Benazir Bhutto Case: Access Denied is Justice Denied – by Anas Muhammad

This year began with a blow to the UN investigation into Benazir Bhutto’s murder, as the commission was denied access to the top brass military and intelligence officials. The three member commission, which was investigating the facts and circumstances that lead to former Prime Minister Ms Benazir Bhutto’s murder, was not allowed to interview the Army chief along with several other officials.

Dawn News reported that the government had denied the commission access to:

the Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, former ISI Chief Lt.Gen Nadeem Taj and former Military Intelligence Chief Lt.Gen Nadeem Ejaz Mian among other top officials of the intelligence agencies.

Now the commission that was supposed to present the final report at the end of 2009, has extended its investigation for another three months.

These recent developments seem to raise many questions, some of which might suggest the role of radical establishment into the murder of Benazir Bhutto. In the light of what has already been presented, along with some historic facts, we can begin to derive certain conclusions.

Benazir, returning Pakistan after a long period of self exile, knew of the dangers she faces upon her return. She had been warned by many friends outside and in Pakistan of the dangers and threats to her life. Her life as a politician has always been at risk, as she had inherited enemies and dangers along with her party after her dad was executed by a very extremist dictator Gen. Zia-ul-Haq. She had known of the threats and the people who have vowed to kill her. By the time she started politics, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq had managed to infect the establishment of Pakistan with an extremist mind-set and jihadi agenda. He had filled the intelligence agencies and the army with the people who had jihadi ideology and agendas for Afghanistan, and very close ties to terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda and Taliban.

The powerful intelligence agency ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), not only had its links with jihadi militants, but also with politicians. The agency managed to create a coalition of powerful right-wing (Islami Jamhoori Ittehad) that would challenge Benazir’s popularity and undermine her control over the government. The then ISI chief Hamid Gul was in-charge of this whole operation. He used all his resources and money to manipulate the politics of Pakistan. He along with Al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden, committed failed attempts to assassinate Ms. Bhutto.

It is no surprise that Ms. Bhutto listed Hamid Gul as one of the conspirators, who might attempt to kill her. She did this in a letter to then President Pervez Musharraf, after a failed attempt to assassinate her in Karachi upon her arrival to Pakistan. She also identified Ejaz Shah (IB Cheif), an intelligence official who was put in-charge of her security in Karachi.

Ejaz Shah (Nadeem Ejaz) is also one of the people to whom UN probe was denied access to. He is a friend of Musharraf and Muhammad Aziz, the man who orchestrated the overthrow of Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister in the October, 1999. He was the creator of Musharraf’s party PML-Q and a special friend of the Chaudhries, the rightist political rivals of Benazir Bhutto. He was also a key figure in breaking more than 20 members of the National Assembly from the PPP after the 2002 elections. He was the ISI’s handling officer of Osama Bin Laden and Mulla Omar. And also had ties with extremist leader Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, with whom he kidnapped and killed American journalist Danial Pearl. And it was on his and, a close friend of Musharraf’s, Maj. Gen. Nadeem Taj’s advice Chief Justice Chaudhry Iftikhar was sacked. Gen. Taj was the director ISI when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. He is also one of the official to whom UN probe access has been denied.

It is widely believed that the Intelligence agencies of Pakistan are fully capable of removing any political opponent they deem not fit for their pro-taliban and proxy war agendas. The view that has also been expressed in a report on the Henry Jackson Society’s – an independent foreign policy organization – website.

President General (retired) Pervez Musharraf’s military and intelligence colleagues were, for example, responsible for the killing of two democratic, secular and anti-Taliba’an leaders from the rebel Pakistani province of Baluchistan. The former Governor and Chief Minister, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, was assassinated in 2006,[1] Mir Balaa’ch Marri was bumped off last November.[2] These murders are evidence that Musharaaf’s men are capable of the assassination of political opponents

As we know that Benazir has always been the target of these extremist segments of Pakistani establishment, it was only under the shadow of Musharraf’s dictatorship they succeeded in eliminating her. She posed greatest threat to extremism, as she wanted to change the direction of Pakistani society, away from the agendas of these extremists, and towards progress and democracy.

They knew that Benazir has an agenda to clip off the wings of the powerful establishment and its terrorist proxies. One example of it comes from the American Congress’s Kerry-Lugar Act, which was her idea of bringing America on the side of democracy rather than military dictatorships. She knew that the only legitimacy and the source of power for dictators and its agencies is the west and its aid. If she manages to get the Americans to aid democracy and condition the aid to the promotion of democracy, only then will the establishment weaken and democracy will strengthen. Farahnaz Ispahani described the then Biden-Lugar Bill as:

This Biden-Lugar bill reflects the shift in the way Americans look towards Pakistan as an ally, this time focusing on the people of Pakistan rather than its military alone. The role of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and the decades- long struggle by the Pakistan People’s Party to put Pakistan’s people first must get credit for persuading American leaders to broaden their outlook towards Pakistan. The Biden-Lugar bill is actually the result of the vision of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. She often espoused her vision of a different kind of relationship between Pakistan and the United States. Mohtarma Shaheed always advocated and lobbied for greater support by the US government for non-military projects in Pakistan, terming it the only way that the Pakistani masses would be able to trust the United States and to see it as a friend not a master.

Recently, with the dissatisfaction of Kerry-Lugar Act by the establishment, it has become very evident that whenever pushed the establishment will use its full muscle. It was very apparent how the establishment manipulated the politicians and the media coverage to direct the debate to favor its views.

Benazir came to Pakistan with the clear agenda of democracy and reconciliation with all her opponents. She managed to strip Musharraf off of his uniform and made him drop all charges against all politicians that were not proven under his term. She made sure that democracy returns to Pakistan and the establishment loses its biggest strength, the political players and politically motivated cases, that can be used to manipulate the government to their liking as they have before.

Benazir Bhutto’s party came to power, knowing  of the involvement of establishment and its powerful high ranking officials in Benazir’s murder, they decided to have the United Nations investigate the case. UN has also hit the wall and it is very unlikely that the military will let one of its own get punished, at-least knowing their history we cannot expect that to happen anytime soon. Pakistan is a very unpredictable country, what happens next, only time will tell. For now the justice seems to be denied.

Related articles:

Benazir Bhutto murder case takes new turn as officials hunt for retired and serving army men

UN team grills close aide of Musharraf in Bhutto murder

17 responses to “Benazir Bhutto Case: Access Denied is Justice Denied – by Anas Muhammad”

  1. It is sad to see that the PPP leadership is negotiating with the killers in order to stay in the corridors of power.

    Thanks, Anas, for writing on this.

    Here are a few related articles:

    Ban announces UN commission on Benazir’s murder: Bad new for the jihadi-ISI alliance in Pakistan?

    Benazir Bhutto’s UN murder probe —Khalid Hasan

    Who is Gilani trying to please? by Omar Khattab

  2. On a related note, given that the Supreme Court of Pakistan is enjoying its newly won ‘freedom’, let us hope that CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry will take a suo moto notice, instructing our Generals to cooperate with the UN Commission. Similarly, let us hope that the flag-bearers of the ISI sponsored “Aman ki (limited) Aasha” in Pakistani media will pay a little bit of attention to Pakistani Generals’ hesitation to answer certain questions by the UN Inquiry Team.

    We will see many faces exposed in the next few days.

  3. Jang Group & Shaheen Sehbai VS Saudi Arabia.

    WASHINGTON, October 17: Dear Readers, this is the final piece on the South Asia Tribune, as this site is now being closed for good. I understand that it may come as a rude shock to many and may create despair and depression for all those who had started to look up to SAT as a beacon of courage and resistance, but this decision has been based on many factors, which I will explain briefly. SAT would be on line for the rest of this month, till the end of October. On November 1, 2005 it will disappear from the Internet. All those who may be interested in keeping a record of any SAT article or report can save it any time before that date. REFERENCE: The Final Word from theSouth Asia Tribune By Shaheen Sehbai WASHINGTON DC, Oct 17, 2005 ISSN: 1684-2057

    Mr Shaheen Sehbai (former correspondent of Daily Dawn; former editor of The News; ex Director News of ARY ONE TV Channel; former director of GEO News Network; and presently Group Editor the News), escaped from Pakistan to save himself from the so-called wrath of the establishment headed by General Musharraf, after the controversy surrounding his story about the murder of Daniel Pearl. It was apparently simply to obtain the Green Card for himself, and his family in the United States. Mr Sehbai then started to run a web based news service, i.e., South Asia Tribune, funded through dubious sources, but he suddenly reappeared and closed his website. During his self-imposed exile in the USA, he used to raise hue and cry against the military establishment that he and his family members’ life was in danger, but the so-called danger suddenly vanished after the whole family getting the Green Cards. He then returned to Pakistan and that too under the same Musharraf regime, and joined ARY TV channel, then GEO, and then the News, where he is presently working.

    Now as to how Jang Group/The News International plays with the National Interest of Pakistan.


    By Shaheen Sehbai in Washington and Rauf Klasra in Islamabad Vol-2, Jul 27-Aug 02, 2002 ISSN:1684-0275 Vol-2, Jul 27- Aug 02, 2002 ISSN:1684-0275

    It can only be called mind boggling. Something very mysterious and fishy was going on between the Saudi Royal family and General Musharraf’s government prior to September 11 WTC attacks. Or, as the Pakistan Ambassador to the Royal Kingdom hinted, someone was trying to use the name of the Saudi royals to promote some hidden agenda in Pakistan under the garb of huge investments. Documents in Pakistani Government files show that on Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz’s invitation, a Saudi prince had offered to invest close to $10 billion in Pakistan, an offer which was unprecedented in Pakistani and Saudi history. The money would have come over a few years but $300 million were immediately made available and the Saudis were very eager to get things off the ground, as if in a great rush.

    The offer was so serious General Musharraf himself wrote a letter to the Saudi prince, inviting him to Islamabad. The prince wrote back accepting the invitation and first sent his representatives to do the ground work. The Saudis wanted to invest in four key sectors: Renew a whole new city project near capital Islamabad (a project launched by the Benazir Bhutto government but later abandoned); take over country’s second largest and lucrative Habib Bank of Pakistan; build an oil refinery in Port city of Karachi; and build or buy a five star hotel. The projections of investment were $4 billion in the city project, $2 billion for the oil refinery, $2-3billion for Habib Bank and $100 million for the five-star hotel.

    This mysterious story began with secret negotiations between the two sides sometime in beginning of 2000 resulted in General Pervez Musharraf dispatching a letter on Nov 6, 2002 to Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz, said to be Chairman of the little known International Islamic Development Trust (IIDT) and International Infrastructure Development Company (IIDC). (Click to view the image).

    The prince had accepted to be Chairman of the company on April 9, 2000 vide a signed letter (Click to view the image). URL:

    The highly pleased prince responded with his own letter to General Musharraf dated Nov 30, 2000 in which he disclosed that a team of IIDC/IIDT was already “in serious negotiations” with Pakistani officials as he was writing the reply. (Click to view the image).

    General Musharraf was asked to give an audience to the prince’s man, IIDT President one Mr Saeed Akhtar, who, he wrote, “can brief you in person (about) the avenues we are seeking for cooperation and investment.” It is not clear whether General Musharraf received Saeed Akhtar but in two letters sent to the Board of Investment, Government of Pakistan, on Dec 14 and Dec 20, 2000, IIDT and its subsidiary SUNWAYCO, gave details of the proposed investments. Ambassador Asad Durrani says SUNWAYCO was not a Saudi-backed company and no royal family member was involved. He also disputes that Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz had anything to do with these offers but he says Prince Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz has been investing in Pakistan. The documents in Pakistan Government files, however, mention Prince Sultan Bin Turki and his signatures, genuine or forged, are there on at least three documents. It is not clear whether General Musharraf received Saeed Akhtar but in two letters sent to the Board of Investment, Government of Pakistan, on Dec 14 and Dec 20, 2000, IIDT and its subsidiary SUNWAYCO, gave details of the proposed investments. Ambassador Asad Durrani says SUNWAYCO was not a Saudi-backed company and no royal family member was involved. He also disputes that Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz had anything to do with these offers but he says Prince Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz has been investing in Pakistan. The documents in Pakistan Government files, however, mention Prince Sultan Bin Turki and his signatures, genuine or forged, are there on at least three documents. The first detailed SUNWAYCO offer was made in a letter dated Dec 20, 2000 and said in part: “We take this opportunity to introduce our group as investors from Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries including overseas Pakistanis, headed by His Royal Highness Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz, under the name of International Islamic Development Trust (IIDT) incorporated under the laws of Bahamas with the base capital of US$ 3.8 billion.” (Click to view the image




    “The Trust activities include diverse economic fields but mainly it helps and assists in the social and infrastructure development sectors and human development particularly in the Muslim developing countries,” the letter said, disclosing that “IIDT has already budgeted for an initial investment of $1 billion in Pakistan during the next 12 months with a firm commitment for further investments in different mega projects in years to come. We have already approached the concerned authorities..” it said, giving details of the four sectors and the expected investment totaling over $9 billion. IIDT has already approved an initial financing of $200 million and $100 million as a soft term loan for the Islamabad New City Project. The money is available for immediate dispersal, the letter said.

    The Board of Investment responded to the offer on Jan 2, 2001 saying the proposals were being sent to different ministries for consultations and when their views are available, the BOI will revert to you.(Click to view the image). URL:

    A copy of the proposals was faxed to the Pakistan Ambassador in Saudi Arabia, Lt. General (Retd) Asad Durrani, a former head of Pakistan’s infamous Inter-Services intelligence agency, the ISI. That is when the trouble for the Saudis began.

    On Jan 15, 2001, Gen Asad Durrani sent a letter to the Board of Investment writing, inter alia, that the Prince’s company was fake and “cannot be entrusted responsibility for huge projects for which it has shown interest.”

    The Durrani letter was a bomb shell for many and only he knows why he kicked out proposals for billions of dollars of investment, dismissing the company as fake. The written reason Durrani gave for his judgment was that “the company is not known in business circles of Saudi Arabia, the phone numbers given do not belong to it, and faxes sent to the prince have remained unanswered.” (Click to view the image). URL:

    Later talking to the SA Tribune on phone from Riyadh on Tuesday, July 23, 2002, Gen. Durrani confirmed that he had blocked the offer as it looked suspicious with apparently no connection to the Saudi Royal Family. He said two Pakistanis met him in connection with the proposed investments but he found them to be suspicious and could not believe they were able to invest billions of dollars in Pakistan. “Straightaway, whenever someone comes and gives you such a project, you should get suspicious…If I were to go and make these claim that I want to invest 12billion dollars, people will throw me out of the room, I suppose,” General Durrani said. (Click to hear Interview). On Jan 20, 2001 the Board of Investment issued a letter saying in view of Gen. Durrani’s comments, the Saudi investments “chapter should be closed.”

    The Saudis were enraged, so say the least, and felt embarrassed and insulted. But in Pakistani files a letter of Prince Sultan is available which appears to be another desperate attempt to revive the project. This letter is addressed strangely enough to the then Chairman of the National Accountability Bureau, Lt. General Maqbool, now Governor of Punjab province, with copies to Gen. Musharraf’s office and Board of Investment. In this letter dated March 7, 2001, the Prince wrote that the IIDT had already started work on the oil refinery while the purchase of Habib Bank was under negotiations. (Click to view the image) URL:

    The letter emphasized that IIDT was ready for final negotiations and urged the NAB Chairman to complete these negotiations “under your personal auspices” at the earliest. Why was an accountability bureau chief being asked to take over the investment portfolio is not only mysterious but unexplained.

    Nothing happened on the Pakistani side, though.

    On May 21, 2001 SUNWAYCO, the lead company for the Islamabad city project, rejected as “fake” by Ambassador Asad Durrani, sent a five-page letter to the Chairman, Board of Investment, with copies to Finance, Interior and Housing Ministers, General Musharraf’s Chief of Staff, now late Gen Ghulam Ahmed, Chairman of National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and other officials.

    This letter accused General Durrani of sabotaging their proposals and gave some more details of what had been going on behind the scenes. ( Click to view the image pg:1 pg:2 pg:3 pg:4 pg:5 ). It for the first and last time mentioned the name of Prince Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz, saying he had already visited Pakistan along with a representative of IIDT/IIDC.





    It also revealed that:

    The IIDT was invited to invest in Pakistan by Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz. IIDT had approved an initial $1 billion and another $1.5 billion for investment. Concerned Pak Government authorities have been seriously negotiating with representatives of IIDT/IIDC and various delegations have exchanged visits. A representative of IIDT, Mr Al Riyatti was included in the delegation of Saudi Prince Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz. Describing SUNWAYCO as a fake company was a malicious statement and it is libel under international law for a compensation exceeding billions of dollars. The immediate inflow of $300 million in these projects has been stopped. A formal apology to Prince Sultan was demanded from the Government of Pakistan. But the letter still kept the doors open and suggested some remedies including a visit of the Board of Investment Chairman to Saudi Arabia and eliminating the role of the Pak Ambassador in Saudi Arabia in any future dealings which, it proposed, should be done through the Saudi Embassy in Islamabad and directly with the office of Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz, whose telephone numbers and contacts were given.

    An application was also filed with Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan on May 21, 2001 to incorporate SUNWAYCO in Pakistan.

    The Islamabad address of the Saudi company in Sector F-10 was said to be a huge office until around May of 2001. A visit to that office this week by our correspondent Rauf Klasra showed there was nothing there any more. “I went there in the afternoon on Tuesday, July 23, 2002, and found the house (office) closed. Neighbours told me that a big office was opened a couple of years ago but had been closed for more than a year. There was no sign board, no name plate, or anything indicating any Saudi presence in that house. Repeated ringing of door bell to confirm whether someone was inside produced no response,” he reported. “Everybody appears to have evaporated into thin air.”

    All this has raised a number of questions, which remain unanswered. Among them:

    Why did the former ISI Chief Gen Durrani summarily dismiss the offer as fake. Did he have some special background of the company or the people behind it? He says the looks of the executives of the company, who were Pakistanis and not Saudis, were suspicious. Can a government make judgments about investment proposals sent in writing on mere looks of some people?

    Who really is Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz? There is no detail available on any Saudi site. He is said to be a close relation of the long time Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki bin Abdul Aziz. Does it mean it was some kind of a Saudi intelligence scheme to pump in money into Pakistan and take control of strategic assets like a major bank, a whole city where any number of people could stay and take shelter, a five-star hotel to keep VIPs, a front business like an oil refinery? The Ambassador says Prince Sultan Bin Turki was not involved. Then why have all the government files letters signed by him and correspondence in his name.

    Why did General Pervez Musharraf write a letter to Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz, if he was not the person involved. Why not send a letter to Prince Sultan Bin Nasir, who did visit Pakistan later? Who misled Musharraf and what game was going on? The Ambassador says the other Prince, Sultan Bin Nasir, was interested in investments, but his name does not figure on any file or in the proposals made by IIDT/IIDC or SUNWAYCO. Was he then in the picture or was he trying to hide his name for fear of exposure or some other reason?

    Was something going on between General Musharraf and the Saudis to create a huge joint infrastructure that could be used later for any other purpose? Why were the Saudis, or people using their name and identities, so keen to pump in money and then suddenly disappeared? Was it all connected to terrorism or terrorist organizations operating in Afghanistan and in the US?

    Following is the transcript of the interview of Lt. General (Retd) Asad Durrani, Pakistan Ambassador to Saudi Arabia with Shaheen Sehbai, Editor, South Asia Tribune, on Tuesday, July 23, 2002 about suspicious Saudi investment plans in Pakistan. The interview was in English, but was mixed with Urdu language in some places:

    SS: Last year, some time around March/April, the Government of Pakistan decided, and that was on the basis of one of your comments, that this (Saudi) company was not genuine. The Government closed the whole project and they said this matter is closed..

    AD: Yes, there was one company which did not belong to any of the princes. About that, I had said look we cannot find out anything about that company here.

    SS: Sunwayco..

    AD: Apparently that company had their headquarters in Switzerland..

    SS: Probably in Monaco…

    AD: That’s the only thing that I remember, the rest, Prince Sultan Bin Nasir and others, they are very genuine people.

    SS: Have there been any investments in the last one year or two by these people in Pakistan?

    AD: I think there have been plenty of investments in the last year and a half. If you are interested, you can always send your contact number and fax and one will dig out all the details.

    SS: (Did these investments include) any of these big projects they were talking about like buying the Habib Bank or setting up a Islamabad (New city).

    AD: No, on that, I don’t think anything final has been done, I think these negotiations take a long time, I suppose.

    SS: What is the position of Prince Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Turki, is he fairly high in the royal family?

    AD: Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz, and this name has no “Turki” anywhere.

    SS: But the papers that we have show Prince “Turki” is also there.

    AD: I would suggest to you not to depend on the papers, because it confuses the source, it confuses the name, it confuses the project. But, you know, we have to live with this environment, I suppose. Sultan Bin Nasir Bin Abdul Aziz, that means he is the direct descendant of King Abdul Aziz.

    SS: One of your letters was about a company named Sunwayco…

    AD: Oh, yes yes, that is the one we were told that is based in Geneva and we found out they had some representatives here but they were “airy fairy.”

    SS: And that was the company. Probably they were trying to make those proposals in Pakistan. Later, they wrote a protest letter too to the Government of Pakistan…

    AD: That’s correct, when you talk of Sunwayco, that is correct. Sunwayco, Switzerland, as far as I know, there was no prince involved in it. The two gentlemen, who were here, were also not Saudis who came to see me.

    SS: They were Pakistanis probably, the letters had Pakistani names like Sohail Akhtar and..

    AD: He never came to us, their Pakistani representative never came to us.

    SS: Why have they been using the name of the prince, because his name is (everywhere).

    AD: I suppose, I don’t know why they did that exactly, you can probably ask them but I was not told the name of the prince.

    SS: President General Musharraf also wrote a letter to Prince Sultan Bin Turki Bin Abdul Aziz regarding cooperation and then he replied back. Things were going back and forth.

    AD: I really would not know about that.

    SS: But basically what the story is saying…

    AD: When you refer to Sultan Bin Turki’s name, then I get confused and I don’t know what case you are talking about. I am not aware of that..

    SS: But the whole case, they say, is because, you wrote a letter, you wrote about Sunwayco, that’s very clear in your letter.

    AD: I definitely wrote about Sunwayco that we have no information about this company. Here in Saudia, we have no information and we could not trace out this company. You better ask Switzerland where this company is based. After that, these two gentlemen did come to me and told me that were the (Sunwayco) representatives, how could you state that we don’t exist. So, those two gentlemen came but I was not convinced. To me it was something not interesting really.

    SS: They were asking for fairly huge projects, if you total their proposed investment, it was something close to 8-9 billion dollars.

    AD: Straightaway, whenever someone comes and gives you such a project, you should get suspicious.

    SS: Something was suspicious because 8-9 billion dollars, like 4 billions dollars for a city near Islamabad, 3-4 billion dollars in Habib Bank, another 2 billion in an oil refinery, that was huge money. It has never been done before.

    AD: If I were to go and make these claim that I want to invest 12 billion dollars, people will throw me out of the room, I suppose.



    The Saudis Respond to Bugging Story: Pakistanis Still Mum Special SAT Report Issue No 65, Nov 2-8, 2003 ISSN:1684-2057

    ISLAMABAD: Saudi Arabia has finally reacted to the South Asia Tribune report that the suites of Crown Prince Abdullah were bugged in Islamabad and that the Saudis had detected the bugging. But the Saudi response, coming almost a week after the report was published by SA Tribune and then by several international newspapers, raises more questions than it answers. The Saudi Ambassador in Islamabad, Ali Awadh Asseri, when contacted by an Islamabad newspaper “The News” described the report as “irresponsible”. “Such irresponsible reporting has its own motives and objectives,” the ambassador told “The News” while commenting on the report.

    But then he immediately went into the diplomatic mode and said: “Let me assure you that nothing in the whole world can affect traditional historical ties between Pakistan and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” The implication either was that the bugging could not affect the historical ties or may be its reporting did not. The ambassador was quoted as saying: “This irresponsible report did not reflect the historical trust existing among the two countries and the two nations. The love and affection demonstrated by the Government of Pakistan during Crown prince visit showed what the visit meant to them.” “What we saw in Pakistan during the visit—the genuine love was unprecedented,” Ambassador Asseri said.

    This was the total comment of the Saudi Ambassador but “The News” also quoted an un-named Saudi source, who said the report was “an attempt only aimed at the derangement of the historical relations between the Kingdom of SA and the brotherly country of Pakistan.” “The current relations between the two countries are based on a stable principle and transparency in dealing with every matter between the two countries which does not need from either side to resort to such acts that are mentioned by those who are prejudiced,” un-named source was quoted as saying.

    “The Kingdom of SA while stressing the falsehood of this story reaffirms that it does not pay any attention to this matter and that its trust in its brotherly Pakistan is bigger than any attempt from someone to harm it or influence it,” the un-named source said. Though the Saudi response came a week after the story was published, interestingly there has been absolutely no reaction from the Pakistani officials. Highly placed sources in the Pakistani police, however, again confirmed to the SA Tribune that the incident did take place and the Saudis were very angry about it all. But the sources said the Pakistani officials were not issuing any official statement as they did not want to convey to the Saudis what may be perceived as “public lies or misstatements” about something the Saudis knew well was true. Amusingly the statement of the Saudi Ambassador in Islamabad was published only in Islamabad and the same correspondent who filed the story and who also reports for the English language newspaper, The Saudi Gazette, published in Jeddah, did not either file the story to his Saudi newspaper, or they did not use it.


  4. ‘judiciary, armed forces escape accountability’ By Syed Irfan Raza Tuesday, 12 Jan, 2010,-generals-escape-accountability–bi-07

    The Musharraf regime had excluded the judiciary and the armed forces from the purview of NAB with an excuse that both had their own accountability systems.—File photo

    ISLAMABAD: The army and the judiciary were declared sacred cows in the accountability process started by Gen Musharraf in 1999 and no case was registered against any serving or retired generals and judges of the superior courts by the National Accountability Bureau.

    A study of NAB record revealed that the Musharraf regime had excluded the judiciary and the armed forces from the purview of NAB with an excuse that both had their own accountability systems.

    A retired NAB official told Dawn that although retired army personnel fell within the purview of the NAB, no case was made against any retired general.

    On the other hand, he added, the bureau had initiated hundreds of corruption cases against politicians, bureaucrats, government servants and retired military personnel.

    The incumbent president, three former prime ministers and a number of present and former federal ministers and top bureaucrats are currently facing NAB references.

    Although an inquiry against a general who was a patron-in-chief of a private housing scheme (Askariya Town) was initiated, he was later exonerated.

    However, the NAB ordinance was compromised in 2002 when a former navy chief, Mansurul Haq, was convicted by an accountability court and under a plea bargain deal he had returned to NAB $7.5 million he allegedly received as kickbacks and commission in a deal.

    According to reports, many judges have been accused of being involved in corruption cases, but no action was taken against them.

    A judge of the superior court was accused of receiving a plot in Islamabad on ‘disable quota’ despite the fact he was perfectly ‘healthy and fit’.

    “The armed forces have their own accountability process which provides for strict action in cases of corruption. The NAB Ordinance does not provide for accountability of serving armed forces personnel,” the report said.

    About the judiciary it said: “There is the Supreme Judicial Council which decides allegations and misconduct cases in judiciary. Bringing the judiciary under an administrative action will amount to compromising its independence.”

  5. Martial Law, NRO, NAB & Across The Board Accountability.

    General Pervez Musharraf & Co. [now Retired] after imposing Martial Law in Pakistan on 12 Oct 1999 by violating article 6 of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan, in his address to the nation had said:


    ISLAMABAD, Oct 17: Chief executive Gen Pervez Musharraf has announced the setting up of National Security Council (NSC) which will guide cabinet ministers in running the affairs of the country. In his address to the nation on radio and television on Sunday night, Gen Musharraf set a seven-point agenda to revive the economy and work for national integration. He also said that there was no martial law in Pakistan.” The Constitution has temporarily been held in abeyance to save the country”, he said. The chief executive said he was happy to tell the nation that Rafiq Tarar had consented to continue as the president of the country. Giving the details, Gen Musharraf said he would head the six-member National Security Council, whose members would be the chief of naval staff, the chief of air staff, a specialist each in legal, finance, foreign policy and national affairs. A ‘think tank’ of experts would be formed as an adjunct to the NSC to provide institutionalised advice and input. The seven-point agenda would be: rebuilding of national confidence and morale; strengthening of the federation, removal of interprovincial disharmony and restoration of national cohesion; revival of economy and restoration of investor’s confidence; ensuring law and order and dispensing speedy justice; depoliticization of state institutions; devolution of power to the grossroots level; and ensuring swift and across- the-board accountability. REFERENCE: Musharraf addresses nation: Security Council to run state affairs By Ihtasham ul Haque 23 October 1999 Issue:05/43 DAWN WIRE SERVICE


    Lets see as to how General Musharraf and his Illegal and Rampant Military Regime conducted the Across the Board Accountability and that too after violating article 6 of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan i.e. by Imposing Martial Law and sacking an Elected Government of Mr Nawaz Sharif. REFERENCES: MORE DETAILS ON DRACONIAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU: Human Rights Developments Special Corruption Courts in Asia Pakistan Country Reports on Human Rights Practices Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2002 March 31, 2003

    The National Accountability Bureau is Pakistan’s apex anti-corruption organization. It is charged with the responsibility of elimination of corruption through a holistic approach of awareness, prevention and enforcement. It operates under the National Accountability Ordinance-1999, with its headquarter at Islamabad. REFERENCE:

    IN an interview, Lt-Gen Hafiz is said to have termed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) a ‘professional’ organization run by qualified people. What sort of professional organization is he talking about? The Merriam – Webster dictionary defines the word professional as “characterized or conforming to the ethical standard of a profession.” The Bureau was constituted with the aim of bringing the corrupt to justice and free society from the menace of graft. Lt-Gen Syed Amjad was appointed its first chairman with Farooq Adam as prosecutor-general. Several high profile politicians and bureaucrats were arrested in the beginning and lodged haphazardly at different police stations without any record on paper as NAB was itself groping for ways and means to legalize these arrests.

    One can recall the statement of Farooq Adam in the apex court that NAB had ‘dumped and forgotten’ former chairman of the HBFC, Siddiqul Farooq. Can that organization be termed professional whose PG (seniormost prosecuting officer) issues such a feckless statement in front of Supreme Court judges? NAB prepared dozens of corruption cases against the Sharif family and it was claimed with full confidence that this organization would bring all members of the Sharif family to justice. But the military government wanted them to leave the country. A ‘deal’ (still a mystery) was struck and they were flown overnight out of the country. This was in complete negation of the NAB Ordinance but this professional organization remained a silent spectator to the episode. In a series of other events, some of the top-notch politicians under NAB custody were released on one pretext or another with the promise to switch loyalties to the government. And now the investigations initiated by NAB against the former chairman of Evacuee Trust Property Board, Lt-Gen Javed Nasir, are dragging on. After all that has happened, is it right to call NAB a professional organization run by qualified people?

    NAB Officials spend over Rs. 24. 7 million on foreign tours Friday February 03, 2006 (0035 PST) ISLAMABAD: Atleast 47 National Accountability Bureau (NAB) officials including two former chairmen spent more than an estimated Rs. 24. 7 million on foreign trips, as details in this connection presented in the parliament. Online learnt Thursday through well placed sources of Senate Secretariat, according to which two former chairmen of NAB, Lt Gen (Retd) Amjad Hussain and Lt. Gen (Retd) Munir Hafiz toured about 20 countries. Gen Amjad spent estimated Rs four hundred thousand while touring UK and USA, whereas Gen Munir toured an outrageous 18 foreign destinations spending about 60,00,000 from exchequer’s kitty.

    Most of these tours have been claimed to be undertaken in connection with pending investigations about corruption charges against Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari, whereas NAB officials also underwent training in foreign institutions against corruption handling. Further activities include seminars, attended by NAB officials in such diverse destinations as, Dubai, Malaysia, London, Geneva, Singapore, Hong Kong, USA, Saudi Arabia, Paris, Nairobi, Manila, Jakarta, Mexico, Korea, China, Australia, etc. According to the detailed reports provided by the Prime Minister house to the Parliament, the former deputy secretary of NAB, Maj Gen Shujaat Zamir, spent Rs 2, 49000, Deputy chairman NAB Hassan. M. Afzal spent about Rs. 2,73,000 on his Geneva trip, Attorney General Pakistan Makhdoom Ali Khan spent an estimated Rs. 2,75,000 on his Geneva trip, former prosecutor General Farooq Adam Khan spent, Rs 2,75,000, D.G NAB Talat Mahmood Ghumman spent 12,00,000 on his trip to London, Sydney, Zurich, Switzerland, D.G NAB Maj. Gen Ijaz Ahmad Bakhshi spent about Rs 1,61,000 on his USA trip, DG Rear Admiral Saeed Ahmad Sargana spent Rs 2,56,000 on his Mexican tour, COS Brig. Tayab Waheed concurred an expenditure of Rs, 400,000 on his tours to Singapore, Hong Kong, Vienna, Austria, and Kuala Lumpur. Among other more, group captain Naseer Ashraf spent 2,66,000 on his trips to Moscow, Dubai, and London, member financial crimes Najam -Ul- Hassan Saqib spent 14,00,000 on his itinerary of Zurich, Geneva, London and Australia. Ms Nadia Sheikh, who is a legal consultant, spent more than 2,00,000 on her Korean trip, and additional director Tanvir Akhtar and Farman Ullah spent more than 600,000 on their Hong Kong trip. Besides these, other officials also spent astronomical amounts from official sources, ranging from Rs. 13,000 to Rs. 300,000 on their foreign trips. REFERENCE: NAB Officials spend over Rs. 24. 7 million on foreign tours Friday February 03, 2006 (0035 PST)

    In October 1999, right after Pervez Musharraf’s coup d’état, General Syed Mohammad Amjad of Corps II (Multan) was appointed as first chairman of National Accountability Bureau (NAB). General Amjad was said to be close friend of General Mahmood Ahmed, Musharraf’s right-hand man in those days. General Amjad and General Mahmood were classmates and shared accommodation throughout their school and college life in Lawarance College, Murree. On April 4, 2002, for the first time in the history of Pakistan Army, a serving general and Corps Commander of Multan, General Syed Mohammad Amjad, was posted as chairman of the Fauji Foundation, the premier military business organization. In 2003, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Amir Jamat-e-Islami, alleged that General Syed Mohammad Amjad has been allotted an expensive piece of land measuring two kanals in Lahore Cantt, at a throwaway price. REFERENCE: Illustrious career of General (retd.) Syed Mohammad Amjad March 14th, 2008 by Kashif Aziz

    According to Qazis’ claim, the Military Land and Cantonment Headquarters, Lahore, allotted a 2-kanal plot (No.2-A) to General Amjad on August 31, 2003 through allotment letter No.11-1484RD-Ihr-88, under survey No.92/2-A. The plot, situated on Sarwa Road, Lahore Cantt, was leased out to the worthy General for 99 years, against an annual lease fee of 50 rupees only. The plot was worth 90 lakhs and General Amjad has already sold one kanal for 45 lakhs. When Qazi first leveled these allegations, there were vociferous denials from various important government officials. However, the same government officials later admitted that the plots had been allotted in accordance with existing rules. An Army spokesman conceded that General Amjad and other soldiers who fulfil the merit and service oriented criteria are eligible for some benefits on payment of the cost of the land. “Lieutenant General Syed Mohammad Amjad has also been assessed by the same criteria.” In June 2005 a complaint was filed in NAB against Syed Mohammad Amjad, Chairman Fauji Foundation, for corruption in sales of Khoski Sugar Mill. It was stated that General Amjad has sold Khoski Sugar Mill, property of Fauji Foundation, to a favorite for an amount much less than the highest bid and this information was confirmed by the Defence Ministry in the National Assembly. The Parliamentary Secretary for Defence, Tanvir Hussain, admitted in the Assembly that the “sugar mill had been sold at Rs. 300 million, against the highest bid of Rs. 387 million.” The Senate’s Defence Committee summoned the Fauji Foundation management to appear and explain why this corruption had been done. But instead of coming clean on the issue, General Amjad and the other top Generals sitting in the GHQ have decided to challenge the jurisdiction of the Parliament to look into the affairs of Army-run businesses. The Senate Standing Committee on Defence and Defence Production on June 4 received a communication from the Defence Ministry stating that the Committee had no jurisdiction to appear for or against Fauji Foundation at any forum. A press release said the office of the Chairman, Standing Committee on Defence, received a communication from the Defence Minister intimating that after having a detailed briefing from the ministry’s officials it was apparent that “Fauji Foundation is a private sector organization.“ REFERENCE: Illustrious career of General (retd.) Syed Mohammad Amjad March 14th, 2008 by Kashif Aziz

    On March 21, 2007, the Board of Directors of Karachi Electric Supply Corporation (KESC) appointed General (retd.) Syed Mohammad Amjad as the new Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board with effect from April 5, 2007. General (retd.) Amjad replaced Frank Scherschmidt, who was previously serving the post ever since the privatization of KESC. In June 2007, Maheen A. Rashdi wrote that Syed Mohammad Amjad, CEO KESC, draws a salary of Rs. 1.1 million besides perks amounting to Rs. 0.3 million. His appointment was made outside proper procedure on the recommendation of the Board of Directors and he has no credentials to prove that he possesses technical know-how of running such a sensitive outfit. REFERENCE: Growing debts of KESC By Maheen A. Rashdi June 10, 2007 Sunday Jamadi-ul-Awwal 24, 1428 REFERENCE: Illustrious career of General (retd.) Syed Mohammad Amjad March 14th, 2008 by Kashif Aziz

    Mr. Abbasi Praising General Musharraf’s Martial Law Regime’s “Alleged Reforms” when Ansar Abbasi used to be a Correspondent in Daily Dawn, he never mentioned even a single time that Impsoing Martial Law is Treason and Violation of Article 6 of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan.

    As per 1973 Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan


    PART I

    6. (1) Any person who abrogates or attempts or conspires to abrogate, subverts or attempts or conspires to subvert the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.

    (2) Any person aiding or abetting the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.

    (3) [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.


    Definition of Accomplice: An accomplice is a person who actively participates in the commission of a crime, even though they take no part in the actual criminal offense.

    During 1999 Mr. Ansar Abbasi was Praising General Musharraf Martial Law regime’s “Alleged Reforms” when Ansar Abbasi used to be a Correspondent in Daily Dawn, he never mentioned even a single time that Impsoing Martial Law is Treason and Violation of Article 6 of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan. Read the news reports which Ansar Abbasi filed in the Daily Dawn in 1999. Not a single time Ansar adress Musharraf as CMLA but Ansar was very respectful towards “Alleged Chief Executive” Musharraf. You may not find a single personal observation by Ansar Abbasi on Constitutional Tampering by Military Regime. Musharraf was given mandate by the Judiciary to tamper with the Constitution. Everybody knows who was part of that Supreme Court Bench. REFERENCES: Special courts to try cases of accountability Ansar Abbasi 06 November 1999 Issue : 05/45 [Courtesy Daily Dawn Wire Service] Musharraf approves pre-1973 authority for FPSC by Ansar Abbasi Week Ending : 29 January 2000 Issue : 06/05 [Courtesy Daily Dawn Wire Service] Sharifs lose 80pc of assets, says Qureshi by Ansar Abbasi Week Ending : 16 December 2000 Issue : 06/48 Beneficiaries of NRO cannot get bail: NAB By Ansar Abbasi Friday, November 13, 2009 Finally, dreaded NRO list is out and official By Ansar Abbasi Friday, November 20, 2009

    When NRO erupted on the face of Mr Zardari, another meeting between the Army Chief and the PM was essential on Monday night so that the right message was conveyed. And it was. Then we saw the surrender. The Zardari era, the argument goes, consists of broken promises, colossal mistakes in assessing the mood of the people, taking decisions with arrogance, taking on the establishment and institutions which were needed to survive, taking gigantic U-turns when under pressure and smiling about them, claiming unabashedly as if it was a considered policy (like the restoration of judges, sacking and restoration of the Punjab government of PML-N, surrender on the Kerry Lugar Bill and eventually running away from the NRO). REFRENCES: Has a countdown begun in Islamabad? By Shaheen Sehbai Saturday, November 07, 2009 The contours of a changed, unwritten script Situationer By Shaheen Sehbai Wednesday, November 04, 2009

    Mr. Shaheen Sehbai [Group Editor The News International] talks about NRO and Accountability in his editorials and stories which he has been filing since months but forgetting what he used to say about National Accountability Bureau in his web based magazine South Asia Tribune [Shaheen Sehbai Founded this magazine after he escaped from Pakistan in 2002 to seek political asylum in USA]. Mr. Shaheen had advised all the readers before closing down his website to save the material.


    WASHINGTON, October 17: Dear Readers, this is the final piece on the South Asia Tribune, as this site is now being closed for good. I understand that it may come as a rude shock to many and may create despair and depression for all those who had started to look up to SAT as a beacon of courage and resistance, but this decision has been based on many factors, which I will explain briefly. SAT would be on line for the rest of this month, till the end of October. On November 1, 2005 it will disappear from the Internet. All those who may be interested in keeping a record of any SAT article or report can save it any time before that date. REFRENCE: The Final Word from theSouth Asia Tribune By Shaheen Sehbai WASHINGTON DC, Oct 17, 2005 ISSN: 1684-2057



    Book Confirms Musharraf’s First Multi-Million Dollar Telephone Scandal Special SAT Report WASHINGTON DC, Sept 8, 2004 ISSN: 1684-2057

    WASHINGTON, Sept 8: Musharraf Government’s first multi-million dollar scandal of awarding a lucrative cell phone contract to a Canadian company in early 2000, ignoring the ever reliable Chinese friends, became the main reason for a split between Musharraf and his honorable and honest colleague, General Syed M. Amjad, who quit as Chairman of the National Accountability Bureau in less than a year.

    “This was an open-and-shut case as all the evidence was there, but when (Gen) Amjad wanted to move in and scuttle the contract, he was refrained from doing so. The only man who had the power to do this was Musharraf himself,” reveals a new book on Pakistan due to be released worldwide on Sept 11.

    The scandal was first reported by the South Asia Tribune in its issue No 47 on June 22, 2003 and full documentary evidence was also published, including a letter issued by the office of the then Chief Executive General Musharraf ordering that the contract be given to the company he favored and General Amjad objected to. Click to Read the original SAT story with documents [How Extra Millions were Paid on Musharraf’s Orders By Aijaz Mahar Issue No 47, June 22-28, 2003 ISSN:1684-2057 (RED THE TEXT BELOW]

    The latest confirmation comes in the book written by Hassan Abbas, a former police officer and currently Research fellow at the Harvard Law School and a PhD. candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. The book is titled Pakistan’s Drift Into Extremism: Allah, The Army, And America’s War On Terror, published by M.E. Sharpe. The author, who was also associated with NAB for some time and saw all these inner contradictions of Musharraf’s accountability bureau, has thrown a new light on how Musharraf started the accountability process to give credibility to his illegal regime but soon became a victim of its own ambitions. Abbas observes that NAB had an ominous start to begin with. In its first two weeks of operations, it cracked open a multimillion-dollar case of fraud and corruption. Nortel, a Canadian telecommunications company, had unfairly been handed a fat contract to build a mobile telephone network in Pakistan. After General Amjad’s departure and appointment of a new Chairman, the NAB was dead for all practical purposes, Abbas says. A noble experiment had ended because those who had initiated it did not have the moral stamina to carry it through.

    Following are excerpts of his book’s chapter on NAB: “The first decisive step that Musharraf took (after taking over in October 1999) was on the domestic front – accountability of the corrupt. With every change of government since the revival of democracy in 1985, the cry for accountability had become louder and louder, but as the problem was so widespread and the ramparts of vested interest so invincible, no government dared go beyond a judicious mixture of flimsy steps and lip service toward meeting this demand. By the time Musharraf found himself catapulted to the helm, he had no option but to bow to the overwhelming sentiment of the people. Thus before the month of October 1999 was exhausted, he announced the formation of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), with Lieutenant General Syed Mohammad Amjad as its first chairman. And by a strange irony, it was fated that the “Attock conspiracy” officers who had paid a heavy price for attempting to conduct accountability twenty-five years before would have a fair representation on the Bureau. Within two days of the formation of the NAB, the services of Saeed Akhtar Malik and Farouk Adam Khan of the Attock court martial fame were requisitioned.

    General Amjad was the ideal and unanimous choice of the senior ranks of the army to be the NAB chairman. He was an officer of extraordinary diligence and exemplary character, his name was a byword for integrity. Ayaz Amir, a leading Pakistani journalist, while treating Musharraf’s choice of certain cabinet members to scathing criticism, had this to say about Amjad: “Chief [Musharraf] has redeemed himself by picking Lieutenant General Amjad – and if anyone can make NAB work, it is Amjad, and if he falters or fails, or even if the pace of his offensive slackens, General Musharraf can say good-bye to the public goodwill.” In the event, Musharraf’s credibility and commitment were to be defined by the performance of the NAB, the words of the journalist were to be prophetic. From the survey of the NAB team, one could only draw optimism. Farouk Adam had a courtly manner, an impressive personality, and a unique ability to smile through the tedium of a sixteen-hour workday.

    Saeed A. Malik had much idealism and passion and also a flair for winning the esteem of those working under him. He had written a freelance column for a decade in a leading English-language newspaper of the times (The Muslim), invariably exposing the corrupt practices of the ruling elite. The initial labors of the NAB were dedicated to drawing up the NAB Ordinance to provide a legal framework for this new organization. The central principle that dictated the ordinance was the shifting of the onus of proof to the accused, that is, that if the accused person could not reconcile his wealth, earnings, expenses, and taxes that he had paid, he must be deemed guilty of corruption. The framers of this ordinance were very conscious that this Draconian law would be applied to a maximum of only four hundred of the most corrupt in the land, and the principle that would determine the qualification of these “selected few” would be that of either an association with a great crime or having a big name adorned perhaps by a theft not that big. Without such a law, the NAB would essentially have been a nonstarter because of the virtual nonexistence of investigative and prosecutorial resources. Had this ordinance been judiciously used to attain the purpose it was designed for, things would be much different today.

    To implement this agenda, Amjad was given full authority to select the “targets,” though he regularly consulted the ISI and a few legal experts while making vital decisions in this regard. Amjad had a free hand to hold across-the-board and evenhanded accountability from which no one was exempt, except the judiciary and serving armed forces officials. On November 17, 1999, the NAB moved in for its first crop of arrests. Many of those arrested were big names. There was great euphoria among the people because many individuals who had always considered themselves beyond the reach of law were now behind bars. Yet most of the arrests were made on the charges of loan default, perhaps the easiest charge to prove, but one that the NAB could be horrendously wrong about because it was very difficult to tell an honest from a willful default.

    With the first blood having been drawn, the public appetite was whetted and they bayed for more. Their clamor could have been ignored, but not that of the government, whose credibility and performance had nothing but the achievements of the NAB to show for itself. The ordinary public was under the impression that the ISI and other intelligence agencies had collected enough data on corrupt elements when they were “monitoring” the civilian governments during the 1990s, but when a few ISI files were handed over to NAB officials, these were mostly speculative and devoid of any sound material necessary to prove a case in a court of law.

    To quicken up things, General Amjad hurriedly developed a core team to run the organization comprising bankers, economists, lawyers, and a few from the intelligence and police backgrounds. It was a combination never tried before, the only handicap being a shortage of time to organize and deliver. Around that time, a letter from Musharraf’s office to the NAB (dated December 11, 1999) adequately reflects the anxiety of the government and its dependence on the NAB to shore up its credibility: “It has been reported with a great concern that corrupt politicians are becoming bold and the press is gradually becoming sympathetic to them. This trend must be stopped and reversed. Following steps are suggested: 1. Move fast on all issues, 2. Expose the corrupt people very expeditiously, 3. Scoop on corruption on a daily basis.

    Consequently, more people were arrested based on their filthy reputations, but proof of their corruption was lacking. The NAB could have gained a lot of credibility in its initial days by prosecuting the ones who were already in custody, but the special accountability courts were not in place yet as selection of judges and establishing a new chain of courts and developing a whole new infrastructure was taking time. What the military hierarchy did not realize was that there is a huge difference between deploying a military unit to a new location and in establishing a law enforcement institution that has to act within the parameters of law. To overcome this shortage, dozens of retired ISI officials were inducted who perhaps knew the art of interrogation well, but had very little legal and investigative experience, which was the core requirement in this case.

    There was a reason behind the compulsion that the new inductees had to be former ISI officials – the ISI was providing the funds for this NAB expansion and they opted to benefit their comrades in the process. As if these problems were not enough to hamper the NAB work, all of the arrested persons were kept in different cities under the custody of respective military commands where the local military officials and intelligence operatives started investigating/interrogating the accused on their own. Every single institution was trying to spy on NAB, making the task further complicated. This was symbolic of the general state of affairs in Pakistan. Amjad and Farouk Adam, the two public faces of the NAB, were now under immense pressure from the public, the press, and the government. As they addressed the press, it seemed to the military hierarchy that they were hogging the limelight, and they became victims of gratuitous envy. Shaukat Aziz, the finance minister, who had Musharraf’s ear, was for blanket protection to businessmen despite the fact that some of the latter, in cahoots with the bankers, were the biggest crooks. Amjad, on the other hand, was heading toward making an example of those industrialists and businessmen who had established their business empires through corrupt practices. This was a risky business as big money was involved.

    One of Amjad’s problems was the subtle increase of government interference with his functioning. As it was, NAB had an ominous start to begin with. In its first two weeks of operations, it cracked open a multimillion-dollar case of fraud and corruption. Nortel, a Canadian telecommunications company, had unfairly been handed a fat contract to build a mobile telephone network in Pakistan. This was an open-and-shut case as all the evidence was there, but when Amjad wanted to move in and scuttle the contract, he was refrained from doing so. The only man who had the power to do this was Musharraf himself. As the NAB moved along, two questions were frequently asked of Amjad, that is, whether there were any holy cows, and if the army generals involved in corruption would also be arrested. The government position was that only serving army officers and the judiciary were exempt from the NAB because both institutions had effective in-house correction systems, but technically, retired armed forces officials were not a part of this category.

    When a journalist publicly asked Amjad about press reports maintaining that corrupt military officials alone had deposited $1billion in foreign banks from kickbacks from weapons purchases, he shot back by saying: “We have not been sitting on our butts as regards defense deals.” Yet it was daily becoming clearer that all the big names among the retired generals were beyond the province of the NAB. The names of Generals Aslam Beg, Hamid Gul, Zahid Ali Akbar, Talat Masood, Saeed Qadir, Farrukh Khan, and Air Marshals Anwar Shamim and Abbas Khattak were discussed more than once, but nothing came of these discussions. Amjad was absolutely dedicated to having them probed, but was restrained from doing so. The reputation of Amjad, however, remained unimpaired. By releasing Khawaja Asif and Mr. Nawaz Tiwana, a leading politician and a bureaucrat, respectively, from detention and personally apologizing to them for wrongful arrest by the NAB, Amjad had set a new precedent in Pakistan by accepting that the mighty are often fallible. This only enhanced his stature, and the envy of his peers. In another high-profile case, a leading politician from the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) known for his corrupt practices threatened NAB officials during his interrogation by saying that he was a CIA agent, and that political instability would be created in the country if he were not released immediately. Amjad responded by making things harsher for him and by appointing more investigators to probe his case. The politician was ultimately convicted.

    One of the brightest experiences of the NAB was the performance of its Central Investigation Team (CIT). General Amjad had allowed Saeed Malik to handpick a team of officers to give the NAB a limited in-house investigative capability. A former commander of army’s SSG, Brigadier Mohammad Nazir, an officer of unimpeachable integrity, was selected to head the CIT. The performance of the 12-member CIT team was outstanding on many counts. For instance, in a mere five months a three-man cell of the CIT (Lieutenant Colonel Riazuddin, Nadir Imtiaz Khan, and Major Taimur Shah) recovered or saved for the government of Pakistan Rs 3 billion (around US$500 million). But unfortunately, the most outstanding member of the team Lieutenant Colonel Obaidullah, a former ISI official, tragically died of a massive heart attack shortly after being wrongly accused of “mishandling” a case by a very senior NAB official. The saddest commentary on Musharraf’s much-vaunted commitment to the cause of accountability is that each member of this team of rare officers was hounded out of the NAB soon after Amjad’s departure from the institution. Their only handicap was that not one of them was prone to entertaining any adverse dictates. And so ended a heroic chapter of the war against crime by a handful of officers in a corrupt environment.

    Reportedly, Amjad had asked to be relieved of his duties more than once. He was not one to take government partiality lying down. He left the NAB at the end of September 2000. NAB’s change of command, in the words of Mohammad Malick’s commentary in Dawn, was “a clear sign of NAB’s tailored, if not changed, priorities.” No one then knew who the real “tailor” might be, but there was an acknowledgment that “Amjad remained a very fair accountability chief.” But Tariq Ali in his book The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihadis, and Modernity, was much more perceptive when he observed that Amjad was ready to push through, but “Musharraf balked at the scale of the enterprise.” The new chairman was General Khalid Maqbool, whose reputation was no match for Amjad’s. The NAB was dead for all practical purposes. A noble experiment had ended because those who had initiated it did not have the moral stamina to carry it through. But it would not be they who would pay the price for this failure. This would be paid once more by those who have always paid it, the people of Pakistan.

    Musharraf had made a clear choice — he would compromise with those politicians who were ready to side with him. He had given in to the building pressure from various sectors that wanted the regime to behave “normally” and not as a revolutionary one. This was the dilemma Musharraf faced — the masses were looking for a Messiah in him, whereas the political and military elite wanted the status quo to continue. Musharraf was still swinging in between.

    I cannot help recalling one of the conversations between Saeed A. Malik and (late) General Ghulam Ahmed (Musharraf’s Chief of Staff) – Malik was strongly asserting that everything was “do-able” provided the Musharraf government had the will to do it, and General GA stunned the audience when he said: “But, sir, first they [Musharraf, General Mahmood, and General Aziz] will have to get out of the cage of Kargil, otherwise all their efforts will be reactive.” And he was not being disloyal. He was merely delivering an analytical conclusion, and his tone and tenor were entirely reflective of this. No one in Musharraf’s government could have mustered the courage to say this.”



    Generals Defy, Degrade Parliament to Protect a Corrupt Colleague By M T Butt WASHINGTON DC, June 8, 2005 ISSN: 1684-2057


    ISLAMABAD, June 8: Deeply engrossed in private businesses, Army Generals have officially refused to recognize the jurisdiction of Pakistan’s Parliament and a landmark battle has begun to determine who would have the upper hand. “Under any democracy and constitutional rule, this would never be an issue, but Pakistan Army is bent upon breaking every rule and demolish or disfigure every institution to protect the Army’s personal, political and corporate interests,” a senior politician said in Islamabad. One of Musharraf’s top Generals, accused of corruption in Army’s biggest corporate entity, the Fauji Foundation, has turned his Rs300 million case of favoritism into this test case by challenging the authority of the Senate to look into his affairs.

    “This case would determine whether elected representatives will ever be able to peek into the back stage money-making secrets of the Army,” an expert said. The case involves Lt. General (Retd) Mohammed Amjad, (Top, Left) once the head of Musharraf’s National Accountability Bureau (NAB). As NAB Chief General Amjad, and his successors, have been continuously using NAB, illegally and unconstitutionally, to investigate every private sector company or businessman the Generals want to target for their own personal, political or financial reasons.

    After General Amjad left NAB he was appointed head of the Fauji Foundation which is, for all practical purposes, an extension of the Pakistan Army, as many sitting armed forces high ups are on its Board called the Committee of Administration. The Committee of Administration of Fauji Foundation comprises Army’s Chief of the General Staff, Quarter Master-General, Chief of Logistics Staff, Deputy Chief of the Naval Staff (Training & Personnel) and Deputy Chief of Air Staff (Administration). According to Fauji Foundation, the Committee handles the administrative and management affairs of the Foundation. The case against Gen. Amjad is that he sold one of the sugar mills of Fauji Foundation to a favorite for an amount much less than the highest bid and this information was confirmed by the Defence Ministry in the National Assembly. So it was official. The Parliamentary Secretary for Defence, Tanvir Hussain, admitted in the Assembly that the “sugar mill had been sold at Rs300 million, against the highest bid of Rs387 million.”

    There was an immediate uproar both inside and outside the Parliament. The Senate’s Defence Committee summoned the Fauji Foundation management to appear and explain why this corruption had been done. A spokesman of Senate said a meeting of the Defence Committee to discuss the working of the Fauji Foundation and the sale of Khoski Sugar Mills in particular was requisitioned by three Opposition members namely Senators Rukhsana Zuberi, Farhatullah Babar and Sardar Mahtab Ahmed Khan. Initially the Foundation did not respond but after two weeks rejected the information given to the MPs through quarter-page advertisements in national dailies. The ads titled “Fauji Foundation Rejects” not only dismissed allegations but also claimed that the Khoski Sugar Mill was sold “in the best interest of the Foundation” and in keeping with the “established corporate norms and business practices.” “We have received no government assistance in cash or kind,” the ads announced, and vowed to “jealously guard its reputation for impeccable conduct.” The MPs took the Foundation’s ads, which rejected the official information placed before them a few days before, as an affront and breach of their privilege. Even Government party member and Parliamentary Secretary, Major Tanvir, bemoaned that the Foundation had breached the privilege of Parliament.

    PPP Senator Farhatullah Babar, an activist on such issues, wrote in a newspaper column: “One is indeed puzzled by the Foundation’s claim that it had not received government assistance in cash or in kind. Under SRO No 395, issued in March 1972, all the properties of the Post War Services Reconstruction Funds of the former West Pakistan were vested in the Federal Government, which in turn transferred these properties to the Fauji Foundation under the Charitable Endowments Act. With such a kick start from day one, how can the management today claim that it has not received from the government “any assistance in cash or in kind”? But instead of coming clean on the issue, General Amjad and the other top Generals sitting in the GHQ have decided to challenge the jurisdiction of the Parliament to look into the affairs of Army-run businesses. The Senate Standing Committee on Defence and Defence Production on June 4 received a communication from the Defence Ministry stating that the Committee had no jurisdiction to appear for or against Fauji Foundation at any forum.

    A press release said the office of the Chairman, Standing Committee on Defence, received a communication from the Defence Minister intimating that after having a detailed briefing from the ministry’s officials it was apparent that “Fauji Foundation is a private sector organization.” The Committee Chairman is an ardent Musharraf and Army loyalist. A hand-picked businessman, former IBM chief and Musharraf’s ex-Information Minister, Nisar Memon is now heading the Senate’s Defence Committee. Instantly he jumped to the General’s side and as Committee Chairman accepted, without a word, the Fauji Foundation’s contention that private businesses were outside the Senate’s purview. Memon accepted the explanation and declared that the meeting requisitioned by the Opposition senators will not be held, cutting his own legs and feet. No one is allowing him to get away with this serious issue and even political allies of the Generals, now providing Musharraf and his men the façade of a democracy, are confused and issuing conflicting statements. “This is how Musharraf undermines the constitution and rule of law as he has his own cronies installed in key places who do not care about any democratic tradition but serve the interests of their Army masters,” a senior politician commented as a chorus of credible political voices rejected Nisar Memon’s decision as totally uncalled for and without authority or legality.

    Even the Parliamentary Affairs Minister in the Shaukat Aziz cabinet, a PPP turncoat and often a Musharraf loyalist, Dr Sher Afgan Niazi, did not agree with Nisar Memon. He told newspaper Dawn on June 5 every organization within the limits of Pakistan, whether public or private, can be summoned before the parliament. “No private organization operating within the country has an exemption from being summoned before the parliament. The principle of sovereignty and supremacy of parliament is applicable in the case.” Another leading constitutional expert, Choudhry Aitzaz Ahsan of PPP went a step further. He said: “The Defence Ministry’s refusal to bring the Fauji Foundation under scrutiny in the committee is a sheer disobedience and disrespect to the parliament. Any entity that is “controlled” or “owned” by the government can be summoned by a committee of the parliament, including the Senate and the National Assembly.” Ahsan said Fauji Foundation was like other organizations which operated as private entities but were “controlled” or “owned” by the government. He said if the PTV managing director and PIA Chairman could be summoned before a committee, nothing barred the management of Fauji Foundation from being summoned. He said the presence of the Defence Secretary and other senior serving officials of the armed forces on the committee of administration of Fauji Foundation made it subject to appear before the committee and the parliament.

    A former secretary of the National Assembly, Khan Ahmed Goraya, said the National Assembly committees had the powers of the civil court and could summon any person or entity within the precincts of the country. Similar rules were applicable to the Senate committees, he said. The influential Editor of Lahore’s Daily Times, Najam Sethi, weighed in with a strong editorial note on the issue titled: “Fauji Foundation must explain its conduct to the Senate Standing Committee.”

    His editorial said: “These are important questions, not only in relation to the issue at hand — namely the dubious sale of the sugar mills — but also vis à vis the larger questions of the military in business and civil-military relations. It is clear to us that the Foundation’s Committee of Administration is loath to appear before a committee of parliamentarians because of military’s traditional disregard of the parliament. Under the rules it is the Standing Committee’s prerogative “to take a decision and express an opinion on the new position taken by the defence ministry”. And as Senator Babar has contended, “The Rules have no provision for the Chairman of the Committee [in this case, Senator Memon] to give a personal verdict and cancel a requisitioned meeting.” ”General Pervez Musharraf continues to talk about a new Pakistan built around respect for institutions. We expect that the process of institutionalization will subsume the military and not bestow on it the status of a holy cow. At the end of the day, Parliament is the highest body in the realm and its members have every right — within prescribed law — to oversee the functioning of various departments, including the military,” the newspaper said.

    “It is also important to determine, once and for all, the sex of entities run by, and under, the military. Are they in the private sector or in the public domain?” Given all these arguments, the attempt by the Generals to bulldoze and over-run the Parliament are blatant, mean and self-serving. They want immunity from accountability for their misdeeds in all Government-run, funded and controlled organizations which they have grabbed. The next step would be to demand that all lands, properties and houses owned by the Generals would be exempt from any law, tax or regulation. This can go on and on. Because if the Generals claim that they are running a private business, which cannot be questioned by the Parliament, then the question that needs an immediate answer is why and how are these officers allowed to run a private business as Government Service rules prohibit any employee to run his own business. And why is tax-payers money being pumped into their private business. The Economic Survey of Pakistan 2004-05, released by the Ministry of Finance on June 4, reveals that the Government had explicit contingent liability of Rs1.02 billion on account of Fauji Fertilizer Company Jordan. The government’s guarantee of for FFC increased from Rs0.70 billion in 2002-03 to Rs1.02 billion in 2004-05, revealed the Survey, an authentic official document released every year before the budget. According to the company profile, FFC Jordan is a Joint Venture of Fauji Foundation and Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited. The Chairman of Fauji Foundation, Lt Gen (retd) Syed Muhammad Amjad, is shown as the chairman of the FFC in its recent annual report. This battle between the Generals and the Parliament is another manifestation of the crumbling state of affairs in General Musharraf’s Pakistan.



    Documents Disclose Details of a Dirty Deal

    How Extra Millions were Paid on Musharraf’s Orders By Aijaz Mahar Issue No 47, June 22-28, 2003 ISSN:1684-2057

    ISLAMABAD: Documentary evidence is now available to show that General Pervez Musharraf’s Chief of Staff intervened and ordered grant of an over $50 million cellular phone contract to a Canadian firm against a much better offer of a friendly Chinese company. Thus the military government not only caused a loss of $5.8 million to the national exchequer but also annoyed Pakistan’s most trust-worthy and strategic friend, China, for unexplained and unknown reasons, to the extent that the Chinese company, and then the Ambassador, had to write a letter to General Musharraf, but in vain. “Certain unknown resource is favoring a Canadian company called Nortel and is pushing Pakistan Telecommunications Mobile Ltd (PTML) to sign this contract with Nortel…. We are sincerely looking that decision should be done on merit basis and favoritism should be stopped immediately,” the Chinese company letter to General Musharraf dated January 29, 2000 said. Click to view letter Page1 Page2

    The deal signed on March 2, 2000, was thrust upon PTML–- a subsidiary of state-owned Pakistan Telecommunications Company Limited (PTCL) Authority — by the Chief of the Staff to General Pervez Musharraf in violation of rules, documents reveal. A memo by the Chief of Staff Office clearly stated that contract should be awarded to one company and “there is no reason to reopen the case”. The company was Nortel which had been allowed to lower its bid while others, including the Chinese company, were denied the same favor. Click to see Memo

    Documents available with SA Tribune, spread over 105 pages, indicate foulplay in dishing out the deal to the Canadian cellular company, Nortel, by allowing it to revise its bid downwards while refusing the same facility to other bidders, including China. Initially five bidders — Alcatel, Ericsson, Nokia, Nortel and Siemens – participated in the bid for providing network, billing, customer care, voice mail, and transmission etc. to PTML for its cellular company U-fone. The cost of duties and taxes, worked at $8.0 to 9.0 million, was to be borne by the PTML. Aclatel offered to complete the job in $71.672 million, Ericsson $78.092 million, Nokia 72.911 million, Nortel 67.622 and Siemens $100.86 million. After receiving the bids, the PTML appointed a Finland-based consultant company Omnitele to examine the technical data as well as evaluate the offers provided by the bidders. In its report submitted to the PTML, Omnitele rated Nokia at the top followed by Ericsson, Nortel, and Siemens respectively but did not recommend Alcatel for this job. Omnitel also backed the financial package offered by Nokia, which had assured 85 percent of financing from China Construction Bank at five per cent per annum with loan maturity period of eight years and a further grace period of at least two years. “Nokia’s implementation proposal is realistic and well-suited for implementing the GSM turn-key project,” the consultant company’s report said describing Nokia’s solution as technically the most favorable among the five bidders. Click to View Omnitele Report

    The consultant company said that although Nortel could offer comprehensive selection of services and features to implements in their GSM networks, “However, their main strength is in the fixed communication network”. Omintele also pointed out that despite repeated requests Nortel failed to provide detailed description of the Comguard system, nor offered any digital cross-connect equipments, estimation fore the category-3 site preparation costs, any tool for network element planning and cost optimization neither provided any price information for measurement instruments. However, this report was not circulated among the members of the Board of PTML causing anxiety among them. “It is rather unfortunate that the evaluation report of the consultants and the tender evaluation report was not provided to the members of the Board,” wrote an agitated Board member Malik Muhammad Saeed Khan in a letter addressed to the Chairman of the Board. He claimed that his letter also reflected the views of Mr Abdullah Yusuf, Secretary Planning/ Member PTML Board. Click to View Saeed Khan letter

    While Nokia had offered to set up 184 GSM Base Stations, Nortel offered to set up only 150. The equalization difference was worked out to be around $ 7million, as claimed by Nokia in a letter written to the PTML Board. Nokia claimed that only this difference made its bid lowest in price amongst all. Despite these facts, the government asked Nortel to lower its bid, which agreed to come down to $50.7 million (excluding duties). Nokia on the other hand offered to further lower its bid by $10 million bringing it down to $44.9 million (excluding duties) but its offer was ignored on orders of Musharraf’s Chief of Staff. Nokia had also written earlier to Lt. Gen Amjad, Chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB), who carried out investigations to unearth the irregularities and concluded that the process had been done irregularly and Nokia should have been the lowest, technically compliant and superior solution than Nortel. In response to NAB’s conclusive report, the Chief Executive Secretariat first directed the PTML Board to reopen negotiations with Nokia, in addition to Nortel but later reversed its own directive by saying that NAB had reported nothing irregular in the evaluation process. The Chinese were so annoyed, their ambassador in Islamabad, Mr Lu Shulin, personally wrote a letter to General Pervez Musharraf on February 20, 2000, saying the Chinese government was very much interested in the project to help Pakistan. He sought Musharraf’s intervention but the deal had probably been finalized and it could no longer be reversed. The Ambassador’s intervention remained fruitless. Click to View Ambassador’s letter Page1

    The PTML Board members also objected to giving the project to Nortel and said that after Nokia’s offer to lower its bid, it was cheaper by $2 million than that of Nortel. “If that be the case, the tender evaluation committee will need to go into depth of this offer as well and bring up the facts before the PTML Board before a considered decision is taken,” the letter written by a Board member to his Chairman said. The “active participation” of the Chief Executive’s office in this “shady deal” has raised many questions. The main question which remained unanswered is why this undue favor was given to one company, even to the extent that a friend like China was ignored. Did the project serve the national interest or someone’s self interest?



    Book shines light on Pakistan military’s ‘£10bn empire’ Declan Walsh in Islamabad The Guardian, Thursday 31 May 2007

    · Business interests range from cement to cornflakes

    · Little transparency into officer-led conglomerates

    The Pakistani military’s private business empire could be worth as much as £10bn, according to a ground-breaking study. Retired and serving officers run secretive industrial conglomerates, manufacture everything from cement to cornflakes, and own 12m acres [4.8m hectares] of public land, says Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, author of Military Inc: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy. The book tackles a previously taboo subject – the range and depth of the military’s business interests – considered a major factor in the ambitions of the generals who have ruled Pakistan for more than half of its 60-year history. “It feeds directly into the military’s political power; it’s an expression of their personal and organisation strength,” said Ms Siddiqa, a former director of research at the Pakistan navy.

    Five giant conglomerates, known as “welfare foundations”, run thousands of businesses, ranging from street corner petrol pumps to sprawling industrial plants. The main street of any Pakistani town bears testament to their economic power, with military-owned bakeries, banks, insurance companies and universities, usually fronted by civilian employees. Ms Siddiqa estimates that the military controls one-third of all heavy manufacturing and up to 7% of private assets.

    Profits are supposed to be pumped back into schools, hospitals and other welfare facilities – the military claims it has 9 million beneficiaries – but there is little transparency. “There is little evidence that pensioners are benefiting from these welfare facilities,” she said.

    Of the 96 businesses run by the four largest foundations, only nine file public accounts. The generals spurn demands by parliament to account for public monies they spend.

    The military’s penetration into society has accelerated under President Pervez Musharraf, who has also parachuted 1,200 officers into key positions in public organisations such as universities and training colleges. The military boasts that it can run such organisations better than incompetent and corrupt civilians.

    In a 2004 speech to open a new industry owned by the Fauji (“Soldier”) Foundation, General Musharraf boasted of “exceptional” military-owned banks, cement and fertiliser plants. “Why is anyone jealous if the retired military officers or the civilians with them are doing a good job contributing to the economy?” he said.

    But Ms Siddiqa says the military businesses thrive, thanks to invisible state subsidies in the form of free land, the use of military assets, and loans to bail them out when they run into trouble. “There are gross inefficiencies and the military is mired in crony capitalism. The primary purpose of a trained military is war fighting. They are not designed for the corporate sector.”

    Her £10bn estimate of military wealth is a “rough figure”, she says, split between £6bn in land and private military assets.

    “Military Inc.” comes at a sensitive time for Gen Musharraf, who is struggling to rebuild his popularity after the botched dismissal of the chief justice, Muhammad Iftikhar Chaudhry, in March. The move sparked nationwide demonstrations that have snowballed into a powerful protest movement. The furore has offered an insight into the raw power wielded by the generals. This week, Justice Chaudhry told the supreme court how military intelligence chiefs spent hours trying to pressure him to quit on March 9, before placing him under effective house arrest.

    Ms Siddiqa fears her book, which names names and pours cold water on boastful claims, may step on some powerful toes. “Over the past three years a lot of my friends have advised me not to publish this book. They think I have suicidal tendencies.”

    But Talat Hussain, a retired general and political analyst, said Ms Siddiqa was a “courageous” researcher. “This area has always been considered a sacred cow in our society,” he said.

    The book will be launched in Islamabad today. The main military spokesman, Major General Waheed Arshad, said he had not yet obtained a copy. “Let me read it and then I’ll get back to you,” he said.


    The 650,000-strong military has been at the heart of power since Pakistan was carved from northern India in 1947. Generals seized power in 1958 and have ruled intermittently since. The main intelligence service, the ISI, has consistently meddled in politics. Three-quarters of all army recruits come from Punjab, reflecting a similar imbalance in the country’s power structures. The army’s reputation for professionalism stretches back to colonial days, but has been eroded by business-related corruption allegations and three wars with India, including the loss of its eastern half, with the independence of Bangladesh in 1971.

    Cover Story The New Land Barons? By Ayesha Siddiqa Abdul Karim waited in the heat outside the Supreme Court for his case to be heard. Sitting miles away from his village in Bahawalpur, the poor peasant was contesting his right over three kanals (0.375 acres) of land that had already been awarded to him through an administrative decision. He had tilled the land for years and he was deemed to be the rightful owner.

    However, the land was subsequently transferred to Brigadier (Retd.) Muhammad Bashir, through another administrative order. The transfer of land to the army brigadier was part of the 33,866 acres of land given to the Army GHQ in 1993 in Bahawalpur by the provincial government. The Punjab government had transferred the land without checking its title. Out of the total land given to the army, the said brigadier got 396 kanals (49.5 acres) of land, out of which about three kanals belonged to Abdul Karim.

    Brigadier Bashir contested Karim’s ownership in the High Court, but the court upheld Karim’s title. Not satisfied with the court’s decision, Bashir filed an appeal with the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court of Pakistan also upheld Abdul Karim’s ownership.

    In its eagerness to favour military authorities, the district government representatives had given Abdul Karim’s land to the army. Moreover, the local administration sided with the brigadier to disprove the respondent’s claim over the stated land.

    The Supreme Court admonished the district collector for acting capriciously and for arbitrarily transferring land that was marked as land not available for allotment. While upholding Abdul Karim’s right to cultivate the land, the court also reproached the retired brigadier for impinging upon the rights of a poor peasant. In a historic judgment passed in September 2003, the Supreme Court bench warned against greed and forcibly and illegally depriving poor people of their rights.

    Amazingly, Abdul Karim received justice not because he had the means to take legal action, but because Brigadier Bashir wanted his land and took the case to court. It’s unlikely that this historic judgment will help many other poor villagers, though, as the only way for them to benefit from this landmark judgement would be to initiate expensive legal proceedings.

    The people of the small fishing village of Mubarik were not as fortunate as Abdul Karim. Situated near the Sindh-Balochistan border, their village adjoining the sea was once their territory. For over five years now, they have watched as their land has been slowly pulled away from under their feet. Generations of their families have lived there peacefully as fishermen, but no longer. A few years back, the villagers found that they could no longer move freely on their own land. The Pakistan Navy (PN) ordered the residents of Mubarik village to limit themselves to a small area. But that wasn’t the only restriction. They were also told not to construct houses on the land because the adjoining land fell within the range of the navy’s target-practice range.

    The villagers claim that the PN broke a promise and extended its presence beyond a point that was previously assured by the navy to be the limit of their expansion. In fact, the PN has continued to expand its presence despite the fact that there is no provision in the existing rules for a naval cantonment. Meanwhile, the uneducated villagers are unable to contest their rights: they neither know the law, nor have the money to take legal action.

    They are not the only ones in this country in the same predicament. Up against elite groups, like the armed forces, poor villagers neither have the means nor the knowledge to defend their own property, the land they inhabit and cultivate. Despite the efforts of some parliamentarians to flag the issue of the military land ownership in the country, there is insufficient information available on the issue. However, one thing is clear: over the years, the armed forces have become major players in Pakistan’s real estate business.

    The military, including its serving and retired members, own massive tracts of land in rural as well as urban centres. They believe that the distribution of land amongst military personnel, particularly within the various housing schemes, denotes the defence establishment’s superior capacity at managing resources. However, the mechanics behind the issue are not so simple. Is the allocation of military land nothing more than a tradition inherited from the British to reward defence services personnel? Or should the acquisition of land by the military be viewed in the larger perspective of the power the armed forces wield over the state and its resources?

    Since the early 1950s, the military has acquired millions of acres of land throughout the country for distribution to serving and retired armed forces personnel. According to one estimate, the armed forces control about 12 million acres, constituting about 12 per cent of total state land. Out of this, 62 per cent is in the Punjab, 27 per cent in Sindh and 11 per cent in NWFP and Balochistan. About seven million acres of the total is agricultural land and has an estimated worth of Rs700 billion. Interestingly, only about 100,000 acres are directly controlled by the armed forces and its subsidiary companies, the Fauji Foundation, the AWT and the Bahria Foundation, and distributed amongst serving and retired personnel. The remainder was given (at highly subsidised rates) to army personnel as awards to be used for their personal gratification.

    Granting agricultural land as a reward to individuals is a tradition inherited from the British. The Punjab Alienation of Land Act, 1900 ensured the use of canal colony land as a means to reward those serving British interests. According to Imran Ali, professor at the Lahore University of Management Sciences, in his book, The Punjab Under Imperialism, land was granted to indigenous communities under various schemes, such as offering land grants to raise horses that could then be acquired by the British cavalry. Following the principle of rewarding the ‘faithful,’ the Alienation of Land Act specifically stipulated allocation of 10 per cent of colonised land to the armed forces. This process of land development was incorporated later in another law known as the Colonisation of Land Act, 1912, which was updated by the Pakistan government in 1965. The law had a feudal underpinning and was based on perpetuating various local social classes that would guarantee the interests of the imperial masters. Today, the land distribution policy is still deeply rooted in this colonial logic, with the military monopolising the state’s resources and continuing to offer land in exchange for allegiance to the

  6. Ansar Abbasi, Draconian NAB & Siddiqul Farooq (PML – N)

    During 1999 Ansar Abbasi was Praising General Musharraf Martial Law regime’s “Alleged Reforms” when Ansar Abbasi used to be a Correspondent in Daily Dawn, he never mentioned even a single time that Impsoing Martial Law is Treason and Violation of Article 6 of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan. Read the news reports which Ansar Abbasi filed in the Daily Dawn in 1999. Not a single time Ansar adress Musharraf as CMLA but Ansar was very respectful towards “alleged Chief Executive” Musharraf. You may not find a single personal observation by Ansar Abbasi on Constitutional Tampering by Military Regime. Musharraf was given mandate by the Judiciary to tamper with the Constitution. Everybody knows who was part of that Supreme Court Bench. REFERENCES: Special courts to try cases of accountability Ansar Abbasi 06 November 1999 Issue : 05/45 [Courtesy Daily Dawn Wire Service]
    Musharraf approves pre-1973 authority for FPSC by Ansar Abbasi Week Ending : 29 January 2000 Issue : 06/05 [Courtesy Daily Dawn Wire Service] Sharifs lose 80pc of assets, says Qureshi by Ansar Abbasi Week Ending : 16 December 2000 Issue : 06/48 Beneficiaries of NRO cannot get bail: NAB By Ansar Abbasi Friday, November 13, 2009 Finally, dreaded NRO list is out and official By Ansar Abbasi Friday, November 20, 2009


    The National Accountability Bureau is Pakistan’s apex anti-corruption organization. It is charged with the responsibility of elimination of corruption through a holistic approach of awareness, prevention and enforcement. It operates under the National Accountability Ordinance-1999, with its headquarter at Islamabad. REFERENCE:

    ‘NAB forgot ex-HBFC chief after dumping him somewhere’ – Bureau Report – ISLAMABAD, May 18: The prosecutor-general of National Accountability Bureau, Farooq Adam, on Thursday told the Supreme Court that they had forgotten Siddiqul Farooq, former chairman of the House Building Finance Corporation, after having dumped him somewhere. Siddiqul Farooq, who was also press secretary to the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, was produced for the first time in any court since his arrest on Oct 18.”I apologize that Mr Siddiqul Farooq was forgotten after being dumped somewhere as we were occupied by other important matters,” Mr Adam stated. Chaudhry Ikram, the counsel for the detainee, lamented that this was the way how the government was treating citizens.

    The court was shown two files by the prosecutor-general on the basis of which the Nab chairman had issued warrants for Siddiqul Farooq on May 11. He stated that no case had been registered so far but prima facie there was a case of corruption against him. Mr Ikram stated that Siddiqul Farooq had been under illegal detention since Oct 18 without registration of any case against him by any investigation agency. He said a habeas corpus petition was filed in the Lahore High Court where all the law enforcement agencies were summoned. The agencies simply refused to admit that he was in their custody. The prosecutor-general himself had stated before the LHC that Siddiqul Farooq was not in the custody of Nab.

    “Now after seven months, they are saying they forgot after dumping him somewhere,” the counsel said. According to information gathered by the family of Siddiqul Farooq, he was kept in Mujahid Battalion 886, Malir Cantonment, since his arrest, said the lawyer. The SC bench consisted of Justice Mohammad Bashir Jehangiri and Justice Sheikh Riaz Ahmed. To a court query why Siddiqul Farooq was kept in custody without registration of an FIR for the last seven months, Deputy Attorney General Mansoor Ahmad said activities of the former chairman of the HBFC before and after Oct 12 were “threat to the security of the state and he had connections with foreign agencies”. Details could not be disclosed in open court, he added. The prosecutor-general told the court that Siddiqul Farooq had met Gen Tariq Pervaiz, former corps commander of Quetta. Gen Pervaiz was prematurely retired by the COAS, Gen Pervez Musharraf, for his alleged connections with the deposed prime minister. The prosecutor-general assured the court that investigations against Siddiqul Farooq would be completed within 10 days and he would be sent to a judicial lock-up soon as it was necessary for his mental health.

    The counsel asked the court to allow Siddiqul Farooq to make a statement, but the court disallowed the request. The judges asked him to write his statement and provide it in a sealed envelope for their perusal only. The statement should not be released to the Press, the court directed. The court rejected the request for bail and observed that they were pleased that the former HBFC chairman was alive. Justice Sheikh Riaz observed that court was worried about the safety of Siddiqul Farooq. “Alhamdo Lillah, he is alive,” the judge remarked. The court adjourned the case till June 1. Family members of Siddiqul Farooq were present and touching scenes were witnessed when he appeared in the courtroom. REFERENCE: 20 May 2000 Issue: 06/19 DAWN WIRE SERVICE

    Military justice: the good and the not so good – Ayaz Amir – THE old gag that “military justice is to justice what military music is to music” is amusing but not wholly accurate if for no other reason than that Beethoven himself has written some rousing military marches, strong enough to make even the dead turn in their graves. If military music (occasionally) was good enough for him, no one else has the right to cavil at it. Indeed the Army School of Music in Abbottabad should seriously think of basing some marching tunes on Beethoven’s music. This would be an improvement on some of the duller melodies that have become part of the army’s repertoire ever since the zeal to move away from the tradition of British things became one of the touchstones of our patriotism.

    Needless to say, this spirit of reform has mostly touched the surface of the army’s existence, leaving its essence still very much faithful to its British foundations. Which is another proof of our dedication to cosmetic changes: of making concessions to tokenism. As for military justice, there should be little doubt that people at large were happily for it in the wake of the dramatic events of October 12. Indeed, the strong show of popular support for the military takeover rested on two counts: (1) people were sick and tired of Nawaz Sharif and the never-ending follies of the heavy mandate and (2) because the takeover held out the promise of swift and ruthless accountability. Since then public perceptions have shifted. Partly because, being an emotional people, we are liable to sharp swings of mood. Partly because the military government has signally failed to keep pace with popular expectations. When the first batch of well-heeled defaulters was caught on November 17 a wave of enthusiasm swept the country. But as the accountability drive faltered, this feeling evaporated. While the momentum may pick up again, a poor impression remains of the army’s tactics. Imagine the same thing on the battle-field: the first wave of assault being brought to a grinding halt the very moment it achieves a breakthrough. It would not be called very smart generalship.

    The other charge against the current accountability drive has to do with the narrowness of its focus. While those caught in the first flush of the army’s revolutionary zeal remain behind bars (that too in police stations where accommodation standards are worse than in jails), other carpetbaggers known for their financial skullduggery remain untouched. This selective zeal raises questions about the army’s performance. True, evidence is required before nailing anyone. But in Pakistan the scale of plunder over the last decade and a half has been such that on a clear day the relevant evidence should be visible from the moon. From where did Humayun Akhtar get the money for his bottling interests? What explains the rise and rise of Gujrat money? Even in poor, lowly Chakwal, General Majid Malik when he first entered politics in 1985 did not own a single brick in the entire town. Thanks to 14 years of sustained effort, he is now a successful rancher and, amongst other things, part-owner of the town’s biggest bus adda. This does not mean (perish the thought) that he should be crucified but his example throws light on how far successful entrepreneurship can go in Pakistan on very little. Then we say this is not a business-friendly country. Ask Sadruddin Hashwani, the hotel-owner, who likes entertaining senior military figures. He certainly would not disagree.

    While it is easy to pick on politicians, the worst offenders perhaps are mandarins who remain in advantageous positions no matter which government is in power. If the true story of the Ahmad Sadiks, the Farooquis and the Saeed Mehdis were ever ritten, mere politicos would look like babes in the wood–barring, of course, the Sharifs, the tycoons of Gujrat and the other political pontiffs who have imparted a wholly new meaning to the marriage of power and money in Pakistan. And what about high-flying bankers? In a sense the current drive against defaulters is flawed because it touches only the loan-takers not the loan-givers. Unless crooked bankers get it in the neck too the right precedents will not be set. The stuck-in-the mud accountability that we are seeing, therefore, is self-revelatory. While it shows what the army is capable of when it is singleminded, it also draws a circle around its limitations. Take, for instance, the case of the Mehran Bank largesse funnelled to Muslim League politicians in the 1990 elections. How much General Beg took from the banker Yunus Habib, how much was put into secret accounts and which politicians were the beneficiaries of this bounty is all known and even on record. A former spymaster, Lt Gen Durrani, has even given a signed and sealed affidavit in this connection. Since Nawaz Sharif’s name also appears in this list, he can be thrown out of politics for life on this count alone. But mention this case and faces go hard and blank. The only charitable explanation for this is that it cuts too close to the bone.

    This defensive attitude is understandable but it can often be taken to excessive lengths. While the army never tires of proclaiming that it is the only effectively-functioning institution left in the country (a claim which, rightly or wrongly, finds widespread support in Pakistan), what it fails to realize is that its self-confidence on occasion falls short of the role it assigns to itself in national life. For example, it bristles too much at sharp criticism which nowhere in the world would be taken as the hallmark of a self-confident posture. With the above paragraph as a preface, let me come straight to the disturbing case of one of my former colleagues in the Punjab assembly, Rana Sanaullah from Faisalabad. On November 25 at a meeting of suspended Muslim League parliamentarians at the residence of Ch. Pervez Ellahi in Lahore, several persons spoke, including Rana Sanaullah. Some of the remarks he made were intemperate and uncalled for. I have checked this from other sources who confirm that he said things against the army he should not have.

    Two days later a case was registered against Rana Sanaullah at the Ghalib Market Thana in Lahore. On November 28 he was picked up from his house in Faisalabad and brought to the Qila Gujar Singh police station in Lahore. The morning of November 29 he remained in the lock-up. At night, I am told, around 9.30 pm he was taken out of his cell and under armed escort taken to the vicinity of the Lahore airport. There he was blindfolded and put on a jeep. After travelling some distance he was taken out, his hands were tied and so tightly yanked up that his feet could barely touch the ground. Then followed a severe whipping by two people who knew their trade, in all 20-20 lashes being given in this manner. With blood streaming down his body Rana Sanaullah was brought back to his cell at the Qila Gujjar Singh thana. Now he is lodged in Kot Lakhpat Jail. If the information I have received is wrong I deserve to be punished. If it is correct it portrays a barbarity which brings shame on all of us. Granted that Rana Sanaullah said things he should not have. Still, he was only delivering a speech and not planning to throw a bomb or committing any other act of terrorism. But suppose, for argument’s sake, it was violence he had in mind. Does even that justify the treatment he received?

    Carlos was the scourge of the western world. Picked up in a sting operation from Sudan he was taken to France where he is now behind bars. But was he ever tortured or subjected to the lash? The Baader-Meinhof gang in West Germany, the Red Army in Japan, were committed to waging war against their societies. But when caught their members were not denied due process of law. Rana Sanaullah is no member of the Baader-Meinhof gang. While not an intimate of mine, I say it from personal knowledge that he was one of the more aware and intelligent members of the suspended Punjab assembly. He did not deserve this. Since he is unknown to Madeleine Albright or Karl Inderfurth (not to mention CNN and BBC) his arrest and punishment are unlikely to ripple the waters of international tranquillity. But that is hardly the point. Such behaviour as Rana Sanaullah has suffered hurts him less than it diminishes all Pakistanis. When Najam Sethi was arrested by the last government on the grounds that a speech he had delivered in New Delhi threatened the security of Pakistan, it made Pakistan look small and ridiculous by suggesting that Pakistan was so insecure as to feel threatened by a mere speech. The same holds true for Rana Sanaullah. While his words on that particular occasion were foolish, the reaction to them shows the country in a dim light.

    Since the Governor Punjab, Lt Gen Safdar, is too busy issuing orders of the day (old habits obviously dying hard) I will say nothing to him. But can the Corps Commander, Lahore, be asked to look into the matter and, if nothing else, at least ensure decent treatment for Rana Sanaullah in Kot Lakhpat Jail? A word in the end about Mushahid Hussain. The exuberance he showed as Nawaz Sharif’s information minister is a matter between him and his conscience. Of concern now is his present plight. He is being held without charge, is being denied due process and his family knows nothing of his whereabouts. Why must we do things in this fashion? It is wrong and far from making us look good, only helps our enemies to paint a darker picture of us. REFERENCE: Military justice: the good and the not so good Ayaz Amir Week Ending: 25 December 1999 Issue : 05/52 DAWN WIRE SERVICE

    Accountability Pakistani-style By Ayaz Amir – AFTER sowing in Kargil the seeds of a disaster with few parallels in our tear-laden history, and in the process making clowns of ourselves in the international arena, on whom do we vent the concentrated fury of our righteous indignation? On the national cricket team. As some of our media wizards might say, this is homespun accountability.

    Our star cricketers may be louts to the last man: lazy, greedy, erratic and temperamental who perform well only by fits and starts. But in possessing these attributes in what way do they differ from the rest of their countrymen? After 50 years of sustained effort we have managed to turn ourselves into a nation of boors, with the dominating national qualities being greed, laziness and mediocrity. What then entitles the nation’s Moral Commissioners to judge anyone else harshly, least of all our cricketers who at least are good at something?

    What can the rest of us claim for ourselves, including our rulers who, even after their victories in Washington, feel no qualms about saying that occupied Kashmir will soon become a part of Pakistan? This inspiring claim, fired at a nation still trying to recover from the Kargil experience, was made at Hiran Minar a few days ago at the ground-breaking ceremony of another inter-change on the motorway, the white elephant whose continued pampering is very likely to be the one economic activity which will survive when everything else comes to a standstill.

    Consider also as to who is doing the judging. Pakistan’s Chief Boy Scout, Senator Saifur Rehman. What is the operating Scotland Yard principle here at work? Set a saint to catch a thief. True, there is a cloud over his dealings with UBL to which he owes over a billion rupees. But he says his default was “engineered”, a term which is Pakistan’s contribution to the art and science of banking.

    Before the Lahore High Court he has also taken the plea that interest is unIslamic, something which he apparently did not realize when drawing his loans. For good measure he is also suing UBL for a sum exceeding 900 crores for causing him undue distress and discomfort. In short, just the right man to conduct an ethical probe and visit judgment upon the cricket team.

    Indeed, if the course taken by the heavy mandate over the last two and a half years emphasizes anything it is the striking indispensability of two individuals. In matters judicial, Justice Qayyum of the Lahore High Court. In matters investigative, administrative, financial and miscellaneous, Senator Saifur Rehman of Redco. Small wonder then if after having dealt with Benazir Bhutto, Asif Zardari, the independent power producers, the Jang Group (whose insurrection, alas, proved only too short-lived) and the Friday Times, the indefatigable Boy Scout has been entrusted with another national task: reforming the morals of the cricket team.

    But what are our cricketers being accused of? That they have fixed matches and as a result brought a bad name to the country. It might be asked as to who has brought a worse name to the country: these match-fixing louts or the victors of Washington and Kargil? Whose is the more heinous offence? But to deal with questions is to tread on dangerous ground. So allowing this to pass, let us dwell instead on match-fixing.

    Is this charge not likely to provoke the laughter of the gods? In a nation where everything is fixed – police, judiciary, customs, bank loans, favoured terms of trade for privileged industries (but not which is a strategic asset) and even elections – is it not funny to prosecute cricketers for match-fixing?

    The present Muslim League itself is a monument to one of the greatest feats of political fixing seen in Pakistan. Conceived and consummated by the country’s invisible masters, its aim was to build a counter-weight to the PPP. This was largely achieved and the result was the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad on whose back Nawaz Sharif successfully resisted the PPP from 1988 onwards. With this and other skeletons in our cupboard, it reveals a skewed sense of proportion to go after the supposed shenanigans of the cricket team. If confronted by the biblical injunction, let him cast the first stone who hath not sinned, what would Senator Rehman say?

    If these same louts had come back with the World Cup as they had half a chance of doing, they would have been treated as demi-gods. Non-taxpaying traders would have held receptions in their honour. The Lord Mayor of Lahore would have feted them in the Shalimar Gardens or the Fort, two items of our inheritance abandoned to the peculiar post-independence culture of Lahore a long time ago. But having thrown away their last match our of sheer incompetence or call it what you will their sins are suddenly being remembered.

    A picture in the papers says it all. Wasim Akram with an ingratiating double-handshake stooping before the newly-appointed cricketing czar, Mujeebur Rehman. Both of them should be ashamed of themselves: Akram, for behaving in a servile manner and not having any self-respect, Mujeebur Rehman for allowing this to happen. Akram after all, match-fixer or not, is a cricketing legend, one of the greatest all-rounders in the world today. Who is Mujeebur Rehman? His only known qualification for his cricketing job is his being the younger brother of Boy Scout Saifur Rehman.

    It is things such as this which give one a headache. After 52 years what do we have to show for ourselves? That we have become a nation dedicated almost solely to the pursuit of mediocrity and bad taste. What else explains the need to commemorate with as much noise as possible the anniversary of our nuclear explosions, install cheap replicas of Shaheen and Ghauri missiles at traffic inter-sections, make empty boasts all the time, have no sense of remorse for our actions and none of shame?

    When the prime minister is shown on television taking telephone calls from the general public on Saturday mornings, two plastic models of these missile can be seen standing next to his desk. Have they been put there to convey an impression of fortitude and iron resolve?

    There is then Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani Oppenheimer, from whom there seems to be no escape. Every day in the papers there is a picture of him attending a ceremony where his scientific genius is lauded.

    With things like this going on all the time, and with verbal and other forms of excess having become national pastimes, it is perhaps a hopeless undertaking even to suggest that a bit of modesty in word and gesture might do us some good or that before attempting to reform anyone else’s morals we might try looking into our own bosoms. REFERENCE:Accountability Pakistani-style By Ayaz Amir 30 July 1999 Friday 16 Rabi-us-Saani 1420

  7. Shaheen Sehabi, Jang Group & Definition of National Interest.

    Group Editor of The News International, Mr Shaheen Sehbai [Former Founding Editor/Owner of South Asia Tribune – USA]

    There was a time when members of the Pakistani establishment and especially those agencies, used to assume the role of determining what is ‘national interest of Pakistan’, and who is loyal, and who is anti Pakistan, have perhaps done more damage to Pakistan than known enemies of Pakistan. It is unfortunate that every blunder, be it at national level or in foreign affairs, is made in the name of ‘national interest of Pakistan’. People of Pakistan are perplexed as they fail to understand what is ’national interest of Pakistan?

    Now this role has been adopted by some of our most “Celebrity Journalists cum Analysts cum Private TV Channel Anchors” even the some of the Senior Most Seasoned Journalist/Editor [Read Shaheen Sehbai, Ansar Abbasi, Dr Shahid Masood, Hamid Mir and Rauf Klasra] have suddenly become so obsessed [right after the announcement of Kerry Lugar Bill] with National Security and National Interest of Pakistan and Futile Ant-Americanism that they forget that what they used to file in web based magazine – South Asia Tribune [based in USA] founded by Shaheen Sehbai [Present Group Editor of The News International Pakistan]. They and some of the most important members of present PPP Government used to contribute in the same web based magazine e.g. Farhatullah Babar, Hussain Haqqani, Wajid Shamsul Hassan and so many others. Shaheen Sehbai never doubted the loyalty of those PPP members when they were contributing for his magazine.

    Recently Shaheen Sehbai in several of his so-called “Breaking Stories/News Analysis” in The News International has targetted the present PPP government for compromising on National Security during the Kerry-Lugar Bill Controversy whereas Shaheen Sehbai himself had already damaged the reputation of Pakistan, Pakistan Army and Pakistan National Interest when he was in Self Imposed Exile in USA in his magazine, yes in a country whose legislative bill [Kerry-Lugar Bill] he considers dangerous for Pakistan.

    Even in his latest which Shaheen Sehbai has filed in The News International are quite detrimental for Pakistan’s National Security [as per the criteria of Shaheen Sehbai and The News International/GEO TV/DAILY JANG], here are some glimpses;


    So far the GHQ has kept the Lashkar Tayyaba quiet by not acceding to the US demands of attacking or even touching Muridke, arguing that once this sleeping elephant wakes up, it could turn around and trample our own forces. After all, the LeT was raised and trained by our military establishment to fight the Indians in Kashmir and they are good at it. Turning their guns inwards, with TTP suicide bombers roaming everywhere, would turn Pakistan into a burning inferno, ready to collapse. Unfortunately, or probably in the interest of the system as the other side may argue, the political wings of our military establishment (read agencies), which had almost become redundant and were dormant for some months, have now come back into action with full force. The intense discussions behind closed doors are focusing on finding some way out before the NRO explodes into the political scene and starts rocking the boat. Political wings of agencies are secretly lobbying members of parliament to vote out the law, which may force the president to think about giving up his powers or to resign. REFERENCE: All power players focus on constitutional knock-out – By Shaheen Sehbai, Dated Friday, October 23, 2009 Kerry-Lugar law’s Muridke clause alienates Army from; NRO-hit presidency; Zardari falls back on Nawaz; ready to give up 17th Amendment powers


    In another “so-called Breaking Story/News Analysis”, Shaheen Sehbai says;


    ISLAMABAD: Intense search has begun in political and media circles to find out who is the father of the Pakistan Army and ISI-specific conditions in the Kerry-Lugar Bill, which ultimately led to the assertive statement issued by the 122nd corps commanders’ meeting on Wednesday. But the search will not be too difficult. Between 1988 and 1999, when civilians ostensibly governed Pakistan, US officials routinely criticised the civilians’ conduct but refrained from commenting on the negative role of the military and the intelligence services despite overwhelming evidence of that role. ISI manipulation of the 1988, 1990, and 1997 elections went unnoticed publicly by the United States while the Pakistan military’s recitation of politicians’ failings was generally accepted without acknowledging the impacts of limits set for the politicians by the military. REFERENCE: Mystery of Kerry-Lugar conditions solved? News Analysis By Shaheen Sehbai Dated Friday, October 09, 2009


    Mr Shaheen Sehbai is condemning PPP government particularly President Asif Ali Zardari for compromising on Pakistan National Security whereas Mr Shaheen Sehbai himself and journalists like him used to do the same in worse possible way while sitting in the USA not only that his present employer i.e. The Jang Group of Newspapers and its top management as well.



    Group Editor of The News International, Mr Shaheen Sehbai [Former Founding Editor/Owner of South Asia Tribune – USA]


    Issue No 22, Dec 23-29, 2002 ISSN:1684-2075

    The Unreported Terrorism Case against Pakistan’s Media King Special SAT Report Issue No 22, Dec 23-29, 2002 ISSN:1684-2075

    LAHORE: A former Chief of ISI has demanded death penalty under anti-terrorism laws for Pakistan’s virtual media “Ted Turner”, and three other senior journalists, in an Anti-Terrorism Court in Lahore, and the charge against them is carrying out “terrorist acts with their pen”, according to court documents.

    In this historic but bizarre case of its kind, the ex-ISI Chief, a Lieutenant General of the Pakistan Army, has submitted a signed petition which in itself is a document revealing some of the most well guarded national secrets, which should never have been revealed, and could get the General hanged for committing sedition if taken up by a fair and judicious court. See other Story.

    The most intriguing part of this story is that this Anti Terrorism Court of General Pervez Musharraf not only started hearing the case, it even completed testimony of five prosecution witnesses without even sending a notice to the defendants. Later when the Judge decided that he had jurisdiction to hear the case, he summoned the defendants, who raised immediate objections. He then started hearing their arguments. The latest hearing of the case was held on December 19, with earlier hearings held on Dec 3 and 14, 2002.

    The complainant in this case is Lt. General (Retired) Javed Nasir, who headed the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) from March 1992 until May 1993 and the case has been filed against owner of the Jang/News Group of Newspapers and GEO TV, Mir Shakil ur Rehman, Mr. Salim Bokhari Editor of ‘The News’ Lahore, Mr. Usman Yousaf Chairman Editorial Committee ‘Jang’ Lahore and Mr. M.A.K. Lodhi Editor Investigations of ‘The News’ Lahore, who is also a senior employee of the official news agency Associated Press of Pakistan (APP).

    The case has been filed under Section 6 (a)(b)(c), 8 & 11 of the Anti Terrorist Act, 1997. Maximum punishment for most of the crimes under this Act is death and Gen. Javed Nasir has demanded in his written petition that the “severest possible punishment” be given to “these terrorists (who) in the garb of journalists have delivered the most lethal blow to the unity and survival of the country.”

    “By attacking his reputation the Army and the ISI have been jointly targeted. Left as the last stable institution, if destabilized can lead to an extreme chaos and confusion and eventually to a civil war,” he notes in his petition.

    Click here to View Petition Page 1

    Page 2

    Page 3

    Page 4

    Page 5

    Page 6

    Page 7

    Page 8

    Page 9

    Page 10

    The basis for General Nasir’s complaint is a report published by ‘The News’ on August 24, 2002 which alleged that the General, as Chairman of the Evacuee Trust Property Board, embezzled Rs. 3 billion and had fled the country. The report filed by Editor Investigations, M.A.K. Lodhi, claimed the writer had documents to prove its contents.

    Click to see Original Story (Warning: Large file)

    “The complainant learnt about it (the report) through a telephone call which was followed by thousands of telephone calls from all over Pakistan and the world including England and USA,” General Nasir said in his petition.

    The General, who is an active member of the Tableeghi Jamaat, an organization of Islamic preachers, said the news item had “terrorized the entire Jamaat, the membership of which runs into millions, and the masses would have led to sectarian strife had it not been for the complainant’s interview on the TV the same night.”

    “The entire report manifests a highly arrogant attitude of a few terrorists garbed as journalists indulging in yellow journalism…they are an incurable cancer of the society which must be removed to save the rest of the nation through major surgical operation in the form of the severest possible punishment,” he demanded.

    Mir Shakil ur Rehman appeared before the Anti-Terrorism Court-III Judge Manzoor Hussain in Lahore on Dec 19. Editor Salim Bokhari appeared before him in an earlier hearing.

    “The entire journalistic community in Pakistan is terrorized, so much so that the newspapers of Mir Shakil ur Rehman himself, the largest circulated Urdu and English language newspapers and GEO TV, a recently launched satellite channel, have not reported anything about this huge case as yet,” journalists in Lahore told the South Asia Tribune.

    The original report against the General, carried by ‘The News’ was denied the same day but the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) of General Musharraf confirmed in a letter to the Editor of ‘The News’ on Nov 15, 2002 that “various complaints against Lt. Gen ® Javed Nasir, Ex-Chairman ETPB, are under consideration in NAB.”

    Click Here for NAB Letter

    This confirmed that not everything reported by the newspaper was wrong but what has shocked the journalists is the manner in which the complaint of the ex-ISI chief was filed and accepted by an Anti-Terrorism Court which started one-sided hearings. Journalists argued that it could at best be a case of defamation and be tried under ordinary law in a civil court.

    The ATC, instead of throwing out the case, started hearing arguments and decided that it was within its jurisdiction to hear a libel case, thus setting a new legal precedent and turning the so-called Press freedom pronounced so often by General Musharraf, on its head.

    In a short judgment given on Dec 3, 2002, the ATC Judge announced that it was within his jurisdiction to hear such a case. “After considering the material placed on record as aforementioned and reading the above provisions of law, I summon all the four persons arrayed as respondents in the complaint for 14.12.2002. A copy of the complaint, as also that of the evidence referred to above, shall be sent to all of them,” Judge Manzoor Hussain said. Click to View Judgment

    The anti-terrorism law was passed in August 1997 by the Nawaz Sharif Government. It gave police wide-ranging powers to arrest suspects and established special anti-terrorism courts. Amnesty International at the time pointed out the manifold ways in which the law violated human rights particularly the right to a fair trial. In … the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared that the Anti-terrorism law as a whole was not unconstitutional but that 12 key sections of the law were unconstitutional and needed to be amended. Several months later this was done by an Amendment Act.

    Dozens of people were tried and convicted by these special courts which still fail to provide a fair trial. Most of the death sentences in Pakistan are imposed by anti- terrorist courts. In November 1998, summary military courts were set up to try, within three days, civilians suspected of specified serious offences. Several people were tried and convicted by these special courts; several were sentenced to death and two men were executed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared these courts unconstitutional and ordered them disbanded.

    General Musharraf enacted the new anti-terrorist law, which replaced the old one of 1997. It came into force on 31 January 2002. The new ordinance provided for new courts which included one senior military officer nominated by the government besides two civilian judicial officers constituting a three-member bench headed by a civilian judge. The courts were to sit in cantonments or jail premises to ensure the security of accused, witnesses and the judiciary. A senior officer said, “these are not military courts in the true sense, but these courts will comprise civil judges and military officers to speedily dispose of cases of all those involved in terrorism”.

    Amnesty International condemning the law said it gave the police a new licence to violate human rights. It authorizes the police and army to fire on anyone “committing, or believed to be about to commit, a ‘terrorist’ offence”. It also provides them with powers to arrest suspects and to search premises without a warrant. Placing the interpretation on what is justifiable use of lethal force entirely in the hands of law enforcement personnel is, in the Pakistan context, an incitement to the security forces to commit unlawful killings.

    Trial by special tribunals including military staff contravenes Principle 5 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, endorsed by the General Assembly in 1985. It states: “Everyone has the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts of judicial tribunals.”


    Another masterpiece against Pakistan Army by Shaheen Sehbai is as under:


    Group Editor of The News International, Mr Shaheen Sehbai [Former Founding Editor/Owner of South Asia Tribune – USA]

    Ex-ISI Chief Reveals Secret Missile Shipments to Bosnia defying UN Embargo Special SAT Report Issue No 22, Dec 23-29, 2002 ISSN:1684-2075

    LAHORE: Pakistan defied the United Nations ban on supply of arms to the Bosnian Muslims and sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles were air lifted by the Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI, to help Bosnians fight the Serbs, an ex-ISI Chief has officially admitted in a written petition submitted before a court in Lahore.

    The document was submitted by Lt. General (Retd) Javed Nasir, who was head of the ISI from March 1992 to May 1993, in a case he filed against the owner and editors of the largest newspaper and TV group of Pakistan, in an anti Terrorism Court. The court started hearings of the case earlier this month.

    The document refers to the career of the ex-ISI Chief, recounting his achievements and his credentials as a leading Islamic international figure, who, he alleged, had been defamed by a report in the English language newspaper ‘The News’, published by the Jang/News Group, owned by Mir Shakil ur Rehman, the virtual media king of Pakistan.

    “The complainant symbolizes the Islam loving populous of Pakistan by being an active member of the Tableeghi Jamaat which stands and works for the preaching of Islam…” his petition in the Anti-Terrorism Court No III, based in Lahore, began. Click here to View Petition Page1 Page2 Page3 Page4 Page5 Page6 Page7 Page8 Page9 Page10

    He then recalled his role as ISI chief in putting together the Mujahideen Government in Kabul, in April 1992 when Soviet-backed President Najibullah was overthrown and US-backed Mujahideen took over Kabul.

    In self adulatory language, the General said in his petition: “On 14th March 1992 I was appointed as DG ISI and became an instant international figure when in April 1992, through his persuasive power and motivational talks he brought all the warring factions of the Afghan Mujahideen to agree to the famous Peshawar Accord and successfully installed the Mujahideen’s first Government under (President) Mujadadi in Kabul.”

    “A true practicing Muslim, he would not compromise on the interests of Islam and Pakistan,” the petition filed by Gen Nasir said, and then revealed: “Despite UN ban on supply of arms to the besieged Bosnians, he successfully air lifted sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles which turned the tide in favour of Bosnian Muslims and forced the Serbs to lift the siege, much to the annoyance of the US Government.”

    The documents goes on to give details of how then the US threatened Pakistan, then ruled by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, to be declared as a terrorist state, if Sharif did not remove him from the post of the ISI chief.

    “He thus became the target of US, Indian and Secular minded lobbies both inside and outside Pakistan. Having failed to buy him, the US Government started a totally fabricated and mendaciously false propaganda against him and demanded his removal as ISI chief, failing which Pakistan would be declared a terrorist state,” the petition filed by his lawyers in the court said.

    “In April 1993, the US Government finally warned Pakistan Government in writing to remove the complainant as ISI’s head failing which Pakistan was threatened to be declared a terrorists state. It was therefore at the behest of the US Government’s official demand that he was prematurely compulsorily retired from service by the Caretaker Government of Mir Balkh Sher Mazari on 13th May 1993,” it said.

    SA Tribune learnt that the highly damaging disclosures by the ex-ISI chief were objected to by the lawyers of the defendants, who had the common sense to point out that these state secrets should not be divulged by a person who was supposed to be responsible and had occupied a sensitive post as the ISI chief.

    But despite the warnings, the petition of the General was not changed and was included in the public record of the case against the newspaper.


  8. The Kargil Conspiracy The Nation 29 May 2003 A.H Amin

    There is general consensus on the fact that military juntas are convenient agents of change employed by larger powers to bring desired policy changes in smaller countries.This is more true for Pakistan where the USA has had a record of using the military juntas as agents of change . Ayub was cultivated in the 1950s and proved his worth as USA’s collaborator par excellence in destroying democracy in Pakistan . The Zia coup was US inspired and had complete US blessings since the USA viewed Mr Z.A Bhutto as a dangerously charismatic leader capable of uniting the Islamic/Third World ! Thus Operation Foul Play of 5th July 1977 ! When Liaquat Ali Khan the then prime minister of Pakistan warned the US Ambassador to Pakistan that the Graham Report on Kashmir must be presented in the UN by 15th October 1951 he was assassinated on 16th October 1951 ! Raja Ghazanfar Ali then Pakistan’s ambassador to Iran noted that Liaquat had planned an Islamic conference to discuss Kashmir , Anglo Iranian Oil Company and Palestine ! Keeping this background in mind the fact that a deliberate conspiracy with a design to control and manipulate Pakistan’s geopolitical future with Kargil as the key point cannot be ruled out.It is possible that Kargil may have been designed as the catalyst to create a civil-military political conflict in Pakistan and as a future launching pad of a military coup.

    In 1998 Nawaz Sharif often criticized as a man with limited IQ took one of Pakistan’s most decisive strategic command decisions defying USA , not appeasing it as Musharraf took in September 2001 ! It is on record that Nawaz Sharif did not surrender on one telephone call from US president like General Musharraf did and defied US threats not to go on with the nuclear tests despite four telephone call threats from US president Clinton and resolutely went on with Pakistan’s Nuclear blasts ! Recently Dr Qadeer Khan speaking at a function in Karachi on 3rd April 2003 stated that Nawaz even refused an offer of bribe from Clinton wherein Clinton had offered to deposite 100 Million USD in Nawaz Sharif’s personal bank account ! All evidence proves that Nawaz Sharif’s decision to go on with the Nuclear blast was a political decision and the role of the armed forces was merely that of a technocrat consultant ! It appears that from May 1998 the US policy makers came to the conclusion that Nawaz was an irresponsible man and must be taken to task.. By September 1998 it appears that the Americans had succeeded in their manipulations . The then Army chief General Karamat at this stage started pressurizing the political leadership to include the army in the political decision making .

    Nawaz had done his homework well.With the ISI firmly under the prime ministers command under Lieutenant General Ziauddin one senior officer Zulfiqar presently chairman WAPDA had been sent to Ukraine to find details of kick backs given to General Jahangir Karamat in the Ukraianian tank deal with Pakistan.Full evidence was prepared of Jahangirs complicity in taking kick backs.Once Karamat asserted his political ambitions Nawaz threatened him with prosecution for taking kick backs ! Thus Jahangir Karamat’s unceremonial exit from power ! USA’s likely agent of change had been removed !

    Now comes Kargil. With the appointment of Musharraf as army chief the more Machiavellian geopolitical moves were planned ! Major general Javed Hassan Khan previously military attaché to Washington where many military attaches are successfully cultivated by US intelligence was posted as Commander FCNA incharge of the forces in Gilgit ,Northern Areas including Kargil.The readers may note that this officer presently the commandant of the Pakistan Army’s National Defence College , back in early 1990s made Mughal Emperor Humayun fight in Second Battle of Panipat in his book “India- A Study in Profile�? ! The fact is that Humayun was dead while Panipat was fought and Humayun had no connection with Second Battle of Panipat !

    The men who planned Kargil military operation using Pakistan’s 80 Brigade to infiltrate Indian positions in Kargil Sector were instruments of a grand conspiracy to destabilize Pakistans political government which had defied the USA and wanted to make peace with India without US involvement ! Ambition of General Musharraf and his team while planning Kargil had infected the entire military thought process ! The Kargil plan was adventurist,superpower manipulated and its intrinsic violence penetrated and cut open the very arteries of the Pakistani state, spurting out in civil military strife and finally a military coup !

    The heroes of those rocky pinnacles are all dead ! Sacrificed in vain ! Diabolically launched into the valleys of death by men who now are dead earnest to make peace with India but propelled by promiscuous and unadulterated ambition wanted to sabotage Nawaz Sharif’s Lahore Peace move in 1999 ! Once Vajpayee came to Lahore on Nawaz’s initiatiave in 1999 he was a vampire but once Musharraf went to Agra later Vajpayee was an angel !

    At the super power level Kargil was planned with a view to ridicule Pakistan’s political leadership , embarrass the Pakistani prime minister and to create a civil military divide aimed at a military coup in Pakistan ! Why ! Someone may ask naievely ! Because the USA views the military junta in Third World countries as a more reliable collaborator agent of change than a prime minister who repeatedly defies US threats of retaliation and a 100 Million USD bribery offer !

    Thus Kargil operation was launched with an ulterior motive to divide Pakistan’s political and military leaderships ! It is an unfortunate fact of history that Nawaz Sharif was mot aided by a good defence analyst team ! Those who were with him and supposedly considered defence experts were either in secret league with Nawaz’s handpicked military man or too naieve to understand the military intricacies of Kargil !

    Kargil in the final analysis stands out as the meticulously planned conspiracy catalyst employed to trigger a chain of events that led to the primacy of the military junta on 12 October 1999 !

    So far the Americans have succeeded ! The Pakistani Nuclear programme is in safe hands ! Pakistan , the beautiful woman in words of General Habibullah has sold herself to , not the highest bidder , but the only bidder at a relatively low price !

    The military junta has divided the society ! Bought the pillars of state ! Balkanised the political parties ! Marginalised the society introducing unjust ethnic domination in the army , reduced the Sindhis into a political minority , pitched Punjab against Sindh by Machaievellian agreement to Thal Canal and is all set to strike a deal with India which would ensure that Pakistan’s military junta is given a permanent share in the political hierarchy simply because it is USA’s best and most reliable agent of change ! Life goes on !

    Kargil-A Military Analysis 15 June 2003 A.H Amin

    Kargil stands as perhaps the final military effort on Pakistans part to settle the Kashmir dispute by military means. Analysis has mostly centred around political aspects of the operation while the military aspects have been largely left to the imagination of the public.Lately it has been claimed that Kargil was launched to bail out Mujahideen as a last resort ! This is an insult to the memory of the Pakistani armed forces “Volunteers” who died in that Himalayan wasteland without a funeral and in circumstances of unimaginable misery ! Kargil operation cannot be understood unless the personalities and motives of the principal characters are examined ! Every action in history is the final culmination of a personality’s self perception,ambition and subconscious as well as conscious urges.

    In this context the Kargil operation was born out of two key factors ! One was the personality of general Pervez Musharraf and the second was the unceremonial manner in which Nawaz Sharif ousted General Jahangir Karamat Musharraf’s predecessor army chief of Pakistan Army. Musharraf as those who have served with him know which includes this scribe also has always been an intensely ambitious man ! One hallmark of his personality is that he wants to stand out as a great military commander ! Propelled by an enormous ego wherever he served he endeavoured to do something extraordinary ! However fate did not allow him the glory in battle which his other coursemates like shabbir sharif achieved ! In 1965 Musharraf was a subaltern in an artillery unit which saw little action apart from supporting operatiions by indirect fire ! The 16 SP unlike 3 SP which fired on Indian tanks with direct gunsights at Chawinda stayed in conventional artillery role ! In 1971 Musharrafs commando company was not involved in action ! Nevertheless Musharraf compensated for this lack of combat laurels by achieving laurels in army courses and in various command assignments ! His final opportunity came when he ascended to the post of army chief in a situation when the army was in a subservient position vis a vis the civilian head of state , something which was regarded by the military herarchy as worse than blasphemy !

    The forced retirement of General Karamat by prime minister Nawaz Sharif was regarded as a personal defeat by the Pakistani military brass and by Musharraf who felt that he would be a far weaker army chief under a strong prime minister who had asserted civilian control over the military machine ! These two factors were the fathers of the Kargil operation ! Ambition accompanied by a perception that the Pakistani public must be convinced that the soldiers were better than politicians. Kargil at the military level was the brainchild of three men i.e General Musharraf the army chief ,Aziz the then army Chief of general Staff and Mahmud the then corps commander 10 Corps ! Musharraf and Mahmud were motivated by intense ambition to achieve military glory and Aziz was motivated by his Kashmiri ancestry plus military ambition.The person they selected to execute the operation was again one distinguished by out of proportion ambition i.e Major General Javed Hassan , author of a book in 1990s that claimed that India was on its way to disintegration and in which mughal king Humayun was resurrected from the grave to fight at Second Battle of Panipat !

    In November December 1998 just one month after Musharraf’s elevation to the post of army chief volunteers were asked for at the army level for an operation in Kashmir ! Many thousand volunteered including both officers and men from various units ! At no stage did any Mujahideen enter Kargil ! This is a piece of fiction and has no veracity ! These were attached to NLI units in the 80 Brigade sector for training.The principal idea of the plan was to infiltrate four battalions of NLI (Northern light Infantry) stationed in 80 Brigade Sector into Kargil Heights overlooking and dominating the Srinagar Ladakh road the lone Indian link with the Siachen and Leh Sectors ! The idea being to cut the lifeline of Indian supplies to Leh and Siachen Sectors ! Indian held heights in Kargil were to be occupied in February 1999 while Indian infantry had abandoned these heights at the approach of winter snow as an annual routine since 1948.In occupying the heights no fighting was involved ! The real issue was that of supplying Pakistani troops holding these heights which was far more difficult from the Pakistani side than from the Indian side !

    Plans were kept secret and even the Commander 10 Corps Engineers of was not allowed to enter the Operations Room in 10 Corps Pindi. The distance involved in reaching the heights varied from 15 to 35 kilometres from Pakistan side over mountains as high as 13 to 19,000 feet .To do this each battalion was divided into two parts , one acting as porters taking supplies forward and one half occupying the heights . The heights were occupied as per the plan but the four units while doing so were severly exhausted ! In March-April the Indians discovered the Pakistani presence and reacted severely ! Severe fighting continued till July once the Indians finally re-captured the heights after Pakistani troops had been left to the mercy of Indian artillery and overwhelming troop concentrations as a result of the Blair House Accord ! A brief military examination of the plan reveals following weaknesses.(1) Failure to assess strategic repercussions of the operation at geopolitic and national strategic level .(2) Logistic failure in incorrect appreciation of supplying the troops . (3) Failure to understand that by occupying the heights the Indians were driven into a corner and had no choice but to retaliate , not for glory as was the Pakistani military’s case but for pure military survival . (4) At a more subtle level the use of the Chora-Batalik Sector as a future spring board for Pakistani operations against India was sealed since Indians heavily fortified this sector for any future war.

    The Pakistani planners failed to assess that war as an instrument of policy is no longer in vogue at the international level and their temporary military success would only bring greater international censure and a negative war mongering image without any corresponding military gain at the strategic level. This scribe interviewed a former commander of FCNA and 10 Corps about logistics and General Imtiaz Warraich replied as following :–

    ” We initiated this operation but failed to support it with comprehensive operational planning and above all buildup for essential logistic support without which no operation can succeed”……’” the principal reason for our heavy casualties and lack of progress was unimaginative and callous logistic operations to support the units”.

    At one point the sepoys who had volunteered to fight and had come from many other infantry units to the NLI units refused to act as porters carrying supplies over 15 kilometres and were so exasperated that they defied Javed Hassan’s personal orders in unit durbars to carry supplies and when Javed Hassn threw his cap on the ground threatened to march over it unless they were not employed as porters ! One such volunteer told this scribe that we had volunteered to fight ,not to act as porters ! The same fact was also mentioned in ISI chief Ziauddin Butt’s secret report to Nawaz Sharif prepared by an Engineer officer on Zia’s staff in ISI !

    The failure to assess the “Enemy” factor was another strategic planning failure at the highest level .I asked General Warraich this question and he stated ” Capture of Kargil Heights would totally stop all Indian movement to Leh and Ladakh Sectors unlike Pakistan in Siachen and Indians had no option but to do and die ” !

    Lust for glory and honour in battle are perfectly reasonable aspirations as long as they are accompanied by commensurate military talent in the generals who are at the helm of affairs ! This was sadly lacking in the Musharraf team who planned the operation. Their egos were many times larger than their real military talent !

    By promoting an intensely ambitious man to the rank of army chief Nawaz did a favour which could only be repaid by betrayal ! The plan was based not on sound military reasoning but on burning ambition and an unrealistic desire for glory by men far away from the heat of battle ! No one above major level died , yet in a report to the military secretarys branch Javed Hassan recommended retiring 75 % of officers involved in the operation below colonel level !

    The prime minister was not fully briefed because of ulterior motives ! Had the operation succeeded it would have been projected as a proof of Musharraf’s Napoleonic brilliance and if it failed as it did Nawaz Sharif would have been made the scapegoat !

    The operations planners were distinguished neither by loftiness of thought,nor audacity in the conduct of battle athe operational or strategic level.Thus boldness at tactiacl level was sacrificed because of operational and tactical timidity at the highest level.

    No one appreciated that the army men who were employed , and it is a fiction that there was a single Mujahid in Kargil , had flesha nd blood ! These men mourned by a few hundred families were sons husbands fathers and brothers !

    The Kargil operation at the military level is a watershed ! Idealism that propelled many hundred to die in those Himalayan wastes is buried for good ! Now there is a new breed which dominates the army ! The ones who aim at going on lush UN secondments or to KESC,WAPDA or as well paid consulatants !

    What can one conclude ! It was the human heart that failed in Kargil and this heart which failed was housed in the ribcage of men sitting in the GHQ and not on the rocky pinnacles of Kargil ! Once the supply lines were closed under Indian threat of a counter attack , these brave men all Pakistan Army regulars were abandoned to die , pounded by artillery fire , bayoneted by overwhelming numbers , weakened by starvation ! Who can hear their cries ! Our ears are covered with heaps of lies ! Truth died at Kargil ! What remains is a body guard of lies!

  9. UN delays Bhutto assassination report

    Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday accepted a request from Pakistan’s president to delay the release of a report on the assassination of his wife, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, until April 15.

    U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky made the announcement just two hours before a three-member U.N. commission that investigated Bhutto’s death was scheduled to hold a press conference to discuss the report’s findings.

    “The secretary-general has accepted an urgent request from the president of Pakistan to delay the report … until April 15,” he said. “The intention is the report will not be seen by the Pakistani government until April 15.”

    Nesirky said he did not know why Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari made the request, which was received at the U.N. overnight.

    “The secretary-general would not have accepted the request if he did not think there were good reasons to do so,” Nesirky said.

    Pakistan’s U.N. Mission had no immediate comment.

    Bhutto was killed in a Dec. 27, 2007, gun and suicide-bomb attack as she was leaving a rally in the garrison town of Rawalpindi, where she was campaigning to return her Pakistan People’s Party to power in parliamentary elections.

    The government at the time of Bhutto’s murder, led by President Pervez Musharraf, blamed Baitullah Mehsud, a Pakistani militant commander with reported links to al-Qaida. Officials at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency also said Mehsud was the chief suspect.

    But Bhutto’s party repeatedly hinted that Musharraf or his allies were involved and demanded a U.N. probe, claiming it was the only way the whole truth would be revealed.

    The secretary-general agreed to appoint a commission to assist Pakistan by determining the facts and circumstances of Bhutto’s death and it began work on July 1, 2009.

    Nesirky said the commission informed Ban that “all relevant facts and circumstances have been explored and the report is now complete and ready to be delivered.”

    The three-member commission is led by Chile’s U.N. Ambassador Heraldo Munoz, a dissident during the dictatorship of Gen. Augusto Pinochet. The other members are former Indonesian attorney general Marzuki Darusman, now a member of the National Commission of Human Rights, and Ireland’s former deputy police commissioner Peter Fitzgerald, who headed the initial U.N. inquiry into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005.

    Under terms agreed to by the U.N. and the Pakistani government, the commission was to determine facts and circumstances but Pakistani authorities would determine any criminal responsibility.

    Zardari succeeded Musharraf as president in September 2008 and when Ban visited Pakistan in February 2009 the president told government officials: “We believe the commission’s findings will eventually expose the financiers, the organizers, the sponsors and the conspirators of this terrorist act and bring them to justice.”

    The decision came as a UN inquiry panel was expected to present its findings about Bhutto’s killing to UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday.

    The UN says the report will be released by April 15.

    “The secretary general has accepted an urgent request by the president of Pakistan to delay the presentation of the report… until April 15,” UN spokesman Martin Nesirky told a press briefing.

    Nesirky said he did not know the reason for the late request to hold the report back.

    He further confirmed that the report had been finished and that neither the UN secretary general nor the Pakistani government had seen it.

    Another UN spokeswoman also said earlier that the world body plans to shut its offices in Pakistan for three days as the country awaits the release of the report.

    Ishrat Rizvi added that all UN staff has been advised to work from home.

    She says the move is “a precautionary measure” to prevent unexpected attacks on the offices after the release of the report.

    “It’s a precautionary measure to avoid any unwanted situation that may occur after the publication of this report, for the safety and security of staff members,” she added.

    The UN-appointed independent panel, which began its investigation last July, held talks with many people to find those behind the assassination attack.

    In Islamabad, Pakistan’s information minister said his country had asked for the delay so that the panel could get input from two former heads of state, who he said had warned Bhutto there could be a threat to her life.

    The two heads of state, whom he declined to name, “could be helpful to the commission in finding who was behind her assassination,” the minister, Qamar Zaman Kaira, told Reuters.

    The panel, headed by Chile’s U.N. Ambassador Heraldo Munoz, looked into the circumstances surrounding the attack that killed Bhutto after an election campaign rally in Rawalpindi city on Dec. 27, 2007.

    “The Secretary-General has accepted an urgent request by the President of Pakistan to delay the presentation of the report … until 15 April 2010,” Nesirky told reporters.

    But he said the panel had told Ban “that, as of today, all relevant facts and circumstances have been explored, and the report is now complete and ready to be delivered.”


    Although Nesirky said Ban would not have accepted the Pakistani request without good reason, he suggested there could now be no change to the report. “My understanding is, and the guidance that I have is, that this is complete, it’s done, it’s not to be added to,” he said.

    Neither Ban nor the Pakistani government had seen the report, Nesirky said. The U.N. chief set up the panel in July at the request of Pakistan’s coalition government, led by Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party.

    The previous government, headed by allies of former president and army chief Pervez Musharraf, blamed then Pakistani Taliban leader and al Qaeda ally Baitullah Mehsud for Bhutto’s murder. Mehsud was killed in a U.S. drone strike last August.

    The panel, whose original six-month mandate had already been extended by three months because of the scale of its task, is not expected to name suspected culprits.

    Any criminal investigation will be up to Pakistani authorities, but Munoz has said the commission’s findings could complement government efforts.

    A U.N. spokeswoman in Islamabad said a U.N. office there had been closed for three days due to security fears in connection with the release of the report.

    Despite the accusations against Mehsud, conspiracy theories have abounded in Pakistan over who was behind the suicide gun-and-bomb attack on Bhutto just weeks after she returned from self-imposed exile.

    She was mistrusted by sections of the Pakistani military and security establishment and speculation has lingered that she was the victim of a plot by allies of Musharraf who did not want her to come to power.

  10. I’m commenting to make you be aware of of the useful discovery my wife’s child encountered reading through your web site. She came to understand many pieces, most notably how it is like to have an incredible helping heart to have a number of people really easily understand specific grueling issues. You actually surpassed our own desires. I appreciate you for supplying the important, trustworthy, informative and as well as fun tips on the topic to Ethel.

  11. I am extremely inspired along with your writing talents as well as with the format to your blog. Is that this a paid subject matter or did you customize it your self? Anyway keep up the excellent high quality writing, it is uncommon to peer a nice weblog like this one these days..

  12. I have noticed that credit repair activity should be conducted with techniques. If not, it’s possible you’ll find yourself damaging your rank. In order to be successful in fixing your credit history you have to take care that from this moment in time you pay your entire monthly expenses promptly before their timetabled date. It is significant simply because by not really accomplishing that area, all other methods that you will decide to use to improve your credit ranking will not be useful. Thanks for expressing your concepts.