Celebrities have often lent their star power to a cause – from Bono’s efforts to rally Americans to fight AIDS and global poverty to Angelina Jolie’s work as UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador. In Pakistan, pop star Shehzad Roy established Zindagi Trust, a not-for-profit organization that aims to provide education for underprivileged children. The organization has established 29 operational schools throughout the country, educating over 2800 children. On Thursday, Dawn reported that Roy was recognized for his philanthropic work when he was awarded the 2009 Patricia Blunt Koldyke Fellowship on Social Entrepreneurship by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Dawn added in its coverage, “The music star is one of the youngest ever recipients of the Tamgha-i-Imtiaz, one of Pakistan’s highest civil honors, and he has also been awarded Pakistan’s highest humanitarian award, the Sitara-i-Eisaar. MTV Pakistan also recently gave him two awards for his music.” During his one week stay in Chicago this October, where he will exchange ideas with local civic, government, business, and academic leaders, Roy told Dawn he would “like to impress upon notable American educationists, politicians, reformists and media persons the need for the Pakistani government to be pushed to bring about reforms in schools, particularly by replacing outdated textbooks and updating curricula. He said he would appeal to foreign agencies for funds for these projects.”

According to the press release on the Chicago Council’s website, “Roy uses the proceeds from his hugely popular concerts to fund the work of the Zindagi Trust, which since 2002 has established vocational centers and health care clinics and has worked to improve Pakistan’s educational system. One of its first projects, ‘I am Paid to Learn’, provided child laborers nationwide with monetary compensation for attending school, an important initiative in a country where more than 10.5 million children under the age of 15 work menial jobs to support their families.”

So congratulations Shehzad Roy. You not only have addressed a very important issue in Pakistan through your work, but your dedication has been an inspiration to us all.

Dawn image: Bakhtawar with sister Asifa flashing Victory signs

Looks like Bilawal will have a sibling companion in the political world – according to sources from Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), President Asif Ali Zardari has decided to introduce his second eldest child, Bakhtawar Bhutto-Zardari into politics “based on strong recommendations from PPP members.” His 18 year old daughter will reportedly enter politics after completing her studies at Edinburgh in Scotland, noted news sources.

The announcement took place during a meeting with the PPP’s Central Executive Committee on Monday, where members were discussing the expansion and reshuffling of the federal cabinet, among other issues. A participant in the session quoted Zardari as saying that Bakhtawar and Bilawal’s “active participation in politics will be the continuation of the valiant struggle that their mother and grandfather had waged.” Dawn cited sources who also noted that Zardari, during the meeting, “pointed out to the participants that Bakhtawar Bhutto-Zardari was also taking keen interest in politics, on which participants of the meeting backed the President’s idea.” According to the Nation, Bakhtawar was present at the meeting, “as a special invitee.”

Yet another example of what many have called blatant dynastic politics. What was interesting, though, was this line from Dawn: “Sources from PPP say that the decision is aimed at presenting Bakhtawar Bhutto-Zardari as a successor to former premier Benazir Bhutto and to compete with Fatima Bhutto in the national political sphere.” In a recent interview with Guernica Magazine, Fatima Bhutto, the daughter of the late Murtaza Bhutto (brother to Benazir), indicated that she has no intention of joining politics, asserting, “I really won’t. There are so many reasons not to enter politics that I can think of.”

When the interviewer pressed her on the topic, asking, “When I read, watch, or hear you say in interviews that you don’t believe in dynastic politics, I always think, ‘Maybe that, paradoxically, is exactly who Pakistan needs,’” she responded,

We’re already hearing from dynastic quarters in Pakistan: Yes, yes, I know it’s a dynasty. But actually, I’ve got great experience from my parents or… Yes, yes, I know dynasty is bad, but my uncle takes me along to all of his meetings and therefore I get to… Whatever. I think there are many other ways to push for change or be political, and I think that at the moment doing what I do, writing and speaking, I’m unfettered, I’m not obliged to anyone or anything, and I’m free to speak my mind. That’s not the case when you’re in politics.

My sentiments exactly. It’s disturbing to me that an 18 year old and a 20 year old have already been pinned to run one of the country’s largest political parties. If the political torch of “democratic” parties are ultimately passed down by blood, can we really call that a democracy?

Finally, if Bakhtawar Bhutto does become a leading figure in the political party, what will become of her rap career [see video below]? Maybe Pakistan will have its first rapping politician. Compete with that, Arnie [aka the "Governator"].

Apparently, I wasn’t one of the only ones a little less than impressed by President Obama’s recent interview with Dawn. You know, the interview where Obama talks about his great love and respect for Pakistani culture, Urdu poetry, and his ability to cook keema and daal.  The ever-hilarious Jon Stewart broke it down for us on The Daily Show:

The U.S. President’s sit-down with Dawn’s Anwar Iqbal certainly seemed warm and fuzzy, but considering the U.S. drone strike that killed 45 people happened just three days later, I’d like to say, “That’s great. Now please stop bombing our country!“

Posted in News Briefs ]]> http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/06/jon-stewart-pokes-fun-at-obamas-pakistan-connection/feed/ 22 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/05/pakistan-may-be-a-top-ten-failed-state-but/ http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/05/pakistan-may-be-a-top-ten-failed-state-but/#comments Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:58:31 +0000 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/?p=1734 ]]>

According to the Happy Planet Index (HPI), which is calculated by life expectancy, life satisfaction, and ecological footprint, Pakistan ranks number 24 in the world. Not bad for a country recently included in Foreign Policy’s 2009 Failed States Index.

According to New Economic Foundation, the organization that conducted this study, “The HPI is an innovative measure that shows the ecological efficiency with which human well-being is delivered around the world. It is the first ever index to combine environmental impact with well-being to measure the environmental efficiency with which country by country, people live long and happy lives.” However, despite media headlines blaring, “Costa Rica: World’s Happiest Place,” the Index doesn’t reveal whether countries are “happy.” In fact, the nations that top the index aren’t the happiest in the world, but are countries that show that “achieving, long, happy lives without over-stretching the planet’s resources is possible.”

Ultimately, the HPI is meant to show that around the world, “high levels of resource consumption do not reliably produce high levels of well-being, and that it is possible to produce high well-being without excessive consumption of the Earth’s resources.” The UK’s Telegraph noted,  “Economists said the richer countries came lower in the ranking because of the high carbon footprint of the population, measured by looking at how much of the world’s resources people consume per capita.” The news agency added, “In the UK, the low ranking [#74] was largely due to social problems or what has been labeled “broken Britain” and the high carbon footprint of most of the population. If everyone in the world wanted to live as people do in the UK, it would require the resources of more than three earths.” The United States also came in quite low on the rankings, at 114.

The last time the HPI was revealed, in July 2006, Pakistan actually ranked at 112. Based on the previous data, it looks like this can be mainly attributed to life satisfaction [based on surveys] being extremely low [4.3 versus 5.6 today - Costa Rica, to give you a good comparison has a high life satisfaction of 8.0]. The change, coupled with higher life expectancy, means we now rank in the top 25 of the world. Something interesting albeit questionable to celebrate, but definitely better than being called a failed state. What do you think?

On Wednesday, the LA Times reported the most ridiculously absurd story about the Pakistani Taliban. According to the news agency, juice bars in Lahore have been bombed after claims by militants that they are “dens of immorality” because men and women can meet and talk to one another (oh my!). The LA Times wrote, “Attacks on fresh juice bars in Lahore late last year centered on the Garhi Shahu neighborhood,” where many Afghans and Uzbeks have settled. The owner of Dasko Juice told the Times, “Basically it’s just a place where girls and boys come and drink juice. These people try and portray us as immoral, but it’s not true. They’re just sitting and talking, but that’s a threat to them.”

The story conjured up many other examples of how Islamist militants have used their convoluted interpretation of Islam to overpower Pakistan – from the Lal Masjid “moral policewomen” wielding batons and publicly burning DVDs to the public flogging of young girls and banning of women from the marketplace in Swat. A recent poll by World Public Opinion.Org, though, shows that most Pakistanis disagree with such views. According to the poll, which surveyed 1,000 people across the country from May 17 – May 28, 2009 [margin of error is +/- 3.2%], 75% said they believe Sharia law allows women to work, [only 24% said this was not allowed under Islam]. An even larger 83% said Sharia permits girls’ schooling. In comparison, 81% of respondents felt the Pakistani Taliban, if they were allowed control over an area, would not allow women to work, while an equally overwhelming 81% believed they would not allow girls to go to school, [see the graph below].

The results above ultimately show that the majority of polled Pakistanis disagree with the Pakistani Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia. In fact, 81% now see the activities of the Taliban as a critical threat, compared to 34% of those polled in September 2007.  Moreover, reported World Public Opinion, Pakistanis “show far less confidence in the potential for the Pakistani Taliban to govern effectively than they do for the government,” [for example, 56% felt the government would provide timely and effective justice in the courts, versus the 14% who chose the Taliban]. At the same time, the poll showed that many people also have low confidence in the government, [26% voted both/neither to the above question]. Therefore, although many Pakistanis don’t prescribe to the same brand of Sharia as the Taliban and most feel they don’t have the competence to govern, this does not necessarily mean they feel the government will do a better job in its wake. The state must therefore work to not only instill confidence in the public, but improve governance all together.

I went to an event yesterday where World Public Opinion’s Clay Ramsay presented these findings and RAND Corporation’s Christine Fair and Brookings’ Stephen Cohen commented on the results. Fair also provided a provincial breakdown of the results, but noted that in Pakistan, “there is more variation within provinces than between provinces.” She also related several anecdotes from when she trained the enumerators in Pakistan [those who carried out the 1,000 face-to-face interviews for the survey]. Her and her colleague’s goal, she said, was to eliminate the “don’t knows” that often crop up in survey results, especially with questions related to Al Qaeda. According to Fair, most enumerators didn’t even know what Al Qaeda was, [one woman in a training even thought it was a group associated with Hamid Karzai's government] so the training of the enumerators was important in order for them could to properly communicate questions to the respondents.

Fair’s talk was significant because she contextualized the results of the World Public Opinion findings, noting the survey was taken [May 2009] soon after Taliban militants had moved into Buner, just 60 miles from the capital. She said the development ultimately changed the view of people in Pakistan, especially the NWFP and Punjab, and more began to view the Taliban as a critical threat. The survey, therefore, was a reflection of this evolving sentiment, with most supporting the military’s campaign against the militants, [see below chart].

In a related email exchange with Fair, she indicated to me that the World Public Opinion sample was not drawn to be statistically representative at the provincial level, [a new poll, which will survey 6000 people, she said, should be more reliable in shedding light on these inter-provincial differences]. She noted the inter-provincial differences she discussed in her talk “were not meant to dilate upon any point estimate in particular, rather to remind folks that we can’t think of “Pakistani public opinion” because there are many publics.”

The issue of Pakistani public opinion was also raised by Stephen Cohen, who felt that there is no such thing as “Pakistani public opinion,” a point that I feel is important to debate on this forum. Do you think a national Pakistani identity exists, or is it something created or forced by these polls? And, if you don’t agree, are identities formed in Pakistan along provincial lines? In terms of young Pakistanis, do you think that new media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and blogs can be instrumental in forming nationalist sentiment?

Posted in News Briefs ]]> http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/new-poll-finds-that-most-pakistanis-view-taliban-as-critical-threat/feed/ 10 Kalsoom Picture 6 Picture 7 http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/pakistans-military-offensive-whats-in-a-name/ http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/pakistans-military-offensive-whats-in-a-name/#comments Wed, 01 Jul 2009 06:19:27 +0000 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/?p=1725 ]]>

Image Credit: NY Times, Soldiers on patrol in Swat

On Tuesday, news agencies cited a militant spokesman from Hafiz Gul Bahadur’s group in North Waziristan, who said they were “scrapping” their peace deal with the government because of U.S. drone strikes in the region. The Taliban faction had initially agreed to stay on the sidelines during the offensive against Baitullah Mehsud in neighboring South Warizistan.

However, Bahadur’s spokesman Ahmedullah Ahmedi [who spoke over the phone from an undisclosed location] told reporters, “Our leadership has decided that as long as U.S. drone attacks continue and security forces stay here, there will be no peace agreement.” The BBC also cited him adding that the  group “would now carry out attacks on military targets in the region until the army left and U.S. drones strikes were halted.”

In the past, reported the Wall Street Journal, the rivalry between the two militant commanders and the peace deal  had helped Pakistan’s military focus on Mehsud. Now, noted the BBC’s Syed Shoaib Hasan the end of the agreement “leaves the army facing a near impossible task – no one has ever defeated a combined insurgency in the Waziristan area.” The Pakistani government on Tuesday sought to quell such speculation, claiming the peace deal had been signed with the tribal elders and not with Taliban militants. In an interview with BBC World Radio yesterday, Interior Minister Rehman Malik further insisted that countering Bahadur’s group would not be “that difficult,” affirming, “we will take over” [the Waziristan area].

Pakistan’s ongoing military offensive has garnered a continuous stream of news headlines. However, given that journalists have largely been denied access to the frontline, media reports are often a regurgitation of contradictory information provided by both military and militant spokesmen. The difficulty is always extracting the “truth” from what both sides want us to believe. For example, noted the NY Times, “For the past month and a half, the Pakistani military has claimed success in retaking the Swat Valley from the Taliban, clawing back its own territory from insurgents who only a short time ago were extending their reach toward the heartland of the country.”

However, the news agency on June 28 offered a rare glimpse into Swat’s aftermath, noting, “…from a helicopter flying low over the valley last week, the low-rise buildings of Mingora…now deserted and under a 24-hour curfew, appeared unscathed. In the surrounding countryside, farmers had harvested wheat and red onions on their unscarred land.” The NYT added, “All that is testament to the fact that the Taliban mostly melted away without a major fight, possibly to return when the military withdraws or to fight elsewhere, military analysts say.”

This snapshot of Swat, coupled with the fact that the military has failed to kill or capture a top Taliban commander, makes the idea of “success” all the more abstract, and the new push into “the far more treacherous terrain” of South Waziristan worrisome. Are we essentially going down the same inconclusive path of military offensives past? Rehman Malik, in his talk with BBC World Radio, reassured the skeptics by simply noting, “measures have been taken to prevent these militants from regrouping,” (he would not specify the measures so as not to compromise the secrecy of the mission).

This is not to say the military has not made gains in this new offensive. In fact, in the perception management side of the war, the Pakistani Army has indicated a new resolve in countering militancy, most interestingly demonstrated by the names of these military offensives. In a recent study by Shuja Nawaz entitled, FATA – A Most Dangerous Place, he wrote, “In the Swat district, the first operation by the regular army was named Operation Mountain Viper, not exactly a name that inspired participants or local residents or drew them into the task for fighting Islamist militants…” However, the new commander of the troops in Swat, Maj. Gen. Janjua in 2007 “launched a fresh operation named Rah-e-Haq or the Path to Truth (i.e., the true Islamic faith), aimed at wresting the Islamic ground from the insurgents by claiming to act in the name of the true Islam.”

The army’s recent offensive titles indicate a further evolution of this trend. On May 16, 2009, the military announced that Operation Rah-e-Haq (4) in Malakand would be renamed Operation Rah-e-Rast, or the Path to Righteousness. Most recently, Rah-e-Nijaat, or the Path to Salvation, was attached to the military’s operation in South Waziristan. Last week, COAS Gen. Ashfaq Kayani told reporters, “We are conducting this operation to bring misguided people back on the right path…They are not fighting for Islam. Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and we know how to protect it.”

What seems to be occurring therefore, is an effort on the military’s part to reframe the war in a language digestible by the public. They are challenging the convoluted interpretations of Islam and Sharia espoused by these Taliban-linked militants, and are no longer allowing them to hijack and leverage this space. However, while certainly a part of unconventional warfare, winning will still take more than just good PR. As Shuja Nawaz noted, “Troops, training, and equipment are one part of a two-part approach to counterinsurgency. The other, and some might say more important part is the underlying political dynamic and governance, without which military actions will fail to gain traction or produce a lasting solution.” In our case, it means we once again concede to the militants.

Posted in Op-Eds ]]> http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/pakistans-military-offensive-whats-in-a-name/feed/ 12 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/a-diplomacy-lesson-from-indo-pak-tennis-duo/ http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/a-diplomacy-lesson-from-indo-pak-tennis-duo/#comments Mon, 29 Jun 2009 04:34:53 +0000 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/?p=1723 ]]>

Qureshi and Armitraj talk tactics, AFP photo

This past Friday, the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan met in Italy to discuss terrorism and strained ties between the two nations. Reuters labeled the development “the second high-level bilateral talks since November’s Mumbai attacks.” Pakistan has been pushing for a resumption of peace talks with India since the attacks, and while state-to-state relations have long been the primary channel of diplomacy [hence the name Track I], citizen diplomacy, or people-to-people relations have also been instrumental in promoting goodwill and improving perceptions between the two nations.

These days, the trend is best exemplified by a Wimbledon doubles team made up of Pakistani player Aisam ul-Haq Qureshi and Indian Prakash Armitraj. Dawn, in an article entitled, “Indo-Pak Tennis Duo Defy Traditional Rivalry,” wrote, “The pair believe their tennis doubles partnership shows sport can transcend the boundaries between people — and say the warm response to their joining forces shows how the situation has shifted in recent years.” Armitraj, in an interview with the AFP, said,

You find a big international event like this, you find an Indian and a Pakistani playing together, and all differences — color, creed, everything — go out the window. You’re fighting for a common cause on the court and it’s a beautiful thing. The only thing you have to lean on is each other.

This is Qureshi’s second time partnering with an Indian player, [he previously played with Rohan Bopanna.] Pakistan’s number one ranked player told Reuters, “These guys are my best friends on the tour. We have the same taste and same culture and I love hanging out with them.” He asserted to the AFP, “…there has been so much going on between India and Pakistan politically but I never once thought of that when I’m playing with Prakash…I just hope I can send a positive message.”

In 2002, Qureshi teamed with Israeli player Amir Hadad during Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. Although the partnership was denounced by the Pakistani tennis federation, who threatened to ban him from the Davis Cup, the pair were awarded the Arthur Ashe Humanitarian of the Year award for continuing to play together despite pressures from both communities. This time, Qureshi and his partner are facing less backlash, a sign that attitudes have shifted, he noted. He added,  “People in Pakistan have been wishing me all the best…I’m glad they’re able to realize that sport is bigger than all the religions, colors, cultures.”

The Qureshi-Armitraj duo have moved on from Wimbledon’s second round to face the fourth seeds in the third round match on Monday [1200 GMT]. As Qureshi noted to reporters, “My goal is to promote tennis in Pakistan and the only way is to do well in the biggest tournaments in the world. I’m very pleased that he’s [Armitraj] the guy next to me.” His partner echoed, “You’re fighting for a common cause on the court and it’s a beautiful thing. The only thing you have to lean on is each other. A lot of people can benefit from that attitude.”

On Thursday, the NY Times’ posted another video story by Adam Ellick, who’s produced diverse reports on topics ranging from Pakistan’s sex toy industry to the rise of drug-resistant tuberculosis in Karachi. This time, he profiled Todd Shea, an American who came to volunteer in Pakistan after the 2005 earthquake, a disaster that killed 80,000 people. As Ellick noted in the voiceover, “he never left.” Three years ago, Shea established a “no frills” charity hospital in Kashmir called CDRS, or Comprehensive Disaster Relief Services, which provides quality healthcare services to the people in the remote and earthquake-affected areas in northwest Pakistan. CDRS’ efforts are concentrated in Chikar, one of Pakistan’s poorest and most remote villages located about 25 miles from the Indian border with a population of about 150,000 people. According to Ellick, “For decades, the community’s medical needs have been ignored by the government…”

The video [embedded below] opens with Shea singing “Dil Dil Pakistan” at a community fair, designed to teach the survivors of the earthquake the basics of proper healthcare. He doesn’t have a college degree or a medical background, but told the Times, “I’m certainly not the most qualified person to take on the task of building…in this area at least…a revolutionary healthcare system, but I’m the one who’s here.” A musician prior to his time in Pakistan, Shea indicated that he once suffered from addiction issues. Now however, he “decided to get addicted to something that was good for other people.” In fact, Shea uses music to raise awareness about CDRS and their efforts, at one point performing at MTV’s studios in Karachi with a Pakistani musician.

His story is incredibly powerful and inspirational. So far CDRS employs 38 people, although only one doctor has relocated to Chikar to work. And though Dr. Rizwan Shabir said he was surprised by Shea’s “casual” appearance when they first met, he told the NY Times, “I thought, if this person can come from America and serve our people, then why not me…”

CDRS currently runs on $170,000 a year and served over 100,000 patients in 2008. If you would like to make a donation to Todd Shea’s efforts, click here.

AP Image: Qari Zainuddin with his bodyguards earlier this month

On Tuesday, media outlets reported that Taliban commander Qari Zainuddin was shot dead in Dera Ismail Khan. According to the NY Times, “The initial investigation indicated that the gunman was a guard named Gulbadin Mehsud who was thought to have been loyal to Mr. Zainuddin.” Dawn, in its coverage, noted the attacker entered the compound after morning prayers “and opened indiscriminate fire when they were asleep, killing Zainuddin on the spot.” The alleged attacker escaped after the attack, which also wounded another guard.

News agencies primarily framed the incident in light of Tehreek-e-Taliban head Baitullah Mehsud, noting Zainuddin was considered his “chief rival.” Al Jazeera quoted one of Zainuddin’s aides, Baz Mohammed, who vowed to avenge his death, asserting, “It was definitely Baitullah’s man who infiltrated our ranks, and he has done his job.” Earlier this month, Zainuddin reportedly criticized Mehsud following an attack on a mosque that killed 33 people. He told the Associated Press, “Whatever Baitullah Mehsud and his associates are doing in the name of Islam is not a jihad, and in fact it is rioting and terrorism…Islam stands for peace, not for terrorism.”

The purported rivalry between Mehsud and Zainuddin is interesting and goes much deeper than last month’s statement. Zainuddin, also a member of the Mehsud tribe, split from the Tehreek-e-Taliban nine months ago, according to the UK’s Daily Telegraph. The NY Times reported that he had formed an alliance with Turkestan Bhaitani, an older Taliban fighter who had switched sides to ally with the government, [although the Pakistani military 'officially' denies supporting either Zainuddin or Bhaitani].

According to the Daily Times, Zainuddin was also the self-appointed successor of his cousin Abdullah Mehsud, a top Taliban commander best known for masterminding the October 2004 kidnapping of two Chinese engineers in Pakistan. He was killed in 2007 when security forces raided his hideout in Balochistan. After his death, Baitullah Mehsud emerged as the leading Taliban commander in the region, [the power base is located in South Waziristan], but sources note a splinter group claiming to be the successors of Abdullah [as well as the "real" Taliban] also formed at this time.

In fact, noted both the Daily Times and the Long War Journal, Zainuddin used posters with images of Abdullah Mehsud as well as pamphlets vilifying Baitullah Mehsud in order to recruit followers. The Daily Times cited one pamphlet distributed in Tank and South Waziristan on March 16, which said, “Baitullah Mehsud is not involved in jihad because Islam does not allow suicide attacks, which his group is perpetrating…Our doors are open to all those who have suffered injustice at the hands of Baitullah. We also warn people against keeping contacts with Baitullah or facilitating him in prolonging his rule.”

This past month, reported the NY Times, both Zainuddin and Bhaitani organized a tribal jirga with as many as 100 elders of the Mehsud tribe in the town of Tank in an effort to rally further opposition to Baitullah Mehsud. And, although Zainuddin said he commanded around 3,000 fighters, there is also no confirmation of these claims, [in fact, the Long War Journal suggests he had inflated the number to portray a greater influence and capability than was actually the case].

Here’s what we do know: 1. Zainuddin’s assassination Tuesday signified an escalation in the rivalry and the long-standing tit-for-tat murder campaign between Baitullah Mehsud and fraction groups. Dawn reported a successor has already been appointed to replace Zainuddin. However, although Baz Mohammed indicated the murder would strengthen “their resolve to wage war against Baitullah,” other news sources indicate it may instead intimidate others from joining the anti-Mehsud group.

According to the Guardian, as he came to power, Baitullah had in fact “demonstrated his utter ruthlessness by killing hundreds of the Mehsud tribe’s traditional elders…who might have led resistance.” McClatchy News spoke to around a dozen Mehsud chiefs in separate meetings. One tribal chief told the news agency, “Not since the time of Alexander the Great have the Mehsud people suffered such slavery…We want to stand with Zainuddin but we don’t trust the government. Three times in the past, they have made deals with Baitullah Mehsud…We are scared that the generals will make up with him again.”

2. Although the Pakistani military officially denies this, most sources report the rise of these anti-Mehsud groups has been part of the state’s strategy to isolate Baitullah Mehsud and his supporters, particularly since “Many believe that Mehsud can be defeated only by a member of his own clan,” noted McClatchy.

This information is problematic, to say the least. Just because Zainuddin and Bhaitani said their fighters would remain neutral against any government offensive against Mehsud’s network does not mean their own motives are clean and rosy. In fact, in an interview with McClatchy News this month, Zainuddin noted he diverged with Baitullah on two fundamental points: the use of suicide bombing and attacks on Pakistan, since, as he noted, “Islam doesn’t give permission to fight against a Muslim country.” However, the late commander had also pledged to send his forces into Afghanistan once Mehsud is vanquished to expel international forces. He told McClatchy, “The whole Muslim world should come together because all infidels have come together against Islam. Whether it is Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Chechnya, Muslims must protect ourselves…The problem is that we cannot go to Afghanistan these days because we have had to deal with Baitullah.”

So ultimately,  in an effort to defeat a short-term but dangerous enemy, we are once again breeding further militancy, a phenomenon that will undoubtedly haunt us [and the West] in the long-run. While I understand the military may have to resort to such measures to create fissures in the militant network, the ramifications and the true benefits of such a strategy must be further weighed. In our effort to take back our country, we need to be aware of whose hands we are placing our future.

As Pakistan prepares to launch its offensive into South Waziristan and resolutely target Baitullah Mehsud, it is abundantly clear that this conflict is not black-and-white, a fact I tried to make clear in my above analysis. It is made increasingly more complex amid news of continuing U.S. drone strikes. Late Tuesday, media outlets reported that 45 people were killed in an alleged drone attack in South Waziristan. According to the NY Times, “If the reports are indeed accurate and if the attack was carried out by a drone, the strike could be the deadliest since the United States began using the aircraft” in Pakistan’s tribal areas, a fact sure to exacerbate anti-American sentiment in the region.

Posted in Op-Eds ]]> http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/analyzing-the-asassination-of-a-baitullah-mehsud-rival/feed/ 23 Kalsoom AP Image: Qari Zainuddin with his bodyguards earlier this month http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/pakistan-are-the-world-t20-champions/ http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/pakistan-are-the-world-t20-champions/#comments Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:43:28 +0000 Kalsoom http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/?p=1691 ]]>

Today, chants of “Pakistan Zindabad” resounded throughout the country, as Pakistan defeated Sri Lanka by eight wickets to become the Twenty20 Cricket World Cup Champions. It was, as Dawn noted, the first major title Pakistan has won in 17 years, and it comes at a time when the country faces a multitude of burgeoning problems. Pakistan’s team captain Younus Khan told reporters after today’s victory, “We were the underdogs and had less pressure, but we came good in the big games. It’s a credit to the country and to the team…This is a our gift to our nation. Hopefully, it will help cheer them up.” Cricket is the sport Pakistanis bleed for, and the team, [especially Shahid Afridi] are undoubtedly national heroes. Congratulations to Sri Lanka as well for an incredible game! Below, Shaheryar Mirza, a journalist based in Rawalpindi, further discusses today’s victory:

It’s true. A four hour cricket match can raise a nation out of the doldrums of war and economic despair. If only temporarily, the Pakistani nation can unite and bask in its glory on the global stage. In a trip around the streets of Rawalpindi, a microcosm for other cities around the country, there was a zeal and fervor only recently seen at political demonstrations. Only this time, there were song and dance to replace anger and frustration. As Pakistanis waved flags and pulled wheelies on their bikes it was reminiscent of what this country used to look like, and what it should look like more often.

In the last few weeks, Younus Khan has proved that he can raise an unpredictable, isolated yet talented team to the top of the sport. Many may argue that it is just 20/20 cricket and not a One Day or Test Series. But to counter these arguments one can just point back to the time that One Day’s were thought to be an aberration or a passing trend. Under the coaching of Intikhab Alam, Khan managed to extract a performance from the Pakistan cricket team that has not been seen for at least a decade. Pakistan’s last great triumph was at the 1992 World Cup and since their embarrassing loss in 1999 to Australia, the team has never looked the same.

What more can one say but BOOM BOOM. If I had a dollar for every time I heard that phrase in the last few weeks I’d be a rich man. Shahid Afridi dazzled the cricketing world with his drifted yet pacy leg spin. Googly’s, the quicker ones, pure leg spin and the flipper, you name it, it was part of Afridi’s bowling arsenal. As cricket commentators would put it, he bamboozled the batsmen in this tournament and made many a top order batsman look amateurish. Through the first few matches, Afridi struggled to find form with the bat until his promotion up the order. The captain told him to play his natural game and Afridi’s natural game is exactly what makes his fans love him, but it is also his greatest weakness. Fortunately, once he was promoted, the cries of BOOM BOOM from the crowd were justified by the bat.

Afridi displayed a previously un-witnessed maturity, patience and class to his approach between the wickets. Gone was Afridi’s trademark: close-your-eyes, swing and just pray. He played deft cuts, quick singles and doubles and built his innings like a master batsmen. Yet he still managed to entertain the crowd with big hits, and with the crowd already on his side he could do no wrong. Afridi’s performance cannot be mentioned without highlighting the running catch he took against New Zealand to dismiss Scott Styris and what seemed to be a turning point in the match and Pakistan’s T20 campaign.

It would also be unfair to go on without highlighting Umar Gul’s effect on the tournament. Gul’s 12 wickets in five matches with a record-breaking performance of 5 for 6 were truly phenomenal. Batsmen seemed defeated before they even faced him. His reputation built during the first few matches preceded him, and in cricket, mental advantage is key to winning the battle between bat and ball. Gul managed to get the ball to start reversing by the 12th over, a feat apparently never seen by most of the cricketers participating in this tournament. Gul showed that it was his skill and superior bowling action that achieved the reverse swing and not ball tampering. No other team had a bowler that could match the consistency and lethal nature of his Yorkers.

Credit goes to the whole team as Younus Khan, after experimenting in the opening matches, settled on an opening pair in Kamran Akmal and newcomer Shahzaib Hassan. Akmal was consistent in providing Pakistan with a steady start in each innings. Shahzaib failed to make an outstanding impression, but he is young and shows promise. Younus Khan consistently put on 20 to 30 quick runs with a couple fifties throughout the tournament. Shoaib Malik played out his role as an orthodox batsman that could anchor Pakistan’s innings at any given time. Malik proved useful with the ball to fill up some of the middle overs and dry up the runs.

Saeed Ajmal turned out to be the silent hero for Pakistan. One of the leading wicket takers of the tournament, he was overshadowed by Umar Gul, but his performance with the ball contained the opposition’s runs and took wickets at regular intervals. He has proved to be a standout off-spinner for Pakistan with an impeccably disguised “doosra.”

Lastly, Abdul Razzaq proved to be Pakistan’s psychological trump card. His admission into the team re-energized the squad and made believers of a team which at the beginning only looked like they half-believed. He bowled disciplined spells that can only come with experience. Razzaq was that extra spark that the team needed to finish the job.

Pakistan’s number one weapon, though, was the heart and will to win. They played with a passion that had been missing from the team for years. This passion seemed to be fueled by their desire to uplift a bruised and battered nation. They had the hopes and dreams of an entire nation on their shoulders, and they carried it proudly. A team without a home-ground showed that they can turn any ground into their home territory.

It goes without saying, but this win was a gift for the Pakistani people and most importantly a gift for those internally displaced people of the Swat Valley. The sons of their land were the heroes of the Pakistan team. The people of the NWFP have been thrust onto the world stage for the wrong reasons, and now they can hold their heads up high and display their talent. Thanks to Younus Khan’s gift, the displaced people may have something to smile about, if only for a short while.

As Pakistani’s sing and dance throughout the night they can once again feel proud to be Pakistani. Cricket is after all, just a game. But in a country like Pakistan it’s a game that serves as an ambassador that every Pakistani can be proud of. Shahbash boys…shahbash.

Posted in Contributions ]]> http://changinguppakistan.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/pakistan-are-the-world-t20-champions/feed/ 25 Kalsoom Reuters: Afridi celebrates after hitting the winning runs.