China ‘Belting’ Pakistan on The Road to A Debt Trap

SALEEM SAMAD

The political debacle of the ambitious Gwadar International Port built by the Chinese is yet to be fully operational. It was discovered that the challenges were unbearable and the threat perception has increased manifold in the restive Balochistan province in Pakistan.
The security threat challenged by Baloch separatists and armed nationalists demanding an independent Balochistan has caused a ripple of fear for the future of the Gwadar Port and China’s ambitious connectivity with Central Asia into the Arabian Sea.
The ‘all-weather friends’ China and Pakistan signed a precursor deal to develop the Karachi coastline at the cost of $3.5 billion – another would be a debt trap.
China’s strategic shift from Gwadar to Karachi has prompted Pakistan’s ousted Prime Minister Imran Khan to dub the “jackpot” project “a revolution” in his Tweet to develop Karachi’s coast.
Chinese policy puts strategy over investment and ignores profits. The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) leadership has shifted from high-risk lending to hedging its bets.
The ancient silk-road was envisioned as a megaproject – Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by China’s powerful President Xi Jinping.
However, the project seems to have hit a speed bump after reaching Gwadar and is losing its steam.
Meanwhile, China is extremely concerned about the safety and security of its personnel engaged in the construction of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects, including the Karakoram Highway linking with Gwadar.
China defending its lending practices, said they were “sincere and unselfish”, and insisted it only lent to countries that could repay.
Patterns of Chinese investments in South Asia – Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka – all of which are part of BRI, depict Chinese propensity to control the domestic markets and the natural resources of the South Asian nations.
Many countries where China has offered ambitious BRI proposals could not contemplate where and when they were going to fall into a debt trap.
Some countries admitted that they have fallen into a debt trap and the mega infrastructure is being colonized, like the $306.7m Hambantota International Port in Sri Lanka built by China in 2010.
In 2016, a 70 per cent stake of the port was leased to China Merchants Port Holdings Company Limited (CM Port) for 99 years for $1.12bn. The lease was questioned during the street revolution which toppled the Rajapaksa brothers. The cash-starved Sri Lanka now wants the port back.
Pakistan is one of them. They know where the trap is. The Sunni Muslim majority nation knows they are sliding into China’s debt trap. Despite the debt trap, a strong pro-Chinese lobby with Pakistan elites and military in Rawalpindi promotes Chinese megaprojects, while the politicians have to swallow the Chinese red pills.
Pakistan is China’s gateway to Central Asia and the Middle East. CPEC’s transportation corridor will create a low-cost network of roads, railways and other infrastructure and substantially increase trade capacity between southwest China with Europe, the Middle East and North African countries.
The $62bn Gwadar project links with the persecuted Uyghur Muslims in East Turkistan (now Xinjiang Province) of China and is being built through disputed territory in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan-administered Kashmir, and militant-infested Balochistan.
Well, the BRI flagship project in Pakistan fails to address the participation of the fiercely independent Baloch people, which has scaled up armed insurrections in Balochistan.
Historically, Balochistan was a princely state and once an independent nation under British Raj. Before the British colonialists quit India, signed its independence months before Pakistan’s independence in August 1947. Muslim League overzealous leaders invaded Balochistan in March 1948 with full knowledge of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, founder of Pakistan.
Gwadar has been leased to China for 43 years and the prospect of the Chinese navy converting the port into a strategic naval base will invite greater security issues.
China which they do not hide its grand plan to expand its maritime presence in the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Oman – a major strategic global oil trade route.
The United States and its allies in the Gulf reckon China’s hegemony in the Gulf has been deemed a security issue of the oil route.
America thinks the presence of the Chinese navy will provide military backup to Iran’s naval patrol in the Persian Gulf, from yet another Chinese-built Chabahar port in Iran, not far from Gwadar.
Earlier, Communist China for decades propagated on its state radio that the United States, Japan, Britain, and European countries are economic imperialists, warmongers and backed autocratic regimes in third-world countries.
Several think tanks argue that China has become an economic giant and a new superpower – the neo-economic imperialist or another “East India Company”.
A British popular tabloid newspaper The Sun claims that China is “colonizing” smaller countries by lending them massive amounts of money, which they can never repay.
Developing countries from Pakistan to Djibouti, Maldives to Fiji, all owe huge amounts to China. Countries around the world owe huge sums to China and have fallen into a debt trap.
Some political scientists are calling it “debt-trap diplomacy” or “debt colonialism” offering enticing loans to countries unable to repay, and then demanding concessions when they default.
Alarm bells are ringing for Pakistan’s public debt is piling up, while a new narrative taking shape in the West that the BRI is creating a debt trap for developing economies, many are quick to link Pakistan’s ballooning debt to loans incurred under the CPEC.
Pakistan will have to pay back $100 billion to China by 2024 of the total investment of $18.5 billion, which China has invested on account of bank loans in 19 early harvest projects, under CPEC.
Nevertheless, Pakistan elites and media hype boast CPEC has the potential for a dramatic impact on Pakistan’s economy, but this transformation would come at a heavy price of making Pakistan a colony of China. Piling up loans from China is a big gamble for Pakistan’s economy, writes Abdul Khaliq, a debt analyst.
As China makes inroads into Pakistan, the government has given sweeping tax exemptions to Chinese companies, a situation which is creating a damaging and discriminatory playing field against Pakistani business entrepreneurs virtually abolishing the remaining locally owned manufacturing sector in the country.
In fact, Pakistan heavily relies on CPEC and has put all its eggs in one basket. Piling up loans from China and building too many hopes in the CPEC may be a big gamble for Pakistan’s economy.

First published in The New York Editorial, 18 November 2022
Saleem Samad, is a South Asia Special Correspondent for the New York Editorial. He is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh. He is a recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award and is a correspondent of the Reporters Without Borders (@RSF_inter). He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter: @saleemsamad

‘Game changer’ Imran Khan is not out yet!

SALEEM SAMAD

Pakistan’s cricket star-turned-politician Imran Khan did not hesitate to admit that the “establishment” (the Pakistan military) gave him three options.

The first option was to face a no-confidence vote in parliament. The second one was to dissolve parliament and hold snap elections and the third one was to resign as prime minister and forget about patronage of the military.

Khan’s party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) swept into power in 2018, albeit with the blessings of the military, pulling strings to ensure that PTI has 121 seats in the assembly, thus making it a minority government.

The military denied the claims of giving Khan three options and backing him in the election, but he successfully dodged the ouster by following one of the three pieces of advice after consulting his cronies and advisers.

Pakistan’s former celebrity cricketer Wasim Akram wrote on Twitter: “The Game Changer #ImranKhan #Skipper #NotOutYet #Surprise”.

The tweet of the former captain and international sports commentator has earned 72.3K likes and 10.2K Retweets in a day.

What Akram and other supporters of Khan have not mentioned is that Khan remained loyal to “His Master’s Voice” – the military bigwigs who continued to interfere in foreign policy, civil administration and political affairs.

For nearly half of the 75 years of Pakistan’s birth, the country was ruled by the military which caused immense harm to the national economy, and sustainable development goals, blocking the capacity building of democratic institutions and freedom of expression.

As a result, the news organisations that were critical of the PTI government fell prey to Inter-Services Intelligence, the military’s spy agency. The dreaded agency has long been accused of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and torture of journalists in custody, especially in restive Balochistan and Waziristan of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Several prominent journalists were killed. Journalists critical of the military establishment were forced to go into exile. The owners of several private news organisations were stopped by the ISI from employing these journalists.

The opposition moved to oust Khan accusing him of failing to revive the economy and crackdown on corruption. Now he is blamed for “burning down democratic order” as the minority government dissolved parliament to avoid the vote of no-confidence that he claims is backed by the United States because he visited Moscow on the day Russia launched the invasion of Ukraine.

After the chaos in parliament before its dissolution, Pakistan’s independent newspaper Dawn in an editorial wrote: “The nation is stunned. Ahead of the vote of no-confidence, the prime minister had repeatedly hinted that he had a ‘trump card’ up his sleeve. There were indications all along that something might be amiss: even as political pundits and the media confidently predicted Mr Imran Khan’s defeat in the vote of no-confidence, he seemed unperturbed. No one could have guessed that his last ploy would involve having the democratic order burnt down by a democratically empowered party.”

Maleeha Lodhi, a Pakistani diplomat and political scientist wrote in the Dawn: “The Imran Khan government’s denouement raises the question of how he ended up facing a vote of no-confidence. Although that parliamentary process was subverted and a constitutional crisis ensued it will still mark an end to his rule. Few governments in Pakistan’s recent history began their term with Khan’s advantages. He had unqualified support from the military, widespread public goodwill, control of Punjab, a divided and demoralised opposition and a popular yearning for change.”

The country’s political landscape has recently been abuzz with political activity as parties and individuals changed alliances and the PTI and the opposition were seen trading barbs and allegations alongside intensifying efforts to ensure their success in the no-confidence contest.

Zaigham Khan, a leading political analyst told Al Jazeera: “[The dissolution is] a blatant violation of the constitution and can lead to a very serious crisis.” If the apex court of Pakistan orders the speaker to go ahead with the no-confidence motion, the dissolution of parliament will become invalid, the analyst said.

Former prime minister Muhammad Khan Junejo appealed to the Supreme Court in 1988 after the assembly had been dissolved by former president General Zia-ul-Haq, who had taken power in a military coup years earlier.

The court agreed his government had been dissolved unconstitutionally but ruled that since elections had been announced anyway it was best to move on.

The fate of Khan’s political future now rests upon the Supreme Court’s decision. Although opposition leaders seemed confident to win a vote of no-confidence against Khan, chances are weak to get a proactive verdict. It’s highly unlikely the Supreme Court will overrule the decision to hold the vote at all.

First published in the news portal bdnews24, 5 April 2022

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, defender of media rights, and the recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award

Time’s Up For Imran Khan

SALEEM SAMAD

When Imran Khan was in the opposition, he told journalist Hamid Mir on a live talkshow on Pakistan’s popular channel Geo TV that Pakistan should seek an apology for war crimes during the bloody war of independence of Bangladesh in 1971.

Since he came to power backed by military hawks in Rawalpindi GHQ on 18 August 2018 he never bothered to warm the relationship with Bangladesh despite several hiccups.

Bangladesh was blasted several times in the Pakistan parliament. When a war criminal was indicted and the war crimes tribunal in Dhaka handed down maximum punishment, the parliament in Islamabadrebuked Bangladesh for eliminating Islamic scholars and leaders and said their only crime was that they were loyal to Pakistan. Islamabad also officially blamed Dhaka for purging opposition, blah, blah, blah!

Bangladesh has hanged several high profile suspects for committing crimes against humanity and mostly belonged to Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami, Muslim League, Jatiya Party and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

Such unwarranted remarks and resolutions angered the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Her regime decided to lower the status of diplomatic relationships. Bangladesh High Commission in Islamabad and Karachi suspended issuing visas to Pakistan nationals from travelling to Bangladesh.

Imran Khan did little to thaw the relationship between the two countries and of course forgot the pledge to seek an apology for genocide and war crimes by marauding Pakistan forces in 1971.

Now the flamboyant cricketer turned politician seems to have dug his own grave.  He is facing a vote of no confidence which is expected to force him from office.

His ruling party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) coalition with minority parties has fallen apart for hundred and one reasons. Most of the PTI lawmakers and regional leaders point their fingers at Khan for the debacle.

Pakistan’s premier independent newspaper the Dawn writes: Out of a total of 342 seats, the opposition parties have managed to cross the magical figure of 172 and enjoy the support of 177 members in the NA [National Assembly], even without nearly over a dozen dissidents of the ruling PTI, who have already publicly declared the withdrawal of their support to the prime minister.

In the days to follow, the country’s political landscape had been abuzz with political activity as parties and individuals changed alliances and the PTI and opposition were seen trading barbs and allegations alongside intensifying efforts to ensure their success in the no-confidence contest.

The opposition includes Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), Pakistan Peoples Party, MuttahidaMajlis–e–Amal, MuttahidaQaumi Movement (Pakistan), Balochistan Awami Party (BAP), Balochistan National Party (Mengal), Awami National Party, JamhooriWattan Party and Pakistan Muslim League (Quad) hold the magic number.

Khan told a private TV channel that the country’s ‘establishment’ [the Pakistan military] gave him three options facing the no-confidence motion in parliament. To face the no-confidence motion in parliament, hold fresh elections in the country, or resign from the post of prime minister, to end the ongoing political turmoil.

He blamed the West for hatching a conspiracy against Khan’s government after he visited Moscow just days after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Khan when he mentions the west means the United States and blames Washington for leaning his shoulder toward Russia at the crucial juncture of the second phase of the cold war era in Europe.

Pakistan had always been a trusted ally of the United States, during the ‘War on Terror" campaign when US troops invaded Afghanistan and also an all-weather friend of China. Despite the tension, the USA wants Pakistan to play its role in Afghanistan.

Khan said he has credible information that his life is in danger but asserted that he is not afraid and will continue his fight for an independent and democratic Pakistan.

First published in The News Times, 4 April 2022

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad

Military hawks gives sermons to Pakistan lawmakers

Is a rogue spy agency calling the shots in Pakistan?

SALEEM SAMAD

Pakistan is possibly the only country in South Asia where military hawks nesting in Rawalpindi GHQ give sermons to lawmakers and legislators in Islamabad on how to desist from engaging in divisive politics on issues of national interest.

Earlier this month, Pakistan’s Parliamentary Committee on National Security was debriefed on the prevailing situation in the country and region by no less than the director-general of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Lieutenant General Faiz Hameed.

Pakistan’s rogue spy agency is calling the shots in Pakistan. The “Pakistan Military Incorporated” flexes its muscles because of the extra-constitutional powers that it has illegally appropriated over all the state organs, including the judiciary.

What the ISI chief said undoubtedly makes perfect sense, but his discourse on political correctness to legislators has raised eyebrows among the civil society, independent media, and rights groups.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan -- with his election promise for “Naya Pakistan” -- has swallowed his nerve to speak out against the Rawalpindi GHQ hawks. His “wahi” (sermons) come from the military bigwigs and not from his civil or political advisers. 

He seems to have lost confidence in the politicians and legislators from the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). The wings of the party leaders were cropped, and their beaks waxed to stop them from chirping in satisfaction of Rawalpindi.

Political observers argue that Khan, the cricketer turned politician, is backed by the military, and that the hawks engineered the July 2018 elections and installed a puppet regime of PTI. Meanwhile, the PTI politicians snorted against military hegemony, but would not dare blow the gaff.

Pakistan’s premier English newspaper The Dawn underwent legal harassment and intimidation by the dreaded spy agency ISI, after a news story in October 2016 appeared on the front page: “Act against militants or face international isolation, civilians tell [the] military,” reflecting the anger of the civil society and rights groups.

The outcry of civil society is weak but revealed that Rawalpindi’s hawks have continued patronage to jihadist terror networks, fanning conflicts by Islamist militants in neighbouring countries -- Afghanistan and India.

Pakistan has failed to block the military hawks from aiding and abetting jihad in neighbouring countries and elsewhere. Thus, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international anti-money laundering and terrorism finance watchdog refused to remove Pakistan from its grey watchlist because the country had not been vigorous enough in the prosecution of United Nations-designated terrorists.

Greylisting carries no legal sanctions but restricts a country’s access to international loans. A top Pakistan official estimated that the greylisting cost his country’s economy $10 billion annually.

The meddling of the spy agency in politics, civil administration, and the judiciary has gone so far that Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, a senior sitting judge of Islamabad High Court, was sacked within three months of having spilled the beans. He admitted that the “Judiciary [in Pakistan] is not independent … the ISI forms benches of its choice to get desired results.”

A Supreme Court judgment two years ago by Justice Qazi Faez Isa reminded that: “The Constitution emphatically prohibits members of the armed forces from engaging in any kind of political activity, which includes supporting a political party, faction, or individual.”

On the other hand, the cash crunch is pushing Pakistan on the verge of a failed state. Independent think tanks have warned that Pakistan will turn into a pariah state if the interference of the military hawks continues.

To salvage the nation from an economic crisis during the coronavirus pandemic, Khan has had to reach out to his all-weather friend China to repay the second instalment of $1 billion out of the $3 billion owed to Saudi Arabia.

Khan is widely dubbed as a populist and appears to reinforce a widespread traditionalist attitude that rejects religious tolerance, as well as the rights of women and ethnic minorities.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 13 July 2021

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan face-off over Kashmir

A world map minted in Saudi Arabia's banknote shows Jammu and Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan not in Pakistan - Photo: Public Domain

SALEEM SAMAD

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has now fallen out of grace from Saudi Arabia. The diplomatic relations have gone cold after Islamabad attempted to ally with Turkey.

In recent times, the relations with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and Turkey have dived further after the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018.

The Kingdom’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (popularly known as MBS), squeezed Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan to repay a $1 billion loan.

To further humiliate Pakistan, the Kingdom announced that the $1 billion, repaid by Pakistan, would be invested in Reliance Jio Fibre in India.

Embarrassed, Pakistan saved its face by repaying the debt with the help of China, and Khan’s electoral vision for “Naya Pakistan” is in shambles. 

After Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi struck Article 370 from Jammu & Kashmir on August 5, 2019, which revoked its special status, Islamabad did not hesitate to criticize Riyadh over the contentious issue.

The worst is yet to come.

On October 24, Saudi Arabia released a 20 Riyal banknote to commemorate its presidency of organizing a G-20 summit on November 21-22. The world map displayed at the rear of this commemorative banknote deliberately scraped Gilgit-Baltistan and Kashmir from the map of Pakistan.

Riyadh was angered over Islamabad’s official publication of a new political map in August 2020, which has shown Kashmir annexed with Pakistan, leading Delhi to term it as “political absurdity.”

Riyadh believes Pakistan has no legitimacy over Gilgit-Baltistan and Jammu & Kashmir. The depiction of the map of Pakistan devoid of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan has adequately disgraced Pakistan in the international arena, particularly in the Muslim world. 

Well, the disputed Jammu & Kashmir have been taken out from the map of India too. The map depicts Kashmir Valley as an independent nation.

South Block in New Delhi immediately protested for the exclusion of Kashmir from India and demanded an explanation. Riyadh is yet to issue a statement. 

China, an all-weather friend of Pakistan, had been irked in the process and along with Pakistan has thrice dragged the Kashmir issue to the UN Security Council in the past year.

Pakistan miserably failed to draw the attention of the 57 members of Muslim nations -- the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) -- for a call for condemnation on scraping Kashmir autonomy.

During the China and India face-off over Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, Pakistan became desperate to form a new bloc with Turkey, Iran, Malaysia, China, and Russia, outside the traditional dictates of the United States. Malaysia silently backed out.

The Kingdom has given a clear signal to Islamabad that the KSA-India economic ties strengthened with a rejection of any financial aid to Pakistan is a new marker in international relations.

Observers understand that Saudi Arabia’s attitude towards Pakistan may also be “read” as “no confidence” against China.

Further pouring salt in the wounds, the governments of Saudi Arabia and Iran refused to allow Pakistan diplomatic missions to hold public events to observe the October 27 anniversary of Jammu & Kashmir’s accession to India as a 'Black Day'.

Plans to hold a public event inside Pakistan’s consulate in Riyadh were also blocked by the Kingdom.

Similarly, the Pakistan embassy in Tehran’s proposal to hold an event at Tehran University to observe Black Day was refused.

The change in stance adopted by two influential Islamic countries is a reflection of Pakistan’s equations in the Middle East as a fallout of its growing partnership with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is seen to aspire for a leadership role in the Islamic world.

Analysts believe Imran Khan had bitten off more than he could chew. It’s a clear sign of Khan’s growing desperation for his failure to garner support over India’s abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 3 November 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad

Pakistan needs new enemies

Pakistan army-soldiers. Photo: Reuters

SALEEM SAMAD

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s government-backed Rawalpindi military hawks recently published an official country map that showed Kashmir Valley as part of Pakistan.

In fact, Pakistan has repeatedly given India the opportunity to present the restive Kashmir to the world as nothing more and nothing less than a Pakistan-backed insurgency. 

Pakistan’s policies have effectively undermined the struggle of the Kashmiris, even those living under Pakistan’s occupation.

When Islamic militias and terrorists engaged in an armed insurrection in Kashmir, it was dubbed as jihad -- holy war. 

When the Baloch people demonstrated through peaceful struggle for their basic rights, they were labelled as terrorists. What a contradictory interpretation of the regime in Islamabad!

All of Pakistan’s actions are an attempt to counter India’s move in August last year, which changed the status of Kashmir by bringing it under Delhi’s direct control under Article 370, scrapping Kashmir’s autonomy. Then they imposed a blackout of the internet and enforced a curfew.

Since then, India has been accused of using excessive force to maintain peace in the valley. 

Delhi obviously has a reason to be cautious, on account of Pakistan’s interference in Kashmir for the last seven decades. Since the Indo-Pakistan partition in 1947, the Pakistan army has unsuccessfully attempted to infiltrate Kashmir innumerable times.

After the birth of Pakistan, it violated the status quo agreement and invaded a part of the valley, with recruits of ferocious Pashtun tribes in the absence of sufficient infantry soldiers to push into Jammu and Kashmir.

This invasion started the current 70-year conflict between India and Pakistan, as India deployed troops to defend Kashmir against the marauding Pakistan military.

In September 1965, Pakistan soldiers crossed into Kashmir to foment a rebellion -- but failed. 

In the 1990s, Pakistan-backed jihadists, trained by the Rawalpindi General Headquarters (GHQ) to fight against the Soviet occupation in the 80s, were later mobilized as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed against the Indian-administered Kashmir.

In 1999, Pakistan made another failed attempt to capture the Kashmir territory through infiltration but ended up abandoning its own soldiers once the international media exposed Pakistan’s actions and Delhi countered the move with its military.

Since then, Pakistan has relied increasingly on backing militant networks that have terrorized not just the Kashmir Valley but also mainstream India. 

This includes Delhi’s parliament assault and the Mumbai terror attack in 2001 to recent terror attacks in Pulwama and Pathankot, carried out by Pakistan’s militants recruited from Kashmiris.

These aggressive tactics by Pakistan army GHQ have sealed India’s perception of the Kashmiris through the lens of its historic confrontation with Pakistan.

Meanwhile, a growing schism between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has unfolded recently as tensions threaten their strategic partnership.

Pakistan has pushed for action since August last year when India revoked Kashmir Valley’s special status, but had limited success. 

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation -- OIC -- has only held low-level meetings on the Kashmir crisis despite Islamabad’s crying calls.

Nevertheless, Imran Khan has denied rumours that Pakistan’s relationship with Saudi Arabia “soured” over its lack of support for Kashmir during the crisis.

There was also a recent statement by Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi concerning the establishment of an alternative Muslim platform to deal with the Kashmir issue -- in the face of Saudi opposition to raising it within the OIC.

Acting as another nail in the coffin, Maldives, after plugging Pakistan’s attempt to target India on “Islamophobia” at an OIC meet, has recently echoed New Delhi’s wishes in blocking a bid to conduct the failed 19th SAARC Summit in Pakistan, on the excuse that South Asia, like the rest of the world, is preoccupied with the Covid-19 pandemic.

The rapidly shifting geopolitical realities, especially the current circumstances in South Asia, behoove Pakistan to treat the Kashmir issue as its top priority. 

Thankfully, Islamabad is doing that.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 5 October 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Imran Khan's tantrum, much ado about nothing

Pakistan PM Imran Khan at UNGA in 2019 - Photo AFP

Imran Khan did not impress many with his speech at the UN General Assembly

SALEEM SAMAD

Anybody would have mistaken Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s speech at the UN General Assembly as the one he delivered in 2019. Retrofitted with pandemic era phrases, Khan spelled out what was effectively an abridged version of last year’s rant on India.

The video broadcast beamed from Islamabad was framed against a flag festooned backdrop and a painting of Muhammad Ali Jinnah on the wall behind him. Khan sat at a desk amidst a haze of green coloured props and rattled off a bucket list of macro-level grievances.

Khan’s tantrum speech last Friday was no dif.ferent from last year’s wide swipe at the world, talking about “corrupt elites,” tree planting schemes, Islamophobia, RSS, Modi, Jammu and Kashmir, and then Kashmir again.

Ranting that India “sponsors Islamophobia,” he called India’s Hindu-nationalist government a sponsor of hatred and prejudice against Islam while denouncing its moves to cement control of Muslim-majority Kashmir.

Reiterating the threats of climate change posed by global warming, Khan lamented that his country is severely affected by the climate crisis. As part of its efforts to mitigate the impact of climate change, Pakistan will plant 10 billion trees over the next three years.

Hours later, an Indian diplomat turned the mirror on Pakistan after Khan concluded his speech at the UN -- dripping with vitriol -- and recalled its record of genocide committed during the brutal birth of Bangladesh in 1971.

Indian UN Mission’s First Secretary Mijito Vinito, a Nagaland-born diplomat, articulated his statement in response to the acclaimed cricketer and said: “The only crowning glory that this country [Pakistan] has had to show to the world for the last 70 years is terrorism, ethnic cleansing, majoritarian fundamentalism, and clandestine nuclear trade.”

The young diplomat, in a strongly-worded reply to Pakistan’s call to outlaw those who incite hate and violence, said that it left others wondering whether Khan was referring to himself. There was a ripple of mild laughter among the diplomats in the hall, as well as embarrassment for the friends of Pakistan.

In July, Imran Khan referred to the dreaded Al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden as a “martyr” in Pakistan’s parliament. A leaked intelligence document surfaced in the media, which detailed that UN-listed terrorists had received pensions from state coffers.

Recently, Khan in a telephonic tête-à-tête with Sheikh Hasina urged her opinion about Article 370 revoking the autonomous status of Jammu and Kashmir. She quickly responded that the Kashmir issue is an “internal affair” of India. To stop Khan from dragging her into the discussion of the J&K issue again, she asked that Pakistan seek public apology for the war crimes committed in the Bangladesh Liberation War.

Well, most South Asian leaders are not in a mood to listen to Khan’s sugar-coated sermons for a peaceful solution to the J&K crisis.

Except few Muslim countries, no one seemed to lend their ears when he made frantic appeals that India must rescind Article 370 which granted special status to the state of J&K and end its military siege and other human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune,  28 September 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad

Pakistan’s desperate attempt to come closer to Bangladesh

File photo: Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina (left), and her counterpart Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan

SALEEM SAMAD

"Bilateral synergy between Bangladesh and Pakistan remains a work in progress"

For most journalists, columnists, and academicians in Pakistan, when they write or speak on Bangladesh affairs, it could be understood that they are bashing India and trying to appease Bangladesh by stating or using the term “brotherly Muslim” country.

The Bangladesh Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated about the delinquent Indian press in undermining the relations of the two neighbours. The government could have warned equally about the Pakistan media writing provocative articles and commentaries that Bangladesh has realized after almost 50 years that India is no friend of Bangladesh, and is instead tilting towards China.

A Pakistani columnist Inam Ul Haque in The Express Tribune has written: “Taking a leaf from post-war European history would do well for both brotherly Muslim countries.”

Bangladesh, even after almost half-a-century, has not forgotten the marauding Pakistan Army launched a “jihad war” against the people. 

Thus, the broadcast of Radio Pakistan aptly said that the people of Bangladesh are “kafirs” and “gaddhars” (traitors) and have joined hands with their arch enemy, the Hindu-India.

Pakistan must backtrack their statement of officially declaring the people of Bangladesh as “kafirs” and traitors which gave them the moral legitimacy to commit genocide and rape as a weapon of war.

An estimated 10 million refugees fled Bangladesh and trekked into neighbouring states of India. They fled when their villages and towns were raided. Their relatives and neighbours were slaughtered by the Pakistan Army and their Islamic henchmen.

The plunders and arson of villages and bazaars and desecrating places of worship, and the genocide by Islamist militia -- these narratives are documented in the history of the Liberation War.

The Pakistan media put up stories on the first page regarding Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s telephone tete-a-tete with his Bangladesh counterpart Sheikh Hasina.

Both Bangladesh and Pakistan’s official statements did not mention that Imran Khan wanted to convince Bangladesh to support Pakistan on the Kashmir issue. PM Hasina in three words silenced Khan when she stated that Kashmir is “India’s internal affair.” Full stop.

What Pakistan media will not publish was that Bangladesh reiterated that Pakistan should provide a public apology to the war crimes committed during the Liberation War.

Barrister Tania Amir says that Bangladesh should muster support from friendly countries to hold Islamabad responsible for flouting the historic 1974 Tripartite Agreement signed in New Delhi which released 93,000 prisoners of war (POW).

In Clause 13 of the agreement jointly signed by the foreign ministers of Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan regarding the governments for reconciliation, peace, and friendship in the sub-continent, “the 195 Pakistani prisoners of war should be held to account and subjected to the due process of law.”

However, the Pakistan minister of defense and foreign affairs in the agreement said that “his government condemned and deeply regretted any crimes that may have been committed.”

Former Foreign Minister Dr Kamal Hossain, a signatory of the agreement in Clause 13, stated that the manifold crimes committed by POWs constituted, according to the relevant provisions of the UN General Assembly Resolutions and International Law, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, and that there was universal consensus that persons charged with such crimes as the 195 Pakistani POWs should be held to account and subject to the due process of law.

The Tripartite Agreement stated that the 195 listed as war criminals will face court-martial under the Manual of Pakistan Military Laws (MPML), 1957.

In the home front, during a live discussion over a TV channel on the relationship between India and Bangladesh and the recent developments in regards to Pakistan, Foreign Minister Abdul Momen said the recent tensions between India and China were impacting ties with Bangladesh of both the nations, and he asserted that both India and China were its “neighbours” and that both the nations always had a big heart for Bangladesh.

Pakistan and Bangladesh need to realize that bilateral synergy can bring tremendous good to their people, wrote columnist Inam Ul Haque in The Express Tribune. Political observers merely scoffed at such wild ideas. 

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 24 August 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com.  Twitter @saleemsamad

No quick fix democratic reforms in Pakistan

Photo: Reuters

SALEEM SAMAD

When Pakistani Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa, in an off-the-record briefing with journalists in March 2018, was quoted as saying that the 18th Amendment was “more dangerous than Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s Six-Points political agenda, except the veteran politicians of the 60s,” none in the Islamic Republic understood what the Rawalpindi GHQ chief meant.

The Six-Points was deemed a threat to national security and unity of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan by the Hawks of Rawalpindi GHQ. The Hawks believed that when the Awami League in a landslide victory in 1970 elections won an overwhelming majority, both in provincial assembly as well as in national assembly.

Hawks understood regional parties which won in three other provinces of Balochistan, Sindh, and North-East Frontier Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) also would be upbeat to demand greater autonomy. The implementation of the Six-Points would be fuel in fire to the simmering independence movement in Balochistan, a princely state forcibly occupied in March 1948.

What is the 18th amendment?

After an unceremonious exit of General Pervez Musharraf in 2008, Pakistan’s new civilian government and opposition parties were united in creating several hurdles for the military to seize power again.

During his iron-fisted reign, Musharraf toppled an elected government, dismissed judges, suspended the constitution, and imposed emergency rule to consolidate his power.

In 2010, President Asif Ali Zardari enacted sweeping constitutional reforms that undid provisions that military dictators had introduced to tighten their grip on power and legitimize their coups.

Under the 18th amendment, the president no longer had the authority to dissolve parliament and impose an emergency rule on his own. The courts no longer had jurisdiction to validate suspensions of the constitution and powers were transferred from the presidency to a prime minister and their cabinet. The amendment also transferred power from the centre to the provinces, restored parliamentary democracy, and closed off paths to generals overturning the civilian rule.

Now, a decade on from that landmark move, there are fears that the government of Prime Minister Imran Khan, who is backed by the military, is seeking to roll back the changes, which are widely seen as the bulwark of the democratization process.

The ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has called for a review to “fix” what it perceives as flaws in the 18th amendment, including restoring federal authority over legislation and finances.

Ian Bremer recently wrote in Time magazine: “Army leaders equate the new powers granted to provinces with the ‘Six-Point’ movement, which led to the creation of Bangladesh, a stinging blow for Pakistan’s military.”

Opposition politicians have accused the powerful military of manipulating the 2018 elections to help the PTI win. The opposition parties also condemned Imran Khan’s political catchphrase “Naya Pakistan.”

Amid the coronavirus outbreak which gripped Pakistan, it has immensely delayed the politics of “quick fix” of the 18th amendment.

Michael Kugelman, South Asia senior associate at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington DC, argued that reining in the amendment would “amount to a demoralizing defeat for the forces of democracy in a nation where such forces have long struggled to secure a sustained foothold.

“The 18th amendment has long endured like a brave and bold achievement that showcases the very real potential for strong democracy in Pakistan.”

Fortunately, the Naya Pakistan government does not have a two-third majority in both the national assembly and senate that it would take to repeal or amend the 18th amendment.

As Ian Bremer writes, the Pakistani army has long had concerns over the 18th amendment.

So it did not surprise that Khan’s government, which relies on the army’s support to remain in power, has been pushing to make revisions to the law.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 6 July 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad

Will Pakistan recognize Israel?

Pakistani Foreign Minister Khursheed Kasuri shakes hands with Israeli FM Silvan Shalom. Istanbul, Turkey. Sept. 1, 2005. It remains the only publicly acknowledged talks between the two states, Photo: AP

SALEEM SAMAD

Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan’s political buzzword “Naya Pakistan” has given lots of surprises since he came to power in the last quarter of 2018.

Khan has failed to allure his neighboring countries, especially India, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Instead, he went three steps forward to make the relationship from sweet to sour.

On the other side, Pakistan’s most distinguished print and TV journalist, Kamran Khan, who is also editor-in-chief for the influential Dunya Media Group, triggered a controversial debate in a tweet: “Why can’t we openly debate the pros and cons of opening direct and overt channels of communication with the State of Israel?”

It was once a taboo to overtly discuss a relationship with Israel, but the issue has entered Pakistan’s capital Islamabad and has spilled over into mainstream discourse.

Early this year, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi of “Naya Pakistan” told the Israeli newspaper Maariv that Pakistan wants “normal ties” with Israel.

Speculation is ripe about whether or not the ace cricketer, Khan, has let the balloons loose to feel the pulse of the mainstream. A renewed debate has been active in Islamabad over the recognition of Israel for the past 12 months.

In the decades of hostility among Muslim countries and the Jewish State of Israel, except for a few Arab and Muslim countries, none has recognized the country which was given birth using forceps by superpowers in the late 1940s in the hostile neighborhood of Palestine.

In the same decade, 50% of Muslims in India decided to migrate to a new country -- born through a cesarean section -- on the basis of religion.

After two months of the nation-state being founded on Muslim nationalism, Pakistan’s first foreign minister Zafarullah Khan rejected the concept of Jewish nationalism in the United Nations General Assembly session on October 1947.

He argued that, unlike Pakistan, a Jewish state in Palestine would be an “artificial” result of “immigration,” thus ignoring the partition of India that caused large scale cross-border migration, and which is described as a dark period.

Following Israel’s independence, its first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion sent a telegram to the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in a bid to establish diplomatic relations. The message was stowed into cold storage.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had a “fanatical hatred” for Israel in the 70s, but at the same time did not “conceal his dislike for Arabs.”

In August 1994, Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto quietly declined to visit Gaza because the visit would have to be coordinated with Israeli authority, as part of their agreement with Palestine.

Despite Islamist pressure and Pakistan being controlled by its military, several unofficial diplomatic exchanges have taken place between Pakistani and Israeli officials over the decades, including the reported meetings of Israeli president Ezer Weizman with his counterpart Rafiq Tarar (in Ankara in 1988), and with Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto (Johannesburg, 1994).

The political governments in Pakistan are hesitant to seek a breakthrough in establishing diplomatic ties with Israel when the nation and the military, both major stakeholders, condemn Israel’s killing of Palestine and Arab “Muslims.”

Fourteen years ago, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri held their first-ever publicly acknowledged meeting with Israeli FM Silvan Shalom on September 1, 2005, at Istanbul. After Ankara and Istanbul’s tête-à-tête, the interactions between Israel and Pakistan have been limited to counter-terror intelligence and arms trade.

The military dictator General Pervez Musharraf has continued to urge Pakistan to establish relations with Israel, echoing the views of Pakistan’s corridors of power.

Imran Khan, being the army’s “Chosen One,” has guaranteed protection against domestic backlash from the military, which would hope to benefit from formal defense ties with Israel.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 10 September 2019

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender also recipient of Ashoka Fellow and Hellman-Hammett Award