Jan Achakzai

(The Frontier Post, August 13) The British Prime Minister, David Cameron’s, comments in India regarding Islamabad’s alleged role in exporting terrorism has understandably sparked a negative reaction in Pakistan. However, British Prime Minister’s comments were not the result of a slip of tongue or of his alleged diplomatic naivety. There are other underlying considerations that underpin the emerging new thinking in London. British policy makers have started to look differently to the whole gamut of London-Islamabad and London-New Delhi relations. Traditionally, Britain has supported the US broad foreign policy objective in South Asia i.e., to maintain a balance between India and Pakistan. That was part of the US strategy to preserve stability and promote its long-term interest in different regions by forging balanced relations between competing countries, for example, the balance between Israel-Arab states, erstwhile Iraq and Persian Iran’s balance and in South Asia balance between...

(Source: LUBP) Almost on daily basis Pakhtuns are killed in Karachi and there is a complete silence in the media to the plight of the beleaguered community. And the victims are dismissed as workers of ANP as if their blood is cheap. The knowledge that how the MQM’s military wing is undertaking the killings of political opponents, police officers and the Pakhtuns is in public domain- a fact even acknowledged by the government’s own interior ministry report (May 23, The News) with input from all the official security stakeholders in Karachi, including the Sindh Police, Special Branch, IB, ISI, Rangers and the Interior Ministry. So what is the strategy of the MQM behind these targeted killings of the Pakhtuns? Those carrying out this war has two goals: the first is to create sympathy in Karachi and throughout the country for Urdu speaking community to portray the picture as if they are being driven by the Pakhtuns from their homes parallel to what happened to...

Here is what General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, should – but most likely won’t – say in his anticipated policy speech on Nov 29 resuming o his new extended three years tenure (Source: LUBP) My dear countrymen! In every nation’s history, there are moments that call on its leader to face the truth and tell the truth to his fellow countrymen and women. This is such a moment. It is a moment of peril, but also a moment of great opportunity. You have heard a lot from me in recent months about the peril. I am terribly concerned about the existential threats to our country. But you have not heard enough from me about the opportunity that we have today to devise a strategic, long-term approach to reduce these threats. We have an opportunity – one that may not reoccur for generations to come – to reach the kind of regional security that we have been seeking since our parents and grandparents established this astonishing country sixty-two years ago. Sure, there are...

http://www.thefrontierpost. com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=1352 The classified documents released by the organisation, WikiLeaks, has provided fresh ammunition to hawks in the Afghan government urging the US to come hard on Pakistan for its support to the Afghan Taliban. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has reportedly asked his officials to study the WikiLeaks. Afghanistan’s National Security Council said the United States had failed to attack the patrons and supporters of the Taliban hiding in Pakistan throughout the nine-year conflict. But despite some critical voices, the leaks dismissed by the US administration as "old hat" are unlikely to force Karzai to adopt a more hawkish stance against Pakistan. Hamid Karzai is perhaps one of the Afghan leaders of current generation who has realised the inherently weak geo-political standing of Afghanistan in the region and the constraints the US and Kabul are working under when it comes to dealing with Pakistan. Karzai already transf...

(The Frontier Post July 26) The Kabul Conference paved way for the need to seek deeper regional cooperation in bringing peace and stability to Afghanistan. Particularly the role of neighbouring countries like Pakistan, Iran and India have become all the most crucial to the US effort to successfully complete its draw down by 2014 and leave behind a relatively stable government. Iran has most levers in Afghanistan after Pakistan. For Iran, Afghanistan has always been important and its value grew manifold when the US-led coalition launched attack on the Taliban regime in 2001. This is why it has maintained an effective leverage in the country. From Tehran’s point of view, Afghanistan’s western part constitutes its "near abroad". In other words, Afghanistan’s western area falls within Iran’s sphere of influence.Tehran has focused extensively on Herat, Farah and Nimruz for its economic, social and educational efforts. Iran recently held a high profile cultural conferen...

(The Frontier Post, July 24) The Kabul Conference was watershed moment in the effort of the US and its allies to defeat terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan what is called Af-Pak region. The Conference marked further deepening of the regionalisation of the US effort to combat terrorism. But the US policy of regionally defeating terrorism has failed in Af-Pak region. The ragionalisation of the fight against terrorism i.e. involving the cooperation of regional/host countries has so far created positive results in other parts of the world. Particularly, it has seen a steady progress in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Indonesia, while in Yemen the authorities are struggling to contain the al-Qaeda movement with the US help. But the jury is still out on Somalia. As far as Af-Pak region is concerned, the overriding aim of the US effort was to defeat terrorism that emanated from this region spearheaded by al-Qaeda and its allies, the Taliban. But over the last couple of years, the US has sca...

http://www.thefrontierpost. com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=1321 The Kabul Conference was watershed moment in the effort of the US and its allies to defeat terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan what is called Af-Pak region. The Conference marked further deepening of the regionalisation of the US effort to combat terrorism. But the US policy of regionally defeating terrorism has failed in Af-Pak region. The ragionalisation of the fight against terrorism i.e. involving the cooperation of regional/host countries has so far created positive results in other parts of the world. Particularly, it has seen a steady progress in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Indonesia, while in Yemen the authorities are struggling to contain the al-Qaeda movement with the US help. But the jury is still out on Somalia. As far as Af-Pak region is concerned, the overriding aim of the US effort was to defeat terrorism that emanated from this region spearheaded by al-Qaeda and its allies, the Taliban. But over the last coup...

(The Frontier Post, July 23) The international Conference in Kabul was perhaps the first international gathering of high profile foreign dignitaries that was prepared and organised by Afghans themselves. The security of the conference was ensured by Afghan security forces showing their ability to host such a mega event on Afghan soil. Interestingly, the conference itself was notable for focusing more on the time frame for readiness of Afghan security forces than on the US draw down deadline of 2011. Reading between the lines, the conference scaled down all the talk of perceived unceremonious US withdrawal by 2011, rendering it to a more symbolic beginning of the draw down process than substantive withdrawal. Some observers even went as far as to say that the US withdrawal of 2011 effectively slipped to 2014. However, the caveat for the qualification of this assertion is that substantial withdrawal will definitely have to wait behind 2011 and 2012. Another development at ...

(The Frontier Post July 21) The Kabul Conference is precursor to certain new signs of movements in the US effort in Afghanistan. Though they could not be depicted as policy shift as yet when it comes to the US strategy and its drawdown deadline. The US administration is in hurry to see signs of progress in Afghanistan so that it can conclude its withdrawal smoothly. There are few signs, however. The Republicans have come hard on the Obama administration that it is not fully committed to Afghanistan project and that its drawndown timetable is more driven by 2012 presidential elections than the progress on the ground. They believe that the deadline is tantamount to handing over a victory to the Taliban in a plate. They also contend that the Obama Administration should recalibrate drawdown deadline. The Iraqi withdrawal is all poised to start in days and there are plans that around 50,000 troops might stay behind and if needed they can play a combat role as well. Pentagon is increasing...

(The Frontier Post July 20) Pakistan has not been a great admirer of President Karzai during most of his two tenures as President of Afghanistan. Of late, Pakistan seems to have increased coordination with Karzai. Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, the head of the Pakistani army, and Inter-Services Intellgence (ISI) agency chief Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha have regularly been visiting Kabul and reportedly met with Karzai in the last couple of weeks. They visited Kabul again on June 28. Since Pakistan’s strategic policies on Afghanistan have largely been shaped by the army establishment, is the  establishment  ready to accept Karzai as some one who Pakistan can do business with in the post-US Afghanistan? There appears to be many reasons which have left Pakistan with little choice but to work with Karzai and accept him in his place possibly after the US forces have long gone from Afghanistan. Pakistan wants to see its backed Taliban co-opted as well in any possible government. Pakistan has b...

   (www.pashtunforums.com)   & (Frontier Post July 19) Some pro-Taliban writers have said on the Internet media that Pakhtun nationalism as a political movement is against Islam that nationalist leadership both in Pakistan and Afghanistan do not enjoy the backing of the people and that they are a small clique who are western stooges whereas Pakhtuns are following political Islamists. But this discourse refutes that Pakhtun nationalism is anti-Islam and argues that Pakhtun nationalism is not only alive in Pakistan but also thriving in Afghanistan and is the only guarantee in the long run that can help prevent mayhem in both countries and the repeat of Sept 11. Pakhtun nationalism as political ideology despite its shortcomings has always been there on both sides of the Durand Line. However, there might be some differences in emphasis and scope. Another distinction is that one may be a political Islamist, not a nationalist or communist but may take national...