February 2000     Vol 3      No 7     Reg No.SS-346

Publisher & Managing Editor:
Ikram-ul-Majeed Sehgal

Chief Patron
Air Marshal (Retd)
Mohammad Asghar Khan

Patrons
Lt Gen (Retd) SF Lodi
Brig (Retd)TH Siddiqi
Lt Gen (Retd) Imtiaz Waraich

Board of Editorial Advisors
Ardeshir Cowasjee
Arif Nizami
Ms Maleeha Lodhi
Ms Nasim Zehra
Hameed Haroon
Humayun Gauhar
Ambassador (Retd) Afzal Mahmood

Panel of Contributing Editors
Air Marshal (Retd) Ayaz A. Khan
Vice Adm (Retd) IF Quadir
Dr Shireen Mazari
Farhan Bokhari

Panel of Columnists
Col (Retd) EAS Bokhari
Col (Retd) Abdul Qayyum
Dr. Matiur Rahman
Ms Amina Jilani
Capt (Retd) A.A. Jilani

Executive Editor
Ms Ambreen Jahangir

Vice President Marketing
Syed Tauseef  Muhammad Ali

Advertising Manager
Naushad Alam

Internet Coordinator/Graphic Designer
Rizwan Alam Khan

Cover Design
Shujaat Ali

Vice President (Circulation & Accounts)
Ms Parveen Akhter

Printing Manager
Tariq Jamal

PR/Advertising (Rawalpindi/Islamabad)
Brig (Retd) Asmat Beg Humayun

AVP Coordination (Lahore)
Azizullah Goheer

Printed at Pathfinder Printing Press. Under the steps Hocley Stadium, Phase 5, Defence Housing Authority Karachi.

Creative Publicity is handled by
DYNAVIS (Pvt) Ltd
Tel 5861637, 5830582, 5863920 Fax:(021) 5863924
Lahore (042) 6360236
Islamabad (051) 277683, 815168

Dear Readers,

The month of January has been eventful. India has continued its massive propaganda campaign against Pakistan over the hijack issue. We may have countered very effectively over PTV, however, our efforts to contain the Indian media offensive in the rest of the world has not been upto the mark and one can only evaluate it when visiting abroad. We have to make efforts for our experts to get on the electronic media channels like CNN and BBC. The world has very selective moral standards, state terrorism used indiscriminately against civilians is given less negative ratings than the occasional hijack, we have to use sophisticated arguments to negate this world perception. A case in point is the overwhelming use of forces by the Russians in Chechnya, as the frustration increases, their conduct of the war becomes more brutal. A good friend of mine and an outstanding soldier whose career was cut short due to medical problems, Brig (Retd) Saeed Ismat has kindly accepted my invitation to join the Board of Editorial Advisors. For this issue I am taking the liberty of including my article 'BEYOND 100 DAYS' from THE NATION dated Saturday January 29, 2000.

Politicians make for natural infantrymen, when under fire they know it is prudent to keep their heads down. Now that things seemed to have eased down plus/minus a few days of the 100 since Oct 12, 1999, 'the natives have started to get restless' and talk about the restoration of the Assemblies 'so as to restore the democratic image of Pakistan'. The assumption here is that whatever passed for democracy in Pakistan was not a con game, that the military regime should disqualify a handful of corrupt politicians, thus cleansed the Assemblies can be allowed to function according to an agreed formula giving an acceptable constitutional role to the Armed Forces. This way the representatives who want to be elected would remain happy, the Armed Forces would be satisfied and who cares about the people anyway? Whereas an early return to democratic rule must be the ultimate aim of the military regime, those who would be comfortable with a partial solution are incurable optimists or simply gone cases. Nobody wanted the coup, once it became a fait accompli full accountability to weed out the corrupt of this Earth must take place.

Let's face it, reforms are in the works that will not only restore the institutions but will make them far more pragmatic in future. It is a slow process that does not cater for the impatience of the masses, on the contrary it requires them to trust in the credibility of the military regime to do the right thing by the nation. A 100 days are enough to confirm that the regime is sincere in interest and is not trying to sell the Eiffel Tower to the people of Pakistan. Let down by the experience of three martial laws, the public is necessarily cautious about giving time to the rulers to come good and redeem the promises made.

The Chief Executive (CE) accompanied by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance and Commerce, made a short and worthwhile trip to China. Over the past decade China has shrugged off the trauma of Tianenman Square and with great maturity has taken its due place in the comity of nations as an emerging Superpower. The old guard has given way to a new generation of leaders seemingly more interested in economics than geo-politics that is a perception not a reality. There has been some apprehension in Pakistan, duly stoked by India's attempts to deepen their relationship with China. Kargil was a dangerous watershed in our relationship, annoyed by the fundamentalist support within Pakistan for the Muslim Uighurs of Sinkiang Province and mindful of being evenhanded as befits an emerging superpower, China's support was less vociferous than it usually is. The scheduled honeymoon with India was not consummated before it fell apart thanks to an unlikely reason, the Karmapa's escape from Tibet to the ranks of the Tibetan dissidents in India led by the self-exiled Dalai Lama. During the CE's visit, China rebounded and gave absolute support to Pakistan and re-scheduled Pakistan's debts in a generous manner that froze the debt maturing till date without any mark-up for a decade, a model that Pakistan can hold up as an example for other re-schedulings. For the CE this was a personal vote of confidence from Pakistan's traditional and closest ally, a re-affirmation of the bond that stands us in good stead when dealing diplomatically with USA and Europe and militarily with belligerent India. Pakistan badly needs a self-confident China to back us with both word and deed if the war of words unleashed by the associates of Nathuram Godse escalates into the real thing. In contrast India's long-time supporters, the Russians, have been exposed by the hard-fighting Chechens as being paper Bears.

History was quietly made on Saturday Jan 14, 2000 by the Police Reforms Group's second meeting chaired by Lt Gen (Retd) Moinuddin Haider, the Federal Interior Minister. It is vitally necessary to make police independent and answerable to the law instead of politicians, bureaucrats, special interest groups, etc that used them as an instrument of torture rather than being the apostles of peace that law enforcing agencies should be. The Group decided not only that there should be a National Public Safety Commission to look after Federal Affairs and policies but as law and order is a Provincial subject, to set up a Provincial Public Safety Commission and for major cities, to start with the Provincial capitals, the long standing demand for a Metropolitan Public Safety Commission. The Group went on to agree in minute detail of how the members of the neutral Commissions would be chosen and their mandate to make them effective. The functions of the Commission were almost all agreed to, some administrative points remained to be settled. Gen Moin Haider is an exceptional selection by the CE for the post he is holding, a man for all seasons, an activist type of person very much result-oriented. Despite the healthy debate, (which as a member of the Group one is ethically bound presently not to discuss), the Interior Minister guided the Group to a decision-mode rather than keep it pending forever in limbo in Committee sessions. The draft of the working paper as well as the Ordinance (prepared by eminent lawyer Liaquat Merchant) was put together by the representatives from Karachi led ably by Jameel Yousuf, Chief of CPLC who made a forceful presentation, the proud sub-group saw very few (but meaningful and pragmatic) amendments in the suggestions. On Jan 29, the Group is meeting to finalise the proposal for the Federal Cabinet for approval. In his quest to establish the rule of law, such reforms are high on the CE's agenda. The rule of law is what gives any nation the dynamics of being a firm and just society, that in turn goes towards making the nation great. Only leaders who are confident about their sincerity and intention can afford (or allow) such discussions, the CE scores heavily on this point.

Pakistan has always been a paradox to the US mainly because of the changing geo-political objectives of the Superpowers. In the late 70s, Kissinger, then US Secretary of State and President Ford, warned of making a 'horrible example' out of Pakistan if we persisted with our nuclear policy. Afghanistan changed all that as the US saw an opportunity to 'Vietnamize' the Soviet Union down to size, in the process the Soviet Union disintegrated. At the cutting edge of the guerilla war, ISI personnel worked closely with CIA throughout the 80s but as the Afghan war wore down, the nuclear bogey was brought out to haunt Pakistan again. Our then military leaders, mainly for personal gain, did not take long-term economic or military advantage of Pakistan's strong bargaining position at the start of the Afghan War, settling for short-time political plus points. We failed to get the type of benefits Egypt and others got out of the Gulf War (in Egypt's case waiving off of all its US $ 15 billion debt). On the contrary, this once-upon-a-time 'front-line State for the free World' is always in danger of being declared a terrorist nation whereas India which has voted and schemed against the US in all social, political and economic forums as a front-line member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), became a tempting economic fleshpot that began being politically supported by the US and the west because of the potential one billion consumers in its population. Pakistan needs US understanding and support in dealing with problems inherited from the Afghan War. The statements and body language in the visit of the US Senators as well as US Under-Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth, to Pakistan, suggest that the CE and his colleagues have got grudging US support for their agenda (first blood in her second stint for Ambassador Ms Maleeha Lodhi). A democratic road map has been asked for rather than a commitment about a time frame, that distinction is important as it accepts the CE's argument that there was no democracy in Pakistan, only a sham that camouflaged outright nepotism and rampant corruption. While the US side expressed concern about their nuclear force and terrorism (a la Osama mainly) there was none of the strident criticism that marked Kargil. Gen Guthrie, the Chief of British Defence Staff, had set the tone by his short visit a week earlier, the western stance is clear, to caution Pakistan mildly but refrain from condemning it as demanded by India in all conceivable forums, not excluding cricket (if one takes into account the vicious statements of sportsmen Kapil Dev and Tendulkar not so long ago NOT to play with Pakistan anymore). US President Clinton would like to visit South Asia for both economic and political reasons during the last year of his office, to use his good offices to calm the most dangerous nuclear flashpoint of Kashmir. If anyone can tell me how this can be accomplished by forsaking our goodwill by excluding Pakistan from Clinton's itinerary one is more than willing to listen.