who preferred anonymity.
Read more
AFGHANISTAN: Running on drugs, corruption and aid
Question
Is US and Indian humanitarian aid going down the drain or increasing drug trade? Is the drug trade financing terror factories in Pakistan and Afghanistan?
The drugs trade and corruption generate more money than lawful economic activities in Afghanistan. Opium sales generated an estimated US$2.8 billion in 2009, while in the same year Afghans paid $2.5 billion in bribes to government officials, according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
The drug-cum-corruption economy of $5.3 billion in 2009 is more than the $4.4 billion earmarked in 2010 for running the government and financing the development budget.
The overwhelming victims of corruption and drug-induced insecurity are ordinary Afghans, according to the Ministry of Counter-Narcotics (MCN).
“It is almost impossible to obtain a public service in Afghanistan without greasing a palm: bribing the authorities is part of everyday life,” said a UNODC survey, which described corruption as “the biggest problem” in the eyes of Afghans. “Bribery not only robs the poor and causes misallocation of resources, it destroys trust in government.”
Jean-Luc Lemahieu, UNODC’s country representative, was skeptical of the notion of linking drug money with corruption “yet nobody can argue that drug money and corruption are one unholy alliance sharing the same sick bed,” he told IRIN.
International mafia to blame?
Too powerful
Read more
AFGHANISTAN: Running on drugs, corruption and aid
Question
Is US and Indian humanitarian aid going down the drain or increasing drug trade? Is the drug trade financing terror factories in Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Monday, May 10, 2010
National Security: India warns US against military aid to Pakistan
New Delhi (AFP) May 7, 2010
India's defence minister cautioned the United States on Friday against military supplies to rival Pakistan, saying the hardware could be diverted to target India.
The warning came after the US in March said it would deliver unarmed drones to Pakistan and less than a month after it unveiled plans to transfer 600 million dollars to Islamabad to pay for anti-militant operations.
A. K. Antony told reporters in New Delhi that India's concerns had been conveyed to Washington.
"Even though the US is giving equipment to Pakistan to fight against the Taliban, we feel there is every possibility of (Pakistan) diverting most of them to the Indian borders," Antony said.
India warns US against military aid to Pakistan
Diplomatic Negligence: The Obama administration fumbles relations with India
India's defence minister cautioned the United States on Friday against military supplies to rival Pakistan, saying the hardware could be diverted to target India.
The warning came after the US in March said it would deliver unarmed drones to Pakistan and less than a month after it unveiled plans to transfer 600 million dollars to Islamabad to pay for anti-militant operations.
A. K. Antony told reporters in New Delhi that India's concerns had been conveyed to Washington.
"Even though the US is giving equipment to Pakistan to fight against the Taliban, we feel there is every possibility of (Pakistan) diverting most of them to the Indian borders," Antony said.
India warns US against military aid to Pakistan
Diplomatic Negligence: The Obama administration fumbles relations with India
Pakistan Terror Factories: Taliban behind Times Square incident
Sunday 09 May, 2010.
US said it has evidence that the Pakistani Taliban was behind last week's failed attempt to detonate a car bomb at Times Square in New York and that terror suspect Faisal Shahzad was "working at their direction".
The evidence has given new direction to the fight against terrorism, as investigations into the Times Square incident has revealed that the Pakistani Taliban has the "aim" and "capability" in carrying out attacks against the United States.
"We've now developed evidence that shows that the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack," US Attorney General Eric Holder told a news channel on Sunday.
"We know that they (Pakistani Taliban) helped facilitate it. We know that they probably helped finance it, and that he (Shahzad) was working at their direction," he said.
30-year-old Shahzad, a Pakistani who became a naturalised US citizen, was arrested on Monday last for attempting to detonate the car bomb in New York.
The FBI has said that Shahzad, son of a former Pakistani Air Force officer, has admitted to attending a terrorist training camp in Pakistan's restive Waziristan tribal region.
US has evidence that Pak Taliban behind Times Square incident
Comment: Pakistan is home to all forms of Terrorists. How are these terrorists being financed and trained is the mute question which the world at large and India specifically needs to address! Is the Pakistan Government blind to the terrorist factories in their own land?
US said it has evidence that the Pakistani Taliban was behind last week's failed attempt to detonate a car bomb at Times Square in New York and that terror suspect Faisal Shahzad was "working at their direction".
The evidence has given new direction to the fight against terrorism, as investigations into the Times Square incident has revealed that the Pakistani Taliban has the "aim" and "capability" in carrying out attacks against the United States.
"We've now developed evidence that shows that the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack," US Attorney General Eric Holder told a news channel on Sunday.
"We know that they (Pakistani Taliban) helped facilitate it. We know that they probably helped finance it, and that he (Shahzad) was working at their direction," he said.
30-year-old Shahzad, a Pakistani who became a naturalised US citizen, was arrested on Monday last for attempting to detonate the car bomb in New York.
The FBI has said that Shahzad, son of a former Pakistani Air Force officer, has admitted to attending a terrorist training camp in Pakistan's restive Waziristan tribal region.
US has evidence that Pak Taliban behind Times Square incident
Comment: Pakistan is home to all forms of Terrorists. How are these terrorists being financed and trained is the mute question which the world at large and India specifically needs to address! Is the Pakistan Government blind to the terrorist factories in their own land?
Monday, March 29, 2010
Terror and beyond: Are we expecting peace amidst turmoil?
By Raj Narayan, 22/02/2010
Terror and beyond: Are we expecting peace amidst turmoil?
Violence, both externally driven and internal, has become a way of life in India. So much so, that each morning our eyes scan the newspaper for acts of terror. We let out an involuntary sigh of relief if the papers are bereft of pictures of shattered skulls, broken limbs and blood-stained roads.
Rescue workers carry the body of a policeman at a police camp attacked by Maoist rebels in Silda village, Midnapore district of West Bengal. On Monday, about 24 jawans were killed in the biggest-ever Maoist assault when the rebels caught the troops unaware. Photo Courtesy: Reuters
But such days are getting as rare as snow in the desert for Indians. The violent terror attacks in Mumbai on 26/11 2008 had barely receded into the recesses of our collective minds when the bakery blast at Pune returned to remind us of the external threats. And just as we were reeling from that blow to the solar plexus came the upper-cut straight to the jaw in the form of a daring Naxal attack on a police camp in Sildah, West Bengal.
And our country continues to bleed from a thousand cuts inflicted on us by envious neighbors and militant desperados.
In fact, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh surprised many by his recent statement that naxalism and not terrorism was the bigger threat to India's internal security. He sought to know the reasons for this sense of alienation amongst people in central India and suggested that the new age policeman must train to be more professional, motivated, empowered and above all trained to use technology for investigation.
Be that as it may, the question that springs to mind is the ease with which terror actors get access to weapons of war and funds in the region. While external help is easy to understand, where do the Maoists find the money and the guns to raise a stink?
The answer is not too difficult to fathom. Fly three hours in any direction from New Delhi and what do you get...? A conflict zone or one where a conflict has recently resolved. There is Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Bangladesh and Nepal - each a hotbed of conflict and each providing a haven for desperados with a veritable departmental store for arms purchase.
Terror and beyond: Are we expecting peace amidst turmoil?
Terror and beyond: Are we expecting peace amidst turmoil?
Violence, both externally driven and internal, has become a way of life in India. So much so, that each morning our eyes scan the newspaper for acts of terror. We let out an involuntary sigh of relief if the papers are bereft of pictures of shattered skulls, broken limbs and blood-stained roads.
Rescue workers carry the body of a policeman at a police camp attacked by Maoist rebels in Silda village, Midnapore district of West Bengal. On Monday, about 24 jawans were killed in the biggest-ever Maoist assault when the rebels caught the troops unaware. Photo Courtesy: ReutersBut such days are getting as rare as snow in the desert for Indians. The violent terror attacks in Mumbai on 26/11 2008 had barely receded into the recesses of our collective minds when the bakery blast at Pune returned to remind us of the external threats. And just as we were reeling from that blow to the solar plexus came the upper-cut straight to the jaw in the form of a daring Naxal attack on a police camp in Sildah, West Bengal.
And our country continues to bleed from a thousand cuts inflicted on us by envious neighbors and militant desperados.
In fact, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh surprised many by his recent statement that naxalism and not terrorism was the bigger threat to India's internal security. He sought to know the reasons for this sense of alienation amongst people in central India and suggested that the new age policeman must train to be more professional, motivated, empowered and above all trained to use technology for investigation.
Be that as it may, the question that springs to mind is the ease with which terror actors get access to weapons of war and funds in the region. While external help is easy to understand, where do the Maoists find the money and the guns to raise a stink?
The answer is not too difficult to fathom. Fly three hours in any direction from New Delhi and what do you get...? A conflict zone or one where a conflict has recently resolved. There is Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Bangladesh and Nepal - each a hotbed of conflict and each providing a haven for desperados with a veritable departmental store for arms purchase.
Terror and beyond: Are we expecting peace amidst turmoil?
Thursday, February 18, 2010
War on Terror: Pune Bomb Blast
The fact that the incident took place despite the strong alert, the official said, had once again proved that India still lacked assessment capabilities and the mechanism to ensure adequate follow-up action.
Sources said the Pune blast has forced security agencies to have a closer look at the little known Islamic Students Congregation (ISC), an organization headquartered in Pune and comprising Arab students. The ISC is said to have branches in Hyderabad, Mumbai and Bangalore too. This organization is said to carry out its activities, mainly student meetings, unobtrusively without attracting media attention.
The intelligence official said this organization first came on the Indian security radar in 2007 when a Sudanese member of al-Qaida visited Pune and stayed there for a month interacting with members of ISC. It was only after the Sudanese national left India that the authorities realized his true identity. He had come to India assuming a fake identity.
While Pune's association with Abu Zubaidah, Osama bin Laden's No.3 man, is well known, the fact that Pune was likely to be targeted by al-Qaida became obvious in August 2006, when three al-Qaida operatives were arrested in Algeria. "These three men had then disclosed that the same year in March, all three of them had visited Pune on a reconnaissance mission. It then became clear that Pune was on al-Qaida's hit list," said the official.
The fact that the perpetrators targeted German Bakery and not the nearby Chabad House has also set security officials thinking. "It's possible that they found it easier to plant the bomb in the bakery. However, it can't be ruled out that the perpetrators were influenced by al-Qaida leader Bekkay Harrach who has been issuing threats against Germany," said the official. The bakery was being run by a local who had earlier lived in Germany.
Meanwhile, after the Pune blast, the US has again extended a travel alert for its citizens in India saying that it continues to receive information that terrorist groups may be planning attacks in the country. "Terrorists and their sympathizers have demonstrated their willingness and capability to attack targets where US citizens or westerners are known to congregate or visit. This replaces the travel alert dated December 29, 2009, and expires on April 30, 2010," said the alert.
US ambassador Timothy J Roemer condemned the Pune bombing. "On behalf of the people of the United States, I extend heartfelt sympathy to the Government of India and the victims of this tragic terrorist blast in Pune. The US remains shoulder-to-shoulder with India in the fight against terror and will assist as needed to help bring the perpetrators of this cowardly act to justice."
US had warned of attack in Pune, Mumbai
The challenge from Pune
Sunday, January 3, 2010
War on terror: Pakistan Terrorists escape
3 Pak terrorists escape from Delhi hospital IANS 2 January 2010, 06:56pm
NEW DELHI: Three Pakistani terrorists who have already completed their sentences and were soon to be deported home on Saturday escaped from a city hospital after giving immigration officials the slip, police said.
The trio managed to slip out of the clutches of Foreigners Regional Registration (FRRO) officials at the G.B. Pant hospital in central Delhi.
"There were not in the custody of the police. But they were under restraint orders of the FRRO. We have registered a case and are searching for them," Joint Commissioner of Police Karnal Singh said.
The hospital administration feigned ignorance about the incident.
"I do not remember any such case in last few days. We are verifying our records," the hospital's Additional Medical Superintendent, Shashi Gururaja, said.
The police said the three Pakistanis were arrested in 2000 for planting a bomb near Delhi airport. A large amount of RDX was seized from them.
3 Pak terrorists escape from Delhi hospital
NEW DELHI: Three Pakistani terrorists who have already completed their sentences and were soon to be deported home on Saturday escaped from a city hospital after giving immigration officials the slip, police said.
The trio managed to slip out of the clutches of Foreigners Regional Registration (FRRO) officials at the G.B. Pant hospital in central Delhi.
"There were not in the custody of the police. But they were under restraint orders of the FRRO. We have registered a case and are searching for them," Joint Commissioner of Police Karnal Singh said.
The hospital administration feigned ignorance about the incident.
"I do not remember any such case in last few days. We are verifying our records," the hospital's Additional Medical Superintendent, Shashi Gururaja, said.
The police said the three Pakistanis were arrested in 2000 for planting a bomb near Delhi airport. A large amount of RDX was seized from them.
3 Pak terrorists escape from Delhi hospital
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Can India unearth Money Launderers who fuel World Terrorism?
India, Switzerland to renegotiate tax treaty
October 21, 2009 17:05 IST
The government on Tuesday said it would renegotiate the taxation treaty with Switzerland under the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Model Tax Convention.
"...There is a provision in OECD...The article 26," Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters when asked about the proposed talks with Swiss authorities later this year.
The negotiations are expected to take place in the wake of the issue of black money stashed away in Swiss banks that has created a political furore in the country, and India has sought details related to the same from Swiss authorities.
OECD sets the international tax standards. Article 26 of the OECD Model Convention on Income and Capital, covers "tax of every kind and description" and allows for exchange of tax-related information between two countries.
In August, Mukherjee had said that India and Switzerland would meet in December to negotiate amendments in the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The Swiss banks in August had said that India could not come on a fishing expedition for secret bank account details.
Mukherjee had later made it clear that India was not interested in a "roving inquiry" over unaccounted money stashed away in Swiss banks.
The Swiss Ambassador to India had recently said that Switzerland was willing to open negotiations on disclosing data information about black money. "Switzerland will completely live up to the legitimate expectations out of the treaty... For release of data in the future. The (amended) treaty would be possibly adapted, revived and then we will live up to the new obligations...," he had told a private news channel.
According to him, most probably Indians would ask for the inclusion of tax evasion in the set of provisions of the treaty, which would mean that the release of data would be possible.
India, Switzerland to renegotiate tax treaty: October 21, 2009 17:05 IST
Can India match US- IRS in unearthing money launderers?
Swiss Banking Terror is more dangerous than Pakistan- Taliban Terror
Swiss banking giant UBS will give the IRS the details of more than the client accounts under a deal to end a contentious international lawsuit. Keystone/Walter Bieri/AP/File
IRS cracks open 4,450 Swiss bank accounts
Deal with Swiss banking giant UBS gives access to 4,450 secret accounts of Americans evading tax authorities.
October 21, 2009 17:05 IST
The government on Tuesday said it would renegotiate the taxation treaty with Switzerland under the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Model Tax Convention.
"...There is a provision in OECD...The article 26," Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters when asked about the proposed talks with Swiss authorities later this year.
The negotiations are expected to take place in the wake of the issue of black money stashed away in Swiss banks that has created a political furore in the country, and India has sought details related to the same from Swiss authorities.
OECD sets the international tax standards. Article 26 of the OECD Model Convention on Income and Capital, covers "tax of every kind and description" and allows for exchange of tax-related information between two countries.
In August, Mukherjee had said that India and Switzerland would meet in December to negotiate amendments in the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The Swiss banks in August had said that India could not come on a fishing expedition for secret bank account details.
Mukherjee had later made it clear that India was not interested in a "roving inquiry" over unaccounted money stashed away in Swiss banks.
The Swiss Ambassador to India had recently said that Switzerland was willing to open negotiations on disclosing data information about black money. "Switzerland will completely live up to the legitimate expectations out of the treaty... For release of data in the future. The (amended) treaty would be possibly adapted, revived and then we will live up to the new obligations...," he had told a private news channel.
According to him, most probably Indians would ask for the inclusion of tax evasion in the set of provisions of the treaty, which would mean that the release of data would be possible.
India, Switzerland to renegotiate tax treaty: October 21, 2009 17:05 IST
Can India match US- IRS in unearthing money launderers?
Swiss banking giant UBS will give the IRS the details of more than the client accounts under a deal to end a contentious international lawsuit. Keystone/Walter Bieri/AP/File
IRS cracks open 4,450 Swiss bank accounts
Deal with Swiss banking giant UBS gives access to 4,450 secret accounts of Americans evading tax authorities.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
India prepared to fight Taliban: Antony
Left Wing Extremist Affected Areas in India
Click map for enlarged view
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Al-Qaeda seeking nuclear secrets from Pakistan: Holbrooke
Posted: Wednesday, Sep 16, 2009 at 1748 hrs
Washington: Richard Holbrooke has said that Al-Qaeda may be seeking nuclear secrets from Pakistan
Al-Qaeda is trying to seek nuclear secrets from Pakistan and it remains as dangerous as ever, Special US Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke said on Wednesday.
"Al-Qaeda is still there in the region, ever dangerous and publicly asking people to attack the US and publicly asking nuclear engineers to give them nuclear secrets from Pakistan," Holbrooke said at a reception hosted by the Congressional Caucus on Afghanistan at the Capitol Hill.
Holbrooke? the point man of the Obama Administration for Afghanistan and Pakistan- said the US is not in Afghanistan to support the elections, but it is there for its own national interest and security. "We are not in Afghanistan for the election."
Al-Qaeda seeking nuclear secrets from Pakistan: Holbrooke
More Reading
Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues
PLAYING IT CRISP- Is the Indian political class maturing in its dealings with the US? The Telegraph
Al-Qaeda is trying to seek nuclear secrets from Pakistan and it remains as dangerous as ever, Special US Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke said on Wednesday.
"Al-Qaeda is still there in the region, ever dangerous and publicly asking people to attack the US and publicly asking nuclear engineers to give them nuclear secrets from Pakistan," Holbrooke said at a reception hosted by the Congressional Caucus on Afghanistan at the Capitol Hill.
Holbrooke? the point man of the Obama Administration for Afghanistan and Pakistan- said the US is not in Afghanistan to support the elections, but it is there for its own national interest and security. "We are not in Afghanistan for the election."
Al-Qaeda seeking nuclear secrets from Pakistan: Holbrooke
More Reading
Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues
PLAYING IT CRISP- Is the Indian political class maturing in its dealings with the US? The Telegraph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
