Swine flu case in Pakistan confirmed

By: Daily.pk

The health ministry on Monday confirmed the country’s first swine flu case but stressed that the patient was in a stable condition.

‘Swine flu was detected in one patient at the national institute of health Islamabad,’ Dr Rashid Juma, a health ministry official said.

Meanwhile, federal Minister for Health Ijaz Hussain Jakhrani told the National Assembly that precautionary measures had been taken.

‘We have taken precautionary measures at our airports, ports and bus stops and health officers have also been alerted,’ Mr Jakhrani told the house.

Around two million Pakistanis live in Europe, North America and other countries where the swine flu pandemic has appeared.

India and Israel: Dawn of a New Era

Written by Dr. Dinesh Kumar,Western Defense Organization Bulletins

PAKISTAN THINK TANK

At the beginning of the 21st century, South Asia and the Middle East pose major challenges to international peace and security. Amid many turbulent political and military developments in the two regions, India and Israel find a growing convergence in their strategic interests. The emerging Delhi-Jerusalem strategic alliance is creating much concern in the Arab world, but could become one of the crucial factors maintaining global security.

Relations between India and Israel remained cold and strained until recently. Delhi consistently felt itself constrained to develop normal and friendly ties with Jerusalem yet followed a pro-active pro-Arab policy. In the 1970s and 1980s, working within the framework of a zero-sum game, India became one of the greatest assets the Arabs had in their diplomatic assault against Israel.

However, the new world order of the 1990s eroded the Indian perception of conflicting interest with Israel, as new strategic variables sidelined the traditional constraints (the sentiments of Indian Muslims, deference to Arab sentivities and non-alignment) from the Indo-Israeli bilateral equation. The disintegration of the Soviet bloc, India’s economic and defense related need to move closer to the West, as well as the beginning of the Middle East peace process, made Delhi realise that the continuation of the traditional negative policy towards Israel would undermine India’s national interests in the changing strategic landscape of the Middle East and beyond.

Grasping the imperatives of the changed global and regional politico-strategic milieu, Delhi gradually de-linked its Israel policy from the Arab-Israeli conflict and developed a new perception of common interests with Jerusalem. Since the normalization of diplomatic relations in January 1992, the two countries have rapidly developed close relations and cooperate in many areas of mutual interest – cultural, economic, political and matters of defense and security. After four decades of strained relations, the current phase of warm and special ties includes a strategic alliance between India and Israel. This report highlights the process of emerging India-Israel strategic cooperation, its significance for regional and global security equations and the growing Arab worries.

The Historical Background

During the first half of the 20th century, a dialectic relationship emerged between the Indian national movement and the Zionist movement in Palestine. Indian leaders saw a sharp contradiction between the goals of the Zionist movement and the Indian freedom movement, especially on the issue of partitioning countries on religious grounds.

Gandhi’s attempts to woo Indian Muslims for the sake of Hindu-Muslim unity and Nehru’s negative assessment of the Zionist movement, which he considered the child of imperialism, led the Indian National Congress to adopt a pro-Arab policy in the Arab-Jewish conflict. This policy not only established a crucial link between Indian policy towards its Muslims and the trans-Muslim issues in Palestine, but also caused Indian leaders to view their Israel policy through the prism of Arab-Israeli conflict. However, it is important to stress that India’s negative attitude to the Zionist movement was not tainted by anti-Semitism.

After gaining independence, India adopted an ambiguous policy towards Israel; deciding on a half-hearted delayed recognition of the Jewish state but refusing to establish full diplomatic relations. The unfinished agenda of Kashmir, Nehru’s dream of leading a non-aligned bloc and the existence of a post-partition traumatised Muslim minority in India caused Delhi to view any positive gesture towards Israel as harmful to its vital interests.

The perception of serving Indian national interests by a negative policy towards Israel in the Middle East was so strong among the Indian leadership that even the failure of the Arabs to reciprocate during India’s wars with China (1962) and Pakistan (1965 and 1971), growing public dissension, and the formation of the pro-Israel Janata government failed to cut much ice in Delhi. If the price for making the Arabs happy was to refuse establishing full diplomatic relations with Jerusalem and criticise Israel at various international forums, the Indian leadership showed no hesitation to pay it..

Yet the Indian government’s attitude to the Arab-Israeli conflict could neither ensure continued electoral support from the Muslims nor win the goodwill of Arab states. Indeed, in retrospect, some of its aspects proved counterproductive.

However, at the unofficial level, there were always some undercurrents helping to create a perception of converging long-term interests between India and Israel. The Israeli Consulate functioned actively in Bombay and some high level delegations exchanged visits. There was much sympathy for Israel among Indian right-wing intellectuals, organizations and political parties. The socialist and trade union movements of the two countries provided more links. Pro-Israel voices in the Indian Parliament and media were not uncommon.

A New Beginning

With the change in the international balance of power after the 1991 Gulf War and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, India and Israel finally found the opportunity to normalize their relations. The following factors were significant in this regard:

1. The end of the Cold War eroded the political and ideological relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement.
2. The depressed oil prices in the early 1990s somewhat reduced India’s dependence on oil from Arab states.
3. Repeated pro-Pakistan resolutions on Kashmir by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) further encouraged India to re-evaluate its Middle East policy.
4. After the Madrid Peace Conference of October 1991, the argument of annoying friendly Arab states and Muslims at home became irrelevant, as the Arabs, including the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), were themselves negotiating peace with Israel.
5. In the early 1990s, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism worsened the domestic and the regional security environment of India, and Delhi saw a common cause with Israel in this regard.
6. After the Gulf War, public opinion in India was once again demanding a fair attitude towards Israel.

Thus by the end of 1991, most of the actual and perceived constraints behind India’s policy of ‘no full diplomatic relations with Israel’ had lost their rationale. After much deliberation, the first significant policy change occurred when India voted to rescind the 1975 UN resolution ‘equating Zionism with racism’.

Moreover, this was the time when Delhi gradually began to identify Indian political and economic interests with the West. The role of the US Jewish lobby in stopping Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) sales to Pakistan and garnering support for India on Kashmir was not only appreciated by Delhi, but also apprised Indian leaders of the Jewish clout in the US. The Indian leadership became increasingly convinced that the American Jewish lobby provides a vital link of influence in American policy making and finance and that in order to fully utilize this link it was imperative to normalize relations with Israel. Against this background, Delhi upgraded its ties with Israel on 29 January 1992, on the eve of Prime Minister Narasimbha Rao’s high profile visit to the US.

Once the ice was broken, a new era of partnership began between India and Israel. Keeping a low profile for about a year, both countries worked hard to strengthen the institutional mechanism. Over a period of five years, India and Israel developed the vast institutional gamut of bilateral relations, which in normal circumstances requires a decade or more. The socio-cultural and political affinities between the two countries created a healthy atmosphere for improving ties. Thus, helped by fast changing international realities, the two countries moved very carefully but rapidly to develop a many-faceted friendship.

Flourishing Cultural Interaction and Economic Cooperation

India and Israel first emphasized economic and cultural ties. These were rightly considered not only mutually beneficial, but also instruments to build confidence and bridge gaps on the political and strategic issues. After 1992, there was a flood of cultural interaction between the two countries. Meanwhile, many high-level visit exchanges, including the high profile visits of Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres (1993) and President Ezer Weizman (1997), Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh (2000) and Home Minister L. K. Advani (2000) took place. Israel celebrated with a fanfare, “Shalom India” as a mark to India’s fiftieth year of independence. India reciprocated by organizing many cultural events all over Israel as part of the celebration of the fifty years of Israeli independence.

An increasing number of Indian students at Israeli universities and Israeli students at Indian universities have created effective channels of better understanding between the two countries. In the recent past, Israel’s image in the Indian press underwent a positive change. Though the traditional pro-Arab (anti-Israel) class of Indian politicians, diplomats and intellectuals still exists, its influence has significantly declined in the past decade. The cultural interaction of the past nine years has helped India and Israel to discover social, cultural and political affinities between them.

The establishment of full diplomatic ties in 1992 also paved the way for greater economic cooperation between the two countries. India’s main interests are in the spheres of agriculture, technology transfers and using Israel as a platform to expand its commerce with the European Union and the US (with which Israel has free trade agreements.) Israel’s main considerations are the huge Indian market with more than 200 million middle class consumers, a link to the Far East and arms sales.

On this basis, the two countries established over 200 joint ventures in the spheres of engineering, ground water management, desalination, agro-industries and prevention of desertification, high-tech etc. Israeli investment in India increased from $0.36 million in 1992 to $1 billion in 1999. Both countries accorded ‘most favoured nation’ status to each other. Transport links and the financial and institutional infrastructure required to expand bilateral trade have also been developed rapidly. The volume of trade between the two countries grew from $202 millions in 1992 to more than $1 billion in 2000 and is being continuously diversified.

Considering the vast potential of Indo-Israeli economic cooperation, in coming years, we can witness more joint ventures, alliances and even mergers and acquisitions between Indian and Israeli companies. Under the shadow of congenial political environment between the two countries, a big jump in the bilateral trade can be expected in the years to come.

Symbiotic Military Interests

Even when normal diplomatic relations were missing, a fundamental understanding of long-run convergence of defense and security interests led India and Israel to maintain some secret military contacts. Israel started courting India to expand them after the Arab states failed to help India during its conflicts with her neighbours.

Israel’s impressive military successes against the Arabs were closely watched and quietly admired by the Indian military establishment. Israel’s help with arms and military hardware during India’s wars with China (1962) and Pakistan (1965 & 1971) indicated the potential for military cooperation between the two countries. The following instances of such cooperation are noteworthy:

1. Soon after the Indo-China war, Israeli Chief of Staff General David Shaltiel visited India in 1963.
2. After Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated in October 1984, India sought Israel’s help to improve the protection of its important people. Israeli security specialists reportedly devised Rajiv Gandhi’s security system when he was Prime Minister.
3. Two Boeing 707 aircraft of India’s external intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing’s (RAW) were fitted with Israeli equipment.
4. Since the early 1980s, Indian army and military intelligence officers are believed to be receiving anti-terrorist training in Israel.
5. In the late 1980s, India and Israel were engaged in a secret dialogue over destroying Pakistan’s nuclear facility in Kahuta and signing military agreements.

Strict secrecy was maintained over these contacts owing to political constraints and the involvement of sensitive security issues. But it is no exaggeration to say that the decision of the Indian government to upgrade diplomatic ties with Israel was also influenced by Delhi’s understanding of the importance of military cooperation with Jerusalem.

The normalization of bilateral ties in the post-Cold War period enabled India and Israel to develop their military ties on the basis of their security and commercial interests. During this period of uncertainty, the Indian military establishment was facing the following major challenges:

1. The disintegration of the Soviet Union, India’s longstanding ally and the biggest supplier of arms, was a big strategic blow to India. Suddenly, crucial supplies of arms and military spare parts were interrupted. India felt the need to diversify its defense suppliers, realising the dangers of too much dependence on one source.
2. During the serious resource crunch in the early 1990s, India’s short-term defense preparedness depended not only on its ability to obtain crucial spare parts, but also on upgrading and optimising its existing forces.
3. India’s major defense projects like the Main Battle Tank (Arjun), Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the Integrated Missiles Development Program (IMDP) are lagging behind because advanced technology and sufficient funds are not available.
4. In recent decades, India’s internal security environment has deteriorated to threatening levels. The availability of modern arms and weapon systems to terrorists has necessitated the introduction of the latest security technology.

Israel’s developed and research-oriented industrial-military complex is viewed by India as a good option answering some of its defense and security needs. Israel’s sophisticated expertise in manufacturing and upgrading high-combat aircraft, anti-tactical ballistic missiles, electronic warfare and communication equipment, as well as security technology are of particular interest to India. Indian military officials are not only interested in Israeli weapons and technology, but they have also shown interest in the Israel Defense Forces’ successful warfare strategies and concepts.

On the other hand, the Israeli quest for qualitative superiority in arms over its neighbours is closely linked to its tapping of more markets, and India is a big attraction in this regard. The volume of the Indian arms market reaches about two billion dollars and after the Pakistani nuclear tests (1998) and the Kargil crisis (1999), the demand of the Indian defense forces has soared. Today, after China and Turkey, India is the third largest importer of Israeli weapons. Notably, Israel does not have any objections to sell its arms and technologies to India, as it regards India as a responsible country with similar long-term interests.

As Southeast Asia is becoming an important destination for Israeli trade, Jerusalem has a profound interest in developing close military ties with India, which is one of the key actors safeguarding commercial shipping routes between the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Moreover, since the Indian Ocean is becoming important for the security of both countries, Indo-Israeli naval cooperation is mutually beneficial.

After the nuclearization of South Asia in May 1998, India assumed greater importance in the long-term security concerns of Israel. The Jewish State has a vital interest in preventing the transfer of mass destruction technology from Pakistan to its declared foes in the Middle East. Close cooperation with India in the intelligence sphere is crucial in this regard.

The symbiotic nature of Indian and Israeli security interests caused the two governments, their defense forces and their industries to interact extensively in the development of India-Israel military collaboration. However, in order to avoid any potential backlash, many of these contacts and related decisions were kept secret. The followings are the major areas around which the Indo-Israeli military cooperation is focussed:

ARMS SALES

At first, despite intensive talks on military cooperation, India hesitated to buy weapons from Israel. However, after the Kargil crisis (1999), during which Israel acceded to the Indian request to speed up the delivery of military equipment and ammunition despite US pressures to implement an arms embargo on India, a new chapter began in the arms trade between the two countries and now the Indian leadership is working hard to remove the remaining political constraints hampering military cooperation with Israel. The Indian purchases from Israel include:

1. Two Dvora fast attack boats equipped with modern surveillance systems and a sophisticated gun system. Four more will be manufactured as a joint venture of Goa Shipyard Limited and Ramta of Israel Aircraft Industry (IAI).
2. An undisclosed number of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) made by IAI, including the recent deal estimated at $230 million.
3. The EL/M-2080 search acquisition and fire-control radar, which was developed for Israel’s Arrow anti-ballistic missile program by Elta Electronics Industries Ltd.,
4. Electronics suites for upgrades of the Indian Air Force’s Su-30, MiG-27 and Jaguar aircraft, as well as for Mi-35 helicopters.
5. Thirty sea-to-sea Barak missiles in a $270 million deal with Rafael.
6. Hi-tech sensors to help manning the Line of Control (LOC) along the India-Pakistan border.
7. A large quantity of artillery and rifle ammunition, 155mm shells and other sophisticated radars.

India has shown much interest in the Israeli expertise in AWACS and other electronic counter-measure technologies. Defense sources confirm that the talks for buying the ‘Green Pine’ radar (based on Israel’s anti-ballistic missile system) are in an advanced stage. The Indian defense establishment is also contacting Israel about the purchase of the advanced Phalcon surveillance aircraft (whose supply to China was cancelled by Israel under US pressure) in a bid to improve its early warning capability against the regional threats. Although officials have played down this project, defense sources maintain that good progress has been made on the prospective deal.

Israeli contractors are said to be competing with Western firms in many other areas, such as assault rifles, self-propelled guns, satellite programs, air defense systems, electronic fencing, ammunition, and small arms for the Indian security forces. India’s potential purchase list from Israel also includes equipment for special needs like vision gadgets, evacuation and rescue devices and techniques. To sum up, at a time when India is gearing to its 21st century military modernization plans, Israel has emerged a favoured supplier of imports.

UPGRADING AND SECURITY TECHNOLOGY

The Indian armed forces find Israeli expertise valuable for meeting the challenge of upgrading its Soviet military equipment,. Israel was a major contender for the upgrading of 125 MiG-21 BIS aircraft. Though it lost the $400 million deal to the Russian firm, Mikoyan Design Bureau of Russia – the manufacturers of the aircraft – Israel was able to get the sub-contract to provide avionics and electronic warfare equipment for the upgrading of the MiGs. It is important to stress that in this case Delhi’s decision was more influenced by political reasons than by professional considerations.

The Indian defense market provides other prospects a big deals of upgradation. Sources close to the Indian defense headquarters suggest that India shortly needs to upgrade almost whole of its MiG-21 BIS, MiG-27ML, and MiG-29 aircraft fleet. Indigenous T-72 tanks are also considered to be in line for upgradation and Israeli company ELBIT has emerged as one of the favourite contenders. Another Israeli company, Soltam is already involved in upgrading one hundred and eighty 130 artillery guns to 155 artillery guns. In a significant move, the IAI and the Indian aircraft industry jointly bade for upgrading Indian assault helicopters Mi-8.

In the recent past, India has shown much interest in Israel’s internal security technology, equipment and methods to meet the threat of cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, the insurgencies in northeastern states, and the challenge posed by the naxalites (extreme leftist groups which advocate Maoist methods to eliminate the class differences) in many states.

The visit of Indian Internal Security (Home) Minister L. K. Advani to Israel (May 2000) was a major step towards strengthening the Indo-Israeli cooperation in this area. It is significant that Advani was given access to the Mossad’s offices to obtain an insight how the agency works. During this visit, Israel agreed to provide India with modern security equipment, as well as training.

Against this background, military intelligence reports claim that Israel has been given a contract to fence off the areas in the disturbed Kashmir region and is probably the only foreign country that has access to the sensitive installations in this border-state. Israeli anti-terrorism experts are training their Indian counterparts in checking infiltration along the borders, tracking movements of militants within the country, detecting explosives, defusing bombs and the use of many other devices and tactics developed by Israel.

TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY AND JOINT WEAPON DEVELOPMENT

India’s three major defense projects: Main Battle Tank (Arjun), the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), and the Integrated Guided Missile Project are facing severe financial and technological constraints. Many Western defense experts regard them, especially the Arjun and LCA projects, as white elephants. However, despite numerous hurdles causing long delays and cost overruns, the vision of emerging a big power in the 21st century would let India tolerate the serious limitations linked with the success of these ambitious projects.

Indian defense sources believe that these projects can make a reasonably good headway if Israeli technology and expertise are available. They point out that the Israeli Merkava tank’s long battlefield experience in hot and hostile desert conditions may provide relevant technical and operative support for the Arjun project. The avionics developed during the Lavi aircraft project (which Israel abandoned in 1987) can be useful for the LCA. A similar possible link can be made between the two countries’ missiles programs. The Israeli surface-to-surface missiles Jericho I and Jericho II broadly resemble the Indian Prithvi and Agni missiles respectively. Recently, India has also shown serious interest in the US-Israeli anti-missile system based on the Arrow project.

Notwithstanding the symbiotic relationship between the specific Indian needs and the Israeli supplies, there are not enough financial resources in India to buy the relevant technology from the shelf. So joint ventures of the two countries will be mutually beneficial and practical in achieving the much-desired goals of India’s search for technological independence and Israel’s quest for qualitative superiority.

Independent defense reports say that the two countries have made significant progress in this direction and today the leading Israeli and Indian defense companies and research organizations are working jointly on many projects. These sources further claim that during last year’s visits of Jaswant Singh and L. K. Advani to Israel, this area was particularly emphasized. The formation of a Joint Ministerial Committee and the decision of conducting a dialogue between the National Security Councils of the two countries will further strengthen collaboration in this field.

Growing Strategic Understanding

The evolving Indo-Israeli cooperation in the sphere of defense and security brings us to the broader dimension of political and strategic issues. A defense and security partnership cannot fully develop or last long if it is based solely on symbiotic commercial military ties. It requires a proper framework of mutuality of overall political and strategic interests.

THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT AND THE KASHMIR ISSUE

In the post-Cold War period, India’s foreign policy-makers faced the difficult task of adjusting their Middle East policy to the changed realities in the region. Delhi began to perceive that it could serve its interests better by having close relations with both Israel and the Arab world. Thus, walking on a tightrope, Delhi consistently reiterated India’s traditional support for the Palestinian cause, but simultaneously worked towards developing close ties with Israel.

This was why Delhi preferred to keep a low profile in the region and avoid active involvement in the Middle East conflict. India expressed concern whenever there were setbacks to the peace process (for example, during the opening of the tunnel beneath the Temple Mount and the disturbances in the Har Homa neighbourhood) but, unlike in the past, it refrained from openly criticizing Israel.

At the United Nations, India gradually stopped sponsoring anti-Israeli resolutions. Though there is no appreciable change in the voting pattern of the Indian delegation at the UN on the issues related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, the content analysis of speeches made by Indian delegates certainly reflects a softening of the Indian position vis-à-vis Israel. Significantly, during the millennium General Assembly summit at the UN, Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh assured his Israeli counterpart Shlomo Ben-Ami that “India will start supporting Israel in international forums and organizations.” If this were to happen, it would have an enormous positive impact on the overall Indo-Israeli ties.

The ascent of the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to power in 1998 marked a new beginning in India’s attitude towards the Middle East. The new leadership in Delhi appears to have shed the inhibitions about dealing extensively with Israel, and prefers to maintain neutrality in the Middle East conflict. Sources close to India’s BJP Government are of the view that “following a pro-Arab policy could neither win over the support and loyalty of Indian Muslims nor the goodwill of Arab states. In fact, these policies have backfired and, for a long time, Arabs were allowed to influence our policies in the region”.

On the issue of Kashmir, Israel has been a consistent supporter of the Indian position. Though the problems in Kashmir and in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories are of different nature, the globalisation of Islamic fundamentalism and the growing contacts between Kashmiri and Palestinian militants have created mutual worries for India and Israel. Similarly, after the NATO-led military intervention in Kosovo, both Delhi and Jerusalem have become more sensitive about any possibility of outside military intervention in Kashmir or the West Bank and Gaza.

Interestingly, realities in Kashmir have taken a different turn. In the wake of repeated anti-India resolutions passed by the OIC, India now regards Israeli security technology and intelligence a more valuable asset for dealing effectively with the Kashmir problem than the unfriendly attitude of the Arab/Muslim countries.

Grasping this strategic imperative, Delhi conveyed to the Arab leaders that in their dispute with Israel they could not take Indian support for granted, especially at the United Nations, unless they reciprocate by taking India’s interests in Kashmir into consideration. This new approach does not mean that Delhi will abandon its efforts to seek political support from the Arab world on Kashmir. What it implies is that, unlike in the past when the Indian support for the Arabs was taken for granted, India is now forcefully asserting its interests in the Arab world.

ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM AND TERRORISM

The resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism concerns both India and Israel. Jerusalem considers the spread of Islamic militancy in North Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East a direct threat to its security. Moreover, while the regional militant groups like Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad are actively and directly involved in trying to undermine Israel’s existence, extra-regional Islamic militant groups look at the Jewish State as Islam’s “eternal enemy” and thus pose a potential threat to Israeli security interests.

India has also begun to bear the brunt of the growing Islamic terrorist activities. India’s internal and external security environment has been deteriorating sharply since the beginning of the 1990s. The role of Pakistan and Islamic mercenaries in abetting terrorism in Kashmir, Punjab, and the northeastern provinces has added to Delhi’s apprehensions. The series of bomb blasts in Bombay in 1993 and the recent rise of terrorist activities in Kashmir have exposed India’s vulnerability to the violence instigated by Islamic fundamentalism.

Thus, India and Israel have mutual political and strategic interests in dealing with the menace of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism. The geopolitical locations of India and Israel also encourage a strategic understanding between them, as they are placed at either flank of the central Arab/Islamic bloc, with further significant Muslim population concentrations on the far side of each. Officially, both India and Israel stress this factor in their strategic relations, as it is the least controversial.

Notwithstanding their mutual concern over the threat of terrorism and their growing cooperation in fighting it, one must emphasise that the sources and nature of the terrorist threat faced by India and Israel do not automatically converge. Israel sees the threat emanating from Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in the Middle East, and considers Syria and Iran as the main sources of global terrorism. Paradoxically, India has good relations with Syria and of late has also developed reasonably close ties with Tehran. India’s threat is mainly from Pakistan, Afghanistan and some fundamentalist groups active in the Arab Gulf states, causing more concern with the Taliban-sponsored global terrorism, which for the time being has not affected Israel.

Nevertheless, the gradual globalisation of Islamic terrorism has provided a broad platform for close cooperation between India and Israel. Various intelligence reports suggest that, with the help of Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network, some Pakistan-based Kashmiri militants are attempting to forge an alliance with Islamic militants active in the Middle East. In the recent past, after reports of the Israeli involvement in quelling insurgency in Kashmir, jihadi militant groups like Lashkar-e-Toiba, Harkatul Muhajeedin and Al-Badr have openly threatened to harm Israeli interests.

By fighting the menace of terrorism together, the two countries can enhance peace and security in the Middle East and South Asia. It was against this background that India and Israel have set up a Joint Working Group for combating international terrorism (together with the United Kingdom and France) and are closely cooperating at various international forums to fight this threat.

NUCLEAR COOPERATION

India and Israel are nuclear states – the former recently declared and the latter clandestinely. The hostile security environments around both countries made the nuclear program strategically important for their national defense and security. Though, officially, India and Israel deny any nuclear cooperation between them, the demonstration of Pakistan’s nuclear capability and the ongoing nuclear programs of certain Middle Eastern countries led to the emergence of discernible similarities between their nuclear interests.

India and Israel previously shared concerns over Pakistan’s nuclear programme in the 1980s, and it is widely believed that since then their intelligence agencies are in close contact over the issue. Moreover, not having signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), both countries may benefit by supporting each other’s position while formulating their diplomatic response to the NPT. Notably, Israel did not react to the nuclear tests conducted by India in May 1998. It was not without significance that, despite being a close and special ally of the United States, which sponsored the sanctions and arms embargo against Delhi, Israel did not cut off its military ties with India altogether.

Notwithstanding Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi’s statement (during his visit to Islamabad soon after the Pakistani nuclear tests) that “Muslims feel more secure from any Israeli threats under the Pakistani nuclear umbrella” and popular sentiments in the Muslim world calling it the “pride of the Islamic nation”, Pakistan’s nuclear capability, so far, has fallen short of the fears of the “Islamic Bomb”. It is in Israel’s interest if the nuclear issue remains confined to South Asia, yet the possibility of its spilling over to the Middle East or Central Asia cannot be overlooked in the long term by either India or Israel. Under present circumstances, low profile nuclear intelligence cooperation seems mutually beneficial to Delhi and Jerusalem – a point often stressed by Israeli and Indian defense sources.

Concerns in the Arab world

The growing strategic ties between India and Israel and their ‘alleged cooperation’ in the nuclear field have created serious concerns in the Arab world. Some of them are listed below:

1. Arabs always had a feeling that India was in their pocket and now they are finding it difficult to cope with the new reality – an India developing close military ties with their adversary, Israel.
2. India-Israel military cooperation may give Israel an important place in the strategic equation between South Asia and the Middle East, thus undermining the Arabs world’s strategic depth in the inter-regional complex.
3. India’s close relations with Israel could help the latter to gain more acceptance on the Asian continent to the Arabs’ discomfiture, especially at the time of the second Intifada when the Arab League is working hard to isolate Israel.
4. Many rejectionist Arab states regard the possibility of an India-Israel-Turkey axis supported by the US as disadvantageous to their strategic and political situation.
5. Most importantly, the Arab world sees any kind of nuclear cooperation between India and Israel as a serious threat to its security.

Any kind of cooperation between India and Israel always created apprehensions in the Arab world, yet Arab protests were usually expressed privately. However, with the Indo-Israeli strategic collaboration gaining momentum in recent years, Arab leaders are becoming more vocal and critical of it. In July 1999, for the first time, the Arab League openly warned against the danger of growing India-Israel military cooperation. The Arab Follow Up Committee on the Hazards of Israeli Nuclear Activities underlined the need for the Arabs to confront Indian-Israeli cooperation, especially in the nuclear field, noting that it constitutes a grave threat to collective Arab security.

During his visit to Israel in May 2000, Indian Home Minister L. K. Advani assessed the prospects of Indo-Israeli nuclear cooperation positively: “I support the expanded cooperation between Israel and India in all fields, including this [nuclear] field.” This further increased Arab apprehensions. There were strong protests from the Arab capitals against Advani’s comment. The pro-Arab lobby in Delhi became active and demanded an explanation from the Government. Some reports revealed that an Arab ambassador in Delhi went to the extent of openly warning India of the “unpleasant consequences” of its new friendship with Israel.

The growing Indo-Israeli strategic ties, especially the possibility and/or actual covert cooperation in the nuclear field, have provided Pakistan a fresh opportunity to gain support in the Arab world. Pakistan’s Government and media claim that Delhi-Jerusalem collaboration conflicts with Arab and Muslim interests. In general, the Arab press is also critical of the emerging military ties between India and Israel.

In the past, the Indian Government used to deny “any cooperation” with Israel in the sphere of defense and security. Now, Delhi’s vague position that the bilateral relations between India and Israel are not at the cost of India’s relations with the Arab world makes the Arabs wary. While categorically rejecting any nuclear cooperation with Israel, a senior Indian Foreign Ministry official chided the 18 protesting Arab ambassadors for looking unfairly at India’s strategic ties with Israel.

This was an unprecedented response from Delhi. Moreover, compared to the high-profile visits of Jaswant Singh and L. K. Advani to Israel, the decision of the Indian government to send only a Cabinet minister, M. M. Joshi, to represent India at the funeral of Syrian president Hafez al-Assad further indicated India’s changed priorities in the Middle East. Today, while Israeli diplomats and military officials are regular visitors at the South Block (Indian Foreign Ministry headquarters), the presence and influence of Arab diplomats there has shrunk substantially. Indeed, since India adopted a balanced approach in its Middle East policy, Arab expectations from India have declined.

It would be an error to term the emerging India-Israel alliance anti-Arab or anti-Muslim. Indeed, India has important strategic interests in the Middle East, especially in the Gulf States. While building strategic ties with Israel, India made intensive diplomatic efforts to develop close ties with the Arab/Muslim states. Nevertheless, the Delhi-Jerusalem strategic ties imply that India, especially under the right-wing BJP government, has abandoned its self-imposed inhibitions with regard to Arab sensitivities in dealing with Israel. Today, the Indian leadership is becoming increasingly convinced that it is in India’s interests to have close strategic ties with Israel, and these can no longer be kept hostage to its relations with the Arab world – a message clearly conveyed by the Indian Foreign Minister during his visit to Israel.

Challenges to the Alliance

The old issues that prevented Indo-Israeli friendship in the past still haunt both Delhi and Jerusalem, but they can no longer seriously threaten the emerging alliance. However, the following three issues could emerge as new obstacles:

INDO-IRANIAN RAPPROCHEMENT

India has begun building strategic ties with Tehran. Yet the growing military power of Iran is one of the main long-term security concerns of Israel. Irrespective of the current economic and strategic rapprochement with Tehran, it would not be in Delhi’s interest to sell advanced technology and/or weapons to Iran because:

1. Such a step would adversely affect its ties with other Middle Eastern states – especially Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
2. As Iran is unlikely to abandon its plans to develop nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, many Indian strategists believe that Iran could also become a threat to Indian security in the long term if the Islamic fundamentalists maintain their grip on policymaking there.

The Indo-Iranian rapprochement can also be positively utilized by Israel as a conduit for dialogue with Tehran, as few countries maintain good relations with Israel while also maintaining close relations with Iran without supplying it with arms. It may be recalled that on Israel’s request India brought the case of the “thirteen Iranian Jews” before the Iranian leadership.

ISRAELI-CHINESE MILITARY COOPERATION

Israel maintains strong military ties with China – a country that India regards as the main threat to its security. Israel gained a foothold in the huge Chinese arms market and may consider military sales to Beijing a possible means of influencing Beijing’s arms transfer to the Middle East. It is ironic that China is often thought to be supplying arms, including missile and nuclear technology, to Iran and other Middle Eastern states.

India’s main concern is that the Israeli arms and technology sold to China should not be transferred to Pakistan. Realising the long-term benefits of its strategic alliance with India, Israel has unequivocally assured the Indian leadership that its arms sales to China (or any other state near India) would not harm Delhi’s security interests. The formation of a Joint Ministerial Commission and the consultations between the National Security Advisors of the two countries will provide useful channels for the consideration of their apprehensions related to this issue.

AMERICAN OPPOSITION

From time to time, the US Administration has expressed its concerns over Israel’s sale of advanced weaponry to India for the following reasons:

1. Although the US does not consider India a military threat to its own troops (as in case of China), it is wary of a military escalation between India and Pakistan, which might lead to a nuclear war.
2. The White House was the biggest critic of India’s nuclear tests conducted in May 1998. The US not only imposed economic sanctions and an arms embargo on India, but also used its influence over its allies to enforce these.
3. In addition, Washington has good commercial reasons for objecting to Israeli weapons sales to India.

However, after the historic US tilt from Islamabad to Delhi in its South Asia strategic equation, US pressures on Israel not to sell advanced weapon systems to India have become milder. As Delhi and Washington begin to develop global strategic ties, the Indo-Israeli strategic alliance can act a useful catalyst, rather than a point of contention.

Prospects for the Future

The present strategic regional and global imperatives have created a consensus in Delhi and Jerusalem that their strategic alliance will be mutually beneficial in the short term as well as in the long term. Their special relationship has gone beyond the institutional framework and is gradually becoming stronger as their interaction multiplies.

India’s shift in its Middle East policy has reaped good dividends for Delhi. Indian diplomats quietly admit that the ‘Israeli card’ is becoming useful in dealing with the Arab states. It has helped India to assume an added importance for the Arabs, including the Palestinians. As the two sides compete to extract favorable statements from Delhi during the ongoing Al-Aqsa Intifada, India has a useful opportunity to carve out a role for herself in the volatile Middle East. Keeping strict neutrality in the Arab-Israeli conflict is crucial for Delhi to gain the confidence of both sides and thereby enhance its profile in the region and beyond.

The future of the Indo-Israeli strategic alliance is tied up with domestic issues, regional security and the global strategic environment. Presently, most of these variables seem to be favourable. Socio-culturally India and Israel are discovering a natural affinity, their economic cooperation is proving mutually beneficial, a partnership in the defense and security spheres is developing, and politico-strategically both states are moving towards each other.

However, it is important to acknowledge that the two countries still need to develop a clear common security threat. In the absence of it, joint ventures in defense and security become vital to the Indo-Israeli strategic alliance in the medium term and long term. If properly pursued, these joint ventures may burgeon into a partnership for the co-production of armaments for sale to Third World countries and both countries will gain appreciably from such collaboration. Similarly, joint military exercises by the Indian and Israeli armed forces would provide further strategic depth for their relationship.

On the political front, the return of normalcy in the Middle East and a subsequent resumption of the peace process would contribute positively to the building of the Indo-Israeli strategic alliance. Conversely, a major Arab-Israeli conflict might slow down this process, especially if the traditionally pro-Arab Congress party returns to power in Delhi.

Seeing India as the emerging power of the 21st century, Jerusalem needs to take into account India’s overall strategic objectives in the Middle East, which might not always coincide with Jerusalem’s. Israeli leaders also need to give more weight to Delhi’s concerns over the supply of advanced weapon systems to China. Meeting these concerns may yield Israel India’s support at the United Nations, where India is a strong contender for a permanent seat in the expanded Security Council. Similarly, India can play a constructive role in further legitimizing Israel’s acceptance on the Asian continent. Indeed, Israel’s strategic alliance with India could constitute the pillar on which Israel’s relations with the Third World are constructed.

Delhi-Jerusalem strategic ties can further be strengthened on the pattern of the Israeli-Turkish relationship. As India and Turkey have also begun to build strategic relationship, the possibility of a future Delhi-Ankara-Jerusalem strategic triangle cannot be ruled out. For those who believe in the importance of the balance of power, such a strategic triangle could provide stability and security to world’s two most turbulent regions – South Asia and the Middle East. Such a strategic bloc should also be encouraged by the US, as its global and regional strategic interests converge with Washington’s. Besides, it would protect and promote liberal democratic values in two regions dominated by dictatorial regimes.

To sum up: While the Cold War world order proved detrimental to India-Israel relations, the new millennium has set into motion forces conducive to a strong India-Israel strategic alliance, and this is the right time to nourish them

U.S.A War on Afghanistan: Quiet dialogue with Barack Obama

By: Daily.Pk

These are some of stances, which I will stand with U.S. President Obama, I would say at the beginning of the meeting:

Oh Obama, oh Obama: you did not ask yourself? or you did not ask yourselves? Because I am not addressing the parole to you only, but to all the countries that stood with you in the war against Islam and Muslims and in the war on the Jihad and the Mujahideen, haven’t you asked yourselves why till now we haven’t won the war in Afghanistan ? What is the secret? What is the reason? even that you own aircrafts of all types and forms ? And all tanks of all types and forms? and missiles with all its types and forms? But why to date you haven’t won?

Although Mujahideen are poor and weak, do not have the Air Force nor the tank corps and don’t have anything, they are poor poor! What is the secret and what is the reason till now you didn’t win against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan? What is the secret?

I will tell you Obama, and there is no need for you to hold conferences and meetings.

The secret is: Allah Almighty glory to him! Truly, Allah defends those who believe yes, this is the secret!

This is the truth, we must understand that truth you Obama, that the one whose in his Hand is the sovereignty of everything , he decides on all maters , and runs everything as he wills the almighty the most high. That is not you who decide on all matters (things) as you want, I consider – oh Obama – that Afghanistan is the miracle of the history, and -in other word- the miracle of this age! Now the two most powerful nations in the world, Note – the two most powerful nations in the world who are they? Russia and America, however, they could not prevail on the Mujahideen in Afghanistan Praise to Allah, even that they do not have anything …, they’re Weak.

Now what do you think you Obama, there is no doubt that all the nations of the world stood with you, all the nations of the world goes down to you, what do you think Obama, if you been told that 500 years ago all the nations of the world met to one country, and that country was poor and weak and didn’t have anything of types of deadly weapons, however, could not prevail on this state! The poorest countries stand to the richest states!

If you’ve been told of that would you believe? Me I would not believe, honestly myself I wouldn’t believe. All countries of the world stand in front of one poor country with poor and simple weapons, however, couldn’t win it, as I told you Afghanistan is a miracle of history, the miracle of this age
before Islam there was Caesar and Kisra two greatest nations, now the greatest in this age are Russia and America, to date, however, could not prevail on the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and now the battle is not over, you, Obama, now the battle still running and is not over. Therefore, you Obama you don’t know the afghan people you Obama!

The Afghan people is being given as an example of patience, the people of desert, mountain people, By Allah your soldiers can’t oh you Obama, By Allah your soldiers are tired, tired tired tired.

Obama: People who grew up on the wine, and raised on the immoral, and grew up on the dance halls, and raised in the red nights, cannot be patient on the wars and battles.

This is why we must review ourselves. These calamities that hit you, the disasters, economic collapse, one day hurricane, another day fires in forests, another day … all these are from Allah Almighty glory to him, why? Because you violated Muslim countries, and raped Muslim women violated honors and done so and so and spoiled on the land what only Allah knows.

Obama: I am traveling around in Afghanistan, from village to village and from city to city and from state to state, thanks to Allah, and the bounty and the credit and praise, I speak in mosques and urge the Afghan people for a holy war and urge them to stand with the Mujahideen and expulse the Cross, which has blighted the country and the people.

Frankly, you Obama haven’t you asked yourselves what have we accomplished during the eight years? You are now in the eight years of war in Afghanistan, what have you achieved? Have you achieved one goal?

Loss of funds, loss of lives, waste of energies, make efforts, Compared to what? Compared To none, By Allâh nothing you Obama, none, none, you haven’t achieved any goal.

By Allah you Obama since your soldiers came to the land of Afghanistan, crimes have gone up and theft have increased and bandits have increased in numbers and corruption have become more frequent and more problems among the people, have you realized rest to the Afghan people? Have you realized happiness to the Afghan people? Have you realized tranquility to the Afghan people? Have you realized safety to the Afghan people? By Allah you Obama You achieved nothing, eight years and you haven’t achieved any goal.

How long will this terror go for you Obama? How long will this terror go for you Obama? How long will this terror go for you Obama? You spoiled bloodshed you Obama, you raped Women you Obama, you killed children you Obama, you destroyed the mosques you Obama, you desecrated the Koran, you humiliated Allah’s words you Obama! By Allah this is the greatest terrorism, the greatest terrorism in the world is the desecration of the Koran you, Obama, and your soldiers have been found guilty of humiliating the book of Allah the almighty and glory to him in several instances.

In the province of Khost your soldiers slaves of the cross have gone, they entered one of the private schools, which teaches the holy Koran, they entered the school and started beating the young students, and took the Koran and began firing at it with machine guns!
Isn’t this a terrorism you Obama? Isn’t this terrorism? By Allah the greatest terrorist in the world is the humiliation of the book of Allah.

In the state of Ghazni your soldiers slaves of the cross entered the mosque and started insulting the Koran in the House of Allah and vandalized the mosque, and the people went out in demonstrations.

Obama till when this terrorism will last you Obama?

Obama Do you know that only in Kabul .. I went to Kabul and toured in Kabul, just in Kabul imagine Obama 40000 widow! 40000 widows isn’t terrorism? We have 40000 widows, who don’t have a man, isn’t this terrorism you Obama?

For this you Obama your soldiers slaves of the cross and lovers of prostitution, you may be surprised why I call your soldiers lovers of prostitution?
Obama, quite frankly, when your soldiers go and roam in the villages looking for the Afghan Mujahideen ,they start harassing the women you Obama, and women are subjected to them and rape them, and you Obama know that in our faith in our Islam that a women have a place, with greatness of her sainthood, has a great place in our hearts and in our social, not like in yours! , no, no, no in yours women is humiliated, women is exposed, on the streets in the discotheques in the factories, goes out with whom she wants, sleep with whom she wants, travel with whom she wants, stays late with whom she wants, No, Obama, we are not like this you Obama, Obama we, and watch well for this word – we set up a war, set up a war, for what? For a woman

One time our Prophet (peace be upon him) set up a war against the Jews for what? Because one of the Jews harassed Muslim women in the market, a Muslim man went to kill that Jew, the Jews killed that man, therefore our prophet (peace be upon him) set up a war for what? for a woman.

You, you don’t set up a war for a woman, impossible, impossible, and impossible to set up a war for a woman.

We – Obama – and note well that word – we sacrifice our souls and our blood and all we have for what? In order to preserve the women, you, you don’t sacrifice your souls and blood in order to preserve women.

You bring the best and most beautiful woman you have and make her make publicity for shoes! Is this where you place women? Is this the standing of women? You make the most beautiful woman and the sweetest woman trade for shoes!? Praise Allah!

For us you Obama, a women is like a Jewel, a diamond, if you have a jewel or a diamond would you exposure it to people or would you maintain it? Certainly maintain it, therefore I would say to you, Obama: Where is the evolution? Where is the progress? Where is the civilization that you pretend when you sexually abuse Muslim women and rape them and harass them, is this evolution? By Allah this is not evolution, this is retardation, is this progress? By Allah, this is not progress, this is the retardation you Obama.

Obama think of your fate, Think of Your fate, Where is your fate after death you Obama? You will die, by Allah you will die, as your father died and your grandfather died, but what will be your fate you Obama after death, what will be your fate, the world will end, the prophet peace be upon him said: “any Jew or a Christian who hears of me, then would not believe on me, Allah will throw him in the hellfire, or as our Prophet peace be upon him said.

Obama When you come on the Day of Resurrection, that terrible day , difficult day, critical day, and come alone, where are your soldiers? Where are your guards? Where is your money? Where is your position? Where is your fame? Where is your dignity? All Gone Oh Obama, all gone, you Obama, then what? Stand up in the hands of a great Allah, the big Allah, honorable Allah, the Allah of the ancients and the later generations and the Almighty Allah glory to him will asks you about the blood of Muslims in Palestine, and Allah asks you about the blood of Muslims in Somalia, and Allah asks you about the blood of Muslims in Iraq, and Allah asks you about the blood of Muslims in Afghanistan, Allah will ask you about the blood of the martyrs and the blood of women and children and the blood of the old, where is the escape you Obama? Where is the escape you Obama? Where is the escape you Obama?

Obama, I want you to think for five minutes only, imagine this scene, imagine the scene a volcano, look at the volcano look at it well, look at that volcano and imagine and think of yourself swimming in that very great volcano very hot, imagine and think of yourself swimming in that volcano I won’t say for an hour, but one minute, one minute and imagine yourself swimming in that volcano, what about the torment of the hellfire! What about the torment of the hellfire you Obama! Fire fire and what will make you know (exactly) what fire is?! Its torment is so painful and its heat is so intense and its bottom is so far, our Prophet peace be upon him says that if a drop of Zaqqûm (a horrible tree in Hell)? Imagine a drop of Zaqqûm falls on the people of the earth, above the people of the earth not only on the American continent or Asia, or Africa, no, on the people of the earth, of all the people of the Earth , just one drop down on the people of the land is enough to ruin their lives, all people will suffer from this drop, something that the mind can’t imagine or a man can think of , then our Prophet said, peace be upon him, what about the one who the zaqquum will be his food and drink ! We ask Allah safety and wellness.

The punishment of Allah you Obama does not have bound, and does not end, Allah the Great and honorable says: But those who disbelieve (in the Oneness of Allâh – Islâmic Monotheism), for them will be the Fire of Hell. Neither will it have a complete killing effect on them so that they die, nor shall its torment be lightened for them, imagine you Obama that the greatest wish of the people of Hell is death, but cannot die , Neither will it have a complete killing effect on, rest from the torment of fire, or its torment will be reduced, sitting in a thousand year in the torment, So on that Day none will punish as He will punish. And none will bind (the wicked, disbelievers and polytheists) as He will bind.

Obama You raised the slogan yes we can during the election, which means that we can. Oh no, no, no you cannot Obama, the slave is weak, slave is creature, can only after the will and desire of Allah, But you cannot will, unless Allah wills You, praise and thanks to Allah to date you could not against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, even that all the nations of the world are with you, all the nations of the world you Obama do not forget kneeled to you in the events of Afghanistan, yes, every country in the world goes down to you, the events of Afghanistan revealed the facts, In order that Allâh may distinguish the wicked (disbelievers, polytheists and doers of evil deeds) from the good (believers of Islâmic Monotheism and doers of righteous deeds),you do not have anything you Obama, Allah Almighty and most high says about himself:

Say (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) “O Allah! Possessor of the kingdom, You give the kingdom to whom You will, and You take the kingdom from whom You will, and You endue with honor whom You will, and You humiliate whom You will. In Your Hand is the good. Verily, You are Able to do all things”, think of this verse, Verily, You are Able to do all things.

Obama, we have a great faith that in the hands of Allah the Almighty and glory to him is everything, I am telling you about the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, you Obama, I mixed with the Mujahideen from the Taliban and I sat down with the princes and leaders, By Allah they have nothing, By Allah some of them had his shoes chopped, sewn, ancient weapons, and yet so far you could not win against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and this is because of Allah favor and mercy and generosity the Almighty glory to him, and the world will see, with Allah’s will and power, that he is The Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it: “Be!” – and it is. The world will witness this year or next year you Obama, Allah’s willing, and Allah’s grace and strength and ability and power and reign and handling that the Mujahideen in Afghanistan were victorious on the slaves of the Cross, yes you, Obama, Allah’s Almighty and glory to him.

Obama the lesson is not at the very beginning, no, no, the lesson is in the ends, the one who withdraw first from the battlefield is the loser, is the loser, yes is the loser, Obama calamities that hits you, you Must understand this truth, you Obama Like You’ve raised the slogan yes we can means we can, I also have my slogan Obama, my slogan in this world you Obama, save the logo: my day of happiness is the day I die martyr, my day of happiness is the day I die martyr, why I am telling you this you, Obama? I am telling you this you Obama because the real life for us Muslims, the real life in not is this world you Obama, no, no this is not real life, real life, you Obama, for us Muslims, begin after death, Allah is great! Imagine that stance you Obama, there is no god but Allah! When the spirit of the believer or the spirit of the martyr comes out, where does it go? As soon as it come out, the spirit of the martyr, you Obama, or the spirit of sincere truthful believer, go where you Obama? Allah is Great, oh my Allah, do you know where it goes you Obama?

It goes to Allah, there is no god but Allah, the greatest meeting and wonderful meeting and most beautiful meeting and happiest meeting when creature meets his creator, so the creature became happy for the meeting of its creator, and the creator is happy to meet its creature, yes, yes, yes, yes, Creator happy to meet the created, the prophet peace be upon him said : “one’s who loves the meeting of Allah, Allah loves meeting him, but when you Obama? The creator loves meeting his creature? That is the important question you Obama, Creator loves meeting its creature if that creature was a good slave sincerely devout believer martyr, the creator will be happy to meet the creature, but if this slave or creature, was a disbeliever slave, the creator will not be happy to meet him? It will not even meet the creator, why? because the spirit is malicious, unclean. Spirit of the infidel does not meet with the Creator.

Obama your soldiers besieged me, I have been surrounded by your soldiers ten hours, besieged for ten hours imagine Obama, thirty tanks with helicopters and warplanes and ****ling ,****ling, ****ling ,****ling, the battle began at seven in the morning, but the first thing the battle started By Allâh, I tell you my feelings, I talk to you quite frankly, you Obama, the Almighty Allah and glory to him, because of His mercy and grace He sent down As-Sakînah (calmness and tranquility) upon us with grace of Allah.

We were surrounded at one of the villages of Afghanistan, the first the battle broke out at seven and a half, they attacked us the worshipers of the cross lovers of prostitution in this village, we were hiding in an Afghan village, We were surrounded with thirty Hummer or a tank with helicopters, and the battle began at seven thirty, I tell you my feeling, Obama, and I do not forget this day because it was on Monday, and thankfully Allah this day, I was fasting and credit to Allah for His mercy, and my greatest wish, imagine Obama that my greatest wish and biggest wish and sweetest wish in this world do you know what is it you Obama?

Is to die a martyr for the sake of Allah while fasting, to meet Allah while fasting martyr patient looking for reward, going forwards not running away, the battle started, grinding and ****ling, imagine you Obama, the weapon jammed, honestly I tell our weapons are old, we poor! And your weapons are the latest models!

The disruption of weapons is not a problem, we have grenades, but there is bigger problem and greater problem you Obama, do you know Obama, I slept in the course of the battle, By Allah I slept you Obama, (Remember) when He covered you with a slumber as a security from Him, you, you cannot imagine this thing but it is a grace from Allah the almighty and glory to him, we do believe because we don’t talk …, Obama I do not speak in the air, every word I say emerge from a doctrine that I believe in, where do we take that doctrine from? We take it from the book of Allah and from the tradition of our Prophet peace be upon him, what does Allah almighty most honorable says in his book? Almighty says:

(Those (i.e. believers) unto whom the people (hypocrites) said, “Verily, the people (pagans) have gathered against you (a great army), therefore, fear them.” But it (only) increased them in Faith, and they said, what have they said ? , they said : ( “Allâh (Alone) is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs (for us).”)

Allah is great, why did they say “Allah (Alone) is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs (for us)?, they didn’t say east is sufficient for us, or west is sufficient for us, or that person is sufficient for us, or that side is sufficient for us, no they said: ( “Allah (Alone) is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs (for us), why? Because the faith is in their hearts, because the greatness of Allah is in their hearts, but if there was greatness of the creature in their hearts, they would have said east is sufficient for us and west is sufficient for us!

We believe in the saying of the prophet peace be upon him when he said: “guard Allah ,he will guard you, “till when he said :and know that if all the nation gather to harm you of anything, they couldn’t do except what Allah has decided it will happen to you, In our doctrine what Allah want it will happen, and what Allah doesn’t want, it won’t happen, imagine you Obama, I slept in the course of the battle, I slept, there was bombing, bombing, bombing, bombing, bombing! Thank to Allah and praise for him and with his guard and care, your soldiers the adorers of the Cross didn’t know the place where I slept, this is thanks to Allah, we believe, as I said to you Obama, we believe that what happen to you wouldn’t have missed you, and what missed you, wouldn’t have happen to you, till the battle ended in the last .. till before the prayers of Maghreb (sundown prayer), the troops withdrew, but I didn’t have the chance to be a martyr in that battle, I swear frankly, quite frankly I say to you Obama, me if I am not killed as a martyr, I want to tell you my feeling, I give you my feelings as a present, I am not showing my muscles to you, or showing my heroism and courage and strength, no no no Obama, Allah almighty glory to him advised us against this : So ascribe not purity to yourselves, but these are feelings, I swear you Obama if I don’t die martyr in this battle, because this battle is one of the greatest battle of Islam, a great battle the battle of Islam with the slaves of the cross, this is one of the greatest battles, you imagine Obama, in the history, didn’t happen what is happening now, that all the nations of the world agree on the war against Islam and Muslims and the war on jihad and the Mujahideen in the land of Afghanistan.

In the Russian days all the world was with the Mujahideen but now all the world is against the Mujahideen, I would say this battle is one of the best battles of Islam in these times, By Allah if I don’t die martyr in this battle ,I will be very sad with great grief you Obama, You come to Afghanistan for what? For life, for this world, we, you Obama, come to Afghanistan to die as martyrs for the sake of Allah, we come to Afghanistan for the Afterlife, and we came to Afghanistan for what you Obama? That is the truth I want you to understand you Obama, I have come to Afghanistan so the word of Allah is uppermost and the word of those who disbelieve is the lowermost, By Allah you Obama we will never accept that the word of the disbelievers rise above the word of Allah, By Allah we will sacrifice our blood and our money and everything we have so that the word of Allah is the uppermost and the word of the disbelievers is the lowermost.

We came to Afghanistan so that Islam is superior and nothing goes above it. Obama, I want you to think of Your fate very well, think of your fate, think of your reality, this word is temporary, and death comes suddenly, death comes suddenly and then what? Everything will be forgotten in this world, where are the kings? Where are the presidents? Where are the princes who preceded us? Where are they? Forgotten in all this time, went to where? Went to the afterlife home, a man may enjoy, for how long will he enjoy, sixty years? Seventy years? and then what? to death.
Think of yourself when you will be put in your grave, in that narrow gloomy hole, no friend no companion, nobody with you Obama.

True happiness is in Allah’s religion, By Allah when the human says this word, the greatest word in this whole existence is the word: there is no god but Allah, we live by it and we die by it and fight for it, we do not accept, you Obama, to fight for the sake of other than Allah Almighty glory to him, yes, we don’t fight for nationalism, nor for ignorant slogans, no, we fight so the word of Allah is the uppermost and the word of disbelievers is lowermost, by Allah when a human says: there is no god but Allah, imagine, say there is no god but Allah, Say No god but Allah, the human feels happiness, feels comfort, feels tranquility, feels Strength, feels stable, this is the greatest word on which the skies and earths have risen up.. There is no god but Allah.

Rethinking Pakistan

by: THE NEWS INTERNATIONAL

Syed Jawaid Iqbal

Pakistan has a chequered history — right from Jinnah’s demise and Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination to the toppling of democratic governments several times by the armed forces. Whether we like it or not, a majority of today’s politicians are provincial leaders at best. On the contrary, the army, which happens to be the only permanent political party in Pakistan, has its loyalty with the state and not with any particular group or sub-strata of society. Before we criticise this institution, we must also remember that it does not assume power by virtue of its merit. Rather, it is the demerits of our politicians that disqualify them from being the right choice to lead the nation.

The first time a democratic government had attained consensus among all political parties was during the regime of Z A Bhutto. Much to the displeasure of vested interests who only wanted a dialogue between the ruling and opposition parties and not an agreement, Air Marshal Asghar Khan unconstitutionally invited army intervention through a letter to the then chief of army staff, Gen Ziaul Haq. In the name of protection, all political leaders were arrested and martial law was imposed, which led eventually to Bhutto’s ‘judicial murder’. Talking of our democratic leaders, if they have flaws, they also have their merits. One example is of Benazir Bhutto and her PPP who deserve the credit for being the only truly liberal and national representatives of Pakistan.

Is our democracy really successful and sustainable? It must be remembered that democracy is not a manufactured product that can be imported, but rather it should be seen as a locally-grown fruit whose strength depends on factors such as ‘soil’, ‘climate’ and ‘farmers’. Our ground realities are different from those found in the west and hence in our context we will have to meticulously determine what parts of this fruit need to be peeled and discarded and which ones preserved and made use of. In other words, Pakistan needs to find its own definition of democracy and not one inherited from the west.

Pakistan is a brand; and every brand has its life cycle. Pakistan’s positioning within and outside Pakistan has deteriorated sharply. Before it falls below the danger level, it is essential that we redefine its attributes, utility, packaging and positioning.

The first thing that we need to do is to increase the literacy rate and reduce our population. This means providing universal free education. Parents who don’t send their children to school should be penalised. ‘Food’ banks should be set up in places where there are many impoverished families and help from NGOs, the private sector and charitable organisations should be taken in this regard. On the population front, only two children should be allowed per family. The law should be made applicable after one year of its announcement. Those with more children should be made to pay a higher tax burden.

The second step is to dissolve all provincial boundaries and use the old system of divisions. The latter should be treated as autonomous states, each with its own state government. Foreign affairs, currency and defence should be under the federal government, while the rest should be administered by the respective state governments. This would not only help overcome the issues of cultural animosity, language and ethnic discrimination, but would also be in the greatest interest of Punjab, which is accused of being responsible for the 1971 dismemberment of East Pakistan and for capturing the country’s major resources since 1947.

The third essential element would be the redefinition of our identity. If we are uncertain of what it should be, we should go by the old Chinese proverb, “If you don’t know where to go further, go back to where you came from.” To recognise our identity, we need to revert to our origin and recognise the ideology whereupon Pakistan was founded.

In his address as first governor-general of Pakistan to the Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947, Jinnah said: “You are free to go to your temples; you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the state… You will find that in the course of time, Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.”

As rightly envisioned by Jinnah over half a century ago, religion should be a personal matter to every practitioner of any faith, and not a subject regulated by the government. Accordingly, it should be declared that political parties’ manifestos should be based on social and economic programme and all religious parties should be given a month’s notice to decide once and for all if they are religious factions or political parties. Thereafter, Pakistan should neither be called a secular state, nor an Islamic one. Rather, it should be a welfare state, dedicated to the welfare of all its nationals alike.

Pakistanis have never voted the country’s largest religious party into power. The fact that this party had only three MNAs in the National Assembly during Z A Bhutto’s regime is a clear sign of the moderate mindset of Pakistani people, and a living testimony to Jinnah’s apt vision. Later on, they were the first ones to hijack the nation’s ideology and impose their version of religion on our moderate way of life.

The writer is a freelance contributor. Email: jayeye49@gmail.comPak

China plans to break up “India” into 40 states: Analyst Guo Gang of IISS

By: RUPEENEWS

The Chinese dragon blows fire and brimstone. India and China were having their 13th round of Sino-Indian border talks; and just as the talks were in progress an article has appeared in China captioned ‘If China takes a little action, the so-called Great Indian Federation can be broken up’ (Zhong Guo Zhan Lue Gang, www.iiss.cn, Chinese, August 8, 2009). This political strategist is the sounding board of the political leadership and he often expresses the views of the powers that be. And Lo and behold this article was reproduced in several other strategic and military Web sites of the country and by all means, targets the domestic audience.

India map insurrection: Naxalite insurgency

Claiming that Beijing’s ‘China-Centric’ Asian strategy, provides for splitting India, Zhan Lue has argued that New Delhi’s corresponding ‘India-Centric’ policy in Asia, is in reality a ‘Hindustan centric’ one. He mentions that ‘local centres’ exist in several of the country’s provinces (excepting for the UP and certain northern regions) and in the face of these potent local characteristics, the ’so-called’ Indian nation cannot be considered as one having existed in history

According to the article, if India today relies on any thing for unity, it is the Hindu religion. The partition of the country was based on religion. Stating that today nation states are the main current in the world, it has said that India could only be termed now as a ‘Hindu religious state’. It goes on to attack the secular character of India by adding that Hinduism is a decadent religion as it allows caste exploitation and is unhelpful to the country’s modernisation. It has described the Indian government is facing a major dilemma with regard to eradication of the caste system as it realises that the process to do away with castes may shake the very fragile foundations of the consciousness of the Indian nation.

Arguable, the only country that can ever hope to compete with China and hope to oppose its hegemony is a strong India. To make its presence pre-eminent, it is in China’s own interest to join forces with different nationalities like the Assamese, Tamils, and Kashmiris and support the latter in establishing independent nation-States of their own, out of India. And to camoflague this nefarious end, it is stated that it is interest of resurgent Asian geo-political scene.

In particular, the ULFA (United Liberation Front of Asom) in Assam, a territory neighboring China, can be helped by China so that Assam realises its national independence.

United Bengal Brihot Bangladesh Bangistan or Greater Bangladesh map

The article has also felt that for Bangladesh, the biggest threat is from India, which wants to develop a great Indian Federation extending from Afghanistan to Myanmar. India is also targeting China with support to Vietnam’s efforts to occupy Nansha (Spratly) group of islands in South China Sea. Hence there is need for China’s consolidation of its alliance with Bangladesh, a country with which the US and Japan are also improving their relations to counter China.

It has pointed out that China can give political support to Bangladesh enabling the latter to encourage ethnic Bengalis in India to get rid of Indian control and unite with Bangladesh as one Bengali nation; and in case the same is not possible, then there is need to create at least another free Bengali nation state as a friendly neighbour of Bangladesh. This would emasculate India; dampen Indian expansionist programme and threat aimed at forming a ‘unified South Asia’.

The punch line in the article is to split India. China can bring into its fold countries like Pakistan, Nepal and Bhutan, support ULFA in attaining its goal for Assam’s independence, back aspirations of Indian nationalities like the Tamils and Nagas, encourage Bangladesh to give a push to the independence of West Bengal and lastly recover the 90,000 sq km territory in southern Tibet.

Naxalite insurgency spreading like wildfire. Hindustan’s Maoist insurgency map. There are secessionist movements in almost every state in “India” encompasisng more than 200 districts

Wishing for India’s break-up into 20 to 30 nation-States like in Europe, the article has concluded by saying that if the consciousness of nationalities in India could be aroused, social reforms in South Asia can be achieved, the caste system can be eradicated and the region can march along the road of prosperity.

According to Chinese analysts China in its own interest should join forces with different nationalities like the Assamese, Tamils, and Kashmiris and support the latter in establishing independent nation-States of their own, out of India.

An article has appeared in China captioned ‘If China takes a little action, the so-called Great Indian Federation can be broken up’ says that the ULFA (United Liberation Front of Asom) in Assam, a territory neighbouring China, can be helped by China so that Assam realises its national independence, rediff news reports.

The article has also felt that for Bangladesh, the biggest threat is from India, which wants to develop a great Indian Federation extending from Afghanistan to Myanmar. India is also targeting China with support to Vietnam’s efforts to occupy Nansha (Spratly) group of islands in South China Sea. Hence the need for China’s consolidation of its alliance with Bangladesh.

It has pointed out that China can give political support to Bangladesh enabling the latter to encourage ethnic Bengalis in India to get rid of Indian control and unite with Bangladesh as one Bengali nation; if the same is not possible, creation of at least another free Bengali nation state as a friendly neighbour of Bangladesh, would be desirable, for the purpose of weakening India’s expansion and threat aimed at forming a ‘unified South Asia’.

ASGHAR \ Dynamic Shipping <asghar.malik@dynamicshipping.com>

Taliban Now Winning, U.S. Commander in Afghanistan Warns of Rising Casualties

By YOCHI J. DREAZEN in Kabul and PETER SPIEGEL in Washington

Associated PressU.S. soldiers from the 5th Stryker Brigade take position next to Sari Ghundi village as they patrol near the Pakistani border in Afghanistan.

The Taliban have gained the upper hand in Afghanistan, the top American commander there said, forcing the U.S. to change its strategy in the eight-year-old conflict by increasing the number of troops in heavily populated areas like the volatile southern city of Kandahar, the insurgency’s spiritual home.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal warned that means U.S. casualties, already running at record levels, will remain high for months to come.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, the commander offered a preview of the strategic assessment he is to deliver to Washington later this month, saying the troop shifts are designed to better protect Afghan civilians from rising levels of Taliban violence and intimidation. The coming redeployments are the clearest manifestation to date of Gen. McChrystal’s strategy for Afghanistan, which puts a premium on safeguarding the Afghan population rather than hunting down militants.

View Full Image

ReutersTwo boys watch a U.S. soldier Sunday during a dawn patrol in Kunar Province in northeastern Afghanistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander, is making protection of civilians a priority over hunting Taliban rebels.

Gen. McChrystal said the Taliban are moving beyond their traditional strongholds in southern Afghanistan to threaten formerly stable areas in the north and west.

The militants are mounting sophisticated attacks that combine roadside bombs with ambushes by small teams of heavily armed militants, causing significant numbers of U.S. fatalities, he said. July was the bloodiest month of the war for American and British forces, and 12 more American troops have already been killed in August.

“It’s a very aggressive enemy right now,” Gen. McChrystal said in the interview Saturday at his office in a fortified NATO compound in Kabul. “We’ve got to stop their momentum, stop their initiative. It’s hard work.”

In an effort to regain the upper hand, Gen. McChrystal said he will redeploy some troops currently in sparsely populated areas to areas with larger concentrations of Afghan civilians, while some of the 4,000 American troops still to arrive will be deployed to Kandahar.

The Obama administration is in the midst of an Afghan buildup that will push U.S. troop levels here to a record 68,000 by year end. There are roughly an additional 30,000 troops from North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries and other allies.

Gen. McChrystal’s predecessor, Gen. David McKiernan, had a request outstanding for 10,000 more troops. Gen. McChrystal said he hadn’t decided whether to request additional U.S. forces. “We’re still working it,” he said.

Several officials who have taken part in Gen. McChrystal’s 60-day review of the war effort said they expect him to ultimately request as many as 10,000 more troops — a request many observers say will be a tough sell at the White House, where several senior administration officials have said publicly that they want to hold off on sending more troops until the impact of the initial influx of 21,000 reinforcements can be gauged.

The U.S. war effort in Afghanistan is costing American taxpayers about $4 billion a month.

Gen. McChrystal also said he would direct a “very significant” expansion of the Afghan army and national police — which would double in size under the plans being finalized by senior U.S. military officers here — and import a tactic first used in Iraq by moving U.S. troops onto small outposts in individual Afghan neighborhoods and villages.

Outside experts are giving Gen. Stanley McChrystal an assessment of what the war in Afghanistan looks like on the ground, as WSJ’s Peter Spiegel reports.

One person briefed on the assessment said it will call for boosting the Afghan army to 240,000 from 135,000 and the Afghan police to 160,000 from 82,000.

One official noted the emerging plans to double the size of the Afghan army and police will require thousands of additional U.S. trainers. The U.S. will also need more troops if security conditions in north and west Afghanistan continue to deteriorate, the official said. “At the end of the day, it’s all about the math,” he said. “The demand and the supply don’t line up, even with the new troops that are coming in.”

In earlier phases of the assessment process, Gen. McChrystal’s staff conducted a “troop-to-task” analysis that weighed increasing U.S. troop levels by two brigades — each such unit has 3,500 to 5,000 troops — or by as many as eight brigades, according to officials familiar with the matter. A middle option of four to six brigades was also considered, these people said.

The prospect of more troops rankles some of Gen. McChrystal’s advisers, who worry the American military footprint in Afghanistan is already too large.

“How many people do you bring in before the Afghans say, ‘You’re acting like the Russians’?” said one senior military official, referring to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. “That’s the big debate going on in the headquarters right now.”

View Full Image

Associated PressU.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, center, meets Afghan citizens in Canada’s “model village” of Deh-e Bagh, Afghanistan, in June.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said publicly during his campaign for the approaching Aug. 20 elections that he wants to negotiate new agreements giving the Afghan government more control over the conduct of the foreign troops currently in the country.

Gen. McChrystal, however, says too many troops aren’t a concern. “I think it’s what you do, not how many you are. It’s how the force conducts itself.”

Regardless of how he resolves the internal debate on troop numbers, Gen. McChrystal’s coming report won’t include any specific requests for more U.S. troops. Those numbers would instead be detailed in a follow-on document that is set to be delivered to Washington a few weeks after the assessment.

The timing of Gen. McChrystal’s primary assessment remains in flux. It was initially due in mid-August, but the commander was summoned to a secret meeting in Belgium last week with Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and told to take more time. Military officials say the assessment will now be released sometime after the Aug. 20 vote.

The shift came amid signs of growing U.S. unease about the direction of the war effort. Initial assessments delivered to Gen. McChrystal last month warned that the Taliban were strengthening their control over Kandahar, the largest city in southern Afghanistan.

American forces have been waging a major offensive in the neighboring southern province of Helmand, the center of Afghanistan’s drug trade. Some U.S. military officials believe the Taliban have taken advantage of the American preoccupation with Helmand to infiltrate Kandahar and set up shadow local governments and courts throughout the city.

“Helmand is a sideshow,” said the senior military official briefed on the analysis. “Kandahar is the capital of the south [and] that’s why they want it.”

Gen. McChrystal said in the interview that he planned to shift more U.S. troops to Kandahar to bolster the Canadian forces that currently have primary security responsibility for the region. Hundreds of American troops equipped with mobile armored vehicles known as Strykers are already in the province.

“It’s important and so we’re going to do whatever we got to do to ensure that Kandahar is secure,” he said. “With the arrival of the new U.S. forces we’ll have the ability to put some more combat power in the area.”

View Slideshow

Emilio Morenatti/Associated PressU.S. soldiers took position near Sari Ghundi village as they patroled near the Pakistani border, about 60 miles southeast of Kandahar Monday.

Regional Violence

View Interactive

Despite the mounting concern about the Taliban’s infiltration of Kandahar, there are clear limits to how soon additional U.S. forces can be sent to the city.

Moving forces from neighboring Helmand is nearly impossible, because those troops have already set up forward bases and recruited help from local tribal leaders, who have been promised American backing. As a result, the additional American troop deployments to Kandahar have only begun in recent days, with the arrival of new reinforcements that will continue into the fall.

Gen. McChrystal defended the decision to focus first on Helmand. The current operation, one of the largest since the start of the war in 2001, was meant to disrupt the Taliban’s lucrative drug operations there, he said.

The armed group reaps tens of millions of dollars annually from the sale of opium from Helmand, and the commander said he wants to have troops on the ground before local farmers start to plant their next batch of poppies in November. The U.S. is working to persuade Helmand’s farmers to replace their poppy fields with wheat and fruit.

The roughly 4,000 Marines in Helmand have been charged with putting Gen. McChrystal’s thinking about counterinsurgency into practice. They are trying to build local relationships by launching small development and reconstruction projects.

Gen. McChrystal said his new strategy had to show clear results within roughly 12 months to prevent public support for the war from evaporating in both the U.S. and Afghanistan.

“This is a period where people are really looking to see which way this is going to go,” he said. “It’s the critical and decisive moment.”

Write to Yochi J. Dreazen at yochi.dreazen@wsj.com and Peter Spiegel at peter.spiegel@wsj.com

COURTESY : WALL STREET JOURNAL

http://hpb.online.wsj.com/article/SB124986154654218153.html