Good News from Pakistan - Washington Times editorial
Pakistan and the Bush Doctrine - Wall Street Journal editorial
What Pakistanis Deserve - London Daily Telegraph editorial
Pakistan's Fresh Start - Toronto Star editorial
Pakistan on a Better Path - Boston Globe editorial
Pakistan's Democracy Difference - Christian Science Monitor editorial
The Pakistan Challenge - San Francisco Chronicle editorial
Our Man in Islamabad - Robert Novak, Washington Post
Beyond Musharraf - Husain Haqqani, Wall Street Journal
Pakistan's Democratic Surprise - Greg Sheridan, The Australian
Musharraf's End - Sumit Ganguly, San Francisco Chronicle
Pakistan Election Dictates New Day - Asif Ali Zardari, Chicago Tribune
Reading the Tea Leaves in Pakistan - Graham Allison, Boston Globe
Radical Turnabout in Pakistan - Ballen and Aslan, Christian Science Monitor
Backing the Wrong Horse in Pakistan - Robert Novak, New York Post
Islam at the Ballot Box - Amir Taheri, Wall Street Journal
Full Version: Pakistan
Common Ground Common Sense > National & International News > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media
Pakistan's Victory - Washington Post editorial
Reason for Hope in Pakistan? - USA Today editorial
A Chance for Pakistan and the US - New York Times editorial
Progress in Pakistan - Los Angeles Times editorial
Pakistani Poker - London Times editorial
Pakistan Votes, Terror Loses - Amir Taheri, New York Post
Reason for Hope in Pakistan? - USA Today editorial
A Chance for Pakistan and the US - New York Times editorial
Progress in Pakistan - Los Angeles Times editorial
Pakistani Poker - London Times editorial
Pakistan Votes, Terror Loses - Amir Taheri, New York Post
Pakistan in Peril - The Austalian editorial
U.S.–Pakistan Relations - Lisa Curtis, Heritage Foundation
U.S.–Pakistan Relations - Lisa Curtis, Heritage Foundation
Juan Cole| Pakistan turns scary for Bush's war on terror With a short historical revue of the ins and outs in Pakistan, Prof. Cole also explains how changes in the government may make a difference to US presidential decisions. "Bush the Wilsonian, and Bush the militarist" he outlines. There's retribution for the man ousted in 1999 and a touch of solace for Benazir Bhutto's widower.
Limited options for US in Pakistan
There seems to be a bipartisan understanding in Washington that the US is climbing a slippery slope in Pakistan. Balmy rhetoric about democracy is doing little to deflate an enormous groundswell of anti-Americanism or widespread opposition to the US's "war on terror". The US may have very little leeway other than depending on President Pervez Musharraf and the Pakistani military. - M K Bhadrakumar (Feb 22, '08)
There seems to be a bipartisan understanding in Washington that the US is climbing a slippery slope in Pakistan. Balmy rhetoric about democracy is doing little to deflate an enormous groundswell of anti-Americanism or widespread opposition to the US's "war on terror". The US may have very little leeway other than depending on President Pervez Musharraf and the Pakistani military. - M K Bhadrakumar (Feb 22, '08)
Pakistan's election winners to work out coalition: Raising the prospect of a government intent on forcing U.S. ally President Pervez Musharraf from power
Pakistani Militants bide for time and turmoil
Limited options for US in Pakistan
Pakistani Militants bide for time and turmoil
Limited options for US in Pakistan
Letting go of Musharraf
Despite an election drubbing, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf is adamant he will participate in the next administration. That's fine by Washington - beefing up Musharraf's regime to defeat terrorists has been a cornerstone of America's post-September 11 foreign policy. But the dramatic rise in terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan has shown the failure of this approach and Washington may now be better off putting its weight behind the new parliament and the Pakistani people. - Najum Mushtaq (Feb 21, '08)
[color="#999999"][/color]
Despite an election drubbing, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf is adamant he will participate in the next administration. That's fine by Washington - beefing up Musharraf's regime to defeat terrorists has been a cornerstone of America's post-September 11 foreign policy. But the dramatic rise in terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan has shown the failure of this approach and Washington may now be better off putting its weight behind the new parliament and the Pakistani people. - Najum Mushtaq (Feb 21, '08)
[color="#999999"][/color]
Uncertainty on terror's 'central front'
Washington appears unsure whether Pakistan's election results are a setback to US strategic interests or an advance. Embattled President Pervez Musharraf is looking much less "indispensable" as an ally in the US's "war on terror". At the same time, close cooperation with the Pakistani military - which retired general Musharraf commanded until last fall - remains essential. - Jim Lobe (Feb 21, '08)
Washington appears unsure whether Pakistan's election results are a setback to US strategic interests or an advance. Embattled President Pervez Musharraf is looking much less "indispensable" as an ally in the US's "war on terror". At the same time, close cooperation with the Pakistani military - which retired general Musharraf commanded until last fall - remains essential. - Jim Lobe (Feb 21, '08)
Proceed with Caution in Pakistan - The Australian editorial
Pakistan's Milestone on Road to Democracy - Pervez Musharraf, Washington Post
Pakistan Votes for Freedom - Con Coughlin, London Daily Telegraph
Pakistan's Milestone on Road to Democracy - Pervez Musharraf, Washington Post
Pakistan Votes for Freedom - Con Coughlin, London Daily Telegraph
Pakistan’s Elections and the Terror War
By: Jamie Glazov
Terror expert Steve Schippert pinpoints how the election results will handicap American efforts against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
By: Jamie Glazov
Terror expert Steve Schippert pinpoints how the election results will handicap American efforts against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Pakistan opposition parties to form coalition government: The decision leaves embattled President Pervez Musharraf's ruling party in opposition and dramatically alters the balance of power in the nuclear-armed nation.
Proposed Pakistan coalition could oust Musharraf: The leaders of the two top parties in Pakistan's recent election meet on Thursday to discuss forming a coalition government that could force President Pervez Musharraf out of power.
Don't sack Musharraf, US and UK warn election victors: The US and Britain are pressing Pervez Musharraf’s victorious opponents to drop their demands that he resign as president and that the country’s independent judiciary be restored before forming a government.
Bush phones Musharraf after election defeat: Talking with reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Liberia, Perino said Bush has supported Musharraf all along because he "helped Pakistan on its path to democracy." And she said Musharraf has been a good partner in the war against terrorists.
White House, diplomats clash over Pakistan: The Bush administration is pressing the opposition leaders who defeated Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to allow the former general to retain his position, a move Western diplomats and some U.S. officials say could trigger the very turmoil the United States seeks to avoid.
Proposed Pakistan coalition could oust Musharraf: The leaders of the two top parties in Pakistan's recent election meet on Thursday to discuss forming a coalition government that could force President Pervez Musharraf out of power.
Don't sack Musharraf, US and UK warn election victors: The US and Britain are pressing Pervez Musharraf’s victorious opponents to drop their demands that he resign as president and that the country’s independent judiciary be restored before forming a government.
Bush phones Musharraf after election defeat: Talking with reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Liberia, Perino said Bush has supported Musharraf all along because he "helped Pakistan on its path to democracy." And she said Musharraf has been a good partner in the war against terrorists.
White House, diplomats clash over Pakistan: The Bush administration is pressing the opposition leaders who defeated Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to allow the former general to retain his position, a move Western diplomats and some U.S. officials say could trigger the very turmoil the United States seeks to avoid.
[b]Pakistan Post-Election[/b]
Pakistan's two main opposition parties have agreed to form a coalition government following their victory over President Pervez Musharraf's allies in Pakistan’s general elections. Carnegie experts provided post-election analysis on the implications of the February 18 elections.
• Grare: Pakistan Facing 'Governmental Instability'
• Tellis: Pakistan’s Mixed Record on Anti-Terrorism
• Kurlantzick: Déjà Vu All Over Again
• The Pakistani Army and Post-Election Scenarios
• Full list of resources and analysis
Pakistan's two main opposition parties have agreed to form a coalition government following their victory over President Pervez Musharraf's allies in Pakistan’s general elections. Carnegie experts provided post-election analysis on the implications of the February 18 elections. • Grare: Pakistan Facing 'Governmental Instability'
• Tellis: Pakistan’s Mixed Record on Anti-Terrorism
• Kurlantzick: Déjà Vu All Over Again
• The Pakistani Army and Post-Election Scenarios
• Full list of resources and analysis
Clouds gather as 'sulky' Musharraf retreats to bunker: Despite US support, president is isolated in battle for power
President Musharraf may not face the music immediately
Pakistan's two biggest parties should ally- Poll reveals
A PPP-MQM embrace is in the cards
‘Pakistan PM likely named next month’
Pakistan's winning parties urged to restore deposed judges
President Musharraf may not face the music immediately
Pakistan's two biggest parties should ally- Poll reveals
A PPP-MQM embrace is in the cards
‘Pakistan PM likely named next month’
Pakistan's winning parties urged to restore deposed judges
Pakistan, US raise militant tempo
Thursday's missile attack by a US Predator drone in the Pakistan tribal areas has a significance far beyond the dozen or so militants killed. The pilotless craft was launched from a Pakistani airbase - a first - and the targets were hit in an Islamic seminary. In the border regions, these madrassas are widely used by militants to transfer weapons and for meetings - and until now they have fallen under the intelligence radar. - Syed Saleem Shahzad (Feb 29, '08)
Thursday's missile attack by a US Predator drone in the Pakistan tribal areas has a significance far beyond the dozen or so militants killed. The pilotless craft was launched from a Pakistani airbase - a first - and the targets were hit in an Islamic seminary. In the border regions, these madrassas are widely used by militants to transfer weapons and for meetings - and until now they have fallen under the intelligence radar. - Syed Saleem Shahzad (Feb 29, '08)
OpEdNews
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mu...hind_the_te.htm
March 3, 2008
Who Is Behind The Terrorism?
By Muhammad Khurshid
The charge of a Pakistani caretaker minister that the United States and some other countries have been harbouring terrorism in Pakistan has raised several questions in the minds of tribesmen. Now they are asking the question, why are we being killed?
Now it is time for the United States to clear her position. In the US there is feeling that their government had been doing a good job of eliminating terrorism. But here in Pakistan an impression is being given that the US is supporting terrorism.
In its editorial Daily Times discussed the issue. The caretaker interior minister, Lieutenant General (Retd) Hamid Nawaz Khan, has done the predictable thing that he learned in PMA by saying on Saturday that India, Afghanistan and the United States had a hand in the terrorism in Pakistan. He admitted he had no proof of this involvement but that "people" had this perception. His "rational" explanation did not go further than the "circumstantial evidence" that the Taliban-Al Qaeda offensive in Afghanistan had gone down in the same measure as incidents of terrorism had gone up in Pakistan. He said suicide-bombings and other acts of organised violence needed big funding and this could come only from states unfriendly towards Pakistan.
The manner in which the charge was made was meant to be disingenuous; but it reflects lack of intellectual depth. The argument on offer is that that it was the "people's" perception that these foreign powers are behind the trouble. But the framing of the sentence suggests that the establishment is once again ready to spread the evil rumour and make the political environment of Pakistan more toxic. Earlier, a similar charge was made in relation to the uprising which the Musharraf establishment faced in Balochistan. But in that instance, there was some proof in hand and there were some people - definitely excluding the Baloch - who were willing to buy the line.
Some of the national brainwash may accept the India angle contained in this newly refurbished "revelation", but, more dangerously for Islamabad, the entire national psyche is also dying to believe that the United States too is deceiving Pakistan in its overtures of friendship while in fact it is pursuing the agenda of annihilating Muslims wherever they may be found. Since the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai is seen as a useless appendix of the American military dominance in Afghanistan, there is easy access to the domestic mind through an accusation of this kind.
What is the spokesman of the establishment trying to do? Is he expressing the anger of his establishment over the newborn tendency in the Washington establishment to speak with many voices, some of them not as loyal to President Musharraf as they used to be? Is he reacting to the change of tack in the State Department as expressed by its deputy secretary Mr John D Negroponte recently? By tilting at India again, is he reaffirming that Pakistan is miffed at India for not budging on Kashmir? If that is so, then he should know that the military point of view in the policy on Kashmir is passé, and it will bring no kudos to him from anyone who wants Pakistan to survive and grow.
Now let us look at the sub-text of what was said on Saturday. Since three countries are hounding Pakistan through terrorism, it was implied, it becomes incumbent on Pakistan to take countervailing action. But no one knows how our establishment will strike against the United States and deter it from making mischief in Pakistan. At the most we can withdraw the hundred thousand Pakistani soldiers away from the Durand Line and the Tribal Areas, which will of course compel the Americans to switch off the funds to Pakistan that sustain these operations (and possibly others not mentioned, as reported in the foreign media recently) and go after the terrorists directly. Or our establishment can set on feet conspiracies to create chaos in Afghanistan as it did in the 1990s in the name of "strategic depth". In parallel to that, of course, it can teach India a lesson by reviving the old jihad there!
If the news has not reached the relevant quarters then let us inform them for the nth time that in the case of both India and Afghanistan, our "strategic" policies in the past have brought Pakistan nothing but a sense of defeat. These policies of jihad and strategic depth are discredited and Pakistan can adopt them again only at the risk of certain isolation and censure at the global level. It is a blunder of comprehension on the part of such disseminators to think that their message will resonate with the people of Pakistan or the politicians. The people of Pakistan may err now and then in welcoming military rule, but they certainly don't love defeat.
The retort to this line of propaganda has come from the co-chairman of the PPP Mr Asif Zardari who has "de-linked" Kashmir from the process of normalisation of relations with India. In his latest statement delivered on the day the interior minister was delivering himself of his "anti-everybody" wisdom, Mr Zardari gave priority to the pursuit of bilateral trade, giving everybody "time to grow up" in India and Pakistan. The only elements who will buy the line fed by the establishment are the people who are carrying out terrorism in Pakistan, simply because it exonerates them.
The End
Authors Bio: Muhammad Khurshid, a resident of Bajaur Agency, tribal areas situated on Pak-Afghan border is journalist by profession. He contributes articles and news stories to various online and print newspapers. His subject matter is terrorism. He is also heading Voice For Peace working against terrorism in tribal areas. The aim of the Voice For Peace is restoration of peace in Bajaur Agency, tribal areas and whole world. Back
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mu...hind_the_te.htm
March 3, 2008
Who Is Behind The Terrorism?
By Muhammad Khurshid
The charge of a Pakistani caretaker minister that the United States and some other countries have been harbouring terrorism in Pakistan has raised several questions in the minds of tribesmen. Now they are asking the question, why are we being killed?
Now it is time for the United States to clear her position. In the US there is feeling that their government had been doing a good job of eliminating terrorism. But here in Pakistan an impression is being given that the US is supporting terrorism.
In its editorial Daily Times discussed the issue. The caretaker interior minister, Lieutenant General (Retd) Hamid Nawaz Khan, has done the predictable thing that he learned in PMA by saying on Saturday that India, Afghanistan and the United States had a hand in the terrorism in Pakistan. He admitted he had no proof of this involvement but that "people" had this perception. His "rational" explanation did not go further than the "circumstantial evidence" that the Taliban-Al Qaeda offensive in Afghanistan had gone down in the same measure as incidents of terrorism had gone up in Pakistan. He said suicide-bombings and other acts of organised violence needed big funding and this could come only from states unfriendly towards Pakistan.
The manner in which the charge was made was meant to be disingenuous; but it reflects lack of intellectual depth. The argument on offer is that that it was the "people's" perception that these foreign powers are behind the trouble. But the framing of the sentence suggests that the establishment is once again ready to spread the evil rumour and make the political environment of Pakistan more toxic. Earlier, a similar charge was made in relation to the uprising which the Musharraf establishment faced in Balochistan. But in that instance, there was some proof in hand and there were some people - definitely excluding the Baloch - who were willing to buy the line.
Some of the national brainwash may accept the India angle contained in this newly refurbished "revelation", but, more dangerously for Islamabad, the entire national psyche is also dying to believe that the United States too is deceiving Pakistan in its overtures of friendship while in fact it is pursuing the agenda of annihilating Muslims wherever they may be found. Since the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai is seen as a useless appendix of the American military dominance in Afghanistan, there is easy access to the domestic mind through an accusation of this kind.
What is the spokesman of the establishment trying to do? Is he expressing the anger of his establishment over the newborn tendency in the Washington establishment to speak with many voices, some of them not as loyal to President Musharraf as they used to be? Is he reacting to the change of tack in the State Department as expressed by its deputy secretary Mr John D Negroponte recently? By tilting at India again, is he reaffirming that Pakistan is miffed at India for not budging on Kashmir? If that is so, then he should know that the military point of view in the policy on Kashmir is passé, and it will bring no kudos to him from anyone who wants Pakistan to survive and grow.
Now let us look at the sub-text of what was said on Saturday. Since three countries are hounding Pakistan through terrorism, it was implied, it becomes incumbent on Pakistan to take countervailing action. But no one knows how our establishment will strike against the United States and deter it from making mischief in Pakistan. At the most we can withdraw the hundred thousand Pakistani soldiers away from the Durand Line and the Tribal Areas, which will of course compel the Americans to switch off the funds to Pakistan that sustain these operations (and possibly others not mentioned, as reported in the foreign media recently) and go after the terrorists directly. Or our establishment can set on feet conspiracies to create chaos in Afghanistan as it did in the 1990s in the name of "strategic depth". In parallel to that, of course, it can teach India a lesson by reviving the old jihad there!
If the news has not reached the relevant quarters then let us inform them for the nth time that in the case of both India and Afghanistan, our "strategic" policies in the past have brought Pakistan nothing but a sense of defeat. These policies of jihad and strategic depth are discredited and Pakistan can adopt them again only at the risk of certain isolation and censure at the global level. It is a blunder of comprehension on the part of such disseminators to think that their message will resonate with the people of Pakistan or the politicians. The people of Pakistan may err now and then in welcoming military rule, but they certainly don't love defeat.
The retort to this line of propaganda has come from the co-chairman of the PPP Mr Asif Zardari who has "de-linked" Kashmir from the process of normalisation of relations with India. In his latest statement delivered on the day the interior minister was delivering himself of his "anti-everybody" wisdom, Mr Zardari gave priority to the pursuit of bilateral trade, giving everybody "time to grow up" in India and Pakistan. The only elements who will buy the line fed by the establishment are the people who are carrying out terrorism in Pakistan, simply because it exonerates them.
The End
Authors Bio: Muhammad Khurshid, a resident of Bajaur Agency, tribal areas situated on Pak-Afghan border is journalist by profession. He contributes articles and news stories to various online and print newspapers. His subject matter is terrorism. He is also heading Voice For Peace working against terrorism in tribal areas. The aim of the Voice For Peace is restoration of peace in Bajaur Agency, tribal areas and whole world. Back
Pakistan's grand bargain falls apart
Pakistan has no option, given pressure from the United States, but to continue military operations against Taliban and al-Qaeda militants in the tribal areas. Yet under a scheme devised by the new top brass, the militants were to be given an easy ride as long as they retreated to remote border areas. Militants, initially receptive, have shown through a spate of suicide attacks on the military in cities across the country that they are having grave second thoughts. - Syed Saleem Shahzad (Mar 5, '08)
Pakistan has no option, given pressure from the United States, but to continue military operations against Taliban and al-Qaeda militants in the tribal areas. Yet under a scheme devised by the new top brass, the militants were to be given an easy ride as long as they retreated to remote border areas. Militants, initially receptive, have shown through a spate of suicide attacks on the military in cities across the country that they are having grave second thoughts. - Syed Saleem Shahzad (Mar 5, '08)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.