Archive for March, 2010

« Older Entries

Lighting a tinderbox

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

By all accounts, the political situation in the country is tense. The Nation has called the situation ‘a veritable tinderbox.’ Unfortunately, the same newspaper appears to be determined to ignite the same tinderbox, despite the risk to the country.

Mian Nawaz Sharif putting the brakes on the constitutional reforms package along with Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry pressing ahead on cases that have been revived following the NRO nullification has set many people on edge. It is a time when the importance of a fair and dependable media becomes obvious – people need to have the facts before them so that they can evaluate events and make informed judgments.

Rather than providing facts about developments in energy policy, economics, politics, and security – The Nation is publishing editorials designed to increase resentment and fear among the people. Consider the following lines from The Nation:

The only sections of society that seem to be blissfully ignorant of this fast approaching frightening phenomenon are, however, the ruling classes and the rich people.

…an overall moral degradation whose most glaring manifestation is the rampant greed to make illegal gains at the cost of the poor…

…the rulers keep devising ways to skilfully avoid paying taxes, but making sure to levy more and more taxes on the public…

To demonstrate how the rulers are complicit with the rich to exploit the common citizen, the government has let the ordinance of the Competition Commission of Pakistan lapse to give a free rein to the monopolist-industrialists to fix prices and apply a further squeeze on the common man’s dying resources.

This reads more like a paranoid political manifesto than a proper editorial in a respectable newspaper. What possible use is this sort of writing other than to whip up anti-government hysteria?

Today, another newspaper, Dawn reported that Moody’s Investor Service has said that the constant challenge to the the government’s authority and legitimacy is harming the national economy and preventing an increase in foreign direct investment – something The Nation has previously reported is key to economic growth.

In times of distress, people look to the media for facts and information. They read editorials to receive some helpful analysis of the facts by learned people so that they can understand what is going on and make informed opinions of their own about their society. In a proper democracy, a free and fair media is the foundation of a successful government. The Nation seems to be more intent on scoring cheap political points than proper reporting, though, and they are playing a dangerous game throwing matches at a tinderbox.

There is one shining light of hope in The Nation’s editorial. The writers predict that things may come to an explosion in a day that “would not be too far off.” Considering The Nation’s record of successful predictions, that day may never come.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | No Comments »

The Angry Media Act

Sunday, March 28th, 2010

The Angry Media Act

As was noted in the previous post about Zaid Hamid, it is a common misconception to believe that TV talk shows are “real.” What they are is entertainment. Just as WWE wrestling uses incredible and absurd theatrics to entertain people, so do the talk shows. Nadeem Paracha provides a behind the scenes look at this practice by TV producers (and now even other media types) of seeking out and encouraging the most sensational behaviour. For the sake of ratings, will they sacrifice the nation?

A friend of my brother’s, who is also the son of a pesh-imam, once told me an interesting incident. A bright young man doing an MBA, the imam’s son had decided to serve his father’s wish (nay holy insistence) on sporting a long beard. So, back in 2007, during Musharraf’s operation against the Lal Masjid fanatics, his university was visited by a team from a popular TV channel.

The team wanted to talk to some students about the Lal Masjid operation. After conducting a few on-the-spot interviews, the team then went looking for male and female students with beards and hijabs. One of them was the pesh-imam’s son. He was also asked by the team to become a guest on a political talk show. He agreed.

When he reached the studios he found himself among a group of about six more bearded young men and some women in burqas and hijab. They were all selected for the show by the channel from various universities and colleges.

After about half an hour, the assistant producer of the show addressed the students telling them about the format and topic of the show. The producer then told them that the channel expects them to ‘make the show interesting by exhibiting anger and disgust against the government (for its action against the Lal Masjid clerics).’

As a reference some of them were reminded (by the producer) of the way a burqa-clad guest (on the show) had hurled abuses and curses at the government ‘for killing innocent people holed-up (with guns, mind you) in the Lal Masjid.’

When the students were paraded on to the sets of the show, they were at once addressed by the host of the programme: ‘Ghusa karna hai, accha!” (You have to be angry, okay!), he reminded them.

Though the students tried their best to sound angry and offended by the Lal Masjid operation, the host did not seem happy with their performance. So, during the commercial break, he angrily asked the students to be more convincing: “Yeh log aap kay bhai aur bhenoon ko maar rahey hain,’ (These people are killing your brothers and sisters), he announced. “Kya aap ko in pe ghusa nahin araha?” (Aren’t you all feeling angry at them?).

The guest students were bemused because (according to the narrator of this incident), though they were all very ‘Islamic looking’ and conservative, none of them could relate to the militant ways of the Lal Masjid clerics. Just before the show came back on air, the host insisted that the students make a better attempt at exhibiting outrage against the operation.

So they tried again. But to no avail. The host was still not happy. He was, of course, comparing this performance with the one he got from the burqa-clad woman a few days before in which she had wailed and wept, swearing revenge against the government. This incident took place in 2007. Today, almost two years later, can we say that the ways of the Pakistani electronic media have got any better? Hardly. Things have actually gone from bad to worse. Every single day on one news channel or the other viewers can catch hours of terribly biased journalism in which, for example, one can see talk-show hosts running loathsome media trials of certain ‘corrupt’ politicians (as if the hosts and their employers were themselves in-the-clear to cast the first stones at dishonesty).

Worse still is the way some channels give an open floor to what are quite clearly mad men who unabashedly spout hatred and violence in the name of religion and nationalism. So one wonders, what is a bigger crime? A (media-confirmed, not court-proven) corrupt politician or a mad man in the disguise of a talk-show host; a preacher or an ‘expert’ glamorising hatred and violence?

It is quite a sight watching the so-called TV journalists — who would even struggle to win an election of a press club — demonstrating silly smug expressions and tones, behaving as if they were the true saviours of Pakistan. They actually believe this.

However, the truth is, if men (and some women) gladly sacrifice the concept of responsible (and sane) journalism just so they can pull off a sensational show that would win them fame and a bagful of corporate sponsors, if they are the ones claiming a ‘jihad against corruption’ and ‘patriotism,’ then God help us all.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Funeral For Zaid Hamid’s Media Career?

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

Zaid HamidOne common misconception with media occurs when people believe that if someone is on TV, they must be representing the opinions of a large group of people. After all, there are very many people, but only a small few are given airtime on TV.

Zaid Hamid is a a media personality who can be found on more than one TV channel, as well as across the internet. Because of his constant media presence, there is often the belief that his views are popular. However, Hamid’s group of conspiracy theorists has begun to splinter recently, with groups like Pakistan Youth Revolution distancing themselves from him.

Recently, Mr. Hamid staged an event meant to be a large rally of his supporters, but turned out to be a funeral for his career.

Nadeem Paracha explains what happened, and what this means for Zaid Hamid’s media machine, on DawnBlog today.

(more…)

Tags: ,
Posted in Conspiracy Theories | 11 Comments »

Making Constitutional Reform Personal

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

Constitution of PakistanThe latest reports on proposed constitutional changes have brought many examples of a common problem in reporting, particularly about political issues -  making reforms personal.  This is done when reporters or editors suggest in their reports that particular constitutional reforms are aimed at a person rather than an office. In the current discussion, it is not uncommon to read that a particular reform is aimed at ‘clipping Zardari’s powers’, even though the reforms have nothing to do with Zardari, except that he happens to be President at this time. Furthermore, many of the constitutional reforms currently being discussed are actually part of a package of reforms that Zardari campaigned on, so how can they be targeting him personally?

Sunday’s article in The News by Rauf Klasra is an excellent example of this type of poor reporting. Klasra writes,

President Asif Ali Zardari’s sweeping powers to impose emergency in the country will be clipped in the upcoming constitutional amendment package…

…

Likewise, President Asif Ali Zardari’s powers are proposed to be transferred to the judicial commission and parliamentary committee of both the houses of parliament.

The powers described here do not belong to Zardari. They belong to the President. This is an important point to consider. If another person becomes President after the next elections, Zardari would not keep any Presidential powers. The powers belong to the office, not the person.

Consider the way that Rauf Klasra describes other proposed constitutional changes:

…the upcoming constitutional amendment package, which also envisages absolute powers to the Parliamentary Commission to reject, with two-thirds vote majority, any proposed judge of the Supreme Court/high court referred to it by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Notice that Klasra does not write, “referred to it by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan headed by Iftikhar Chaudhry.” This is because Iftikhar Chaudhry happens to be serving as Chief Justice, but he will not always be such. Actually, the office is not the man. So changes to the powers of the office are neither an affront nor a reward to the man.

The Nation also fails to properly report the reforms, also suggesting that the reforms are targeting an individual. In an unsigned report, The Nation writes that,

President Asif Zardari will lose prerogatives under the proposals, which are designed to guarantee the sovereignty of parliament and devolve power to provincial governments in a country plagued by regional insurgencies against the overbearing federal government.

This turgid sentence obviously more rightly belongs on the editorial page than in a news report, but notice that the sentence begins by stating that “President Asif Zardari will lose prerogatives.” Actually, Zardari will not lose any prerogatives, the office of President will return powers that had been previously seized by previous undemocratic governments.

This brings us to the next important point. The tone of many articles, not limited to the two quoted above, suggests that parliament is somehow punishing Zardari with the package of constitutional changes. Actually, Zardari had previously campaigned on returning powers that Generals Ziaul Haq and Musharraf had claimed for themselves.

Even the anti-Zardari newspaper The Nation admits in its editorial that “When [the constitutional reform package] is tabled before and passed by parliament, it will have restored the balance of powers between the president and prime minister…”

The Nation’s editorial goes on to complain that Zardari is including reforms beyond undoing the changes, but they still admit that “This is not to deny that here is a need for some basic constitutional amendments beyond the dictatorial tamperings…”

When reporting on constitutional reforms, journalists need to take a non-political perspective. The changes have long been discussed and are no surprise. Likewise, they are changes to specific offices not specific individuals. To say that “Zardari is having his wings clipped” is incorrect and misleading to the public.

Please save the opinions for the editorial page and only report the facts.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in The Nation, The News | 1 Comment »

The Nation Tries Statistical Sleight of Hand

Monday, March 22nd, 2010

Once again, The Nation has attempted to pull a statistical sleight of hand trick, making claims about the economy that are not supported by the underlying data. While mistakes are somtimes made, this seems to be an ongoing problem for The Nation, and the pattern suggests that the newspapers editors are either not properly reviewing reports before they are published, or are intentionally misleading their readers.

The present case refers to an article published on March 21, 2010 with no byline titled, “Inflation swings upward.” In this article, the author quotes several statistics from the Federal Bureau of Statistics’ Sensitive Price Indicator (SPI) for the Week Ended March 18, 2010 which can be downloaded here.

All of the statistics quoted by The Nation are based on week-by-week changes. While these are certainly interesting numbers, they are too micro-focused to be able to correctly identify a trend. It is as if a batsman hit a six, and his team was declared winning even though they were behind 272 overall. Better is to look at statistics over a period of time to determine what the trends are.

Monthly, Quarterly,and Half-yearly SPI statistics are published on page 3 of the FBS report, but these statistics were not quoted by The Nation.

Looking at these statistics presents a much different picture than what The Nation tries to paint for its readers. While there has been some increase over recent months, SPI has actually been fairly stable.

Also, SPI is only one metric in measuring economic growth. The Nation appears to have latched onto this as a convenient way to attempt to paint the present government as insensitive to the most vulnerable citizens. However, financial reporting by respected business media paint a very different picture of the economy at present.

BusinessWeek reported on March 11 that “Pakistan Inflation Slows in February for First Time in 4 Months.”

Pakistan’s inflation slowed in February for the first time in four months, giving the central bank room to cut interest rates and support economic growth.

The Nation also does not mention that the statistics that it quotes are for the week ending March 18th. In the weeks prior to this, there was no Finance Minister at the helm of the economy. It was only then that Abdul Hafeez Shaikh was named Finance Minister.

Inflation in the economy is a difficult problem to solve even for nations that are not suffering near-daily attacks from terrorist militants. The media should be presenting good information to the people so that they can make informed decisions and help government leaders to create the conditions for a prosperous economy that benefits everyone. Playing games with numbers and presenting misleading statistics is not only bad journalism, it’s bad for the country.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | No Comments »

The Real Story

Sunday, March 21st, 2010

A regular theme on Pakistan Media Watch is that too many of our so-called journalists do not report or comment on actual issues that are affecting the lives of real Pakistanis. In some way, this is not a surprise. Too many of the elite media personalities are wealthy and privileged and removed from real life. There are no ordinary Pakistanis invited to their drawing room discussions.

Today’s editorial in The News is a great reminder that we need less of this elitist, out-of-touch chatter from the privileged few, and more news reporting and commentary that matters to real Pakistanis.

We have more discussion on news and current events than ever before. On TV channels, in newspapers and, as a consequence of this flow of information, in teashops and roadside corners, we have almost ceaseless talk on the doings of politicians and the rather bleak scenario we face as a nation. The almost-daily acts of terrorism we see, the corruption allegations that pour forth and, lately, the ill-chosen comments of the Punjab CM on the Taliban, all form a part of this discourse. But do we have any spokesmen who can raise their voice on behalf of ordinary people? Is there anyone to comment on the concerns nearest to their hearts and thoughts? These issues include unemployment – which has been rising steadily for years – and the frustration it generates, most notably among the young. There is the question too of lawlessness and consequent social chaos, of poverty and the inability of people to live with a modicum dignity. In all our major cities, we see ‘qabza’ groups who often prey on the most vulnerable. The dwellers of katchi abadis have in many cases, most notably in Karachi, been forced out of their shanties by such mafias. Others have never had a home of any kind in the first place. The thousands of pavement-dwellers are a testimony to this. Drug addiction is rampant, human-smuggling rackets widespread and social despair at an all time high.

These then are the real things of life for most people. In some ways at least they matter more than political developments – though of course all this is inter-connected. The question is whether our parliament has the will and foresight to take up these matters. Or does, for that matter, our media? We need some quarter to forcefully raise these issues, convert them into a national priority and, by doing so, pull people into the mainstream of political happenings. Our leaders need to realize that unless they succeed in doing this, democracy may survive but it will never thrive. Too many of our public representatives have lost contact with their constituents. They need to re-establish it and visit the areas from where they were elected. They must, at the very least, hear the voices of their people and take them to the National Assembly. The media too must play its part in all this. A country, after all, is more than a stretch of territory. Its people make up its heart and soul. For this reason, these people need to be put on centre stage rather than relegated to the sidelines of national life.

Posted in The News | 1 Comment »

Are So-Called Defense Experts Really Connected?

Friday, March 19th, 2010

Interesting article received from a dear reader by email. It raises the question of why some journalists who are considered defense experts were not invited to a recent press briefing by the military. As always, please write in your tips and articles to pakistanmediawatch@gmail.com!

Not invited

A few weeks ago, Army Chief Gen. Kiyani invited editors and columnists to a press briefing. Interestingly, Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood were not invited. Was this an intentional snub by the military brass to send a clear signal that these people do not speak for the military? Or was it just that these journalists are so irrelevant that the Army did not think to invite them?

Usually, if a reporter is truly close to the establishment, they are not only invited, they are given special access like a closed door briefing before the official briefing so that they can get background statements from the officials. These four not only got no invitation to a closed door briefing, they were not even invited to the regular press briefing!

Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood are well known for claiming to be unofficial experts on the Pakistani establishment – especially the military. They are always saying that they have spoken to high up sources, even when what they say turns out to be wrong. But it seems from this latest snub that they are not as connected as they claim to be.

Ahmed Quraishi and Shireen Mazari in particular tend to represent ‘old think’ on security issues. They support a military coup and for the military to cut iself off from allied powers and are opposed to the present democracy and the way that Gen. Kiyani is working with the government.

While each of them probably has some contacts from the military, it could be that their contacts may not be current military leaders. Also, it could be that their sources are actually retired military or ex-military who supported the Musharraf and Zia dictatorships and are filling their heads with false information rather than accurate information in attempt to disrupt the actual policies of the current military establishment.

If this is the case, it makes sense for them not to receive invitations to press briefings by the military brass. The military leadership would recognize them as working for elements that are opposing the actual plans and policies of Gen. Kiyani and his staff so they would refuse them any invitations.

None of these media personalities will reveal who their sources are, so we do not know if this is the case. It could be that sometimes their sources do not exist at all, but are simply invented in order to give their articles and talk shows some air of authority that is missing. But it seems very apparent that if they cannot even get an invitation to a public press briefing, they probably do not have sources that are very high up.

Was this a calculated snub? Is it because Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood do not represent the Army? Are Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood reflecting an old mindset from the past that the present establishment wants to distance itself from? Or does the military brass think that Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood are just too irrelevant to bother inviting them?

Whatever the answers are, one thing is made clear by the snub – Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood obviously do not speak for the military.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

The Nation’s Response to Shahbaz Sharif Is Bizarre

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

One can often tell much about a media group not only by how they approach broadly reported topics. Take, for example, the recent case of Punjab CM Shahbaz Sharif’s statements about TTP ’sparing’ Punjab. The way that The Nation responded to Shahbaz Sharif’s controversial statements was completely bizarre, and speaks volumes about the newspaper’s editorial staff.

Many  media organizations have reported on the various developments – from Shahbaz’s original statements, to his dressing down by Gen. Kiyani, to his complaints that he was misinterpreted – with some attempt at being neutral and trying to get the facts for their readers.

The Nation, on the other hand, took a completely different, and somewhat bizarre, approach. Shahbaz Sharif made some controversial statements about Punjab and Taliban, and Shireen Mazari and her crew wrote that it was about…America?

Most bizarrely, however, is The Nation’s statement that, “As a leader of national standing, he should have known that the entire country thinks on the same line and should be safe from the curse.” What does the entire country agree with? That we are tired of terrorism and the Taliban attacks, surely. But this is not the controversial part of the Punjab Chief Minister’s statement.

Even the right-wing newspaper The News (Jang) has published an editorial saying that Shahbaz Sharif spoke “thoughtlessly and insensitively,” but going on to ask the country to take it as a lesson for building unity. In this way, The News was able to balance their political ideology with a constructive message.

But for The Nation to suggest that the entire country agrees with Shahbaz Sharif is very, very strange.

As a contrast, the next day, statements by Interior Minister Rehman Malik about the recovery of a Pakistani ID card from the possession of Abdolmalik Rigi were called by The Nation, “Verbal Recklessness.” Obviously The Nation will not write something positive or forgiving about Rehman Malik, and nor do they need to. But it is instructive to see how differently these two events are described by the same newspaper.

Shahbaz Sharif has complained that media are twisting his words. But the biggest twisting has to be from The Nation who, despite being sympathetic to the Punjab Chief Minister, twisted his words in a way that befuddles any amount of logic. The response by The Nation was bizarre, but in it’s strangeness it actually represents the newspaper’s ideology pretty well.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | No Comments »

Pakistani media and the romance with “Secret Map”

Monday, March 15th, 2010

This post from Anas Abbas the Let Us Build Pakistan blog contains a thorough rebuttal to the conspiracies that have been built around the “secret map” of the breakup of Pakistan.

Lately, Pakistani media has been propagating the perception that a secret map by U.S. military official Lt. Col Ralph Peters was issued in 2006  to safeguard Israeli security interest and to balkanize Pakistan.

This map has been quite frequently used by Zaid Hamid, journalist Ahmed Qureshi, DR Shireen Mazari, DR Shahid Masood and many others to highlight the American, Indian and Israeli conspiracy in balkanizing Pakistan. This eventually gave them a strong foundation to form their conspiracy theories in order to blame America and its allies rather than Taliban or local terrorists for the attacks in Pakistan.

The map is below:

According to these conspiracy theorists, the above map is a part of a secret plan devised to achieve Israeli security, American energy interests in Baluchistan and Indian long time desire for the disintegration of Pakistan.

Here is the link of a so called security report from Zaid Hamids’ website that is using this map as the best source of evidence against the so called enemies of Islam.

http://brasstacks.pk/pdfs/policypapers/PNACPolicyPaper.pdf

This second link is to a video where he  analyzes the map and highlights the Israeli security interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBPKBgRSH34

Also refer to this “DR”Shireen Mazari article where this map was again used as an evidence for Pakistan’s balkanization.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Columns/21-Oct-2009/Pakistan-trapped-in-the-US-game-plan

Rebuttal of this map hysteria:

Ralph Peters is a retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel, novelist and respected expert on military and intelligence issues just like experts in Pakistan such as General Hamid Gul,  Mirza Aslem Baig or Talat Masood.

http://www.pritzkermilitarylibrary.org/events/2005/09-21-ralph-peters.jsp (About Ralph Peters)

Let us see how this map is in favour of Israeli security interest.

Before this, let me ask Zaid Hamid, his followers, and other conspiracy theorists the following questions:

•     Mr Zaid Hamid, et al, has anyone of you ever attended a math class in school?

•     What grades did you obtain in your technical subjects at University?

•     Do all of you have fake degrees just like the former minister for religious affairs in Pakistan (Amir Liaquat Husain)

Are all of you so blind in your misperceived patriotism and false pride that you have conveniently ignored a major section of this map by Ralph Peters?

Well my readers must be wondering why I am asking these questions

Hang on.

Can anyone tell me what a “map key” is?

I can find the best definition of map key here:

“A map key is a list of words or phrases or colors — usually within a box in the corner of the map — that usually explains the symbols that that are found on the map itself. Also referred to as a “legend.” (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_map_key)

This is the accepted definition of a map key. I doubt that the conspiracy theorists interpret the map of Ralph Peters through the key provided.

Below is the key extract from the above map.

Now what is this key telling us?

It’s indicating that in this map, those countries that are named in black are gaining territory and those in red are losing territory. There are also those countries shown in the map in grey that neither lose nor gain territory.

Now the most blatant error that Zaid Hamid and Co. are making here is to miss out a fundamental point about Israel’s name in Ralph Peters’ map (Remember red means losing territory)

Please see below the extract from the map showing Israel’s name in red which means the country is losing territory.

How come this map is in favour of Israel and how is it possible that this is anywhere successful in achieving Israeli security (by Zaid Hamid) when the map itself is showing Israel losing significant territory to Jordon and Lebanon?

In other words how is Israel achieving its so called goal to balkanize Pakistan by simultaneously balkanizing itself?

This is typical of conspiracy theorists like Zaid Hamid and Shireen Mazari that they distort every piece of information and manipulate it to serve the interest of their paranoia. In this map they are only highlighting the balkanization of Pakistan, conveniently ignoring Israeli territorial loss

Full marks should be given to the gullible followers of the conspiracy theorists who can’t even analyse a simple map key and instead choose to blindly follow their baseless diatribe against this map.

Now let’s look at this article from Ralph Peters which came along with this map in the United States Monthly Military magazine in the year 2006.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899/ (Please read it)

In this article titled “How a better Middle East would look” Ralph Peters carried out an experiment by hypothetically changing the borders of certain countries in the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa to address the concerns of the oppressed people in these restive regions. Some of these concerns are:

  • Baluchistan in Pakistan: the Baloch people have been deprived of their rights and fair share on local resources by the Pakistani Establishment. Not to mention the killings of thousands in army operations, extra judicial killings, kidnappings and mass tortures by the security forces which have added to the Balouchi peoples’ misery.
  • The Pasthun Durand line, which has divided the Pashtun tribes in two countries (Pakistan and Afghanistan), has been a source of unrest and hostility for decades.
  • Gaza, West Bank and Golan Heights: thousands of innocent Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli Security Forces through cluster bombs, chemical weapons, aerial bombardment and through brutal oppressive tactics like blocking the supply of electricity and water in the name of security concern by the Israeli forces. Also, many Israeli citizens have been a victim of suicide bombings and indiscriminate killings by Palestinian Movements.
  • Similar territorial issue’s in Iraqi region of Kurdistan which fought with Saddam regime on autonomy and has been a victim of a genocide called Al – Anfal campaign where Saddam Hussein’s regime massacred thousands of Kurds.

Ralph Peters map was merely just a recommendation based on his personal opinion rather than a clear directive of US Foreign Policy by Department of Defence or CENTCOM.

In fact the journal his article was published in has clearly stated its guidelines here:

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/custserv/guidelines/ (Please read the “who we are” section)

According to their website “Armed Forces journal” is a military magazine where retired or current US military officers share their opinions, analysis and reviews on military policy, defence issues, technology, logistics and tactics. It is senseless to think that this journal dictates US foreign policy.

If it is assumed that Armed Forces Journal dictates American foreign policy then why the same journal has an article extremely critical of (War on Terror) Iraq war and the Blackwater security company (Now known as XE).

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/10/2865287/ (Iraq War)

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2009/01/3889281/ (Trail for Blackwater agents)

Also if conspiracy theorists label Ralph Peter’s map as a doctrine of US foreign policy then they contradict their most cherished claim that Israel and Jews rule America. This is because according to Peters’ map Israel is ceding its territories by withdrawing to pre 1967 borders

Interestingly, HAMAS, a political organization classified as “terrorists” by the US, demands the same territorial retreat from Israel as shown in the above hypothetical map. This demand is also accepted by Palestinian Liberation Organization’s chief Mahmoud Abbas and was also the recommendation of the UN Security Council resolution 242.

Please refer to these references for HAMAS’s stance and UN Resolution:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2008/04/2008615098393788.html

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/94/IMG/NR024094.pdf?OpenElement

A similar article was recently released by a prominent Chinese based think-tank called China International Institute for Strategic Studies that caused massive uproar in the Indian media as the article advocated the balkanization of their country into different states based on several ethnicities.

However after mass hysteria in the media, the spokesperson of the Indian ministry of external affairs clarified to them that the article was representing only the personal opinion of an analyst rather than anything to do with the official Indo –Chinese bilateral relations.

Hence after carefully interpreting the Ralph peter’s map, we can safely reach the conclusion that the map was based on a hypothetical analysis, merely recommending that Pakistan, Israel and some other states give up territories in order to accommodate the demands of the oppressed people and to somehow bring peace in these restive regions.

If an opinion from an individual analyst, journalist or think tank is taken to represent the official policy of a country then how should one interpret former ISI’s chief General Hamid Gul statements in favour of balkanaizing India? Should this also be considered an official declaration by the Chief of Army Staff or the President of Pakistan?

Please refer to this many video of Hamid Gul legitimizing Indian balkanization

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N-uoukDCD0&feature=related

Also refer to this Hamid Gul’s article:

http://generalhamidgul.com/pakarticles/18-pakistan/237-mein-bharat-kay-tukray-tukray-hota-dekhna-chahta-hoon

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Conspiracy Theories | 3 Comments »

Wishful Journalism (part 3): The Firing of Hussain Haqqani

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

President Zardari may be the most popular person for the “Wishful Journalists” to try to pray out of office, but he is not the only one. In part 2 of the Wishful Journalism series, we looked at the case of Rehman Malik. Today, we consider Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States, Hussain Haqqani, and the journalists who have been wishing for his removal for almost two years.

Sajjad Malik recently wrote in Daily Times, “Rumours rife about Haqqani’s removal”:

Rumours about the removal of Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US Hussain Haqqani are once again making rounds in the Foreign Office, with several top diplomats pulling strings to step into his shoes.

Senior diplomatic sources said the rumours about possible removal of Haqqani had gained momentum amid reports that the US may not oppose his replacement because of his widespread unpopularity among khakis.

Malik’s article goes on to not name anyone who actually says Haqqani is being removed. But this is an old line. Last November, Anjum Niaz wrote that the Army was going to “pull the plug on our leaders” in which she predicted the end of the Zardari government and the imminent firing of Haqqani from his post. Obviously, this never happened.

Anjum Niaz went on to suggest that Haqqani could not return to Pakistan because he would be in danger if he returned to his homeland.

“The [Pakistani] military clearly has decided that it would like to have him removed,” says The Boston Globe, citing a congressional aide not authorised to speak to the media. “If he returned home, friends say, his safety could be threatened,” reports the Globe. “Haqqani hasn’t returned to Islamabad for eight months.”

Actually, Haqqani was just in Pakistan where he met with the President and Gen. Kayani to discuss national security matters.

The president said the US drone attacks on Pakistani territory undermined national consensus on the war against terrorism.

Zardari expressed these views during a meeting with US National Security Adviser General James Jones – accompanied by US Ambassador to Islamabad Anne W Patterson and other US officials – who called on him at the Presidency.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Finance Minister Shaukat Tareen, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kayani, Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir and Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US Hussain Haqqani were also present at the meeting.

Anjum Niaz appears to have very unreliable sources, if they even exist.

As for the latest rumours of his imminent removal, these all appear to have started from the same source: an article in The Nation by Kaswar Klasra. Of course, this article also contains no sources, and appears to be based only on speculation and wishful thinking. What is missing from Klasra’s article, in fact, are statements from the Foreign Office or the Embassy. Any proper reporter worth his weight in salt would call the official offices to inquire about these rumours. I don’t know if Klasra took the time to call anyone, but he certainly did not report what answers he was given if he did.

I decided to check for myself to see if there is any truth to these rumours, so I called the Foreign Office and I called the Embassy in Washington. I was told by both offices that there was no plan to remove Mr. Haqqani, and that the rumours were just that — rumours.

But at this point, rumours of Haqqani being removed are a little bit ridiculous. After all, he has almost completed his entire appointment of two years, and has even served longer than other previous Ambassadors to the USA:

Ashraf Qazi served as Ambassador to the USA from 19 August 2002 to 6 August 2004. General (Retd) Jehangir Karamat served as Ambassador from 17 November 2004 to 3 June 2006. Maj. Gen (Retd) Mahmud Ali Durrani served from 5 June 2006 to 9 May 2008.

Hussain Haqqani began his term as Ambassador on 26 May 2008. He has been in this office for almost his entire two year appointment, despite the rather constant predictions of his removal.

Here, I will make some predictions of my own. Gen. Kayani is scheduled to retire in November. When he retires from his post, nobody will say that he was forced out. He will have served his appointment and that will be that. These same reporters,  even if Haqqani completes his appointment, will say that he is being forced out. There will likely be some unnamed ’sources’ that say that he was not offered an extension because he is viewed unfavorably. But is there any evidence for this? Looking at history, as we did above, the answer is no.

It is not for this blog to take any position on Hussain Haqqani and whether he should be Ambassador, or if he should be offered an extension of his appointment. There are plenty of people who have their own opinions about his performance, and they are entitled to whatever opinion they want. But Haqqani has served as Ambassador for almost his entire term, and longer than previous Ambassadors. Please, leave the wishful thinking to drawing rooms and verandas and publish proper facts in the news.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries