Archive for February, 2013

NFL’s Kansas City Chiefs Should Sign Both Alex & Geno Smith

By Manzer Munir for Pakistanis for Peace
Image
The Kansas City Chiefs should trade for Alex Smith, draft Geno as their #1 and still have possible 3rd stringer Matt Cassel for a QB heavy team with great starter between Smith and Smith. The Chiefs should not only take Alex Smith in a trade for a 3rd and possibly a 4th or later round pick from the San Francisco 49ers, but also will allow the Chiefs to still pick up Geno Smith or Matt Barkley as their #1 pick depending on who would be a good pick between the two.
Personally I would pick Geno over Matt Barkley and Alex Smith even though I believe Matt Barkley will also have a great chance to be a good NFL quarterback. Alex needs to reclaim being a good one but hasn’t had the consistency and more importantly since he is now coming back from a big injury an organization coached by Andy Reid should not put all their eggs in one basket. After all that is what happened with Trent Green under Dick Vermeil. Some guys are never the same after some hits, just ask Trent Green, the impressive stats guy during the regular season and either missing the playoffs entirely and not having 1 playoff win.
I believe I have confessed a long time ago that I am a longtime tormented Chiefs fan of this team. Initially as a Buffalo Bills fan in the early ’90’s didn’t work out as a fan and neither have so far my latest project, the Pakistani owned Jacksonville Jaguars, who by the way I will root for since they are owned by that ever successful Pakistani American job creator named Shahid Khan. However it is my beloved Kansas City Chefs whom I care for the most in the NFL, year after year. How fond of them am I, you ask. Well I love them so much that they will have to earn their “i “ with me. Till then, they will remain the Chefs to me. Till they win 1 playoff game, they are my Chefs.
Of course we really will not know at all exactly what the Chefs will end up doing right until and on draft day on 4/25/2013. However as a long suffering fans here in KC Chief land, we can only hope that Andy Reid and John Dorsey can in fact have a great situation with three great quarterbacks, a traded for Alex Smith fighting for a #1 starting job with either a Geno Smith or Matt Barkley as the back up and the 3rd stringer veteran Matt Cassel . This would be the smartest move the Kansas City Chiefs organization can make in my opinion, but will they? No, cause they will prove to somehow be still the Chefs. I actually think this draft is the make or break decision of Andy’s experiment in Kansas City. Only time will tell.

 

Manzer Munir is a long suffering sports fan who is a diehard Kansas Jayhawk, a proud American of Pakistani descent and founder of Pakistanis for Peace and blogs at www.PakistanisforPeace.com and at other websites as a freelance journalist and opinionist.

Beltway Foreign Policy

Image        
By Roger Cohen for The New York TImes 

“It is not going too far to say that American foreign policy has become completely subservient to tactical domestic political considerations.”

This stern verdict comes from Vali Nasr, who spent two years working for the Obama administration before becoming dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. In a book called “The Dispensable Nation,” to be published in April, Nasr delivers a devastating portrait of a first-term foreign policy that shunned the tough choices of real diplomacy, often descended into pettiness, and was controlled “by a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisers.”

Nasr, one of the most respected American authorities on the Middle East, served as senior adviser to Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan until his death in December 2010. From that vantage point, and later as a close observer, Nasr was led to the reluctant conclusion that the principal aim of Obama’s policies “is not to make strategic decisions but to satisfy public opinion.”

In this sense the first-term Obama foreign policy was successful: He was re-elected. Americans wanted extrication from the big wars and a smaller global footprint: Obama, with some back and forth, delivered. But the price was high and opportunities lost.

“The Dispensable Nation” constitutes important reading as John Kerry moves into his new job as secretary of state. It nails the drift away from the art of diplomacy — with its painful give-and-take — toward a U.S. foreign policy driven by the Pentagon, intelligence agencies and short-term political calculus. It holds the president to account for his zigzags from Kabul to Jerusalem.

It demonstrates the emasculation of the State Department: Nasr quotes Admiral Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, telling him of Hillary Clinton that, “It is incredible how little support she got from the White House. They want to control everything.” And it paints a persuasive picture of an American decline driven not so much by the inevitable rise of other powers as by “inconsistency” that has “cast doubt on our leadership.”

Nowhere was this inconsistency more evident than in Afghanistan. Obama doubled-down by committing tens of thousands more troops to show he was no wimp, only to set a date for a drawdown to show he was no warmonger. Marines died; few cared.

He appointed Holbrooke as his point man only to ensure that he “never received the authority to do diplomacy.” Obama’s message to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan was: “Ignore my special representative.” The White House campaign against Holbrooke was “a theater of the absurd,” Nasr writes. “Holbrooke was not included in Obama’s videoconferences with Karzai and was cut out of the presidential retinue when Obama went to Afghanistan.”

The White House seemed “more interested in bringing Holbrooke down than getting the policy right.” The pettiness was striking: “The White House kept a dossier on Holbrooke’s misdeeds and Clinton kept a folder on churlish attempts by the White House’s AfPak office to undermine Holbrooke.”

Diplomacy died. Serious negotiation with the Taliban and involving Iran in talks on Afghanistan’s future — bold steps that carried a domestic political price — were shunned. The use of trade as a bridge got scant attention. Nasr concludes on Afghanistan: “We are just washing our hands of it, hoping there will be a decent interval of calm — a reasonable distance between our departure and the catastrophe to follow.”

In Pakistan, too nuclear to ignore, the ultimate “frenemy,” Nasr observed policy veering between frustrated confrontation and half-hearted attempts to change the relationship through engagement. “The crucial reality was that the Taliban helped Pakistan face down India in the contest over Afghanistan,” Nasr writes. America was never able to change that equation. Aid poured in to secure those nukes and win hearts and minds: Drones drained away any gratitude. A proposed “strategic dialogue” went nowhere. “Pakistan is a failure of American policy, a failure of the sort that comes from the president handing foreign policy over to the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies.”

In Iran, Nasr demonstrates Obama’s deep ambivalence about any deal on the nuclear program. “Pressure,” he writes, “has become an end in itself.” The dual track of ever tougher sanctions combined with diplomatic outreach was “not even dual. It relied on one track, and that was pressure.” The reality was that, “Engagement was a cover for a coercive campaign of sabotage, economic pressure and cyberwarfare.”

Opportunities to begin real step-by-step diplomacy involving Iran giving up its low-enriched uranium in exchange for progressive sanctions relief were lost. What was Tehran to think when “the sum total of three major rounds of diplomatic negotiation was that America would give some bits and bobs of old aircraft in exchange for Iran’s nuclear program”?

On Israel-Palestine, as with Iran, Obama began with some fresh ideas only to retreat. He tried to stop Israeli settlement expansion. Then he gave up when the domestic price looked too high. The result has been drift.

“The Dispensable Nation” is a brave book. Its core message is: Diplomacy is tough and carries a price, but the price is higher when it is abandoned.

Suicide bomber devastates Shiite enclave in Pakistan, killing 83

By Nasir Habib and Holly Yan for The CNN

Image

Pakistani police have revised the cause of a blast that killed 83 people on Saturday, saying a suicide bomber was behind the attack that pulverized a busy marketplace.

The explosion targeted Shiite Muslims in Hazara, on the outskirts of the southwestern city of Quetta, authorities said.

Police now say a suicide bomber, driving an explosive-laden water tanker, rammed the vehicle into buildings at the crowded marketplace.

The water tanker carried between 800 and 1,000 kilograms (1,760 to 2,200 pounds) of explosive material, Quetta police official Wazir Khan Nasir said.

Previously, police said explosives were packed in a parked water tanker and were remotely detonated.

The blast demolished four buildings of the marketplace, leaving dozens dead and 180 injured.

The banned Sunni militant group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claimed responsibility for the attack, spokesman Abu Bakar Sadeeq told CNN Sunday.

The assault left some wondering what could stop the bloodshed in Quetta.

Zulfiqar Ali Magsi, the governor and chief executive of Balochistan province, told reporters Saturday that law enforcement agencies were incapable of stopping such attacks and had failed to maintain law and order in Quetta.

Pakistan, which is overwhelmingly Sunni, has been plagued by sectarian strife and attacks for years.

Last month, two deadly suicide bombings in a predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Quetta known as Alamdar Road killed 85 Shiite Muslims.

Police described that double bombing as one of the worst attacks on the Shiite minority.

Lashkar-e-Jhangvi also claimed responsibility for that dual attack.

According to its interpretation of Islam, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi believes that Shiites are not Muslims. The group believes Shiites insult close companions of Muslim’s prophet Muhammad. Therefore, the militant group believes killing Shiites is a justified in Islam.

Families of victims from Alamdar Road protested for several days bylaying their relatives’ bodies on a road in Quetta until the federal government dissolved the provincial government and imposed governor rule.

Although Balochistan is the largest Pakistani province in Pakistan, analysts and some locals have criticized the federal government for neglecting it, leading to instability.

The Shiite community has repeatedly asked for more protection but to no avail.

During the Alamdar Road protest, Pakistani Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf met with Shiites in Quetta, Pakistani media reported. He agreed to toss out the provincial government and putting a governor in charge.

All administrative powers of the provincial government were given to the governor, who deployed paramilitary forces to maintain law and order in Quetta.

 

Pakistanis for Peace Editor’s Note- This attack and the continued attacks on Shiites, Christians and other minorities in Pakistan completely goes against the teachings of the prophet and civilized society in general. We are deeply saddened by this and past attacks and condemn all violent attacks in the name of religion and any other ideology. May God help Pakistan and soon.

Pakistan Rupee Weakens Beyond 100 to a Record Low in Kerb Market

By Khurrum Anis for Bloomberg News

Pakistan Rupee

Pakistan’s rupee weakened beyond 100 per dollar to a record low in the so-called kerb market amid concern loan repayments to the International Monetary Fund will further erode the nation’s foreign-exchange reserves.

The State Bank of Pakistan tapped the nation’s currency stockpile to pay $145.8 million to the Washington-based lender this week, Syed Wasimuddin, the central bank’s Karachi-based spokesman, said in an e-mail today. The payments are putting pressure on the country’s reserves, which declined to $8.7 billion last month from $12.5 billion a year earlier, Moody’s Investors Service said in a statement on Feb. 7.

“People are converting their goods into dollars because they feel the country will not have enough money to pay the IMF,” said Bilal Razzak, a trader in Karachi at Glaxy Exchange Pvt., a foreign-exchange firm. “They are converting their savings and stay safe, in case there is a shortage of cash.”

The rupee fell to 100.10 per dollar today from 100.00 yesterday in the kerb market, according to Glaxy Exchange and Mega Currency Exchange Co., another Karachi-based currency firm.

In the interbank market, the rupee slid 0.1 percent to 98.075 per dollar as of 2:48 p.m. in Karachi, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It lost 0.9 percent so far this year.

Rates at Pakistan’s kerb market, which isn’t regulated by the central bank, account for 20 percent of total transactions, and caters to the majority of the public. The market allows individual buyers and sellers to exchange currencies outside central bank rules that regulate interbank trading, Sayem Ali, an economist in Karachi at Standard Chartered Plc, said by phone.

Pakistani Militant, Price on Head, Lives in Open

By Declan Walsh for The New York Times

Image

Ten million dollars does not seem to buy much in this bustling Pakistani city. That is the sum the United States is offering for help in convicting Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, perhaps the country’s best-known jihadi leader. Yet Mr. Saeed lives an open, and apparently fearless, life in a middle-class neighborhood here.

“I move about like an ordinary person — that’s my style,” said Mr. Saeed, a burly 64-year-old, reclining on a bolster as he ate a chicken supper. “My fate is in the hands of God, not America.”

Mr. Saeed is the founder, and is still widely believed to be the true leader, of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the militant group that carried out the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India, in which more than 160 people, including six Americans, were killed. The United Nations has placed him on a terrorist list and imposed sanctions on his group. But few believe he will face trial any time soon in a country that maintains a perilous ambiguity toward jihadi militancy, casting a benign eye on some groups, even as it battles others that attack the state.

Mr. Saeed’s very public life seems more than just an act of mocking defiance against the Obama administration and its bounty, analysts say. As American troops prepare to leave Afghanistan next door, Lashkar is at a crossroads, and its fighters’ next move — whether to focus on fighting the West, disarm and enter the political process, or return to battle in Kashmir — will depend largely on Mr. Saeed.

At his Lahore compound — a fortified house, office and mosque — Mr. Saeed is shielded not only by his supporters, burly men wielding Kalashnikovs outside his door, but also by the Pakistani state. On a recent evening, police officers screened visitors at a checkpoint near his house, while other officers patrolled an adjoining park, watching by floodlight for intruders.

His security seemingly ensured, Mr. Saeed has over the past year addressed large public meetings and appeared on prime-time television, and is now even giving interviews to Western news media outlets he had previously eschewed.

He says that he wants to correct “misperceptions.” During an interview with The New York Times at his home last week, Mr. Saeed insisted that his name had been cleared by the Pakistani courts. “Why does the United States not respect our judicial system?” he asked.

Still, he says he has nothing against Americans, and warmly described a visit he made to the United States in 1994, during which he spoke at Islamic centers in Houston, Chicago and Boston. “At that time, I liked it,” he said with a wry smile.

During that stretch, his group was focused on attacking Indian soldiers in the disputed territory of Kashmir — the fight that led the military’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate to help establish Lashkar-e-Taiba in 1989. But that battle died down over the past decade, and Lashkar began projecting itself through its charity wing, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which runs a tightly organized network of hospitals and schools across Pakistan.

The Mumbai attacks propelled Lashkar-e-Taiba to notoriety. But since then, Mr. Saeed’s provocations toward India have been largely verbal. Last week he stirred anger there by suggesting that Bollywood’s highest-paid actor, Shah Rukh Khan, a Muslim, should move to Pakistan. In the interview, he said he prized talking over fighting in Kashmir.

“The militant struggle helped grab the world’s attention,” he said. “But now the political movement is stronger, and it should be at the forefront of the struggle.”

Pakistan analysts caution that Mr. Saeed’s new openness is no random occurrence, however. “This isn’t out of the blue,” said Shamila N. Chaudhry, a former Obama administration official and an analyst at the Eurasia Group, a consulting firm. “These guys don’t start talking publicly just like that.”

What it amounts to, however, may depend on events across the border in Afghanistan, where his groups have been increasingly active in recent years. In public, Mr. Saeed has been a leading light in the Defense of Pakistan Council, a coalition of right-wing groups that lobbied against the reopening of NATO supply routes through Pakistan last year. More quietly, Lashkar fighters have joined the battle, attacking Western troops and Indian diplomatic facilities in Afghanistan, intelligence officials say.

The question now is what will happen to them once American troops leave. One possibility is a return to Lashkar’s traditional battleground of Kashmir, risking fresh conflict between nuclear-armed Pakistan and India.

But a more hopeful possibility, floated by some Western and Pakistani officials, is that Mr. Saeed would lead his group further into politics, and away from militancy.

“When there are no Americans in Afghanistan, what will happen?” said Mushtaq Sukhera, a senior officer with the Punjabi police who is running a fledgling demobilization program for Islamist extremists. “It’s an open question.”

A shift could be risky for Mr. Saeed: Some of his fighters have already split from Lashkar in favor of other groups that attack the Pakistani state. And much will depend on the advice of his military sponsors.

For their part, Pakistan’s generals insist they have abandoned their dalliance with jihadi proxy groups. In a striking speech in August, the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, said the country’s greatest threat came from domestic extremism. “We as a nation must stand united against this threat,” he said. “No state can afford a parallel system of governance and militias.”

Five years of near-continuous battle against the Pakistani Taliban along the Afghan border, where more than 3,300 members of Pakistan’s security forces have been killed in the past decade, has affected army thinking, some analysts believe. Senior officers have lost colleagues and relatives, softening the army’s singular focus on India.

“This is a changed army,” said Shaukat Javed, a former head of the Intelligence Bureau civilian spy agency in Punjab Province. “The mind-set has changed due to experience, and pressure.”

But for all that, there is ample evidence that parts of the military remain wedded to jihadi proxies. In Waziristan, the army maintains close ties to the Haqqani Network, a major player in the Afghan insurgency. In western Baluchistan Province, it has used Sunni extremists to quell an uprising by Baluch nationalists — even though the same extremists also massacre minority Shiites.

And Mr. Saeed’s freedom to roam around Lahore — and, indeed, across Pakistan — suggests some generals still believe the “good” jihadis are worth having around.

Western intelligence officials say Lashkar’s training camps in northern Pakistan have not been shut down. One of those camps was the training ground of David C. Headley, an American citizen recently sentenced to prison by an American court for his role in the Mumbai attacks.

“There’s a strategic culture of using proxies,” said Stephen Tankel, an American academic and author of a book on Lashkar-e-Taiba. “And if that’s the tool you’re used to grabbing from the toolbox, it can be hard to let go.”

For all his apparent ease, Mr. Saeed has to walk a tightrope of sorts within the jihadi firmament. His support of the state puts him at odds with the Pakistani Taliban, which, he claims, are secretly supported by America and India — a familiar refrain in the right-wing media. “They want to destabilize Pakistan,” he said.

But that position leaves Mr. Saeed vulnerable to pressure from fighters within his own ranks who may still have Taliban sympathies. Western security officials say Lashkar has already suffered some defections in recent years..

“If he continues in this direction, the issue is how many people he can bring with him,” Mr. Tankel said.

But ultimately, he added, much depends on the Pakistani Army: “The army can’t dismantle these groups all at once, because of the danger of blowback. So for now they are putting them on ice. It’s too early to tell which way they will ultimately go.”

 

How I Overcome the Biggest Challenge in My Life

By Zulfiqar Ali Malik for Culturally Speaking
Image

I am a Muslim, an American Muslim and that identity itself has become the biggest challenge for me. I am a naturalized citizen, I but my children and grandchild are born in America. Just because we are Muslims, we cannot be treated as foreigners. We do not seek special favoritism but do expect an equal treatment allowed by the U.S. constitution. Muslims are not ‘children of lessor God’.The negative portrayal of Muslims the mainstream media incites the Islamophobia. Anti-Islam groups are rising in popularity. Some politicians particularly in the election year are spreading the fear of the Shariah law. Discrimination and hate crime against Muslims are on the rise. Our holy book Qur’an and several mosques have been desecrated. Seems to me that kicking around the Islamic values is the favorite game in town.

The challenge to me is how to fight bigotry, remove the paranoia and change the American consciousness. Then I remind myself of the  command of the God Almighty  in the Qur’an:
“Goodness and evil can never be equal. Repel evil with what is better (or best). Then see: the one between whom and you there was enmity has become a bosom friend.” [41:34]
I practice patience, tolerance and respect for others. I forgive wrongs done to me and my community. I try to be modest, gentle, friendly, and helpful to others. I participate in several social, cultural, charitable and interfaith activities and events.

Offering prayers and keeping a positive attitude has always been helpful to me. I make efforts to keep the same positive attitude during editing my weekly online newsletter Muslim News Digest. I try to inspire Muslims and cultivate understanding and build bridges between Muslims and my fellow Americans of other faiths.

American Muslims are as American as baseball and apple pie.

– Zulfiqar Ali Malik is a longtime resident of Overland Park, Kansas and is an editor of an online newsletter for his community.

Pakistan’s Balochistan: Minerals, Militants, and Meddling

By Mahvish Ahmad for The Christian Science Monitor

balochistan coast

Balochistan is a key province in Pakistan that is filled with natural resources as well as a volatile mix of Afghan Taliban leaders, anti-Shiite militants, and ethnic separatists.

Why is Balochistan important?
Balochistan is Pakistan’s largest province in terms of size, and its smallest in terms of population. The province has always been seen as occupying a geo-strategic position. It has the country’s longest coastline, with a lucrative deep-sea port at Gwadar in the south, and a shared border with Afghanistan and Iran. Balochistan also has extensive tapped and untapped resources, including copper, gold, oil, lead, and zinc.

The province has always been seen as a strategic asset, first by the British colonial power who saw it as a buffer zone holding off Afghan and Russian forces. Today, it is a key source of gas and minerals for Pakistanis across the country, and seen as a strategic transport route.

An on-going separatist uprising and the continued presence of Islamist groups in the north has made this strategic province especially restive.

Who are Balochistan’s separatists?
A section of the province’s ethnic Baloch are calling for the outright independence of Balochistan, after the 2007 assassination of Akbar Bugti, the head of the Bugti tribe and a former Interior Minister in the provincial government. The demands of the separatist Baloch have prompted the deployment of thousands of Pakistani troops across the province, who have been accused of extra-judicial kidnappings, torture, and killings of Baloch activists. Baloch separatists have also been accused of carrying out attacks against members of Pakistan’s powerful Punjabi ethnicity as well as Baloch who take a more pro-Pakistan line.

Who are Balochistan’s Islamists?
Islamist groups hold sway in areas close to the Afghan border. The province’s capital, Quetta, was once known for the notorious Quetta Shura – a congregation of top leaders within the Afghan Taliban. Sources say that the Shura disbanded in 2010, but many suspect that members of the Taliban live among Afghan refugees close to the provincial capital. Other Sunni militant groups also operate with impunity, including Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, an outfit that has taken public responsibility for deadly attacks against Balochistan’s Hazaras – a primarily Shiite Muslim minority group easily identifiable because of their distinct Mongolian features. Almost 1,000 Hazaras have been killed over the last five years.

What recent political developments are important to watch?
A protest held by the Hazara community in January prompted the federal government to dismiss its provincial counterpart. After two bombs killed 130 people on Jan. 10 – most of them Hazaras – thousands sat in protest for four days, refusing to bury their dead until the government guaranteed that their community would receive necessary security. According to Islamic tradition, the dead must be buried as soon as possible – the protests were a powerful message to a provincial government that had been accused of gross negligence. The imposition of a form of direct rule in the province has, however, been met with criticism from the province’s majority Baloch, who believe it is a sign of a central government once again meddling in the province’s autonomy.

What international players are involved?

The Chinese are mining in various locations throughout the province. The Arabs are known to use parts of the province for recreational hunting. Indians are accused of providing support for Baloch separatists, but there is no evidence supporting this claim. Various Western countries have provided Baloch political activists asylum, in light of the heavy hand exercised by the Pakistani security forces. This prompted US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher to introduce a bill in Congress, calling for US support for the outright independence of Balochistan. The prospect of the bill caused an uproar in Pakistan, prompting politicians to accuse the US of meddling in the country’s internal affairs, but it did not go far. And the State Department has made it clear that the US respects Pakistani sovereignty when it comes to the question of Balochistan.