Hope Taliban will deliver good governance following Islamic principles in Afghanistan: Farooq Abdullah “They should try to develop friendly relations with every country,” the National Conference chief told reporters in Srinagar.

A day after the Taliban unveiled the interim government in Afghanistan, former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah on Wednesday said he hoped the militant group would “deliver good governance” in accordance with “Islamic principles”. He also urged the country’s new leaders to respect human rights.

“They should try to develop friendly relations with every country,” the National Conference chief told reporters in Srinagar. “They should ensure to protect the human rights of their citizens and give them a just and honourable government under the Islamic rules.”
The Taliban on Tuesday announced that they had appointed Mullah Mohammad Hasan Akhund as the ‘acting’ Prime Minister in the new Afghan government, with Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar and Mullah Abdus Salam being his deputies.

Human rights situation in Kashmir

Buy Hawthorn Berry seeds

HR groups file petition for re-probe into unmarked graves

Srinagar, June 02 : In  Kashmir, two human rights Groups filed a petition in State Human Rights Commission seeking re-investigation in 2,683 FIRs related to unidentified dead bodies buried in different unmarked graves in Kupwara, Baramulla and Bandipora in North Kashmir.

In the petition filed by International Peoples Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir (IPTK) and Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP), it has been submitted that the HRC should re-investigate these 2,683 FIRs to ascertain how many bodies are buried in the graves as per these FIRS.

“Besides, we have asked that the HRC direct for identifying the places of burial of these unidentified people registered in these 2,683 FIRs registered in 28 different police stations. Ascertain what procedures have been followed for the burial of these unidentified persons and also investigate what identification profile has been maintained for these unidentified persons registered in these 2683 FIRs by the concerned police’, Convener, IPTK, Khurram Parvez, told media men.

He said: “In the report from the inquiry conducted by the Police Investigation Wing of SHRC, the Police have stated that there are only 464 unidentified graves in north Kashmir. However, the records recently acquired through the RTI procedure suggests that there are 2,683 FIRs filed in various Police Stations of Baramulla, Kupwara, and Bandipora.”

It merits mentioning here that, the HRC of  Kashmir, which is also hearing a petition related to unmarked mass graves in occupied Kashmir including Poonch and Rajouri on May 28, gave final opportunity to the authorities to file their reports within a month about the presence of such graves in Poonch and Rajouri areas of the  Kashmir, failing which the Commission shall order an independent and impartial enquiry into the issue by next date.

U.S. does not support freedom in Egypt

By Christoph R. Horstel

With courage, enthusiasm and readiness to endure police brutalities and other hardships, the Egyptian people have managed to oust their hitherto nearly unchallenged president Hosni Mubarak and his son Gamal as designated political heir plus assurances for substantial changes in the constitution, a referendum and more attention to the needs of the poor. So far, so good, reports Tehran Times

But are we sure, how much freedom and social justice this new constitution will grant the people? How do we know, that the next set of government measures will gradually overcome the widening gap between rich and poor, mass poverty and joblessness in Egypt?

To check the chances of the people’s will to prevail, we look at history: Since the last 15 years serious transition or succession problems in the Arab world were discussed in western countries. Does anyone truly believe the U.S. never developed any change strategies and/or contingency plans to readiness status?

Then we consider social change in Egypt and elsewhere: A new class of mainly young and often secular-minded Arabs has developed among a larger change from a patriarchal society with hand made goods to an economy with wealthy capitalists, regional entrepreneurs and exporters of natural goods. And it were the wealthy, who used governmental power to further enrich themselves, thus pushing back the traditional set of landlords and bazaar traders.

At least three more key issues should be observed: It was the Serbian movement “Otpor” (once supported by the then U.S. ambassador Richard Miles), and nowadays renamed to “Centre for Non-Violent Action” (CNA) (at least indirectly financed through the “Open Society” network of the U.S. billionaire George Soros), which trained activists of several countries including Egypt and Tunisia. Does that mean the Egyptian revolution is in the hands of the U.S.? Not at all. These activists have a common trademark of working mainly via internet.

“Facebook revolution” is the new buzzword in western capitals – that says more than the eager commentators may have intended. Since all those wonderful internet platforms are subject to U.S. law obliging them to full disclosure of all information on all clients any time to U.S. intelligence, it is very clear, that little happens in Egypt that is not on the intelligence agenda.

No matter how often observers write that the U.S. were taken by surprise, stumbling behind events etc. – that is what those intelligence circles want us to believe. We still hear official blabber on intelligence failures on 9/11 and before the Iraq invasion. Had the U.S. with and through their leading Egyptian collaborators wished to stop the uprising early on, that had never put serious problems in the past and would not have this time. Rather the U.S. had helped prepare the events and let them happen:

The U.S. proxies, namely ex-IAEA boss ElBaradei, were ready, the military was faithful and ready, intelligence well informed. For a political steam pot like Egypt just a tiny, well-calculated reduction in pressure on the lid means heavy spill-overs. Imprisonments, torture and killings even continue to this day. For years the U.S. had used some of their support funds for Egypt to finance all those opposition groups susceptible to U.S. influence, translate: “democratic groups” or “development of civil society”. In vain did Egypt protest against this blatant interference in its interior affairs, as we know through embassy cables in WikiLeaks. And there are enough pictures and records of meetings hosted by Hillary Clinton for Egyptian friends of “Freedom House”.

Does this take any credibility off the Egyptian revolution? Not at all. But the U.S. is trying all the time to influence the results and hijack the benefits. Only awareness and efficient counter activities can stop this.

But this background induces us to look at second key issue: the present leadership personnel, since it will be those leaders to organize the start of Egypt’s future – and maybe more, if they do not abandon power as promised. The CIA lists Omar Suleiman as the most powerful Middle Eastern intelligence chief, the people dub him “Mubarak II”. Suleiman enjoys best contacts to the U.S. intelligence leadership. He has made Egypt a preferred CIA rendition hub and has personally overseen torture.

Therefore it is little wonder, that the demonstrators asked for his removal and were pacified only somewhat by introduction of the Supreme Military Council (SMC) as the real though unconstitutional leadership, comprising among others the defense minister Tantawi and army chief Enan. But what does this mean? In order to fully and truly do the will of the Egyptian people, the army and its intelligence shooting-star Suleiman would have to ultimately give up its obedience to the U.S. That is highly improbable: Location and time are not ready yet for Egypt’s Erdogan.

Until the end of February, the SMC will publish a proposal for changes to the constitution, a nationwide referendum is to be held within two months. That means, as the third key issue: turmoil in Egypt, is far from over. Three simple truths call for attention: The only single intact coherent power base in Egypt is the army. Like in the German army, many higher officers are more or less closely linked to the U.S. by multiple bonds - including years of consecutive training steps, many of them held in the U.S. The whole political fabric in Egypt: social groups, parties, internet-based groupings – are no viable power base, since they lack structure and experience. The one exception is the Muslim Brotherhood. And these valuable people are just by name a political monolith. But that is already enough for the U.S. to riddle them with government spies and make sure their influence will be limited at least for now – and mainly limited to those parts and personalities, which are “constructive” or, more accurately put: “open to influence”.

Another thought for accurate political calculation: Exchange old puppets by fresh puppets is old style. Modern U.S. policy accepts even full chaos as a viable “system” – in case a stable obedience can neither be reached quickly nor guaranteed for the next 20 years: Afghanistan and Pakistan are sad examples.

And, last not least, Obama’s speech on the Middle East held Tuesday made it clear: In their struggle against Iran the U.S. want to be sure to enlist any of the new and unstable leaderships. That is also one of the non-public but rock-hard pre-conditions to U.S. support.

For any opposition movement in the region a tough question appears: How to make sure, that no foreign power can hijack or misuse the accomplishments of political activities? Check the priorities: If the government is not pro-U.S., a one-year time delay in mass demonstrations may help to avoid being identified as part of the present U.S. regional plotting. And publicly as well as credibly disassociating the movement from U.S. government policies may prove helpful in many ways.

*The author is a government and business consultant in Germany, multiple book author and expert since 25 years on issues of Central Asia, the Middle East and security-related questions

Terrorism in Pakistan is due to Kashmir, says former ISI chief

Srinagar, 10 April: A former ISI chief credited with creating the Afghan Taliban, has said his country's Army will not change its India-centric policy unless the Kashmir issue is resolved.

“The kind of terrorism which is going on in Pakistan is due to Kashmir issue,” Hamid Gul, the former head of the Inter Services Intelligence who is believed to have created Kashmiri militants groups and finds frequent mention in the documents released recently by the whistle-blower site WikiLeaks, claimed in the CNN's Connect the World programme. “The second [reason] is because of the wrongful occupation of Afghanistan, by the allied forces, it's very wrongful,” he argued. 

“So I think that proud nation is being really ravaged which is very wrong. So, this is the root cause — unless you address the root cause, you are not going to find the solution, as far as Pakistan's orientation towards India is concerned that is a reality, and Indians themselves are making it a reality,” General Gul claimed. “This is amazing that India continues to aim at Pakistan and considers it the enemy — Kashmir dispute is still going on; Kashmir movement is very much on the boil, and at this time it is expected that Pakistan should shift forces from the eastern border and transfer them to the western border — it is not possible, we don't have the resources,” he said.

The former ISI chief told the CNN that the Soviet occupation was wrong, and so is the American occupation.

“And that Afghan nation will not accept that position, Afghan nation has never accepted for past 5000 years, they won't accept it now. So I don't regret it at all, because at that time the whole world was with us. “I think then America should be the first to regret that adventure at that time,” he argued.

General Gul argued that there can be no peace in Afghanistan without Mullah Omar. “I think Mullah Omar has to be spoken to — that's very important — because without him no settlement in Afghanistan can take place. He symbolises the national resistance of Afghanistan against the occupation,” he said.

Lashkar, ISI Expanding Anti-India Operations in Afghanistan: NYT

Srinagar, August 4: Many Afghan and international intelligence officials and diplomats stationed in Kabul have confirmed that with the help of ISI, Lashar-e-Taiba (LeT) has expanded its anti-India operations into Afghanistan and set up training camps, NYT reports. 

Officials said that LeT is believed to have masterminded and carried out three major attacks on Indian government employees and private workers in Afghanistan in recent months, reports said. 

The New York Times reported that Pakistan maintains that it doesn’t support or help Lashkar any longer but its expanded activities in Afghanistan, particularly against Indian targets, raises suspicion that it has become one of Pakistan’s proxies to counteract India’s influence in the war ravaged country, said reports. 

“Our concern is that there are still players involved that are trying to use Afghanistan’s ground as a place for a proxy war,” Shaida Abdali, Afghanistan’s deputy national security adviser, was quoted as saying. “It is being carried out by certain state actors to fight their opponents,” Abdali was quoted as saying. Experts opine that now the LeT is more of a threat in Afghanistan than even Al Qaeda is, reports said. The paper said that there were a few Lashkar cells in Afghanistan three or four years ago, but they were not focused on Indian targets and, until recently, their presence seemed to be diminishing, said reports. In a recent testimony to the US Congress, Pakistan analysts described the LeT as a terror group ‘having ambitions well beyond India’, reports said. 

   

“They are active now in six or eight provinces. They are currently most interested in Indian targets here, but they can readily trade attacks on international targets for money or influence or an alliance with other groups,” a senior NATO intelligence official, who spoke on conditions of anonymity, was quoted as saying.

IRAN NEXT SUPER POWER

by Pyotr Goncharov

Srinagar: There are reasons to suspect that Iran's nuclear program is neither peaceful nor civilian. Its Natanz (pictured) facility will have 54,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges, and it has already put into operation two cascades with 164 centrifuges each. Iran intends to turn on all of the 54,000 centrifuges. 

There are reasons to suspect that Iran's nuclear program is neither peaceful nor civilian. Its Natanz (pictured) facility will have 54,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges, and it has already put into operation two cascades with 164 centrifuges each. Iran intends to turn on all of the 54,000 centrifuges. What for? Photo courtesy AFP.

Moscow (RIA Novosti) Dec 29, 2006
Iran may become one of the top 10 features of the outgoing year for a number of reasons, including its nuclear dossier and the Holocaust conference, as well as the anti-Israeli rhetoric of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In short, Iran has made others view it as a regional superpower and the key player in the Middle East.

Its nuclear program remains the top issue, with good reason, because it threatens the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

If Iran implements its nuclear program in the proclaimed format, namely on the basis of its own uranium enrichment technologies, this will deal a death blow to the NPT. Iran's program will trigger the domino effect, encouraging Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan to follow suit.

The bomb is not the issue, as Iran will most likely decide against creating it. But it will hover merely one step away from it, forcing Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan to cover the same distance. Tehran promises to share its nuclear technology with Kuwait and Syria, which, taken together with Israel's 200 nuclear charges, will turn the region into a nuclear powder keg.

There are reasons to suspect that Iran's nuclear program is neither peaceful nor civilian. Its Natanz facility will have 54,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges, and it has already put into operation two cascades with 164 centrifuges each. Iran intends to turn on all of the 54,000 centrifuges. What for?

Russian nuclear experts say this number will allow Iran to produce its own nuclear fuel for 20 nuclear power units. So far, Iran plans to turn on only one unit, at the Bushehr nuclear power plant, which is being built with Russia's technical assistance. The unit is expected to be put into operation in September 2007 and start generating electricity in November. The construction of the other 19 units is not planned so far.

On the other hand, the same experts say, given the political will, the 54,000 centrifuges can be used to create five to seven nuclear charges within two weeks at the most.

Therefore, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) cannot issue guarantees of the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program, although it cannot prove its military goals either. The IAEA has questions to Tehran which it has refused to answer so far, keeping the world on nuclear tenterhooks.

The talks on Iran's nuclear program, as well as endless debates by experts, political analysts and other specialists, have turned into a cliffhanger compounded by Iran's intricate diplomatic embroidery. More than three months have passed since the UN's August 31 deadline, by which Tehran should have stopped work on its first cascade of 164 uranium enrichment centrifuges. Since then, Iran has put into operation a second cascade and announced the intention to increase the number of working centrifuges to 3,000 by March 2007.

It is certainly bluffing, as it does not have the necessary capacity for this. Yet it has played a joke on the UN Security Council no other country has dared to play before.

Ahmadinejad's statements to the effect that "Iran has made a crucial decision and is moving honorably along its chosen path," and that Tehran would consider any Security Council resolution on sanctions as a hostile move are most likely just verbal bravado, which the world has learned to regard calmly.

Tehran fears sanctions, or else why did Ali Larijani, head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, rush to Moscow shortly before the planned stopover in Moscow by U.S. President George W. Bush? Tehran thought President Bush and Vladimir Putin would discuss the Iranian nuclear dossier, and feared that Bush would convince Putin to vote for harsh sanctions against Iran. Tehran needed Russia's support, and Larijani received it. But nothing lasts forever.

Putin later said that Russia's support to Tehran was aimed at encouraging it to maintain relations with the IAEA so as to clarify the nuclear watchdog's questions and restore the world's trust in the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programs. But it appears that Tehran is not willing to resume talks, at least not now.

On December 23, the UN Security Council voted on the Iranian resolution. The permanent members of the council, who form, together with Germany, a six-country group on Iran, have coordinated sanctions against Iran. The resolution proposed by the European Trio, which is negotiating with Iran on behalf of the European Union, differed radically from Russia's stand.

Moscow argued that the sanctions should cover only the areas that worry the IAEA - enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and work on all heavy water-related projects, and the development of nuclear weapon delivery systems.

The Security Council heeded the Kremlin's arguments, but future developments are almost impossible to predict, especially considering the "Persian motifs" in Tehran's foreign policy. One way or another, Russia's neighbor, Iran, will continue to play a key role in the region, and this is the main result of the story with its nuclear dossier.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board. Source: RIA Novosti