Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AdmSmith; Dog; Coop

Thought I'd post this here.....


Musharraf's double game unravels

By Ahmed Rashid International Herald Tribune

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2005


LAHORE, Pakistan Since the July 7 bombings in London, Pakistan's military ruler, President Pervez Musharraf, has again come under severe international pressure to clamp down on local extremist groups linked to Al Qaeda, bring extremist religious schools under control and stop the Taliban from using Pakistan as a base for attacks in Afghanistan. As a result, serious cracks are developing in the 35-year alliance between Pakistan's army, its intelligence services and Islamic fundamentalist parties.

Musharraf has parried international criticism of Pakistan by accusing Prime Minister Tony Blair of allowing Islamic extremism to flourish in Britain, but since July 7 he has arrested 800 militants and is expelling 1,400 foreign students studying in the religious schools, or madrasas.

For decades, Islamic fundamentalist parties in Pakistan have provided manpower and ideological support for the military intelligence services' forays in Afghanistan and Indian Kashmir. Under outside pressure, however, the inherent contradictions in this relationship are coming to the fore.

In an unprecedented broadside on Sunday, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the head of an alliance of six Islamic fundamentalist parties and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, accused the army of helping militants to attack Afghanistan, supporting "jihadi" training camps in Pakistan and deceiving the West in its commitment to combat terrorism. ''We will have to openly tell the world whether we want to support jihadis or crack down on them - we cannot afford to be hypocritical any more," he said.

For nearly two decades, Maulana Rehman has been one of the strongest Islamic leaders in the country. He heads Jamiat-e-Ullema Islam, or JUI, the most powerful fundamentalist party in the Pashtun tribal belt bordering Afghanistan. Since the 2002 elections, the JUI has dominated the provincial governments of North West Frontier Province and Baluchistan.

Working closely with the intelligence services the JUI has spawned numerous virulently anti-Western, violence-prone extremist groups who now work for Al Qaeda. In the 1990s, the JUI helped the army provide arms and manpower to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, JUI mullahs have allowed Taliban leaders to recruit Afghan and Pakistani students from JUI-run madrasas.

Now there are severe tensions between the army and the JUI. Under considerable American pressure to explain the Taliban resurgence, Lieutenant General Safdar Hussain, the Corps Commander in Peshawar, said on July 25 that the Taliban "are getting public support in Pakistan, especially from some Pakistani religious parties." He was clearly pointing the finger at the JUI and Maulana Rehman was furious.


On Aug. 1, Maulana was detained in Dubai International Airport while on his way home from Libya and promptly deported, with officials in the United Arab Emirates hinting that he was on a terrorist list. Maulana Rehman accused the Pakistan government of not doing enough to save him from humiliation.

Musharraf's declaration that he would send home foreign students was seen as another attack on the JUI, who control the largest number of madrasas. Rehman and other leaders from his six-party alliance mounted a tirade against Musharraf and have threatened to start a campaign to unseat the government.

The fundamentalist leaders don't like Musharraf's liberal stance and are determined to protect their parties and institutions. But they are also furious with the army for trying to make them a scapegoat for all of Pakistan's ills, when they have only been a junior partner to the army's own past policies that have encouraged Islamic extremism to flourish.

Rehman is now defying the army by declaring that it bears responsibility for the fruits of its past policies, and that it should not seek to parry American pressure by blaming Pakistan's Islamic parties.

At one level, such statements are part of the kind of political wheeling and dealing that can be expected before local council elections later this month and general elections scheduled for 2007, when Musharraf wants to get himself elected as president. The fundamentalist parties feel threatened because they know that Musharraf may be trying to reduce their influence. But the danger is that Rehman and others could divulge more details of the intelligence services' links, which might diminish the military's credibility at home and abroad.

Musharraf is in a difficult position. Since Sept. 11 he has successfully ridden two horses, placating the West with promises of reform and crackdowns on extremists while pandering to the Islamic parties in order to retain their support. But now that Pakistan's political system is in danger of slowly unraveling as he loses support across the political spectrum, Musharraf could fall off altogether.

(Ahmed Rashid is the author of ''Taliban'' and, most recently, ''Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia.'')
LAHORE, Pakistan Since the July 7 bombings in London, Pakistan's military ruler, President Pervez Musharraf, has again come under severe international pressure to clamp down on local extremist groups linked to Al Qaeda, bring extremist religious schools under control and stop the Taliban from using Pakistan as a base for attacks in Afghanistan. As a result, serious cracks are developing in the 35-year alliance between Pakistan's army, its intelligence services and Islamic fundamentalist parties.

Musharraf has parried international criticism of Pakistan by accusing Prime Minister Tony Blair of allowing Islamic extremism to flourish in Britain, but since July 7 he has arrested 800 militants and is expelling 1,400 foreign students studying in the religious schools, or madrasas.

For decades, Islamic fundamentalist parties in Pakistan have provided manpower and ideological support for the military intelligence services' forays in Afghanistan and Indian Kashmir. Under outside pressure, however, the inherent contradictions in this relationship are coming to the fore.

In an unprecedented broadside on Sunday, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the head of an alliance of six Islamic fundamentalist parties and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, accused the army of helping militants to attack Afghanistan, supporting "jihadi" training camps in Pakistan and deceiving the West in its commitment to combat terrorism. ''We will have to openly tell the world whether we want to support jihadis or crack down on them - we cannot afford to be hypocritical any more," he said.

For nearly two decades, Maulana Rehman has been one of the strongest Islamic leaders in the country. He heads Jamiat-e-Ullema Islam, or JUI, the most powerful fundamentalist party in the Pashtun tribal belt bordering Afghanistan. Since the 2002 elections, the JUI has dominated the provincial governments of North West Frontier Province and Baluchistan.

Working closely with the intelligence services the JUI has spawned numerous virulently anti-Western, violence-prone extremist groups who now work for Al Qaeda. In the 1990s, the JUI helped the army provide arms and manpower to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, JUI mullahs have allowed Taliban leaders to recruit Afghan and Pakistani students from JUI-run madrasas.

Now there are severe tensions between the army and the JUI. Under considerable American pressure to explain the Taliban resurgence, Lieutenant General Safdar Hussain, the Corps Commander in Peshawar, said on July 25 that the Taliban "are getting public support in Pakistan, especially from some Pakistani religious parties." He was clearly pointing the finger at the JUI and Maulana Rehman was furious.


On Aug. 1, Maulana was detained in Dubai International Airport while on his way home from Libya and promptly deported, with officials in the United Arab Emirates hinting that he was on a terrorist list. Maulana Rehman accused the Pakistan government of not doing enough to save him from humiliation.

Musharraf's declaration that he would send home foreign students was seen as another attack on the JUI, who control the largest number of madrasas. Rehman and other leaders from his six-party alliance mounted a tirade against Musharraf and have threatened to start a campaign to unseat the government.

The fundamentalist leaders don't like Musharraf's liberal stance and are determined to protect their parties and institutions. But they are also furious with the army for trying to make them a scapegoat for all of Pakistan's ills, when they have only been a junior partner to the army's own past policies that have encouraged Islamic extremism to flourish.

Rehman is now defying the army by declaring that it bears responsibility for the fruits of its past policies, and that it should not seek to parry American pressure by blaming Pakistan's Islamic parties.

At one level, such statements are part of the kind of political wheeling and dealing that can be expected before local council elections later this month and general elections scheduled for 2007, when Musharraf wants to get himself elected as president. The fundamentalist parties feel threatened because they know that Musharraf may be trying to reduce their influence. But the danger is that Rehman and others could divulge more details of the intelligence services' links, which might diminish the military's credibility at home and abroad.

Musharraf is in a difficult position. Since Sept. 11 he has successfully ridden two horses, placating the West with promises of reform and crackdowns on extremists while pandering to the Islamic parties in order to retain their support. But now that Pakistan's political system is in danger of slowly unraveling as he loses support across the political spectrum, Musharraf could fall off altogether.

(Ahmed Rashid is the author of ''Taliban'' and, most recently, ''Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia.'')


http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/08/09/news/edrashid.php


1,302 posted on 08/09/2005 6:59:17 PM PDT by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR) [there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1299 | View Replies ]


To: nuconvert; Saberwielder
more info:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_9-8-2005_pg3_1

EDITORIAL: Fazlur Rehman's shocking allegations

Maulana Fazlur Rehman, chief of his own faction of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, has lashed out at the government. He has tried to achieve multiple objectives through his Sunday press conference in Lahore. Despite a late and indirect denial of the central element of his statement against the government, most papers covered his views, albeit with different headlines.

Mr Rehman has alleged that the Pakistani government is deceiving the US and the West by helping militants enter Afghanistan from Waziristan. He said that the government should reveal the identity of the infiltrators and explain its reasons for launching these people into Afghanistan. Mr Rehman says these men are being moved from Waziristan to military training camps in Mansehra before being sent into Afghanistan.

This is explosive stuff. Why would Mr Rehman choose to make such sweeping allegations? The answer to this can perhaps be found in his statement at the same press conference that "if pressured, I will reveal facts that will open a Pandora's box" (emphasis added). This means that Mr Rehman is feeling the heat of some government measures and is signalling to the government to lay off.

Still, the question is: Why would Mr Rehman - a religio-political leader whose party is the biggest vote-getter in the MMA (Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal) alliance - make such an allegation? Mr Rehman was at one time identified with the Taliban and even gave anti-US and pro-Taliban statements. Why should he oppose an alleged official policy that presumably seeks to undermine the Pakistan and Karzai government? For an answer, let's hark back to the time Pakistan got involved in Afghanistan.

The thin end of the jihad wedge at the time was the Jama'at-e Islami. It was the JI-ISI combine that ran the jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's Hezb-e Islami was the leading group that Pakistan was supporting. The Deobandi JUI, Mr Rehman's faction as well as Maulana Samiul Haq's faction, were mostly out of the loop. By the early 1990s, however, with Afghanistan having plunged into a fratricidal civil war since the withdrawal of the Soviets in 1987, the JUI got the opportunity to play a role in Afghanistan when Islamabad conjured up the policy of using the Taliban. Mr Rehman was then an important ally of Benazir Bhutto's government. However, on the ground, it was Mr Haq's JUI faction that appropriated the Taliban, most of whom, followers of Maulvi Nabi Mohammadi, were educated in JUI-S seminaries.

This period saw the decline of Mr Rehman, both as a political and a religious leader. It was during this period that he employed the device of making anti-American statements to capture his religious vote-bank and cosy up to Mullah Umar. At the same time he got down to the task of reorganising his political party. By the time of the US attack on Afghanistan, Mr Rehman had pulled himself up. A combination of factors - government rigging in support of the MMA but primarily in support of the JUI, mobilisation of seminary students, the Pashtun factor, pro-Taliban sentiments and anti-American feelings - helped the JUIF to emerge as the largest vote-getter within the MMA. Mr Rehman has since played his cards well, securing for himself the position of leader of the opposition and keeping his governments in the NWFP and his coalition partnership in Balochistan safe. Indeed, he would have been even more successful but for the hard line taken by Qazi Hussain Ahmed, amir of the JI, who is looking for a direct confrontation with the government.

Mr Rehman's objectives are now clear. He wants to retain his two provincial governments because that allows him to retain and work on expanding his political base; he also wants to safeguard his religious interests because those interests translate into political power for him; so he will criticise the government but not do anything that could radically upset the current power balance; he wants to distance himself from extremist elements and the jihad underground because that does not fit into his scheme of things and so on. However, pressure from outside has forced the government to go for a broad sweep against all religious hard liners. Islamabad also seems to be in the process of reviewing its policy of subterranean alliance with the MMA. Mr Rehman feels that measures against the seminaries and getting the courts to disqualify MMA candidates from contesting municipal polls suggest that Islamabad is changing the rules of the game. This has forced him to lash out at Islamabad.

Mr Rehman employs religion to appeal to his constituency for political purposes. He feels that the heat is wrongly on moderate religious elements like the JUI. This is why he was quite specific in making his allegations when he said: "We ask the rulers to reveal the identity of the people being transported to Afghanistan from Waziristan via Kaali Sarak in private vehicles." It is instructive that he said the government was accusing clerics of promoting religious extremism and militancy although they (JUI clerics) were playing an active role in restoring peace in the tribal areas.

Mr Rehman is really cut up with the government for not having done anything in the wake of his humiliation at the Dubai airport. He feels that the UAE government treated him shabbily because Islamabad is signalling to the world that the extremist trouble can be directly traced to religious parties including the JUI.

Mr Rehman's allegations are serious. He should have thought twice before making them. He may now be keen to deny them. But the damage has been done.
1,303 posted on 08/09/2005 11:38:25 PM PDT by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1302 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson