Publisher & Managing Editor:
Ikram-ul-Majeed Sehgal

Chief Patron
Air Marshal (Retd)
Mohammad Asghar Khan

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

Board of Editorial Advisors
Ardeshir Cowasjee
Arif Nizami
Ms Nasim Zehra
Humayun Gauhar
Ambassador (Retd) Afzal Mahmood
Brig (Retd) Saeed Ismat, SJ

Editorial Consultant
Col (Retd) Nusrat Ullah

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

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

Graphic Designer
Rizwan Alam Khan

Marketing & Sales
Syed Tauseef  Muhammad Ali - EVP-South

Rai Farooq Afzal - EVP-North

Karachi
Naushad Alam, AVP Marketing
Rahil Tariq, Advertisement Manager

Lahore
Faisal Ghafoor, Marketing Executive

Islamabad
Sobia Nisar, Marketing Executive

Muhammad Jawad Malik, AVP Marketing

 

Circulation & Accounts
Ms. Perveen Akhter, EVP

Cover Design
Khurram Mahmood

Printing Manager
Tariq Jamal

Bureau Chief Lahore
Rai Farooq Afzal
Tel: (042) 6360409, 6370409, 

Mobile : 0300-8457933

Fax: (042) 6360236

Bureau Chief Rawalpindi/Islamabad
Amber Idrees Tel: (051) 2650058
Ms Anwara Shaikh, EVP Public Relations
Tel: (051) 2651680

Dubai Representative
Al-Hurriya Advertising
Akhtar Alam

Director Marketing

Tel : (+9714) 2634680, Fax : (042) 6360236

 

Distributor

National News Agency

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

Creative Publicity is handled by
DYNAVIS (Pvt) Ltd
Karachi: Tel 5843502, 578798, 5863920 Fax:(021) 5863924
Lahore: (042) 6360236
Islamabad: (051) 277683, 815168

Dear Readers,

In a tragic air accident, PAF Chief Air Chief Marshal Mushaf Ali Mir died along with his wife and many other senior PAF officers. Mushaf Ali Mir was no ordinary airman, he was an outstanding leader of men. I have written a personal tribute to him in “GOOD, BAD and UGLY” , an article that is carried elsewhere in this DJ issue.
His is a grievous loss and the PAF will be far poorer because of it. The “War on Terrorism” has been overtaken by the likely war on Iraq, UN Security Council Resolution notwithstanding. If war does break out, the world will be a far different place than before it began. Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of the Civilisations” was a camouflage for “Clash of Religions” but it has now been overtaken by “Clash of Morality” as the US and UK line up in the UN Security Council against France, Germany, Russia and China (and in the UN Assembly almost the rest of the world). It has put our wishy-washy foreign policy on the spot. In this respect we need to examine our “STRATEGIC OPTIONS”, I am taking the liberty of re-producing my article for the benefit of readers.
It was not comfortable being either an American or a Pakistani, for widely differing reasons, in Davos this year. The World Economic Forum (WEF) is normally a love-fest, antagonism is almost never aired in the aura of optimism that is normally prevalent. Because of the aversion of most Europeans towards war in Iraq, Americans (constituting a fair percentage of the 1,500 persons attending WEF) found themselves in defensive mode even though the much respected US Secretary of State Colin Powell made an eloquent case for war to topple Saddam Hussain. While one is used to Indians reacting in an offensively defensive manner to our bringing Kashmir on the table, this year the Indians took a back seat orchestrating a world consensus against Pakistan’s very existence as a responsible member of the comity of nations. Speaker after speaker recommended coordinated action against Pakistan’s nuclear potential, there was no fig leaf of innuendo anymore. The straightforward allegation put us in the business of exporting terrorism. The general consensus was that Pakistan’s nuclear facilities were a potential threat to the world, the premise being that if Musharraf was overthrown, the 650,000 man-Pakistan Army would be overwhelmed by “200,000 dedicated Jehadis”. Instead of waiting to be subjected to “nuclear terrorism” their convoluted logic was that world would be far better off launching a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan, even in priority to Iraq! These were no ordinary persons, they happen to be the world’s top leaders in government, business, academics, etc the elite of the elite! More depressing was to see the blissful ignorance we are living in on returning from Davos. This country is in a state of permanent Basant, God help us!
Dangerously out of sync with the existing realities in an increasingly unipolar world, both with respect to our domestic situation and external challenges, this is further complicated by internal shortcomings becoming entangled in issues of primary concern to the rest of the world. The world makes no bones about our being the main sponsors of the Taliban in Afghanistan, who in turn gave shelter to the Al-Qaeda. Despite being a member of the Coalition’s “war on terrorism”, we now stand accused of giving safe haven to the Taliban escaping the American dragnet in Afghanistan and thus by extension, the logistics and moral support for the resurgence of the Al-Qaeda. By effectively blurring the line between freedom fighters in Indian-Occupied Kashmir against Indian oppression and terrorism (that the world is averse to), the adverse international propaganda has successfully merged the concept of “Jehad” into terrorism. Whether we like it or not, the freedom struggle in Kashmir is equated with the international terrorism the US-led world is waging war against. We are in deep trouble for viz (1) not reading the writing on the wall in persisting with our policies of the 90s (2) the irresponsible rhetoric of some of our leaders and (3) complacency and ineffectiveness in coping with the Indian media offensive. For the most part we are oblivious of the extreme dangers of being dragged into the vortex of the deteriorating international situation. Living in a dreamworld largely of our own making, we must prepare ourselves for potential attack on our nuclear facilities. It is one thing to base our strategy on perceptions, it is ridiculous to believe largely self-invented perceptions, “cornerstone of US policy” indeed!
We have three broad strategic policy options, viz (1) non-alignment and neutrality thereof (2) offensive posture with involvement in low intensity conflicts and (3) constructive alignment and preservation of defence deterrent. The first option is not possible because (1) no country with self-respect will accept such hegemony and that too by those with whom we have 1000 year plus history of conflict and (2) have a peculiar geo-political location in a region which is adjacent to the gas-potential which makes the oil rich Gulf Region and Central Asia a vital ground for the world. Not only have an unstable neighbour to our northwest by west (Afghanistan) but because of wrong policy initiatives (and their own policy interests) we have somewhat estranged our neighbour to the immediate west (Iran). Neither small as Switzerland or geographically incapable of being out of harm’s way of big power machinations, we are not like Sweden to be on the rim of geo-political machinations. Given the fact that we see ourselves as defenders of the faith against a numerically superior religious belief (Hinduism) vigorously inimical to Islam (as practiced by Hindutva), we cannot accept Balkan-isation.
The genesis of the second option can be found in the first attempt to send across infiltrators into Indian-occupied Kashmir after the Hazratbal incident of 1964, this was an unmitigated disaster. Yet the same pattern was used in 1965 in the planning and implementation of “Operation Gibralter”, this led to a far bigger disaster. To relieve the Indian counter-pressure in Azad Kashmir because 12 Division (defending Azad Kashmir) had lost several key mountain passes, we had to launch “Operation Grand Slam” to capture Akhnur. This led to the Indians coming across the international border and the stalemate of the 1965 war. With the evacuation of the Soviets from Afghanistan and winding down of the war in the late 80s, we switched the offensive posture applied in Afghanistan to Kashmir and engaged the Indians in low intensity conflict. One must have the maturity to acknowledge that instead of lessening, Indian repression against Muslims in the valley has increased manifold. While Kashmir may have been brought to the centre of the world attention for a couple of years after Kargil as a possible flashpoint for a nuclear showdown (and thus international mediation), it has viz (1) almost exhausted the Kashmiri resolve and (2) 9/11 perpetrators have badly eroded our international standing as a responsible nation. A military solution in the circumstances is outwardly heroic but impracticable. The mood of the world’s governments and intelligentsia where “Jehad” is equated with terrorism, it is suicidal. It has caused serious friction with our traditional trading partners, the G-8 nations. The support of some of our religious groups to rebels in China’s Sinkiang Province almost alienated Pakistan’s long-term strategic ally.
The only strategic option that we can follow in the present world security environment is “constructive alignment and preservation of defensive deterrence” (translated, protecting our nuclear option). We will have to shift emphasis on ideological orientation (better said than done) to economic integration so that we shake off our growing image as an adventurer-terrorist State. We must preserve the nuclear deterrent but reduce the fat of our defence establishments and concentrate on quality, technology and efficiency i.e. more bang for the buck. We should deepen our strategic alliance with China in both military and economic terms while remaining engaged economically and militarily in an increasingly unipolar world with the G-8 countries and the European Union. We should ease tension with India and try economic engagement as a means to address the core issue of Kashmir. We must seriously consider why we are refraining from recognizing the State of Israel. Muslim countries such as Turkey, Egypt and Qatar already have diplomatic ties with Israel, other Arab/Muslim countries are more or less poised to do so. So why should Pakistan, which has no direct quarrel with the Jewish State, take a confrontationist view to the only other country founded on religious ideology?
National policies must be drawn out of national interests, the only premise before our leadership should be “survival” in exclusion to other priorities, we cannot afford continuing to follow policies that have been found bankrupt. Somewhere we must find the leadership that will have the courage to evaluate and implement both short and long-term national aims and objectives.