Showing posts with label Freedom Fighter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom Fighter. Show all posts

Sunday, November 09, 2014

"Attacks On Israeli Soldiers Legitimate and Not Terrorism"



Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni came under fire for making a distinction between terrorists who attack civilians and enemy fighters who fight against IDF soldiers. 

"Somebody who is fighting against Israeli soldiers is an enemy and we will fight back, but I believe that this is not under the definition of terrorism, if the target is a soldier," Livni said in an interview three weeks ago on US television network ABC's Nightline that was broadcast on Israel Radio Tuesday. 

During the ABC interview, Livni was asked whether she considered her father, Eitan, who was the Irgun Zva'i Leumi's director of operations during the pre-state days and fought British rule, a terrorist. 

She replied that her father fought against British soldiers, not civilians, and agreed that if Hamas used suicide bombings only against soldiers she would not call that "terrorism."

Israel's former Consul General Alon Pinkas, who was frequently interviewed on Nightline, said that groups that exclusively target soldiers can legitimately be called "guerrilla organizations." 

Livni reiterated in an interview to Israel Radio Tuesday morning what she had said in the Nightline interview; namely, that attacks specifically against soldiers could be seen as "more legitimate" than attacks on Israeli civilians


Israel's foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, has broken a taboo by declaring that Palestinians who kill Israeli soldiers are not terrorists.

The row began when Israeli radio broadcast an interview in which 48-year-old Mrs Livni said that attacks on Israeli soldiers were "more legitimate" than attacks on Israeli civilians.

"Somebody who is fighting against Israeli soldiers is an enemy and we will fight back," she said. "But I believe that this is not under the definition of terrorism if the target is a soldier."
Mrs Livni first made her comments during an interview recorded several weeks ago by the American ABC television network, where they went largely unnoticed.
But when they were broadcast in Israel this week they provoked an immediate angry reaction.
[Tzipi Livni's defining and making a distinction between legitimate acts of resistance and terrorism, occurred back in 2006. It's a significant statement and assessment by a major Israeli official which remains relevant and can't be recanted]

Saturday, March 05, 2011

New Egypt PM At Tahrir Rally


Thousands of people gathered in Tahrir Square on Friday [Ayman Mohyeldin]


Essam Sharaf Addresses Thousands Of Pro-Democracy Campaigners Who Have Gathered In Centre Of Cairo After Friday Prayers.

Last Modified: 04 Mar 2011 14:03 GMT
Courtesy Of "Al-Jazeera"


Essam Sharaf, the new Egyptian prime minister, has addressed a massive rally by pro-democracy campaigners in Cairo's Tahrir [Liberation] Square.

The square in the centre of the Egyptian capital was the focal point of anti-government protests that brought down Hosni Mubarak last month.

He appeared on the stage with Mohammed el-Beltagy, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Making a brief speech, Sharaf said the security apparatus - much hated by the people during Mukarak's rule - must work for the good of the people.

Sharaf appeared on stage with a Muslim Brotherhood leader [Reuters]
He told the cheering crowds that he had come "to draw legitimacy" from them, and said he will do whatever he can to respond to the revolution demands.

"I'm telling you, I came here because I've been assigned a big responsibility, a heavy burden, that requires patience and strong will.  And there is no other place other than here than Tahrir, where we can extract this will and determination.  We are with you," Sharaf told the crowds gathered in the square.

"You have achieved a big task and the bigger objective is to rebuild Egypt.  

Please listen to me, I’m praying to God that I would see Egypt a free country where opinion is not captured in prison cells and see that the security of the citizen is a top priority. And that the security apparatus works for the good of the citizens and at the end I would like to say, please if you allow me, there are lots of demands that we are working on, but I would like to end my speech.

"I pray to god that may Almighty God has honoured me with more than I've asked for.  And I pray to God to help me to be able to deserve this position.  Please, raise your head up, you are an Egyptian.

"I take my goals from you, and I promise you, if I cannot fulfil those objectives, I will come and join you as a protester."

The rally held after Friday prayers was aimed at pressing the country's military rulers to deliver on their promises of reform.

"What is so iconic about this image and historic is that immediately adjacent to him is a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammed el-Beltagy. Now that image would have been impossible to imagine just a few weeks ago," Al Jazeera's Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from Tahrir, said.

"A senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood standing side-by-side with the current prime minister of Egypt addressing thousands of people ... Indeed it is a very historic moment."

Friday's demonstration came a day after the resignation of prime minister Ahmed Shafiq. Sharaf, a former transport minister, was subsequently named the the new prime minister by the military supreme council.

Shafiq's resignation had been one of the protesters' key demands after 18 days of mass rallies forced former president  Mubarak to step down on February 11.

'Vocal Critic'

Sharaf's appointment has been received well by ordinary Egyptians.

"Certainly he has earned a lot of street credibility with these protesters and more importantly with the political factions who had actually recommended his name to the military council as a potential replacement for the outgoing prime minister," Mohyeldin said.

"He was a very vocal critic of the regime and because he himself was seen as a protester when he didn't have any position of power, when he wasn't even considered as a potential prime minister, that certainly earned him a lot of respect."

Opposition figure Mohamed ElBaradei, who returned to Egypt to join the protests after heading the Vienna-based UN nuclear agency, welcomed Shafiq's resignation.

"We are on the right track, I express my sincere appreciation to the Supreme Council of Armed Forces who have accepted the demand of the people," he wrote on the microblogging site Twitter.

Meanwhile on Friday, Antiquities Minister Zahi Hawass was quoted in Egyptian newspapers as saying he would not participate in the new government to be led by Sharaf.

Hawass has been a cabinet minister since January 31 when Mubarak named a new government led by Shafiq.

Hawass said he was no longer able to carry out his duties amid what he called a campaign against him by officials at his ministry.

Sharaf has been charged by the military council with forming a new cabinet.

The council had previously ordered the government to run the country's affairs for six months "or until the end of parliamentary and presidential elections".

Friday, March 04, 2011

Fighting For Freedom Against Tanks, Mercenaries & Bombs



It has become a symbol of the fight against Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi: Protesters in the northern town of Al-Bayda faced mercenaries, tanks and bombs, but refused to buckle. Dozens died, but those who were wounded say they will return to the front if needed.

By Matthias Gebauer
In Al-Bayda, Libya
February 26, 2011
Courtesy Of "Der Spiegel Online"

It was 9:30 in the morning on Friday when Abdel Aziz Abdallah learned that his son was dead. The 55-year-old received a phone call from an acquaintance with contacts to the unsteady regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Abdallah's son Farj, just 23 years old, died in a hospital in Tripoli, the acquaintance told his father. His body will soon be brought to his hometown of Al-Bayda in north-eastern Libya for burial.

Abdallah is holding a photo of his son as the first guests arrive at the family's small garage following Friday prayers. "He was still young," he says of his son. "But he died for the right cause. He is a martyr for freedom."


Bayda is a small city on the Mediterranean coast in an area of the country that residents have begun to call "the liberated part of Libya." Gadhafi's regime has lost all control of the north-eastern part of the country and the rebels now have the upper hand.

Farj's best friend Said is in a hospital in Bayda; one of his legs seriously injured by several bullets from a machine gun. The doctor next to his bed, a Palestinian, does not have good news, saying he isn't sure that he will be able to save the limb. When Said learns of his friend's death, he becomes enraged. "This regime killed my friend," he yells. "They murdered him in the hospital."

Farj and Said were fighting on the front lines against the Gadhafi regime when they were gunned down. On Friday one week ago, the two were taking part in a protest in Bayda with 23 other friends when they heard a disturbing rumor making the rounds. A giant Ilyushin transport plane had landed at the airport carrying 400 African mercenaries. The demonstrators knew immediately what the mercenaries' mission was. As they had in other cities, the well-paid unit was to brutally crush the protests, if necessary by firing indiscriminately into the masses. Said and Farj rushed to the airport.

'We Can Certainly Take Tripoli'

The three days after the Ilyushin landed were bloody in Bayda; it was a battle that has become a symbol of the Libyan insurgency. Despite being clearly overmatched by the heavily armed mercenaries, who were later reinforced with tanks, the demonstrators fought them down and retook the strategically important airport on Monday. Since then, the battle for Bayda has become proof for many that the aims of the regime opponents can, in fact, be achieved. "If we could defend Bayda against the regime's henchmen," Said said from his hospital bed, "then we can certainly take Tripoli, even if it costs many lives."


Traces of the brutal fight are everywhere on the white-tiled departure terminal at the regional airport.


The ground is littered with bullet casings, weapons crates and the bloody uniforms of the African mercenaries. Among hundreds of boarding passes and suitcases, one can see trails of blood from the wounded and the dead. Jackets, caps and boots from Gadhafi's soldiers lie among ripped open first aid materials. The walls are pocked with bullet holes -- beneath the windows sit empty munitions crates, many of them once containing artillery shells, bearing Russian writing.


The world has Abdul Kadr to thank for spreading the news of the airport battle. The young student lives in a small town not far from the airport -- and he filmed the three-day-long battle day and night. From rooftops and from the street, he shot images of Ilyushins landing at the airport to send more mercenaries into the battle. Though wobbly, one from last Saturday shows a Libyan fighter jet roaring over Bayda -- and one can clearly see the jet dropping a bomb not far from the airport. A further video shows a helicopter shooting into the mass of people.

Solid Proof

Kadr didn't sleep at all during the three days of the battle. Sitting in his parents' living room, Kadr describes how the tanks that were flown in fired on buildings outside the airport grounds. Several houses in his village were hit and four people were killed. Kadr knew how important his videos were. 

When the first BBC reporter made it to Bayda in the days following the battle, Kadr handed over his images and begged him to publicize them. Just hours later, they could be seen on computer screens across the globe. It was the first solid proof of the brutality that Gadhafi had visited upon his own people. It was the first solid proof that the dictator's regime had bombed his own people.

Said was the only one of his friends who survived the battle for the airport. When they first arrived at the airport with hundreds of other insurgents, armed only with wooden clubs and steel rods, the mercenaries opened fire with their machine guns. Said went down immediately as the rest tried to storm the airport doors. Wounded and in shock, Said saw how his friend Farj was captured at the airport gate. "They shot him in the leg and dragged him into the terminal," he says. Since then, Farj and the rest of Said's friends have been missing. Said assumes that they were taken to Tripoli by airplane.

In the days that followed, Said kept track of the airport battle by telephone. Over and over, he called acquaintances for news of the fight, which could easily be heard in the city five kilometers away. Said learned that the mercenaries continued firing on the demonstrators from the terminal building, even using heavy weaponry against the poorly armed insurgents. Twice they tried to advance into the city with tanks. But the rebels stopped them and captured the vehicles. Now, their burned out hulks sit on the shoulder of the road between the airport and Bayda. In the city, the flag of the insurgency is flying from the scorched government buildings, once symbols of power for the old regime.

'I'm Not Dead'

Dozens of people died in the battle for Bayda and hundreds were wounded. Even the doctors in the clinics aren't sure how high the death toll might be, but they estimate that up to 70 may have lost their lives. Said shares his hospital room with several other badly wounded men. One lost an eye after being grazed by a bullet; another was shot in the belly.

Nasr Awad has thick and bloody bandages on his hand and leg. The doctors want to operate again in the evening and are planning to amputate yet another of the 37-year-old's fingers. Nevertheless, Awad says he would go back into battle should it become necessary. "If this revolution isn't successful," he says, "we can just go ahead and kill ourselves."



The phone call from Tripoli finally provided Said with certainty about the fate of his friend Farj. But he is consumed by a new suspicion. Doctors from clinics in the capital have called rebels in Bayda with disturbing news. Units of Gadhafi loyalists, Said said the doctors reported, are gathering up injured Gadhafi opponents so that they are unable to report on the regime's brutality. Said is certain that one of those units killed his friend.

"You don't die from a bullet in the leg," he says. "After all, I'm not dead."

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Egypt Police Officer On Lives Lost

Police Brigadier Says Lack Of Police Training Led To Loss Of Many Lives.

Last Modified: 17 Feb 2011 11:41 GMT
Courtesy Of "Al Jazeera"

Egypt paid a huge price, in terms of lives lost, for the revolution.

However, a Brigadier with Cairo's police, told Al Jazeera in an exclusive interview that many lives could have been saved if police personnel had undergone correct training for riot control.

The government says 365 people died, but scores of people are still missing.

Andrew Simmons reports from Cairo.

Social Networks, Social Revolution

Youtube, Facebook and Twitter Have Become The New Weapons Of Mass Mobilisation.

Last Modified: 16 Feb 2011 15:56 GMT
Courtesy Of "Al Jazeera"

Information is power, but 21st century technology has unleashed an information revolution, and now the genie is out of the bottle.

Youtube, Facebook and Twitter have become the new weapons of mass mobilisation; geeks have taken on dictators; bloggers are dissidents; and social networks have become rallying forces for social justice.

As people around the world challenge authorities, from Iran to Tunisia, Egypt to Yemen, entire societies are being transformed as ordinary citizens see the difference, imagine the alternative, and come together to organise for a better future.

So, are social networks triggering social revolution? And where will the next domino fall?

Empire finds out.

Joining Marwan Bishara to discuss these issues are: Carl Bernstein, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist; Amy Goodman, the host and executive producer of Democracy Now!; Professor Emily Bell, the director of digital journalism at Columbia University; Evgeny Morozov, the author of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom; Professor Clay Shirky, the author of Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age.

Learning From Past Revolutions?


Hungarian foreign minister Gyula Horn (R) and his Austrian counterpart Alois Mock (L) cut through a piece of the Iron Curtain in June 1989. But supporters of democracy in Egypt must also cut through a culture of patronage [EPA]


Egyptians Are Treading A Well-Worn Historical Path, Walked In Eastern Europe, Iran, Cuba and Beyond.

By Chris Arsenault
Last Modified: 17 Feb 2011 08:40 GMT
Courtesy Of "Al Jazeera"

As Hungary's political changes began, Istavan Rev watched cautiously. Like thousands of his countrymen, he feared violence, counter-revolution or extremism - products of revolution the world over.



Two decades after the 1989 political transformation broke the chains of Soviet control, lessons learned in Budapest could now provide insights for jubilant crowds in Egypt and Tunisia.

Likewise, the guillotines of France in 1789, the Bolshevik purges of 1917 and the shrewd ability of Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Party to marginalise other social movements in 1979 provide chilling lessons to would-be revolutionaries. 

"What happened in most of the countries of east and central Europe in former Soviet satellites were not typical revolutions, not revolutions in the textbook sense," says Rev, now professor of history at the Central European University in Budapest.

A Long Way To Go

It is still too early to classify the political developments in Egypt and Tunisia. They could be a reconfiguration of national life, based on mostly peaceful uprisings - leading to broader institutional change.

Or, with Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali out of the picture, the faces of the regimes might change, while the entrenched power of the "deep state" remains untouched, says Kristian Coates, a professor of global governance and scholar of revolution at the London School of Economics.

"Egypt has a fair way to go before it can be described as a revolution," says Coates.

"The removal of a figure-head is not the removal of a regime."

The classic 20th century revolutions - notably Russia, China, Vietnam, Iran and Cuba - involved prolonged, violent struggle, causing a break-up of the ruling elite, says Theda Skocpol, a professor of government at Harvard University and a leading expert on political change.

"Revolutions are usually much more violent than what we saw in Egypt," she says.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall closed the historical curtain on traditional visions of Marxist-Leninist state power seizures, the "colour" revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia provide a good example of what not to do after so-called people power ousts an unpopular leader.

"In post-2004 Ukraine, the oligarchs remained embedded in the political framework, even though there was supposedly a revolution," Coates says of the western-backed "Orange Revolution".

"I suspect Egypt will probably go the way of Ukraine," he says.

"The embedded interests sacrificed Mubarak. He was the visible head of the regime - but these deeply embedded networks will be very hard to dislodge."

Favours For Friends

To mitigate classic concerns like poverty, corruption and a lack of freedom, dictators in Egypt and beyond usually rely on patronage networks, guaranteeing jobs and other perks to supporters. 

Those networks dominated much of Egypt’s economic life, with government jobs - and even positions on local library boards or sports organisations - doled out to ruling party supporters.

"Initially, Egypt could potentially focus on job creation schemes in labour intensive industries, brought under the control of a democratic state, rather than private or semi-private patronage networks"
Kristian Coates,  professor of global governance, London School of Economics
With 40 per cent of the population living on less than $2 a day, it is hard to blame anyone from cozying up to the ruling party in the hopes of getting a job. But a revolution from below requires a rebuilding of the social order - and the excluded majority will question why supporters of an ousted leader continue to enjoy perks.

The military, entrusted with guaranteeing the transition to democracy and a new constitution, benefited more than most from official patronage, including an annual $1.3bn in military aid from the US, Mubarak’s former patron.   

"If - but hopefully 'when' - elections materialise, they will catalyse a process which will begin to open up politics and economics and chip away at the entrenched interests and privileges that run far and wide in Egypt," says Alia Brahimi, senior research associate at Oxford University.

In former Soviet bloc countries, democracy did not level the economic playing field - and officials with ties to old regimes maintained privileged access to the centres of power.  

"People were worried about a civil war between representatives from the old regime and the incoming one," says Istavan Rev from his office in Hungary.

"There was a decision not to ban those people affiliated with the Soviet-backed regime from public office. The lack of such a process poisoned, in some sense, the political process."

For attaining justice, Hungary's choice might have been meek. But for stability, it made sense: revolutionary purges of an old order often end badly - the so-called de-Baathification imposed by the US after its invasion of Iraq alienated small-time players who worked under Saddam Hussein, intensifying instability and sectarian conflict.

Through The Lens Of History

As protests rock Bahrain, the king hasactually  increased patronage, handing the equivalent of $2655 to each family in a bid to bolster his faltering legitimacy. So far, it isn’t working.

"If Egypt moves from being an autocratic regime to being a constitutional order, then over time there will be less patronage," says Harvard's Theda Skocpol.

"It might not happen overnight - and it might be better if it doesn’t happen overnight."

Impatience is a classic trait of revolutionaries. But short-term euphoria often ends in long-term suffering.

Fidel Castro and Che Guevara turfed out a US-backed dictator and his mafia cronies in a 1959 revolution. Castro and the communists greatly expanded public services, improving health and education for average people. But Fidel's dream of a "dictatorship of the exploited against the exploiters" became a good-old fashioned dictatorship, according to human rights groups, who accuse the government of censoring the press and jailing dissidents.

Turkey is frequently cited as an example Egypt and Tunisia could follow, as it successfully merges democracy, Islam and strong economic growth. But Skocpol thinks there is a better example than Turkey: Spain.

Dictator Francisco Franco "was persuaded to step aside, and gradually Spain made the transition to a more constitutional system", she said - adding that the army, once a vestige of fascism, changed their ways of doing things over time.

Spain doesn't figure prominently among intellectual-types discussing Egypt's future. But the idea of a slow transition, rather than the thrill of the guillotine or firing squads, seems to be widely supported.

The Necessity Of Transparency

If history is a guide for Egyptians and Tunisians, then maintaining openness will be crucial in the coming months if a democratic constitution is to take root, says Prof Rev.

"Closed doors always make the population suspicious - and rightly so," he says - adding that current leaders of the opposition must proceed cautiously, as they have not been elected by popular vote.

Televising negotiations to create a new constitution would be a simple way of involving the public, carrying the spirit of a grassroots rebellion into the halls of power, Rev says.  

But fair elections don't fill hungry bellies. And, like revolutions throughout history, basic material concerns loom large in Egypt, Tunisia and beyond.

"Initially, Egypt could potentially focus on job creation schemes in labour intensive industries, brought under the control of a democratic state, rather than private or semi-private patronage networks", says governance professor Coates.

"They need a short term platform to alienate some of the discontent, to train people so they could become regionally and internationally competitive in the long-run."

Rebuilding the tourism industry – "playing to the country's strength" will require projecting an image of normality, he says.  

'Demand The Impossible'

Revolts in Egypt and Tunisia have galvanised a generation tired of unemployment, corruption, censorship and a lack of opportunities. There is nothing new about that. They are following footsteps well worn by the movements of history.

Back in 1968, young people rebelled: in Czechoslovakia, France and the US.
"Be realistic," they cried out. "Demand the impossible."

From his Budapest office, Prof Rev thinks those kinds of demands; those "daring dreams" will have to be shelved - for less glamorous "negotiated outcomes" between various political forces in the country. 

And, sadly, plenty of historical events prove his concluding point: "Reality is always bleaker than people dream."

Saturday, February 12, 2011

The Voice Of Freedom Is Calling




Sout Alhoureya

Hany Adel,Amir Eid Hawary on guitars & Sherif Mostafa on keyboards


Video by moustafa fahmy, mohamed khalifa and mohamed shaker



LYRICS

English (incomplete)

"I went down and I said I am not coming back, and I wrote on every street wall that I am not coming back.

"All barriers have been broken down, our weapon was our dream, and the future is crystal clear to us, we have been waiting for a long time, we are still searching for our place, we keep searching for a place we belong too, in every corner in our country.

"The sound of freedom is calling, in every street corner in our country, the sound of freedom is calling..

"We will re-write history, if you are one of us, join us and don't stop us from fulfilling our dream."

(from Al Jazeera live English blog Feb 11)

Espanol

LA VOZ DE LA LIBERTAD (1)
Hemos levantado la cabeza hacia el cielo
Ya no nos importa el hambre
Lo más importante es nuestro derecho
Y escribir nuestra historia con nuestra sangre
Si eras uno de nosotros, deja de despotricar y de decirnos
Que nos vayamos y olvidemos nuestros sueños
No sigas hablando en mi nombre
En todas las calles de mi país, llama la voz de la libertad

LA VOZ DE LA LIBRTAD (2) He bajado a decir que no vuelvo He escrito con mi sangre en todas las calles Nos ha oído el que no oía Y se han levantado todas las prohibiciones Nuestras armas son nuestros sueños Y tenemos un mañana claro ante nosotros Hace tiempo que esperamos Buscamos y no encontramos nuestro sitio En todas las calles de mi país Llama la voz de la libertad

Friday, October 15, 2010

Why Pakistan Won't Act Against The Taliban

Most Pakistani Soldiers See The Afghan Taliban As Pashtun Freedom Fighters Combating A Foreign Occupation

By Patrick Cockburn
Saturday, 2 October 2010
Courtesy Of "The Independent"

Pakistan has highlighted the hold it has over the US and Nato forces in Afghanistan by stopping their supply trucks from crossing the Afghan frontier. The ban is in retaliation for US helicopters making an attack on the Pakistani side of the border and killing three Pakistani soldiers.

The US is making a somewhat desperate attempt to close down the Afghan Taliban's bases on the Pakistani side of its 2,500km-long border with Afghanistan. The US military's hope of a year ago that a surge in troop numbers inside Afghanistan would turn the tide in the guerrilla war is fading fast. The Taliban have extended their grip in the north and west of the country. The one option left to America and its allies is to try to force the Pakistan army to act decisively against the Taliban in Pakistan.

It is not going to happen. The Pakistan military has become adept over the past decade at outmanoeuvring Washington on this issue. The Taliban were very much Pakistan's creation in the 1990s, though the relationship has been more distant since 9/11. The army has no interest in putting the Taliban permanently out of business and thereby lose Pakistan's main lever over America.

It is reasonable enough for Pakistan to claim that it could not close the Afghan-Pakistan frontier that runs through some of the toughest terrain on earth and is the same distance as between London and Moscow. If the US, with its massive airpower, cannot shut its side of the border, how come the Pakistani army is expected to be more effective on the Pakistani side? Whatever the direct role of Pakistan in sustaining the insurgency in Afghanistan, the bottom line is the same for the US and its allies now as it was for the Soviet Union in the 1980s. So long as the border with Pakistan remains at least partly open, the insurgents cannot be defeated.

One comic aspect of Pakistan shutting down Nato's supply line through the Khyber pass is that the Taliban themselves may not be too pleased to see the ban go on too long. A senior Pakistan officer told me last week in Islamabad that he reckoned that the Taliban received a large part of the $1,500 protection money paid by trucking companies for every one of the 1,000 or so trucks entering Afghanistan each day with supplies for US and Nato forces. This type of extortion may be as important to the Taliban's revenues as the heroin trade.

Local bandits have also been happy beneficiaries of the 80 per cent of supplies for foreign forces in Afghanistan which come through Pakistani ports and are then driven north to the border. These are supposedly non-lethal goods such as fuel, spare parts and clothing. But raids on warehouses in Peshawar by Pakistani security a few days ago discovered two Nato helicopters waiting for a buyer. Locals tell with some merriment of another looted container that turned out to be entirely filled with whisky bottles. Religiously inclined bandits briefly thought of destroying the cargo, but were swiftly convinced by fellow villagers that it would all be sold to non-Muslims.

David Cameron accused Pakistan of aiding the Taliban during his trip to India several months ago and was criticised for his lack of diplomacy. In this minor row the point was lost that the Pakistan and the Afghan insurgency are effectively joined at the hip. The Pakistani army may squeeze the Taliban but it will never squeeze them to death as the Americans want.

It will not do so because the Afghan Taliban are popular in Pakistan. Most Pakistani soldiers I spoke to were happy to fight the Pakistan Taliban, whom they denounced as parasitic on the reputation of their Afghan equivalents. They see the latter as Pashtun freedom fighters combating a foreign occupation and battling for a share in power against their non-Pashtun rivals such as the Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazara. A Pakistani colonel commanding Pashtun troops on the border wondered how American and British troops could conciliate Pashtun villagers since "xenophobia is at the heart of Pashtun culture".

A second reason why the Pakistan military is unlikely to attack the Taliban is that we may be seeing the opening moves in the endgame in Afghanistan. The four main players are the US, the Afghan government, the Taliban and Pakistan. If the Pakistani army plays its cards right, then the outcome of any successful peace negotiations would be a power-sharing government in Kabul in which the Taliban would play an important role. Pashtun provinces would come under substantial Taliban control. Pakistan, with its strong influence over the Taliban, would be established as a regional power.

The American drone attacks on North Waziristan are at a level higher than at any time since they started in 2004. The killing of senior members of al-Qa'ida is triumphantly announced. But the border areas of Pakistan-Afghanistan are an unlikely area from which to mastermind a plot to bomb targets in Europe. There are checkpoints on all the roads in and out of the area. Strangers are closely watched. Jihadi fighters are much more likely to make their way overland to Somalia.

The mess which is American and British strategy in Afghanistan is exemplified by the ease with which the supplies of their forces can be choked off by Pakistan. The Pakistani army, which controls foreign and security policy in the country, is not going to kill off the Taliban at the request of the US. The Hamid Karzai government has less support than the communists at the time of the Soviet military withdrawal in 1988. The US and Britain are politically weak because they have such a feeble Afghan partner in Kabul and militarily weak because they cannot shut the Pakistan border. They have no choice but to negotiate.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

US Occupation Transformed Taliban Into Freedom Fighters

Taliban: The Indistinguishable Enemy

By Mustafa Qadri
Sunday 16 May 2010 13.00 BST
Courtesy Of "The Guardian"

They may be repressive fanatics who enslave women and give sanctuary to al-Qaida, but the US-led occupation of Afghanistan has transformed the Taliban into Pashtun freedom fighters. There are two principal reasons for this.

First, despite our best attempts, the foreign troops and the state they prop up are viewed as outsiders who have come not to liberate the country but subjugate it.

Second, so long as our presence in Afghanistan is primarily military, our relationship to ordinary Afghans will be based primarily on violence. Armies, by their very nature, must intimidate and coerce the population into accepting their authority. Despite the talk of winning hearts and minds and civilian surges, much of what we do in Afghanistan creates fear and hostility. It should not surprise us, then, to hear allegations of US and Afghan forces committing "battlefield executions".

As to the first point, the sense of subjugation by foreign powers is exacerbated by the Karzai administration's inability to provide effective governance. Why should we expect a regime built on foreign military intervention and local warlords to have popular support? Locked in understandable revulsion towards the Taliban, the US and its allies forgot they had to offer a better alternative. A revolutionary guerrilla movement, the great intellectual dissident Eqbal Ahmad wrote, concentrate on "out-administering", not on "out-fighting" the enemy.

Although harsh and primitive, the insurgency has gained a reputation for speedy justice that is juxtaposed against the western-backed Karzai regime's endemic corruption. Insurgencies swell, one leader of the Algerian revolution noted in the early 1960s, "where foreign rule is resented, where acute grievances exist and institutional channels for ventilating and satisfying them are ineffective". By that measure, the Afghan insurgency can be expected to grow.

For ordinary Afghans, especially in the Pashtun heartlands of the south and east where the Taliban predominate, US-led forces are feared just as the insurgents are. One key difference, however, is that the Taliban are not foreigners but, as Karzai once remarked, "sons of the soil".

Matthew Hoh, a former US diplomat in Kabul who resigned in protest over the war, noted, correctly, that what we face in Afghanistan is a "Pashtun insurgency … composed of multiple, seemingly infinite, local groups … fed by what is perceived by the Pashtun people as a continued and sustained assault, going back centuries, on Pashtun land, culture, traditions and religion by internal and external enemies".

That makes it difficult for Isaf forces to distinguish between friends and foes. "It's a mix of different forces that leads [ethnic Pashtuns] to fight," says Fakir Kakakhel, a young but already experienced war correspondent based in Peshawar. "It is what we call gahirat-a-Pashtoon," he adds, "a term referring to our honour, religion, economic and political independence." Not everyone accepts this premise, but that is not the point. What matters is that our foreign armies can never hope to match this natural home advantage.

The US-led forces, with their vast armoury and an equally vast disconnect from the people they are purportedly trying to protect, have always found it easier to treat everyone as an enemy. That is why the conflict has resulted in a steady stream of civilian casualties. Under pressure to sell this as a noble war, Nato has, as a result, consistently tried to cover up atrocities that are all but inevitable.

There should be no illusions about the Taliban either. Who can forget the destruction of the priceless Buddhas of Bamiyan? Afghans have not forgotten their own atrocities either. All of that was washed away, however, with America's unilateral decision to invade Afghanistan in late 2001. Almost overnight the Taliban were transformed into freedom fighters, as the subsequent occupation of Afghanistan, and pressure on Pakistan to use its blunt military that has led to thousands of deaths, stoked incalculable resentment amongst Pashtuns in both countries.

As Wazma Frogh pointed out, the main alternative to all-out conflict, the opening of peace negotiations, is also fraught with dangers and obstacles. The problem for foreign powers in a foreign land is their limited interest in the welfare of the people whose lands they occupy. There can be no sustainable resolution of the current violence, however, unless and until the locals take the lead in looking for political solutions.

Related Material:

How U.S. Aid Puts A Happy Face On Afghan Occupation

By James A. Lucas

USAID projected that it would build 286 schools by the end of 2004, but only eight were completed. Although the Afghan government could build a school for about $40,000, an international aid agency undertook the task of building 500 schools, at a cost of $250,000 each

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

My Father Was A Freedom Fighter

Gaza's Untold Story

Told from the perspectives of the refugees, My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story is a comprehensive chronicle of the tumultuous history and the struggles of the people of Gaza.