کابل پرس

Solidarity for Nigerian Girls

Farrukh Leqa Sultani — 2014-06-05T19:34:10Z

Women from different nations asked solidarity for Nigerian Girls. The gathering was called as a significant action of women from all over the world.

Thursday 29 May 2014, around sixty women from twenty-one countries gathered in front of Massachusetts State House and asked solidarity for Nigerian girls. The Nigerian schoolgirls were kidnapped by a group of gunmen almost a couple of months ago.

Bring Back Our Girls

Fifty Eight Women from twenty one countries

The demonstrators raised the same slogan in different languages: “bring back our girls”. There were well known female writers, feminists and social activists participated in this demonstration including women from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, India, Kazakhstan, Nepal, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Sudan, South Sudan, Egypt, Myanmar, Cambodia, Colombia, Thailand, Mali, Uganda and Cameron.
The demonstrators were also participants of the Women in Public Service Project-2014 held in Boston.

On 14 April 2014, three hundred schoolgirls were kidnapped by gunmen belong to radical group of Boko Harram. Despite military investigations the girls are still in hostages. However the military has announced that they have found some signs from where the girls are but still there is no update from them.

Gloria Steinem- the United States feminist, Journalist and writer appreciated the women's gathering for solidarity to Nigerian girls. She said: “It is a vital action of the women against brutality in twenty-one century.”

Aziza, the Afghan American woman who interested to watch the demonstration, said: “This is amazing. What a peaceful action. This means we are close to reach the change.”

According to the report published at Women in Law and Development in Africa's website (http://www.wildaf-ao.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=84&Itemid=66&lang=en) women are the sufferers of the many years of military misrule in Nigeria.

Marceline Mukakarangwa- the demonstrator from Rwanda expresses her regret and says to the families of the kidnapped girls: This action may or may not have impact but at least we raised our voice. We are women from twenty one countries and our voice is the strongest voice you have ever heard. We raised our voice to ask the countries to seriously follow this matter.

U.S. Afghanistan Campaign Faces Fuel Supply Pressures in Kyrgyzstan

Eugen Iladi — 2010-10-31T23:57:32Z

Afghanistan is known for its forbidding terrain. Add to that the abrupt change of government in nearby Kyrgyzstan earlier this year, compounded by flooding and the recent supply routes blockage in Pakistan, and even the most casual observer can understand how difficult it is to deliver supplies to U.S. forces in the region.

“U.S. and NATO forces have always existed at the bottom of the logistical barrel,” said Larry Goodson of the Strategic Studies Institute at the U.S. Army War College.

One supply depot in particular struggles against — yet somehow overcomes — these odds: the Manas Transit Center near Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan.

For a variety of reasons, the Pentagon is considering installing new fuel contractors. But experts, including some in the Defense Department, agree the supply chain and the Manas location are crucial for the U.S. effort in Afghanistan and would prove very costly to replace.

In mid-April, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that while there are alternatives to Manas Transit Center, he was hopeful that the U.S. will continue to use the base for supplying Afghanistan. Why? Because alternatives to Manas would be more expensive and represent a seriously increased logistical challenge, Gates said.

Indeed, since the American military was evicted from Uzbekistan's Karshi-Khanabad (K2) airbase in 2005, Manas is the last affordable U.S. base of operations in the region.

“Losing the Manas air base would be serious. We can go on, but it wouldn't be pretty,” said Stephen Blank, also of the Strategic Studies Institute.

The interim government installed in Bishkek said it would honor the Manas lease agreement with the U.S. But Kyrgyz authorities have announced an investigation of the fuel supply contracts to Manas. According to the Kyrgyz government, the son of the former president, Maksim Bakyev, controlled companies that sold fuel to Manas contractors as an indirect way for the Pentagon to pay the former ruling family for continuing American access to the base. A subcommittee of the U.S. Congress is also investigating.

But — so far at least — no proof or documentation in support of these allegations has been offered.

The U.S. Embassy in Bishkek has stated that the most recent one-year fuel supply contract “was awarded to Mina Corporation in August 2009 in accordance with both U.S. and Kyrgyz law.”

Nonetheless, the outlook for supplies worth billions of dollars has been cast into doubt.

For several years, the main fuel suppliers at Manas and Bagram have been Mina Corporation and its affiliate, Red Star Enterprises Ltd. The two companies are contractors for the U.S. military supply organization, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).

Red Star and Mina have denied having links with the former Kyrgyz ruling families, the Akayevs and Bakiyevs. According to DLA, the companies continue to reliably deliver fuel and bid for contracts as suppliers to the U.S. Defense Department.

DLA says that a change of suppliers would not disrupt supplies. But the reality on the ground is more sobering, military and regional experts say.

"A switch of suppliers would cause a disruption in supplies," Blank said.

"What's working now in terms of fuel supplies has the benefit of functionality as opposed to the potential downside of alleged corruption," Goodson agreed.

An even worse result from tinkering with this vital logistical chain would be the loss of access to the Manas outpost. If it were to disappear, the U.S.'s geopolitical interests in Central Asia would be undermined by rising Russian domination and a thriving black market.

Moscow, which sees the region as its sphere of influence, at one point pressured Bishkek, who, in turn, threatened to close the base for American use. The Kremlin has long coveted Manas and in 2003 opened its own nearby military base at Kant.

"The Russians have always been happy to have their arms around the fuel supply to the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan," Goodson said. He asserted the Kremlin may well use the threat of closing Manas to make more money or extract concessions regarding other Eastern European issues, despite formally opposing re-exporting of Russian fuel into Afghanistan.

And from the U.S. point of view, one thing is clear. "The possible switch of supply lines or the loss of Manas imperils the project in Afghanistan," Goodson said.

The author is a freelance journalist based in Miami.

Violent street protests in Iran, thousands fighting back against police and government officials; maybe dawn of new revolution

Editorial Staff — 2009-12-27T16:21:01Z

Taliban losing influence in Pakistan

Farooq Sulehria — 2009-10-25T09:53:00Z

'Whither Pakistan?' This is a question now a days repeatedly raised in media globally in the wake of high-profile suicidal attacks in last two weeks. It was not the deadly suicidal attacks in the Frontier province that triggered a global panic. Such attacks have become a business-as-usual headline. According to Pakistan's leading daily Dawn, 280 Taliban attacks in last two years have claimed 2200 lives. It was rather less bloody but highly symbolic fidayee assault on jealously guarded army headquarters, GHQ, on October 10 that has traumatized all and sundry.

A coordinated attack on October 15 in Lahore, the country's second largest town, on three police facilities only reinforced the sense of insecurity. The government decision on October 20, following a suicidal attack on International Islamic University in capital Islamabad, to close down schools and colleges across Pakistan have served to spread further panic. Scared citizens, particularly in big cities, are not daring to step out of their homes unless necessary. Traders are complaining of a sharp decline in the number of customers.

Commentators in Pakistan's media have interpreted the recent spate of attacks as last-ditch, desperate attempts by the Taliban to forestall a military operation in South Waziristan, the Taliban's last stronghold. If that indeed was the Taliban's intention, these attacks have proved counter-productive.

On 17 October, the long-awaited military offensive in South Waziristan was launched. Aided by fighter jets and gunship helicopters, 30,000 Pakistani troops have been pitched against 10,000 Taliban. Military spokesperson, Major General Atthar Abbas says army will flush the Taliban out of South Waziristan in six to eight weeks.

Will the military succeed? Before answering this question, we first need to define success. If the aim is to secure South Waziristan, the army will succeed. If the purpose is to eliminate the Taliban, the answer is NO. While the army is busy bombing militants in South Waziristan, and earlier in Swat, it patronises them in Punjab and other parts of the country. The Waziristan offensive is a selective operation against Taliban who have gone out of army's control. They are in the army's view: ''Bad Taliban''.

Talibs fighting US forces in Afghanistan need not worry. They are ''Good Taliban''. Similarly, outfits like Jaish-e-Muhammad and Laskar-e-Tayyaba, built by Pakistan army to bleed India in Kashmir, keep enjoying impunity. The Jihadi infrastructure, comprised of Maskars (militants' training camps) and Madrassas (Quran schools), is not being dismantled. A section of Pakistani press has repeatedly exposed a military-Taliban connection.

The Pakistani media dominated by religious right, however, have in general been sympathetic to the Taliban and until recently would glorify Taliban as a Pashtoon resistance force fighting US imperialism.

The Taliban are, on the contrary, seen by most of Pashtoons in Pakistan as a threat to Pashtoon culture, economy, progress and peace. Unlike some leftists and Islamists portraying Taliban as resistance force, Pashtoons in Pakistan ask why Taliban are slaughtering locals or bombing their schools if they want to liberate Afghanistan? The Pashtoons don't want to grow beards, give up dance or music and stop sending their girls to schools for the ''liberation of Afghanistan'' that the Taliban want to bring. As a matter of fact, the destruction of the economy, bombing of schools depriving 100,000 girls of an education or other absurd actions in the name of Sharia have rendered Taliban extremely unpopular.

That Taliban have lost sympathy is evident from the fact that country's Islamist or right-wing parties as well as columnists and popular talk-show hosts, who once used to extol Taliban, now find it impossible to defend the Taliban's mindless violence. A few have even have turned against them. Others hide behind conspiracy theories (blaming India and the USA, even Israel).

But mass support or a positive public image are not the Taliban's problem. They are not running an election campaign. They are a band of charged up zealots engaged in what they believe is Jihad. Thus, rising or sinking Taliban popularity does not explain the strength of Taliban phenomenon.

It is poverty, state patronage, aggressive US intervention in the region and petro-dollars that stoke Taliban militancy. Every year tens of thousands graduate from Quran schools. A sizable number of these graduates-in-fanaticism are ready to blow themselves up for the cause. The Quran schools keep breeding Taliban (that literally means students of Quran schools). These schools constitute the real threat.

Are they a threat to Pakistan's nuclear plants too? In the presence of a half-million-strong standing army, it seems highly unlikely. The only, and least likely, possibility is that General Kayani (military chief) is overthrown in a coup by radical Islamist officers who seize control of the country's nuclear weapons. These Islamists within the military, however, stand hardly any chance owing to their growing isolation inside junior ranks. Also, the military leadership, busy mending its image badly tarnished under Musharraf dictatorship, will not go for a coup any time soon. The state will manage to stem present tide of suicidal attacks. The ruling class won't hand the state over to a band of fanatics on a plate. But Pakistan will remain in a civil war-like situation.

The Kabulis of India

Deepali Gaur Singh — 2009-09-13T18:01:26Z

The recent threats of kidnapping and killing in the Swat Valley of minority Sikh community members by the Taliban was a throwback to various periods in history when Afghan Hindus and Sikhs have, like the rest of the population of Afghanistan, had to face displacement brought on by violence. With the ransom demand, or “Taliban Protection Tax” as it was called, agreed at Rs.20 million the Sikh leader was released and the Sikh families were allowed to return to their homes and businesses. But for the Hindus and Sikhs from Afghanistan the issue remains an emotive one bringing back memories of their own flight into India from Afghanistan in the 1990s against the backdrop of the internecine civil war followed by Taliban threats. Today in India Afghan Hindus and Sikhs constitute nearly 90 percent of the Afghan refugee population.

The partition of India in 1947 defined the lives of not just those who made the tumultuous passage to India and Pakistan but also those who sought refuge in Afghanistan. These were the Sikhs and Hindus for whom the journey from the western fringes of Pakistan to India would have been far too arduous and dangerous, and Afghanistan provided what they perceived as a temporary safe haven. That is when another generation of this minority from Afghanistan made the country their home. Others had settled in Afghanistan centuries earlier. They call India their ancestral homeland as their ancestors first went to Afghanistan in the nineteenth century during the time of King Ranjit Singh.

This minority group left at different times in history just as they had gone to Afghanistan at different times in history. Many left Afghanistan just before or during the Soviet war when incessant bombing destroyed the lives of many. Even as ethnic Afghans joined the war with their livelihood destroyed, these groups came to India. The hope was that when things quieted down, they would return to their homes and small businesses. But the short return to their homes was as traumatic as leaving it the first time. Many found their homes occupied by warlords. Ninety five percent of their property was lost during the war years.

In eastern Afghanistan, some members of the community owned large houses and farm lands and were a thriving business community. The relative prosperity of this group can be gauged from the fact that despite being barely two percent of the population in Jalalabad, they controlled a large part of the economy. Over time they were also accorded a reasonable level of religious freedom. But now, post 2001, many have sought refuge in India after clashes with some hostile local communities over cultural practices and rituals. The attempt to cremate a body in 2007 in Kabul led to major tension between the Sikhs and the local community as the ritual of cremation was considered blasphemous.

Sikh refugees from Afghanistan who have come to India are granted a stay visa, which needs to be renewed every 18 months. In the absence of citizenship, these refugees find it hard to secure employment and the absence of relevant documentation gets in the way of admissions to educational institutions. The jobs they find are in the huge informal sector in India. With few avenues for earning many male members do make the journey back to Afghanistan. This means that they leave behind their women who often are ill-equipped to deal with the alien environment in the absence of formal education and language skills. A provision available for this group of refugees from the Indian government is that after 12 years of continuous residency in the country they can apply for an Indian citizenship. Over 500 Afghan Hindus and Sikhs have so far been naturalized through this process even as another 4,000 wait for their turn.

Afghanistan is believed to have had a population of over 50,000 Hindus and Sikhs before 1992 in areas like Jalalabad, Kandahar, Khost, Kabul, Ghazni and Laghman. Today there are just about 1,500 Sikhs in Afghanistan. The ones who remained are either those who had no relatives in India or lacked resources to migrate.

For those in India, while dreams of their homes in Afghanistan are yet to desert them, hopes of returning have. Everything has been lost to the war and the rest snatched by warlords. Besides, many see their return as a huge price to pay as it would mean sacrificing the freedom their children, especially daughters, enjoy in India, many of whom were even born there. And as they reminisce about the lives they left behind in Afghanistan for these ‘kabulis' of India – as they are locally referred to - the hopes for peace in the country they remember as home are still alive.

Will there be a “CHANGE” in Iran?

Mohammad Amin Wahidi — 2009-07-05T02:35:52Z

As protests still continue in Iranian cities, following massive fraud in the presidential election, it seems that the protestors are now demanding more than just the annulment of the election result but rather a change in the whole system of the current regime.

Many Iranian political groups who have been waiting for an uprising of the people against the regime to help change Iran's current political leadership, are now beginning a count-down to the fall of the religious regime in Iran.

The Mujahedin e Khalq e Iran or People's Mujahedeen Organization of Iran (PMOI) organized their annual gathering on Saturday June 20 in Villepinte Paris, to celebrate the 28th anniversary of creation of the National Resistance Council of Iran (NRCI). Thousands of Iranians from across the globe came to Paris, to show their support to the residents of Ashraf city, the PMOI's residential – military camp in Iraq.

Maryam Rajavi president-elect of the National Resistance Council of Iran and one of the PMOI's founders gave a speech to the PMOI's adherents and her supporters while being well-received by several European Parliamentarians invited to the gathering.

The main occasion of this gathering was the celebration of the 28th anniversary of the NRCI and the support for maintenance of Ashraf city, the post-election situation in Iran was highlighted by Mrs. Rajavi in her speech when she said: “it is the time for the people to have a government by the people and for the people.”

In this gathering, European Parliamentarians from the GB, Denmark, Germany, France, Spain, Spain and Canada all spoke on behalf of their parliaments supporting the decision of the European Parliament to remove PMOI from the terrorist list. They emphasized safety and security for the residents of Ashraf city (PMOI Camp in Iraq), based on international humanitarian and refugee conventions. The Parliamentarians highlighted POMI's real struggles against Islamic fundamentalism in Iran. They all called for the USA to support this decision of the European Parliament and PMOI from their terrorist list.

On April 24, 2009 The European Parliament signed a resolution considering all security of the lives of residences of Ashraf city, the POMI's camp in Iraq based on the international humanitarian and refugee conventions.

Mujahedin e Khalq (People's Mujahedin Organization of Iran)
Mujahedin e Khalq is a well known Iran group, that had military bases in Iraq and political offices in Europe, famous for their resistance against the Iranian strict religious regime, is now entering into the stage with a maneuver of its supporters in Europe through a grand gathering in Paris, since lately the restrictions on this political – military group is being released by the European parliament.

Founded in the mid-1960s as a political group by university students, the Mujahedeen first fought against Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlawi, the pro-America King of Iran until the collapse of the monarchy and beginning of the Islamic Republic. They were not granted a role in the post-monarchy Islamic Republic government, because their religious views differed from the conservatives of the Religious Monarchy of Ayatullahs.

This group added a military branch to their political structure after moving from Iran. They were welcomed by Sadam Hussain in Iraq in the early 1980s. With the support of Saddam, they created an army of thousands of religious believers. They announced war against all interests of the Iranian regime until the collapse of that regime, and have launched many attacks against IRI officials and interests over the past 20 years. During the eight years war of Iraq against Iran, 1981-89 they played a major role supporting Saddam against Iran.

After the collapse of the Saddam Regime in 2003, the Mujahedeen e Khalq was peacefully disarmed by the American forces in Iraq and their residential military camp (Ashraf city) was secured by the Americans until August 2008.

PMOI and the USA
Since the Mujahedeen are not yet off the U.S. terrorist list and the American Forces handed the security operations to the Iraqi forces, Iraqi officials have warned they will close the PMOI Camp (Ashraf city) and expel the residents to Iran or elsewhere, when they have established relations with the IRI regime.

PMOI leaders struggle to convince the world that Ashraf city is not a terrorist camp but a city of resistance against the IRI regime. Their struggles have been successful in Europe to some extent, but because they are strong Shiite believers with a tendency towards leftist ideology, they are still recognized as a terrorist group by the USA.

Contemporary Iran and the Iranians
Protests in Iran and around the world show that millions of Iranians around want to see fundamental changes in the system of the ruling regime in Iran, and the latest presidential election that was reported to be tainted by mass fraud has opened a new page in Iran's contemporary history. Protests indicate the good possibility of a new revolution that could end in the creation of a true Islamic Democratic Republic to replace what the Iranian people now call a “religious monarchy.”

Critical reforms of IMF policies demanded

Bobby Ramakant — 2009-04-22T05:18:40Z

Earlier this month the Group of Twenty (G-20) leaders had announced a USD 1.1 trillion booster-dose into the world economy by the end of 2010 through multilateral institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Health advocates believe that critical reforms are needed for IMF policies to prevent disastrous fallouts like rising tuberculosis (TB) incidence in countries that might receive IMF funding.

In July 2008, analysts from Cambridge and Yale Universities had reported that tuberculosis (TB) in countries with IMF loans rose sharply. The strict conditions on IMF loans were blamed for thousands of extra TB deaths in Eastern Europe , and former Soviet republics. A UK TB charity backed the Public Library of Science (PLoS) study findings - but the IMF had firmly rejected them, as per a BBC news (July 2008).

David Stuckler from Cambridge University had said to BBC in July 2008 that "If we really want to create sustainable economic growth, we need first to ensure that we have taken care of people's most basic health needs."

The BBC news further said that "in recent years, it [IMF] has offered assistance to 21 countries in the region, in the form of loans offered in exchange for the meeting of strict economic targets. The researchers claimed it was efforts to meet these targets that were undermining the fight against TB by drawing funding away from public health."

Most striking was the analysis in BBC news that "without the IMF loans, they suggested, rates would have fallen by up to 10%, meaning at least 100,000 extra deaths. Countries which accepted IMF loans averaged an 8% fall in government spending, a 7% drop in the number of doctors per head of population, and a fall in a method of TB treatment called "directly observed therapy", which is recommended by the World Health Organisation."

The Treatment Action Group (TAG) is mobilizing civil society from around the world to endorse a letter before 23 April 2009 to demand that the final proposals must include critical reforms of IMF policies that will enable increased investments in health and education.

As an outcome of the G-20 meeting in London on 2 April 2009, the Declaration called on the IMF to come up with "concrete proposals" for the allocation of these additional resources during the Spring Meetings of the World Bank and IMF planned for 25-26 April 2009 in Washington DC , USA .

The civil society letter calls upon the IMF's International Monetary and Financial Committee and the World Bank-IMF Development Committee as well as any IMF committee tasked with developing proposals to fulfill on the G-20 commitment, to ensure the following reforms are incorporated in the final proposal:

– The IMF must phase out those activities outside its areas of core competence such as those of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF). The IMF does not have a mandate for, or competence in, the long-term development of low-income countries. IMF resources channeled through the PRGF and from the proceeds of gold sales should support grant assistance or debt relief and be directed to an appropriate aid mechanism. The IMF's Policy Support Instrument (PSI) should also be phased out, in order to end the IMF's monopoly on 'signaling' to donors whether or not developing countries warrant support.

– The IMF must eliminate harmful conditions linked with its loan programs and other instruments. The IMF should end its tradition of requiring countries to implement contractionary policies in economic recessions. For instance, the IMF should ensure that expanded investment in health and education are not subjected to overall budget caps and that subsidies that cushion the impact of the crisis on poor people are not eliminated. The IMF has made progress toward eliminating wage bill ceilings as conditions for lending, but it should stop this practice entirely. In addition, the IMF should stop directing countries to engage in privatization of services or financial sector liberalization through its loans and other instruments.

Organizations from around the world are endorsing this civil society letter and let's hope that IMF will listen to these sane voices.

(The author is a World Health Organization (WHO) Director General's WNTD Awardee 2008 and writes extensively on health and development. He can be contacted at: bobbyramakant@yahoo.com)

The year that was…in the subcontinent and what does it mean for Afghanistan

Deepali Gaur Singh — 2009-01-11T08:47:37Z

November 26, 2008 is being now commonly referred to as India's 9/11 in the aftermath of the Mumbai terror attacks on that day. It is ironic that India should need to borrow a label from an America tragedy - which truly and quite horrifically claimed thousands of lives in a matter of hours; but India has a longer history of such attacks and today ranks amongst the highest victims when it comes to casualties of terror. And yet what really has been the true import of Mumbai 26/11?

The Mumbai strikes – irrespective of who masterminded them - were the culminating attacks of a series in the subcontinent; the Marriott hotel in Islamabad, the Indian embassy in Kabul apart from the numerous bomb blasts in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan over the last year. What this has effectively meant is a derailing of a peace process between the countries, especially India and Pakistan, which is important to most countries in South Asia and the larger Asian region, not to mention in the immediate neighbourhood of Afghanistan.

The traditional history of finger-pointing had returned with the Indian embassy attacks and the more recent arrests and counter arrests of ‘spies' is only a reminder of the 1990s when being a member of the Indian or Pakistan consulate was not without its implications whenever relations between the two countries deteriorated. The Kargil War of 1999 barely a decade ago happened immediately after the peace process between Pakistan's PM Nawaz Sharief and his Indian counterpart, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It took ten years to get the process back on track.

The Indian government implicated the ISI in the Kabul embassy attacks and the banned Lashkar-e-Taiyabba in the more recent Mumbai attacks. The links between the two have long been established. LeT's founder, Maulana Masood Azhar – one of the men freed during the Kandahar hijacking (Indian Airlines Flight 814 from Kathmandu) of December 1999 in exchange for the plane load of hostages quite suspiciously (and hardly surprisingly) disappeared from what was first reported as his house arrest in Pakistan.

And meanwhile even as the two countries started by playing down the possibility of a war the American administration jumped in by stating that they would support India's right to defend herself. On the other side, the well wishers, this time for the Pakistani side have been the Pak Taliban who have stated that they would join Pakistan's war effort against India, having tired of the skirmishes with the Pakistani army. More importantly, the Afghan Taliban leadership, like Mullah Omar, distanced themselves from groups like that of Baitullah Mehsud for carrying on attacks against fellow Muslims.

A war with India would help them reclaim their position amongst the Taliban brethren at a time where there are signs of many of the Afghan Taliban moving towards a more political agenda from a militarized one.

As early as 2002 the US administration had wanted India to play a more direct (military) role in Afghanistan which the Indian government very staunchly declined even going to the extent of issuing directives asking Indians to avoid contracting with private agencies operating in Afghanistan or Iraq. It is only recently with India's humanitarian aid and the infrastructural activity in the country that Indian presence in the country has increased.

The last thing, amidst all the violence the region needs is a war between India and Pakistan. While it would help to shift the focus from the Pak-Afghan border and if the Pak Taliban do join the war against India then possibly even de-escalate the violence there given that President Karzai has constantly blamed attacks from across his eastern neighbour for the constant instability in the country. Besides, it would certainly serve the immediate interests of groups engaged there. But a war will not help to dismantle terror networks as has been the experience of the NATO in Afghanistan.

he Jammat-ud-Dawa (JuD), now a front organisation of Lashkar-e-Taiba, banned by the US several years ago is already believed to be preparing to revive under a new name in the wake of the UNSC ban on it after the Mumbai terror attacks. The presence of senior JuD cadres at a recent rally in Pakistan under the banner of Tehreek-e-Hurmat-e-Rasool points to this possible development.

The American President-elect, Barack Obama started his first visit to Afghanistan last year on the wrong foot with President Karzai when he insinuated that Afghanistan was yet to get ‘out of the bunker.' Now, as he gets ready to take over office he has reiterated his earlier commitment of aid to Afghanistan. But the scenario in the region has become far more complicated post 26/11. India and Pakistan are engaged in a second guessing game with both looking to avoid confrontation and yet looking for adequate reasons to blame the other if such a situation does become unavoidable. India goes to the polls this year.

The Pakistani administration is fresh from polls last year and is struggling with an economy in shreds and an army that wants to remain all powerful. President Karzai too has to go back to the electorate for a mandate on his five years of presidency. The political situation in the region remains very fluid and what happens between India and Pakistan could very well shape the future for many actors in the region including Afghanistan.

Another blow to enforcement of tobacco control policies in India

Bobby Ramakant — 2008-12-01T09:55:28Z

Right after the strong and effective guidelines to stop tobacco industry interference in health policies were adopted by the government representatives of 160 countries including India, the pictorial warnings on all tobacco products that were supposed to become mandatory from 30 November 2008 in India, were, again delayed – reportedly due to hectic lobbying by the industry allies and other entities like the beedi growers' association.

Pictorial warnings on tobacco products have been delayed, at least, seven times. Before going to the 3rd Conference of Parties (COP3) to the global tobacco treaty (Framework Convention on Tobacco Control), the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had revealed before the Central Information Commission that tobacco industry is putting "pressure" to relax the tobacco control policies (source: The Hindu, 14 November 2008).

The Article 5.3 of the global tobacco treaty, if defined broadly, recognizes “the tobacco industry's fundamental and irreconcilable conflict with public health.”

The tobacco industry interference has times and again weakened and delayed the enforcement of the public health policies - for example, more than 70 court cases were filed against tobacco control policies in Indian courts in September 2008, and due to aggressive lobbying, the consultative Group of Ministers (GoM) formed to review the pictorial warnings on tobacco products, had diluted the pictorial warnings provision and postponed the implementation of pictorial warnings on tobacco products at least six-times earlier. This is the seventh time the pictorial warnings on tobacco products have been again postponed, as reliable sources revealed, to the end of May 2009.

The industry interference in public health policies certainly needs urgent attention to save lives otherwise it will continue to threaten to reverse the great advancements made in forging public health policies and implementing them. Meantime tobacco continues to kill more than a million people in India, and 5.4 million globally, every year.

Also when these pictorial warnings were finally approved by a GoM, why did the GoM met again in an emergency meeting a week before the pictorial warnings provision was about to become mandatory? GoM including the Union External Affairs Minister - Pranab Mukherjee, the Union Information and Broadcasting Minister - PR Dasmunsi, the Minister of State for Labour and Employment - Oscar Fernandes the Union Minister for Commerce and Industry -Kamal Nath, Union Minister for Culture and Urban Development -Jaipal Reddy and Union Health and Family Welfare Minister Anbumani Ramadoss,

The GOM in an earlier meeting this year headed by India's External Affairs Minister Mr Pranab Mukherjee had agreed for two mild images of a scorpion signal depicting cancer or an x-ray plate of a man suffering from lung cancer as pictorial warning to deter people from smoking.

These pictorial warnings provide smokers with helpful information on the health effects. Most smokers want this information, and certainly want their children to have this information too. The tobacco industry is continuing its decades-long strategy of trying to minimize the effectiveness of package warnings. The tobacco industry is no friend of smokers - and ironically it's true that 'the tobacco industry kills its best customers'.

Pictorial warnings on all tobacco products are a good public health strategy because the cost of package warnings is paid for by tobacco companies, not government. Also this should not be looked upon as an isolated initiative rather has to be supported by comprehensive healthcare, legislative and education programmes to attain long-run public health gains. Pictorial warnings may also be appropriate, particularly in countries with low literacy rates or where research shows that smokers are ignoring standard warning labels.

Several nations have implemented strong health warning label requirements. Examples include:
– Canada, whose health minister recently proposed enlarging the labels from 30% of the package face to 60%;
– Thailand, which has added the message "SMOKING CAUSES IMPOTENCE" to its list of required warnings; and
– Australia, which was the first nation to require that "how to quit" information be printed on every pack.
– South Africa, Singapore and Poland also require strong warning labels.

Over past years there were consistent efforts to water down the implementation of the tobacco control policies in India. India's Union Minister of Labour and Employment, Mr Oscar Fernandes, who is also a member of GoM, had earlier said while replying to a written querry in the Lok Sabha (parliament) on 21 April 2008: "Public health measures such as pictorial health warnings on tobacco products don't have any immediate economic impact on the industry due to the item's addictive nature and the time taken for demand reduction, according to various studies." Mr Fernandes also told the Parliament that 'his ministry was receiving representation from various organisations/central trade unions such as CITU, the Tobacco Institute of India, Federation of Farmers Association and others particularly relating to apprehension of loss of employment, arrangement of alternative jobs to the affected 'beedi' workers and adverse effect on health among others (Source: PTI, 21 April 2008).

On 15 December 2006, GK Sanghi had raised the question in Rajya Sabha about Government's response to the 'beedi' workers agitating against the proposed printing of skull and bones on 'beedi' packs. In May 2007, Gutkha (chewing tobacco) manufacturers in India were attempting to get a court injunction to delay the directive requiring all tobacco products to carry health warnings. Another interesting attempt was made in the same month (May 2007) when External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee suggested in his letter that the sign will likely offend the Muslim community, who are employed in the beedi industry of Murshidabad, as they unlike Hindus bury their dead, and do not burn them.

Another major move to water down the Indian Cigarette and other tobacco products Act also happened in May 2007 when Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi called on the central government to defer implementation of the legislation, saying that "the move has threatened the livelihood of 1.5 million beedi workers in the State." Karunanidhi said beedi manufacturers in the State have stopped production with some tobacco industry players threatening to go on an indefinite strike from 1 June 2007 if the Act is enforced. Also in May 2007, The Karnataka Beedi Association in India said that the directive to print skull and bones on beedi packs would result in a steep decline in beedi sales adversely affecting the welfare of beedi workers.

The All India Beedi Industry Federation had also written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the 2 October 2008 smoking ban has made things tough for the beedi industry. Meanwhile, "we have told the Prime Minister ... that a forced printing of the pictoral (cancer) warning … will lead to a further decline in sales by 30%," had said Rajnikant Patel, president of the All India Beedi Industry Federation to the media.

As per the World Health Organization (WHO)'s MPOWER Report (2008), despite conclusive evidence, relatively few tobacco users understand the full extent of their health risk. Graphic warnings on tobacco packaging deter tobacco use, yet only 15 countries, representing 6% of the world's population, mandate pictorial warnings (covering at least 30% of the principal surface area) and just five countries with a little over 4% of the world's people, meet the highest standards for pack warnings.

“The bidi workers, majority of whom are bidi smokers, are in favour of pictorial health warnings on bidi packets. About 73 percent of the workers agreed that bidis are harmful to health and 79 percent felt that picture based warnings are important on bidi packets, at least to protect the younger generation,' according to the study conducted by the Voluntary Health Association of India (Source: IANS, 3 November 2008).

The fight to enforce public health policies, and put a check on industry interference, is clearly a long uphill battle indeed.

Bobby Ramakant
(The author is a World Health Organization (WHO)'s WNTD Awardee 2008 and can be contacted at: bobbyramakant@yahoo.com)

AFGHANISTAN'S RELUCTANT ALLY

Roohullah Rahimi — 2008-10-28T09:46:14Z

editorial assistance by Bea Vanni

A strategic divergence clearly exists among the coalition partners in Afghanistan on how to deal with the Taliban. This situation in part has its roots in the historical strategic interests of coalition members in Afghanistan. It might also be due to the growing logic that the insurgency is not merely a result of the reaction of the deposed Taliban but a result of a multiplicity of factors. However, the ‘runaway pessimism' exhibited by the British contingent in Afghanistan runs counter-productive not only to the aspirations of Afghans and the Afghan Government but also to the interests of Britain's allies.

While it is imperative that the insurgency and the overall situation in Afghanistan is not dealt with only through military means, an array of approaches extending the peace to the south must include political, development, and other inducements and co-optations. No one understands this more than the Government of Afghanistan, which has taken numerous steps with mixed results. That is probably all we can expect from a government that is severely constrained by a disjointed group of allies and a fractious domestic political base. However, the sentiments shared by British Ambassador Sherard Cowper-Coles in a letter to his French counterpart cannot only be in response to the deteriorating security situation but reflective of the frailties of the British approach in Afghanistan.

In the past other British officials have also raised alarm. The former British Defence Secretary Des Brown shocked Afghans by branding the insurgency an uprising by the Pashtons and legitimized the Taliban movement by calling them a Pashton nationalist movement. British characterization of the Taliban as a Pashton nationalist movement portrays a cruel misrepresentation of the conditions that brought the Taliban to power and the range of factors that propelled them to dominance. It is both a mistake and dangerous to characterize the Taliban as such: The Taliban's struggle and their ideology have no resemblance to Pashton nationalism; indeed, they are opposed to the secularism of Pashton nationalism as evidenced by their constant battles with Pashton tribes in the FATA region.

The British presence in Helmand has been an abject failure since British forces assumed security responsibility in the province. The situation has deteriorated to the point where the insurgents control the majority of the province, where Helmand sits at the centre of poppy cultivation and narcotics trade and home to Taliban training and logistic centers. The 2006 Musa Qala peace deal between the British forces and the Taliban led to a furious row between the Afghan and British governments which eventually resulted in the expulsion of two British diplomats.

Since the United States and other NATO countries including Canada are relative newcomers to Afghanistan, their engagement is not hampered to the same degree as the legacies of historical engagement in that country. Subsequently, their intervention in Afghanistan has, on the one hand, been directed primarily by the imperatives of the so called ‘Global War on Terror' and on the other by the ambiguities of Humanitarian Interventionism. Conversely, Britain has had entrenched interests in Afghanistan that transcends the mandates of the United Nations and NATO's presence. Hence, Britain's more pragmatic approach to deal with the Taliban will save burning all the bridges if they face a future Taliban government. Britain's reluctance to wholeheartedly engage in counter-insurgency operations has been the cause of much trepidation in NATO circles as well as among Afghans.

British ambassador to Afghanistan Sir Sherrard Cowper-Coles

So when Mr. Cowper-Coles beats his chest and prophesizes on the impending failure, we cannot help but notice residues of internal chaos occurring within NATO. Moreover, the British and NATO must realize that neither failure nor once again becoming the largest refugee group in the world is an option for the Afghans, either is a return of the Taliban. Mr. Cowper-Coles and his government must recognize the essential contours of this conflict and choose a side and spare us the political gibberish of reconciliation.

The ideas underpinning aspects of this continuing conflict are not new in Afghanistan and have existed for decades. On the one hand, we have moderate forces that aspire to a democratic Afghanistan; a society that espouses the ideals of Islam with tolerance of its diversity; a society in tune with the realities of modernity in a globalized world, and a responsible member of the community of nations. On the other hand, we have an intolerant political force that manipulates religious sentiments of the people, alongside an understanding of what the Taliban represent, and knowing their aspirations are not congruent with the wishes of a great majority of Afghans.

The government of Afghanistan and the emerging civil society in that country with all their frailties represent a better option than the Taliban: A democratic Afghanistan where the rule of law prevails and a country on the path to peace and economic development stands in the best interests of both Afghanistan and the world. Taliban and their criminal syndicates present a clear track record and the Afghans are well aware of that; so, neither the British nor the West should dictate to Afghans on reconciliation. These matters must be left to the prerogative of the Afghans and they alone are in a position to deliberate on such issues.
Afghans do not need runaway pessimism; they understand both the history of failure in Afghanistan and the fragility of the present situation.

What they do not understand is the wavering on the part of the international community. Afghans need constructive partners who see their own interest in a stable Afghanistan. At a time when the ISI and the Pakistani military establishment might be considering withdrawal of their support to the Taliban, Mr. Cowper-Coles might have done just enough to make the ISI reconsider? The defeatism disclosed by Mr. Cowper-Coles serves only to embolden the insurgents and weaken the resolve of a hesitant NATO. Suffice to say that the determination of Afghans for a peaceful and viable Afghanistan will not weaken.

All this must come as a warning to the Afghans to pick up the slack and get their house in order. Afghans have long been either too willing to resort to violence when outsiders found their way into Afghanistan or too sanguine to believe in foreign benevolence. Afghans must understand the national imperatives that have compelled countries to come to Afghanistan and be on their guard should their hopes be short-changed for political conveniences.

Roohullah Rahimi
roohrahimi@gmail.com
Ottawa, Ontario