Showing posts with label Malala Yousufzai. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malala Yousufzai. Show all posts

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Malala Yousafzai & Fantasies of Shafqat Mahmood.


The apologists call the shooters animals, barbarians, and what not, but refuse to take the name of those who proudly confessed to have sent the men to execute the school girl. They are a reaction to US drone attacks, they keep saying. But what did Malala have to do with the drones? The media keeps asking. On one channel, a woman JI member, pushed into a corner by a TV anchor who popularised the term ‘liberal fascist’ two years ago, tries to squeeze her way out by calling those accusing her party of cowardice, as liberal fascists. It’s a desperate act. She thinks this might soften the anchor’s stance. It doesn’t. PTI, JI and JUI leaders and their supporters slightly change tact. Now they begin to ask, What about all the other Malalas killed in drone attacks? The ‘liberal fascists’ snicker: This is strange, they say. When the same media was going about decrying the plight of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, none of them were concerned about so many other Aafias rotting in local jails (many of them without trial) and for crimes that were mostly committed by men. They further enquire, How come when for weeks the media covered Dr. Aafia’s case, none of these parties accused it of exaggeration, or of overreacting like they are now? Still feeling cornered and sounding sheepish, some PTI and JI supporters in cyberspace flood Twitter and Facebook with a tragic photograph of a young girl supposedly injured in a drone attack. But within hours the picture is proven to be a shameless forgery. REFERENCE: Smokers’ Corner: From apology to perversity Nadeem F. Paracha http://dawn.com/2012/10/21/smokers-corner-from-apology-to-perversity/


Afghanistan's government has lashed out at Imran Khan after the former Pakistan cricket star, now a politician, said the Taliban were fighting a "holy war" in the country that was justified by Islamic law. Speaking after visiting a hospital in Peshawar where Malala Yousafzai – the 14-year-old activist shot in the head by the Taliban for supporting girls' education – was treated last week, Khan told reporters that insurgents in Afghanistan were fighting a "jihad". Citing a verse from the Qur'an, he said: "It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad …"The people who are fighting in Afghanistan against the foreign occupation are fighting a jihad," he added, according to a video of remarks to journalists. Afghan politicians have reacted with disbelief, with one parliamentarian suggesting Khan should be arrested. The Ulema Council, a grouping of senior clerics, declared his comments "unislamic". A Kabul foreign ministry spokesman said Khan was "either profoundly and dangerously ignorant about the reality in Afghanistan, or he has ill will against the Afghan people."Our children are killed on daily basis, civilians killed and our schools, hospitals and infrastructure attacked on a daily basis. To call any of that jihad is profoundly wrong and misguided." REFERENCE: Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law Pakistani politician's comments at hospital that treated shooting victim Malala Yousafzai outrage Afghanistan's government Jon Boone in Islamabad The Guardian, Sunday 14 October 2012 15.20 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/14/imran-khan-taliban-afghanistan-islam Imran Khan thanks Bruce Braley By Ahsan Mansoor Monday, December 24, 2007 http://www.insaf.pk/News/tabid/60/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/689/Imran-Khan-thanks-Bruce-Braley.aspx


2012: Mr. Shafqat Mahmood (Information secretary of the PTI) wrote: I have great respect for Farrukh Saleem. He often quotes precise statistics to make his point. But in posing ten questions to Imran Khan he has rushed to conclusions, made vast generalisations and, in one case, indulged in total fabrication. I am not too fond of the rat-a-tat style he usually adopts but just for convenience let me answer his questions point by point. 1. It is a terrible simplification to say that, according to Imran Khan, the militants are taking innocent Pakistani lives because of drone attacks. Imran has always maintained that the issue of militancy is complex, with many factors at play. Some militants are ideologically motivated, others straightforward criminals, while some are reacting to their kith and kin becoming victims of air attacks, military operations, drones – all captured in that terrible word, collateral damage. Drones, according to Imran Khan are a reminder of American aggression to everybody in the tribal areas. They are not the only reason for militancy but contribute mightily to it. 2. By asking Imran Khan for four names to negotiate with among the militants, Farrukh Saleem is asking a trick question and using his journalistic privilege to be ‘cute’. However, I will try to answer him seriously. Why is it so complicated to understand that ‘kill them all’ is no policy? Does it not make sense to wean away as many militants as possible before dealing with the rest through targeted military operations? REFERENCE: Ten distortions Shafqat Mahmood Saturday, October 20, 2012 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-138503-Ten-distortions

Mr. Shafqat Mahmood way back in 2001 wrote this on Afghanistan and Taliban Militants.


Nov 16, 2001: Afghanistan and our future by Shafqat Mahmood : The Taliban are crumbling faster than cardboard shanties in the path of a storm. Promises of fierce ground battles, that churned the blood of many a chest thumper in Pakistan, are now drifting helplessly in the dust laden Afghan wind. It is not over yet, not by a long shot, but what remains is a mopping up operation. Scattered over rural Afghanistan, the Taliban residue and their foreign volunteers will be picked off slowly but surely. It is sad in a way although I have no love for the Taliban or what they stood for. Much of this could have been avoided if they were less cocky or more rational or more ready to be a part of the world. If they were all these things, though, they would not be Taliban. People who are ready to blow up ancient Buddhist statutes because they are idols or whip women because their ankles are showing or force every man to keep a six-inch long beard, do not live in the same world as you and I. A particularly poignant moment for me as Kabul fell, was the playing of music from a truck mounted loudspeaker. If the ordinary and trivial becomes special and significant, there is something terribly wrong with the world. And there was a lot wrong with the Taliban's world. The image of young Afghans queuing up to get their beards trimmed makes this point more eloquently than a thousand or a million words. The liberators of Kabul are not the Dad's Army either. Within their ranks are some of the most blood thirsty tyrants ever encountered in the tragic Afghan history. Yet it is a sign of the times that many ordinary Afghans let out a collective sigh of relief when the Taliban departed. So let no one mourn the Taliban. They are not synonymous with the Afghans. They were freaks of history and will hopefully be consigned to that special place where other such oddities are kept. Some of our armchair warriors are not finished though. Retired Generals Hamid Gul and Aslam 'strategic' Beg are calling the Taliban disappearing act a brilliant tactical manoeuvre. Earlier they predicted fierce land battles and now, without an apology, they see the spectre of a long drawn out guerrilla war. Do not forget that one of these gentlemen declared Saddam's 'mother of all battles' as another Vietnam. Having had such a comeuppance, he should have taken an eternal vow of silence.


No such luck. The sad part is that some newspapers still bother to give space to his never ending bombast. Others like Qazi Hussain Ahmed also need to pause and do a rethink. If the Taliban were representative of all the Afghans or even of the Pashtuns they would not have crumbled so quickly. The fact is that they were a small slice of Afghani society and had gathered momentum only because of unending conflict and depravity of the warlords. When their true face was revealed most of the Afghans grew to hate them. It must also be remembered that if Afghans hate foreigners on their soil, they must have also grown to hate the Arabs, the Chechens, the Pakistanis and others who had flocked to Osama and the Taliban. It did not require a major calculation for the Afghans to see that at least some of their difficulties were because of the foreigners. It is instructive therefore that the Northern Alliance soldiers make it a point of executing the outsiders, who surrender, but spare the Afghans even if they are Taliban. The heat of the battle may be over but the political headaches have already begun. Putting together a broad based government, which by definition should be majority Pashtun, is not going to be easy. While there are definite problems ahead, some of us are becoming overly anxious about the Afghan government of the future. Yes, it was a mistake of our intelligence not to have a link to non-Taliban forces and I hope we have learnt a lesson. But, it is not the end of the world either. We must have faith in our intrinsic importance for any Afghan government. Most of Southern and Western Afghanistan has already become a common economic market with us. Pakistani goods such as wheat, edible oil, toiletries, POL products, cloth and a host of others are a staple in Afghan markets. Our currency is a legal tender there. This integration of markets is a necessary bond between us and Afghanistan. Geography still dictates that we provide the nearest port to Afghan goods. In fact Afghan transit trade has become a headache for us and a bonanza for Afghan governments. We are also a host to millions of Afghans, whether we like it or not. No future Afghan government can afford to be an enemy of ours. It may not be a bosom buddy but then no Afghan government has ever been one. A businesslike relationship is the best we can hope for and this will happen. We must also have faith in the strength of our armed forces. Internally we may have mixed feelings about them because of their political role but externally we must understand that they can deter any aggression. No Afghan government will risk a conflict with us because they know our strength. So, while there may be a rocky road ahead in the near term, the long-term prospect of coexistence with future Afghan governments is not bad. There is also an apprehension among some people that our love affair with the Americans is about to end. The logic is that after the collapse of the Taliban, we are no longer required. Some even think that we are going to be the next target of American aggression. This is all nonsense. I have no brief for the Americans, and certainly no information, yet is not difficult to see what lies ahead. States come together because of shared interests. I do not see American interest in this region diminishing. Therefore, their interest in us and ours in them will remain.


 The simple fact is that the American are here to stay. They have not gone to all this trouble just to defeat the ragtag Taliban or even to root out Osama. These are valid targets but there is also a long-term strategic/economic objective. Central Asia has the largest untapped reservoir of oil and gas in the world. The best way to transport this to European and American markets is through Afghanistan and Pakistan. To do this, American companies have been trying to build a pipeline for many years now. After Afghanistan has been pacified, this will become a major priority. I do not believe that Americans would have bases either in Pakistan or Afghanistan but they will have some presence in Central Asia. More importantly because of economic and strategic reasons, they will stay engaged with this part of the world. This engagement dictates that they will continue to want a friendly Pakistan. They will also want Pakistan to remain stable and this can only happen if we are economically viable. Therefore, American assistance, and help with the international financial institutions, will remain. When President Bush and Colin Powell and even Tony Blair say that we are here for the long haul, they mean it. They will remain with us not because they love us, but because their economic and strategic interest demands it. Of course, this engagement would have other repercussions; some good, some bad. If the balance has to be towards the good, we will have to play our cards right. No outside power can take us out of our difficulties, if we are not determined to help ourselves. This government has done well to keep the focus on the economy but a fundamental social problem would also have to be addressed. We cannot have three systems of education, deeni madaris, Urdu medium schools and the elite English medium. This will keep dividing our society. We need to have one system of education for everyone. Rich, poor, liberal, orthodox, Shia, Sunni, Wahabi, Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi and Pushtun, would all have to be weaved into a common thread of education. Only this will heal the fissures in our society. We also need to sort out the extremists, the sectarian terrorist, the fascists hiding behind religion, and others of such ilk, who destabilise our society. One way to counter them is to rid them and the country of weapons. If we begin to do some of this, we would on the right road. If we are doing right, the help of our friends from abroad will make a difference. Otherwise no amount of aid can do any good. I stick my neck out to say that I am optimistic about the future. I really think that Pakistan came to an important crossroad and took the right decision. If we follow this up with correct policies only good lies ahead. REFERENCE: Afghanistan and our future by Shafqat Mahmood The writer is a former Senator and a former federal and provincial minister Nov 16, 2001 http://jang.com.pk/thenews/columnists/shafqat/shafqat28.htm

Friday, October 19, 2012

Malala Yousafzai, Taliban & Imran Khan's Jihad.



Afghanistan's government has lashed out at Imran Khan after the former Pakistan cricket star, now a politician, said the Taliban were fighting a "holy war" in the country that was justified by Islamic law. Speaking after visiting a hospital in Peshawar where Malala Yousafzai – the 14-year-old activist shot in the head by the Taliban for supporting girls' education – was treated last week, Khan told reporters that insurgents in Afghanistan were fighting a "jihad". Citing a verse from the Qur'an, he said: "It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad …"The people who are fighting in Afghanistan against the foreign occupation are fighting a jihad," he added, according to a video of remarks to journalists. Afghan politicians have reacted with disbelief, with one parliamentarian suggesting Khan should be arrested. The Ulema Council, a grouping of senior clerics, declared his comments "unislamic". A Kabul foreign ministry spokesman said Khan was "either profoundly and dangerously ignorant about the reality in Afghanistan, or he has ill will against the Afghan people."Our children are killed on daily basis, civilians killed and our schools, hospitals and infrastructure attacked on a daily basis. To call any of that jihad is profoundly wrong and misguided." REFERENCE: Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law Pakistani politician's comments at hospital that treated shooting victim Malala Yousafzai outrage Afghanistan's government Jon Boone in Islamabad The Guardian, Sunday 14 October 2012 15.20 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/14/imran-khan-taliban-afghanistan-islam Imran Khan thanks Bruce Braley By Ahsan Mansoor Monday, December 24, 2007 http://www.insaf.pk/News/tabid/60/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/689/Imran-Khan-thanks-Bruce-Braley.aspx


Let there be no doubt that Malala and her friends are not child soldiers. They are youth icons. They did not wield guns or bombs but pen and microphone In Pakistan, an apparent national consensus followed the heinous attack on the three young girls Malala Yousafzai, Kainat and Shazia. It lasted for less than two days perhaps. What should have transformed into a national resolve to fight the Taliban terrorists degenerated quickly into a Malala and anti-Malala, or more accurately perhaps, a pro- and anti-Taliban Pakistan. The pro-Taliban forces could not keep up a pro-Malala pretence for too long. They went from a qualified denunciation of the dastardly act to oblique compliments to the child icon to a vicious campaign to undermine her standing, ultimately to unabashed apologetics for the Taliban terrorists. The Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Imran Khan, as is customary now, was leading the pro-Taliban pack and spent no time in muddying the waters by declaring the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan as (a perceived) jihad. That he made the comments right after visiting Malala, fighting for her life, was particularly callous. He could not bring himself to denounce squarely the Taliban for being the savages that they are, and of course, not by name. Not to be outdone by Mr Khan and his Internet ruffians, who act more and more like the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and its student wing, the original JI jumped into the fray as virtually the information wing of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The former JI ameer, Qazi Hussain Ahmed and his daughter, the ex-MNA Dr Samia Raheel Qazi, have unleashed an exceptionally morbid effort to malign Malala and her father Ziauddin Yousafzai. The jihadist cheerleaders in the media spent no time in projecting the Qazis and their drivel into every living room. The Qazis have alleged that Malala was groomed by her father as a virtual tool of the US policy in the region. In tandem with their tirade, the Internet was flooded with pictures of Malala and her family with the late US envoy Richard Holbrooke to suggest that the affected family was on some sort of subversive mission. A false dilemma was created to project Malala as a child soldier somehow comparable with the young suicide bombers deployed by the jihadists. In a most unfortunate manner, Malala’s father was first blamed for doctoring her diaries and then for putting the child in harm’s way. A whisper campaign has accompanied this vitriol about how is it possible for a young child of nine or 10 to actually display such maturity in her writings. One anchor took the campaign of drawing false binaries a step further in his show, ostensibly about journalistic ethics. A senior newspaper editor cut that anchor to size but framing the false narratives goes on in full swing. REFERENCE: COMMENT : Malala and anti-Malala Pakistan — Dr Mohammad Taqi Thursday, October 18, 2012  http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012%5C10%5C18%5Cstory_18-10-2012_pg3_2

Excerpts from a Pashto interview of Malala Yusufzai with English subtitles. 


Zahid Buneri: Malala, let us go back when an operation was launched in Swat & people were displaced. You were also displaced?

 Malala: Yes, when Taliban started slitting throats of people, banned girls from going to school, then Pakistan Army (we are thankful to them) asked us to leave the area so we can have a successful operation. If we were there, the operation would never have been successful. So we sacrificed and left our homes for 3 months and migrated to Peshawar, Mardan. People here gave us so much love that we never felt that we were displaced. They treated us like guests for which we are thankful to them. When the operation was successful & we returned to our area, Swat had become the most peaceful place. Then we saw many schools destroyed which were destroyed either by Taliban or during the operation. We want those schools to be reconstructed, many schools have been rebuilt by Army & other organizations but we want all schools that were destroyed reconstructed. The children who are studying under tents should once again return to their schools. 

 Zahid Buneri: May ALLAH solve the problems of our Pakhtoon daughters & the Pakhtoon Nation. If all problems cannot be solved, at least we should be equal to other nations.

 Malala, we would want you to come to Bacha Khan Markaz to our studio so we can talk in detail about various issues. Any message for Pakhtoons?


Malala: I want to give my message to Pakhtoons, to educate their sons and daughters. Not just school, work on them so they treat every human being well. We do not tolerate a Hindu or Sikh in our society. This is no way, tomorrow people will not tolerate us. Teach them tolerance. Teach them how to tolerate the ideas of others and how to live in coexistence with others. Learn to live with each other. Try to build good relations with each other. This is my message to Pakhtoons. REFERENCE:Pashto interview of Malala Yusufzai with English subtitles. Posted on October 18, 2012 (Special Thanks to Dr Aamir Saeed for the Translation) http://baalahisaar.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/pashto-interview-of-malala-yusufzai-with-english-subtitles/

Imran Khan's Jihad and Taliban before 911.


An Afghan Penalty For Soccer Shorts Published: July 18, 2000 The religious police of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban movement arrested visiting Pakistani soccer players on Saturday and shaved their heads because they were wearing shorts, Afghan and team officials said today. The players from the Pakistani border town of Chaman were released after the incident at a playground in the southern Afghan town of Kandahar, the Taliban headquarters. A junior team of Chaman's Young Afghan Football Club had played two matches in Kandahar and was warming up for a third when the Taliban police took the players into custody as thousands of spectators watched, said the club manager, Abdul Qayyum. ''Their heads were shaven,'' he said. ''Five of our players managed to escape from the scene.'' His players were ''quite annoyed,'' he said. ''Guests are not treated like this in our society.'' A Taliban Information Ministry official in Kandahar said the players had violated the Taliban dress code under which male athletes must wear trousers while playing. The Taliban, who have vowed to create the world's purest Islamic state, have ordered women to wear an all-enveloping veil outside their homes and men to grow long beards and to cover their heads. REFERENCE: An Afghan Penalty For Soccer Shorts Published: July 18, 2000 http://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/18/world/an-afghan-penalty-for-soccer-shorts.html

Taliban Jihad under General Pervez Musharraf Regime 




2000: No complaints -- Pak soccer body KARACHI, July 18: The Pakistan Football Federation said on Tuesday that it would not condemn an incident in neighbouring Afghanistan last week in which members of the Taliban militia shaved off heads of Pakistani soccer players for wearing ``un-Islamic dress'' during a friendly football match with Afghans at Kandahar. The bizarre incident occurred when the Taliban raided the third match between the players from Pakistan and their Afghan competitors in the religious capital of Afghanistan, Kandahar, and accused the Pakistani players of ``spreading obscenity and inciting passions'' by wearing shorts.The Taliban had earlier decreed that men could wear only shalwars (baggy trousers) when playing football. The game, which has a passionate following in Afghanistan, was reluctantly allowed by the Taliban, alongwith male wrestling, after most sport activities were banned for being a waste of time. Abdul Qayuum, captain of the young Afghan Club, Chaman (Pakistan) told a Pakistani newspaper said the players were released on Sunday last and were deported to Pakistan.The Pakistani players who escaped sought refuge in the local Pakistani consulate. But the Pakistan Football Federation said that it would not condemn the incident since the punishment was ``not that severe'' and that the match was not an official engagement between the two countries.Earlier, Afghanistan hit the sports headlines when it did not allow their boxing team to shave their beards - as it is a crime to shave one's beard in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The boxers were automatically disqualified from their Asian Boxing engagements. Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. REFERENCE: No complaints -- Pak soccer body KAMAL SIDDIQI Wednesday, July 19, 2000 http://www.expressindia.com/news/ie/daily/20000719/isp19064.html

Imran Khan and Taliban's Jihad in 2009 in Pakistan's Settled Area (After 911)


2009: Taliban shave men for listening to music in Buner PESHAWAR Taliban militants in Buner district shaved the heads and moustaches of four Pakistani men as punishment for listening to music, one of the men said Sunday. Although Taliban and local officials said the fighters retreated from Buner by Saturday, local members of the movement remain. Residents said many fighters were still present in the hilly outskirts of the district. In one incident late Saturday, Taliban hardliners shaved the heads and moustaches of four men for listening to music, a young man from Buner told AFP by telephone, requesting not to be identified. `I was with three other friends in my car, listening to music when armed Taliban stopped us and, after smashing cassettes and the cassette player, they shaved half our heads and moustaches,` he said. `The Taliban also beat us and asked us not to listen to music ever again,` said the terrified man. Local police said they had no information about the incident. The victim said neither he nor his friends lodged a complaint with police, as this would have been `useless.` `It might have annoyed the Taliban further and I fear for my life,` the man said. Residents in Mingora, the main town in Swat, said Taliban posters had been put up in streets and markets ordering women not to go shopping. The posters had appeared after the Taliban`s controversial agreement with the government to enforce Islamic law in the region. `We will take action against women who go out shopping in the markets and any shopkeeper seen dealing with women shoppers will be dealt with severely,` read the poster from the Swat branch of Tehrik-i-Taliban. `The peace agreement does not mean that obscenity should be re-born,` it added. Extremist Taliban consider it `obscene` for women to leave their homes, and ban females from venturing out in public without an immediate male relative — namely a father, brother, son or husband. For years, Swat was a popular ski resort frequented by Westerners but the Pakistani government effectively lost control of the mountainous district after the violent Taliban campaign to enforce Sharia law. REFERENCE: Taliban shave men for listening to music in Buner http://archives.dawn.com/archives/82823

 What the Taliban did after succeeding in Jihad in 90s (before 911) 


Najibullah and his brother Dead bodies after the Taliban took over in 90s






1998: Afghanistan: The Massacre in Mazar-I Sharif On August 8, 1998, Taliban militia forces captured the city of Mazar-i Sharif in northwest Afghanistan, the only major city controlled by the United Front, the coalition of forces opposed to the Taliban. The fall of Mazar was part of a successful offensive that gave the Taliban control of almost every major city and important significant territory in northern and central Afghanistan. Within the first few hours of seizing control of the city, Taliban troops killed scores of civilians in indiscriminate attacks, shooting noncombatants and suspected combatants alike in residential areas, city street sand markets. Witnesses described it as a "killing frenzy" as the advancing forces shot at "anything that moved." Retreating opposition forces may also have engaged in indiscriminate shooting as they fled the city. Human Rights Watch believes that at least hundreds of civilians were among those killed as the panicked population of Mazar-i Sharif tried to evade the gunfire or escape the city. In the days that followed, Taliban forces carried out a systematic search for male members of the ethnic Hazara, Tajik, and Uzbek communities in the city. The Hazaras, a Persian-speaking Shi’a ethnic group, were particularly targeted, in part because of their religious identity. During the house-to-house searches, scores and perhaps hundreds of Hazara men and boys were summarily executed, apparently to ensure that they would be unable to mount any resistance to the Taliban. Also killed were eight Iranian officials at the Iranian consulate in the city and an Iranian journalist. Thousands of men from various ethnic communities were detained first in the overcrowded city jail and then transported to other cities, including Shiberghan, Herat and Qandahar. Most of the prisoners were transported in large container trucks capable of holding one hundred to 150 people. In two known instances, when the trucks reached Shiberghan, some 130 kilometers west of Mazar, nearly all of the men inside had asphyxiated or died of heat stroke inside the closed metal containers. Some prisoners were also transported in smaller trucks. As of late October, some 4,500 men from Mazar remained in detention. The few international relief groups operating in Mazar had evacuated their staff in the days before the attack on the city.1 On August 16, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), resumed its operations in the city. In late October, Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) was permitted to resume its activities.


Following the takeover, the Taliban allowed no journalists to travel anywhere in the area. In the absence of a full-scale investigation, there is no way to know precisely how many were killed in the weeks following the fall of Mazar to the Taliban. Based on interviews with survivors and other informed sources, Human Rights Watch believes that at least 2,000 may have been killed in the city and possibly many more. Manycivilians were also killed in aerial bombardments and rocket attacks as they fled south of the city toward the Alborz mountains. Human Rights Watch is also concerned by persistent reports that women and girls, particularly in certain Hazara neighborhoods of Mazar-i Sharif, were raped and abducted during the Taliban takeover of the city. The killings of Hazara men and boys appear to have been carried out largely in reprisal for the killing of several thousand Taliban soldiers after a failed attempt by the Taliban to take the city from May to July 1997. Of these, some 2,000 were reportedly summarily executed after capture in Shiberghan and other areas, including areas to which prisoners from Mazar were deported. A number of neighborhoods targeted for searches in Mazar had been among those where resistance by Hizb-i Wahdat troops against the Taliban had begun at that time. Witnesses stated that Taliban conducting the house-to-house searches accused Hazaras in general of killing Taliban troops in 1997 and did not distinguish between combatants and noncombatants. In speeches given at mosques throughout Mazar, the Taliban governor, Mulla Manon Niazi, also blamed Hazaras for the 1997 killings. The Hazaras were also singled out because they are Shi'a. The Taliban are Sunni Muslims and followers of a strict conservative sect that considers the Shi'a to be infidels. During their search operations in Mazar, the Taliban ordered some residents to prove that they were not Shi'a by reciting Sunni prayers. Over a period of several weeks, Governor Niazi made inflammatory speeches against Hazaras in which he ordered them to become Sunnis, leave Afghanistan, or risk being killed. The Taliban forces that captured Mazar-i Sharif included Pashtuns from Balkh, the province of which Mazar is the capital and the name of a town northwest of Mazar. These Balkh Pashtuns had been members of a militia aligned with the Hizb-i Islami, a largely Pashtun faction that was part of the United Front. Some weeks before the offensive on Mazar, Hizb-i Wahdat forces launched an operation in Balkh to drive Pashtuns from the area so that they would not be able to provide support to the advancing Taliban troops. The Hizb-i Wahdat forces reportedly engaged in widespread rape and looting. The rapes in particular reportedly drove several key commanders among the Balkh Pashtuns to switch sides and help the Taliban. Some were reportedly also unhappy with Hizb-i Islami leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's courting of Shi’a religious leaders. Other commanders were simply bought off. Balkh Pashtuns were among the first troops entering the city and have been identified among the Taliban troops who engaged in indiscriminate shooting on the first day. Balkh Pashtuns also took part in the house-to-house searches and may have acted as informers identifying Hazara neighborhoods and houses.


However, witnesses interviewed by Human Rights Watch stated that the search parties also included Taliban officers who were not from local areas and that the Taliban officers separating prisoners at the jail were not Balkh Pashtuns but non-local "mainstream" Taliban — those from Qandahar or other predominantly Pashtun areas of southern Afghanistan where many of the senior Taliban leaders are based. The speeches by Governor Niazi also demonstrate an intent at senior levels to target Hazaras. Other witnesses stated that senior Taliban leaders were not only aware of the extent of the killing in Mazar but had decided to allow it to continue for several days before stopping it. Human Rights Watch also interviewed a number of witnesses who described the abductions of girls and women from neighborhoods in Mazar, including Saidabad, Karte Ariana and Ali Chopan. There are consistent reports as well of a number of incidents of rape; Balkh Pashtuns were identified in some cases. In the weeks after the takeover the Taliban announced the execution of some soldiers who had been responsible for crimes, including rape, during the offensive. REFERENCE: November 1998 Vol. 10, No. 7 (C) AFGHANISTAN: THE MASSACRE IN MAZAR-I SHARIF http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/afghan/ Afghanistan: The Massacre in Mazar-I Sharif http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,HRW,,AFG,,45c9a4b52,0.html

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Malala Yousafzai & Land of Apostates.

GEO TV May 05, 2009: Sufi Muhammad not against me, says Qazi PESHAWAR: The former Ameer Jamat-e-Islami (JI) Qazi Hussain Ahmed has said the innocent people are being killed amid army operation in Swat and termed military operations as a bid to bag US dollars. Talking to media during a gathering here, Qazi said that Sufi Muhammad, the chief of Tehreek-e-Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammadi (TNSM) is not against me but the government and media are trying to raise conflicts between us. “The innocent people are being targeted in Swat operation while the government has launched military operation in Swat for sake of US dollars”, Qazi said adding, “US can never see peace flourishing in Pakistan”. The people are unsecured here due to fragile law and order situation in Pakistan, he added. REFERENCE: Sufi Muhammad not against me, says Qazi Updated at: 0234 PST, Tuesday, May 05, 2009 http://www.geo.tv/5-5-2009/41342.htm


Whereas in the same year Qazi Hussain Ahmed was of the view:) 

Sufi might have been a little ‘Kafir’ too: Munawar News Desk Thursday, April 23, 2009 RAWALPINDI: Amir Jamaat-e-Islami Syed Munawar Hassan has said that Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammad chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad had once contested elections of local councillor and won it and therefore might have been a little ‘Kafir’ (infidel) too. Talking to newsmen in Lahore after meeting a delegation of Khaksar Tehrik led by Hameeduddin Al-Mashriqi, he said that the 1973 Constitution was a consensus document having the support of all ulema of the country. Therefore, Sufi Muhammad should consult the ulema and elders before passing edicts . REFERENCE: Sufi might have been a little ‘Kafir’ too: Munawar News Desk Thursday, April 23, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=21697&Cat=13&dt=4%2F23%2F2009


Jihad not mandatory in Kashmir: Sufi News Desk Sunday, May 03, 2009 RAWALPINDI: Chief of Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammadi Maulana Sufi Muhammad has said that democracy is ‘Kufar’ (infidelity) and backing democratic forces is useless. “Even I do not offer prayer under pro-democracy people,” he said in an exclusive interview with Salim Safi, to be telecast on Geo TV at 10:05pm today (Sunday). The TNSM chief said Qazi Hussain Ahmad and Maulana Fazlur Rehman were searching for Shariah in democracy. He said women were not allowed to go out of their homes except for Haj, adding there was no need for a wife’s permission in Jihad (holy war). He was of the opinion that there was no Islamic Shariah system in Saudi Arabia and Iran. He said as the Kashmiris were not demanding Shariah, but a state, therefore, Jihad was not mandatory there. “Today there is no place in the world where ‘Jihad Bil Qataal’ (holy war) is taking place,” he said, adding that Shariah has prohibited stopping vices through the use of force. REFERENCE: Jihad not mandatory in Kashmir: Sufi News Desk Sunday, May 03, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=21884&Cat=13&dt=4%2F30%2F2009

Monday, October 15, 2012

Malala Yousafzai & Alleged Ummah (0+0=0)


At times, one can find a Pakistani hesitating to condemn a killer who murdered another person for suspected blasphemy. Though a tragically large number of people jumped with joy when a man assassinated the supposedly blasphemous governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, in January 2011 (he had spoken out against the country's blasphemy laws), even more Pakistanis were thrown into a mental quagmire, trying to figure out if the killer did the right thing. Forget about comprehending the matter through secular reasoning: A man who commits cold-blooded murder deserves to be tried. It was as if many felt that condemning the killer or his act amounted to condemning Islam itself. In Malala's case, thankfully, no one showered rose petals on the perpetrator, like some lawyers did after Taseer's murder. A flood of statements condemning the young girl's shooting came pouring in from politicians, military men, journalists, and common people. But only few were ready to explicitly mention, or even condemn, the perpetrator: the Taliban. Some of Pakistan's gallant politicians and wise ulema refused to speak out from fear. Others kept silent to safeguard their belief that the drones are bigger culprits than men who have thus far killed more than 36,000 civilians, soldiers, and police in our country. I hope it is Malala's fate to convince a confused population that the crisis facing Islam today results not from the intrigues of other faiths or different ways of life, but from those claiming to be its most vehement defenders.  REFERENCE: We Are All Malala Why can't Pakistanis condemn the Taliban for shooting a 14-year-old girl? BY NADEEM F. PARACHA | OCTOBER 10, 2012 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/10/We_Are_All_Malala


MUZAFFARABAD, Oct 14: Leaders of the Defence of Pakistan Council (DPC), an alliance of mainly religious organisations, addressed a large gathering here on Sunday and expressed complete support for the ongoing armed struggle in Indian occupied Kashmir and criticised Pakistani rulers for supporting the United States. DPC Chairman Maulana Samiul Haq also spoke about the attack on Malala Yousufzai and its repercussions for the country. The gathering was held in the University College ground which had been decorated with dozens of small and large banners of different outfits inscribed with jihadi slogans and portraits of their leaders. “Malala is (like) our daughter and we condemn the attack on her… But the innocent Swat girl has been used as a tool to pave the way for an operation in South and North Waziristan,” Maulana Haq said. “It is a part of a great game by devilish forces and under its cover they want to bomb us again and defame Islam and Islamic forces.” He pointed out that US President Barack Obama had shed tears for Malala but when around 1,200 innocent girls were burned to death in Jamia Hafsa he had termed it accomplishment of his agenda. The Maulana said: “We feel that the Pakistani rulers have ill intentions towards Kashmir and that’s why they have put it on the back burner. “We have come to assure you that Pakistan’s religious and political forces are behind you and we will sacrifice everything for the freedom of Kashmir.” The DPC chief also said that while Pakistanis had been feeling depressed at the slavery of Kashmiris for over 60 years, today they themselves were facing a similar situation. REFERENCE: Malala issue being used to pave way for Waziristan operation: DPC by Tariq Naqash http://dawn.com/2012/10/15/malala-issue-being-used-to-pave-way-for-waziristan-operation-dpc/


LAHORE: At least 50 Islamic scholars belonging to ‘Sunni Ittehad Council’ on Thursday declared Taliban’s attack on Pakistani children’s rights activist Malala Yousafzai as un-Islamic, DawnNews reported. Sunni Ittehad Council represents ‘Barelvi‘ sect of Islam which is influenced by Sufism and defends the traditional Sufi practices from the criticisms of Islamic movements like the ‘Deobandi’, ‘Wahhabi’ and ‘Ahl al-Hadith’. The scholars issued a combined ‘fatwa’ (Islamic ruling) in Lahore which said that the Taliban’s interpretation of Islam was incorrect and was deviant from the actual interpretation of the Shariah. The fatwa added that Taliban were misguided and their mindset was driven by ignorance. “Islam does not stop women from acquiring education and by attacking Malala the Taliban have crossed the limits of Islam,” the fatwa added. “Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had regarded the sanctity of Muslim’s life and property more important than the sanctity of the ‘Kaaba’ (sacred Muslim place),” adding that the fatwa stated, “Murder of one innocent human being is equivalent to murder of entire humanity.” The Islamic ruling added that United States was the enemy of Islam and Pakistan; any kind of cooperation with the US was not in compliance with the Shariah. In response to Taliban’s interpretation of killing females for the greater good of the religion, the scholars said that Islam discourages killing of the females. Adding that, they said, “Even apostate women are not allowed to be killed in Islam.” The assassination attempt on the life of the young National Peace Award winner has drawn widespread condemnation from the government, political parties and civil society groups, terming it a bid to silent voice for peace and education. The banned militant organisation Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) had issued a statement Wednesday, using Islamic Shariah to defend the attack. Pakistani Taliban had said that although they do not believe in attacking women, “whom so ever leads a campaign against Islam and Shariah is ordered to be killed by Shariah.” TTP spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan had argued that it is “not just allowed … but obligatory in Islam” to kill such a person involved “in leading a campaign against Shariah and (who) tries to involve whole community in such campaign, and that personality becomes a symbol of anti-Shariah campaign.” Malala had won international recognition for highlighting Taliban atrocities in Swat with a blog for the BBC three years ago, when the Islamist militants burned girls’ schools and terrorised the valley. Her struggle resonated with tens of thousands of girls who were being denied an education by the militants across northwest Pakistan, where the government has been fighting the local Taliban since 2007. REFERENCE: Fifty Muslim scholars issue fatwa against Taliban DAWN.COM | 11th October, 2012 http://dawn.com/2012/10/11/fifty-muslim-scholars-issue-fatwa-against-taliban/


January 29th, 2011. MQM lawmaker declines to lead Fateha for Taseer ISLAMABAD: Polarisation on religious issues again became visible at the highest level when lawmakers in Senate stood divided over the issue of offering fateha for a deceased person. When Senator Abdul Khaliq Pirzada of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) was asked to lead the prayers for the soul of the assassinated governor of Punjab, Salmaan Taseer, he flatly refused. A parliamentarian later termed the incident an “abhorrent aberration” in the country’s parliamentary history. The prayers were requested by Senator Nilofar Bakhtiar of the PML-Q, who requested chairman Senate Farooq H Naek that the house should offer prayers for the late governor’s departed soul. She also urged the upper house of parliament to pass a resolution to condemn elements supporting Taseer’s killer. Offering prayers for persons of national repute is a routine matter. After the MQM lawmaker refused to lead the prayers, the Senate chairman himself led the prayers to avoid further controversy. Published in The Express Tribune, January 29th, 2011. MQM lawmaker declines to lead Fateha for Taseer http://tribune.com.pk/story/110880/intense-polarisation-mqm-lawmaker-declines-to-lead-fateha-for-taseer/


2011: US aided Pakistan group which supported extremists AP | 11th January, 2012 ISLAMABAD: The US gave money to a Pakistani Muslim group that organised anti-Taliban rallies, but which later demonstrated in support of an extremist who killed a leading liberal politician, the US Embassy in Pakistan said Wednesday. US government website Usaspending.gov shows that the group, the Sunni Ittehad Council, received $36,607 from Washington in 2009. A US diplomat said that the embassy had given money to the group to organise the rallies, but that it had since changed direction and leadership. He said it was a one-off grant, and wouldn’t be repeated. He didn’t give his name because he wasn’t authorised to speak about the issue on the record. The grant was first reported by the Council of Foreign Relations on its website. The Ittehad council was formed in 2009 to counter extremism. It groups politicians and clerics from Pakistan’s traditionalist Barelvi Muslim movement, often referred to as theological moderates in the Pakistani context. The American money was used to organise nationwide rallies against militants and suicide bombings, the embassy official said. The demonstrations received widespread media coverage, and were some of the first against extremism in the country. The rhetoric at the rallies was mostly focused on opposing militant attacks on shrines, which Barelvis frequent but are opposed by Deobandi Muslims, Pakistan’s other main Muslim sect. REFERENCE: US aided Pakistan group which supported extremists AP | 11th January, 2012 http://dawn.com/2012/01/11/us-aided-pakistan-group-which-supported-extremists/


 In 2011 and also this month, however, the council led demonstrations in support of the killer of Salman Taseer, a governor who was killed a year ago for his criticism of anti-blasphemy laws. The displays have appalled Pakistani liberals and stoked international fears that the country is buckling under the weight of extremism. Taseer’s assassin, Mumtaz Qadri, is a Barelvi. He claimed he acted to defend the honour of Prophet Mohammed. At its rallies, the group maintains its criticism of the Taliban even as it supports Qadri — a seemingly contradictory stance that suggests its leaders may be more interested in harnessing the political support and street power of Barelvis than in genuinely countering militancy. Two leading members of the council who have been with the group from the beginning of its existence denied receiving any American funds. The apparent discrepancy could be explained by lack of transparency within the organisation. However, given the current anti-American climate, owning up to receiving funds from the United States would invite criticism. ”This propaganda is being unleashed against us because we are strongly opposed to Western democracy and American policies in the region and in the world,” said Sahibzada Fazal Karim, the head of the council, before reiterating the group’s support for Qadri. ”We are against extremism, but we support Qadri because he did a right thing,” he said. REFERENCE: US aided Pakistan group which supported extremists AP | 11th January, 2012 http://dawn.com/2012/01/11/us-aided-pakistan-group-which-supported-extremists/


A new low even for the Jamat-e-Islami and others like Jamat-e-Islam and PTI. Rather disgusting campaign on twitter, implicitly justifying the attack on Malala, tagging various TV journalists with "Malala amreekee foji hukkam k sath" ("Malala with American army rulers") - While conveniently forgetting that these very Mullahs have also been benefited from USA and even Fought the Alleged Jihad with US Funding and that is not enough Hafiz Muhammad Saeed's real brother used to live in USA. Even the so-called Taliban Fighters were regular visitors of US State Department way back in 90s. During 80s the Cutthroat Irani Ayatullahs even dined with Israeli Spies to settle score with another American Agent Saddam Hussein. 



2011: With $30 Billion Arms Deal, U.S. Bolsters Saudi Ties  HONOLULU — Fortifying one of its key allies in the Persian Gulf, the Obama administration announced a weapons deal with Saudi Arabia on Thursday, saying it had agreed to sell F-15 fighter jets valued at nearly $30 billion to the Royal Saudi Air Force. The agreement, and the administration’s parallel plans to press ahead with a nearly $11 billion arms deal for Iraq, despite rising political tensions there, is dramatic evidence of its determination to project American military influence in an oil-rich region shadowed by a threat from Iran. Though the White House said the deal had not been accelerated to respond to threats by Iranian officials in recent days to shut off the Strait of Hormuz, its timing is laden with significance, as tensions with Iran have deepened and the United States has withdrawn its last soldiers from Iraq. “This sale will send a strong message to countries in the region that the United States is committed to stability in the gulf and the broader Middle East,” said Andrew J. Shapiro, the assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs. “It will enhance Saudi Arabia’s ability to deter and defend against external threats to its sovereignty.” The agreement also suggests that the United States and Saudi Arabia have moved beyond a bitter falling-out over the uprisings in the Arab world. Though the two countries continue to differ on how to handle the popular revolts in the region, American and Saudi officials said, the disagreement has not fractured a strategic alliance based on a common concern over Iran. Saudi Arabia is a longtime foe of Iran, with relations souring further last fall after the United States broke up what it said was an Iranian-backed plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington. Iran has denied the accusations. “When you look at the size of this package, what does it tell you about U.S.-Saudi relations?” said a senior Saudi official, who spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to speak publicly. “It says it’s very strong and very solid. Any disagreements from time to time don’t affect the core relationship.” The weapons package is remarkable, both for its size and for its technical sophistication. Under the terms of the $29.4 billion agreement signed on Dec. 24, Saudi Arabia will get 84 new F-15SA jets, manufactured by Boeing, and upgrades to 70 F-15s in the Saudi fleet with new munitions and spare parts. It will also get help with training, logistics and maintenance. 


The new F-15s, which will be delivered in 2015, are among the most capable and versatile fighter jets in the world, Pentagon officials said. They will come with the latest air-to-air missiles and precision-guided air-to-ground missiles, enabling them to strike ships and radar facilities day or night and in any weather. Though Mr. Shapiro and other officials said the planes were intended to help Saudi Arabia protect its sovereignty, military analysts said they would be effective against Iranian planes and ships anywhere in the Persian Gulf. They are part of a 10-year, $60 billion weapons package for Saudi Arabia that was approved last year by Congress. At the time, there was a vigorous debate, with some lawmakers arguing that such a huge arms package would threaten the military position of Israel. Mr. Shapiro, speaking at a State Department briefing, said the administration was satisfied that the sale of the F-15s would not diminish “Israel’s qualitative military edge.” The White House portrayed the arms sale as part of a concerted effort to shore up its relationship with Saudi Arabia. President Obama has made several telephone calls to King Abdullah, a senior official said; the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, traveled twice to the Saudi capital, Riyadh; and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. led a high-level delegation to the funeral of Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz in October. Early this year, the Saudis were furious when Mr. Obama withdrew support for Egypt’s embattled president, Hosni Mubarak, after he faced massive protests in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. Later, it was the White House’s turn to be upset, when Saudi tanks rolled into neighboring Bahrain to help quash a mainly Shiite rebellion against that kingdom’s Sunni monarchy. 


Yet Saudi Arabia and the United States continue to cooperate in areas like counterterrorism. In recent weeks, the two have worked to resolve the crisis in Yemen, where President Ali Abdullah Saleh has formally agreed to cede power in a Saudi-brokered agreement and has applied for a visa to travel to the United States for medical treatment. “The agreement reinforces the strong and enduring relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia,” Joshua R. Earnest, the White House’s deputy press secretary, said in a statement issued in Hawaii, where Mr. Obama is on vacation. With the United States pulling out of Iraq, the administration has been eager to demonstrate that it will remain a presence in the region. It is proceeding with weapons sales to Iraq, despite fears that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki may abandon his American-backed power-sharing government in favor of a Shiite-dominated state. The administration has weighed stationing combat troops in Kuwait in case of a military confrontation with Iran or a collapse in security in Iraq. It is also seeking to expand military ties with other gulf countries, including Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. “I see this more in the longer-term effort by the administration to signal that even with the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, the U.S. is still committed to the defense of its allies in the gulf and to the containment of Iran,” said F. Gregory Gause III, an expert on Saudi affairs at the University of Vermont. The weapons deal, Mr. Gause said, also illustrated that the two countries could put aside their differences and focus on larger strategic priorities. “After some tension-filled months this year over Egypt and Bahrain, both sides have agreed to disagree on that, and agree on their common interests,” he said. REFERENCE: With $30 Billion Arms Deal, U.S. Bolsters Saudi Ties By MARK LANDLER and STEVEN LEE MYERS Published: December 29, 2011 A version of this article appeared in print on December 30, 2011, on page A10 of the New York edition with the headline: Healing a Rift, U.S. Agrees to $30 Billion Fighter Jet Sale to Saudi Arabia. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/30/world/middleeast/with-30-billion-arms-deal-united-states-bolsters-ties-to-saudi-arabia.html?_r=1


David Kimche David Kimche, who died on March 8 aged 82, was a British-born Israeli spy and diplomat who slipped between the covert and overt domains of foreign affairs, building both the fearsome reputation of his country's intelligence service and its valuable official ties to other nations. : As deputy head until 1980 of the Israeli external security service, the Mossad, Kimche was deeply involved in Operation Wrath of God – the plot to assassinate the terrorists who had killed 11 members of the Israeli team at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Kimche ensured that, rather than eliminating the terrorists with a straightforward sniper's bullet, Mossad used more sophisticated methods (booby-trapped mattresses or telephones) that both burnished the agency's own reputation and struck fear into potential future targets. "We wanted to make them afraid of being a terrorist," he said. "We wanted to make them look over their shoulders and feel that we are upon them. This was a message that they can be got at anywhere, at any time and therefore they have to look out for themselves 24 hours a day." Long before the recent furore over the use of foreign passports by Mossad for its assassination operations abroad, Kimche was at the heart of a similar scandal. As Mossad was being ticked off by Whitehall for using fake British documents for Wrath of God "hits", Kimche was applying to have his own, genuine, British passport renewed. "This is really extraordinary," one Foreign Office official noted. "At the same time as the minister is about to protest to the Israeli ambassador over the misuse of British passports for Israeli intelligence operations, we are apparently contemplating issuing a British passport to a man who may well have been in charge of the operation complained of." But Kimche was by no means a stereotypical Israeli blood-and-guts man of war.


He was an urbane and cultivated official diplomat, who, as director general of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 1980 to 1987, drew on his extraordinary contacts to bring his nation out of the cold at a time when many foreign partners, fearful of an Arab oil-embargo, were minded to shun the Jewish state. No one will now be able to say for sure exactly where Kimche exerted most influence. But it is certain that he had long experience dealing with the Soviet Union and African nations. Inevitably he focused on building ties with the Arab world: "You have to be very sensitive. You have to understand Arab society," he once said. "Above all, you have to be sensitive to their feelings and their attitudes. I've had a lot of dealings with the Arab world. I find it interesting." This boundless interest in people and places was one of Kimche's great assets both in the overt and covert domains. His friends said he was a well-rounded man, not purely focused on operational intrigue. "The fact is that I know the world fairly well," Kimche conceded. "The fact is that I know how to make contacts with people. This enables me to do things that many others don't know how to do." David Kimche, usually known as Dave, was born in London in 1928 to an aristocratic Jewish family with Swiss roots. His parents and brother, Jon, were active Zionists, and Dave left Britain Palestine in 1946, fighting in the war two years later that accompanied Israel's creation. He then joined the Jerusalem Post before joining Mossad in 1953. His postings to Africa and Asia, often under journalistic cover and using the name David Sharon, were designed to create an Israeli sphere of influence on the periphery of the Arab world. A frequent tactic was to approach Christian ethnic groups and offer support in civil wars or uprisings against Muslim rivals. In this role Kimche became known as the "Man with the Suitcase", appearing in various African states shortly before dramatic coups and disappearing again quickly afterwards. There was rarely room for scruple in this "Great Game" strategy, and among the Israeli proteges on the continent was the Ugandan dictator Idi Amin. No state was too remote to prove useful, however, and Israel sought and secured allies from Central America to South East Asia. By the late 1970s, Kimche's covert work was proving crucial in the delicate peace negotiations with Egypt. Using contacts in north Africa, he is thought to have convinced Morocco's King Hassan to broker talks between Jerusalem and Cairo. But Kimche, by then deputy-director of Mossad, fell out with his boss, Yitzhak Hofi, and, in 1980, he resigned to join the Foreign Ministry. It was there that he almost came unstuck. The caution inherent to covert work seemed to give way to adventurism as he championed an Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 where, true to form, he backed Christian militias – which then went on to carry out massacres at Palestinian refugee camps Sabra and Chatila. It was in Lebanon too, that Kimche almost became snared by a web of intrigue that stretched from Nicaragua to Tehran. Following the suggestion that Iran could use its influence with Hizbollah to win the release of American hostages held by the Lebanese militant group, Israel agreed to sweeten Tehran by supplying the regime there with weapons, in defiance of an arms embargo.



The CIA funnelled profits from the deals to anti-communist rebels, or Contras, that it was backing in Nicaragua. Fall out from the so-called Iran-Contra affair proved deeply damaging, and afterwards there was a suspicion that the idea had originated with Kimche. But he retained his contacts in Iran. In 1991, after he had officially retired to pursue "business interests", an American television team reporting in Tehran found that, "whenever we went to interview Islamic revolutionary government officials, David Kimche seemed to be just leaving their offices". But an undercover relationship with a sworn enemy inevitably produced worrying and comical moments. "I was in Hamburg for discussions with a certain ayatollah," he once recalled. "The talks went on into the night, ending at 2am. Then the Iranians beckoned us to go with them.'We have something to show you,' they said, and drove us into the depths of Hamburg's dockland. We stopped outside a warehouse and were led up an unlit staircase. I felt quite nervous when we suddenly emerged into a huge chamber. The light went on – and spread before us was an extraordinary spectacle: a huge collection of magnificent carpets once owned by the Shah of Persia. They had been shipped out for sale to finance the Mullahs' revolution." Sadly for Kimche, his salary could not stretch to meet the price of the treasures on display. In his later years, Kimche, ever the pragmatist, focused on achieving a peace settlement with the Palestinians. He had previously sought to destroy the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) of Yasser Arafat ("Arafat was our mortal enemy" he said). But having weakened the PLO, he later accepted that "like it or not, Mr. Arafat is the only Palestinian leader with the power to curb violence and work out an enduring ceasefire, let alone a peace accord." Even after Arafat's death, and despite endless failures that hardened mistrust among people on both sides, Kimche kept at behind-the-scenes peace efforts. In his last years, and as informed as anyone of Israel's capacity to strike at its enemies if need be, he was in a position, perhaps, to be more trusting than most. "I do not share what I regard as the Diaspora mentality of seeing danger under every rock we pick up," he says. "I do not believe that a Palestinian state poses a danger in any way or form. Whether the territories become a part of Jordan or a Palestinian state, neither will pose a threat to Israel." David Kimche, the author of several books on foreign affairs, married twice. He is survived by his wife, Ruth, and four children.REFERENCE : David Kimche David Kimche, who died on March 8 aged 82, was a British-born Israeli spy and diplomat who slipped between the covert and overt domains of foreign affairs, building both the fearsome reputation of his country's intelligence service and its valuable official ties to other nations. 7:15PM GMT 11 Mar 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/7423398/David-Kimche.html