general aslam beg on current situation in pakistan

8/9/2019 General Aslam Beg on Current Situation in Pakistan

1/37

rofile: Aslam Beg

Aslam Beg was a participant or observer in the following events:

After November 16, 1988: Prime Minister Bhutto Not Much Involved in

Pakistans Nuclear Program

Edit event

A. Q. Khan (right) and Benazir Bhutto (center).A. Q. Khan (right) and Benazir

Bhutto (center). [Source: CBC] (click image to enlarge)After becoming prime

minister of Pakistan following the victory of the Pakistan Peoples Party in

elections, Benazir Bhutto does not play a large role in Pakistans nuclear

policy, according to US analysts. It is unclear whether she chooses not to do

so, or is cut out of it by the military. In her absence the two senior figures

overseeing the program are President Ghulam Ishaq Khan and army headGeneral Aslam Beg. [New Yorker, 3/29/1993]

Entity Tags: Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Benazir Bhutto, Aslam Beg

Timeline Tags: A. Q. Khan's Nuclear Network

Bookmark and Share

February 1989 or Shortly Before: Pakistan Conducts Second Test of Nuclear-

Capable Missiles

Edit event

Pakistan conducts a second test firing of its Hatf 1 and 2 missiles, which are

able to carry a nuclear payload. This follows a first test in May of the previous

year (see May 1988). The missiles are launched from mobile pads on

Pakistans Merkan coast, which is towards the border with Iran. The tests will

be revealed by General Aslam Beg, chief of army staff, in a speech tostudents at Pakistans National Defence College. Beg comments that the

missiles are extremely accurate and can carry up to 500 kg. Beg also

thanks Munir Khan of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission for his teams

work on their development, and indicates that Pakistans development of a

tank is progressing. This is intended as a message to the US that Pakistan is

becoming less and less reliant on it for purchases of military hardware. [Levy


2/37

and Scott-Clark, 2007, pp. 198, 498]

Entity Tags: Aslam Beg, Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission


Bookmark and Share

May 1990: Robert Gates Undertakes Mission to Avert Nuclear War between

India and Pakistan

Edit event

When the US learns of a crisis in relations between India and Pakistan that

could escalate into nuclear war (see January-May 1990), President George

Bush sends Deputy National Security Adviser Robert Gates to meet leaders of

both countries in an attempt to prevent armed conflict. Gates will later say he

appreciated the seriousness of the situation: The analogy we kept making

was to the summer of 1914 Pakistan and India seemed to be caught in a

cycle that they couldnt break out of. I was convinced that if a war started, it

would be nuclear. However, Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who is

on a tour of the Middle East, keeps changing the place where she is to meet

Gates, indicating she has no desire to see him. Gates therefore only meets

with Pakistani army chief Aslam Beg and President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, whosay they will cease supporting insurgents in Kashmir. This is apparently

enough to calm the Indians, who allow US officials to check that the Indian

army is not on the border preparing to invade Pakistan, and the situation

gradually calms down. [New Yorker, 3/29/1993]

Entity Tags: George Herbert Walker Bush, Aslam Beg, Benazir Bhutto, Robert

M. Gates, Ghulam Ishaq Khan


Bookmark and Share

Late 1990 or After: Pakistan Sends Stinger Missile to North Korea to Revive

Cooperation


3/37

Edit event

Pakistan sends a Stinger missile to North Korea. Pakistan obtained the Stinger

from the US, which provided them to Pakistani-backed rebels during the

Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s (see September 1986). The missile is partlyintended as a gift for the North Koreansan incentive for the revival of co-

operation between the two countries, which has been stalled for some time

(see Late 1980s). In addition, the Stingers held by Pakistan are becoming

useless, because their batteries are failing, and the Pakistanis hope that the

North Koreans will be able to help them reverse engineer the batteries. The

mission to North Korea is undertaken by ISI Director Javed Nasir at the behest

of Pakistani army chief Mirza Aslam Beg and nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan, who

will later become closely involved in co-operation with the North Koreans.

[Levy and Scott-Clark, 2007, pp. 220]

Entity Tags: Abdul Qadeer Khan, Javed Nasir, Aslam Beg


Bookmark and Share

February 1991: Pakistan Supposedly Considers Funding Covert Operations

through Drug MoneyEdit event

Pakistans army chief and the head of the ISI, its intelligence agency, propose

to sell heroin to pay for the countrys covert operations, according to Nawaz

Sharif, Pakistans prime minister at the time. Sharif claims that shortly after

becoming prime minister, army chief of staff Gen. Aslam Beg and ISI director

Gen. Asad Durrani present him with a plan to sell heroin through third parties

to pay for covert operations that are no longer funded by the CIA, now that

the Afghan war is over. Sharif claims he does not approve the plan. Sharif willmake these accusations in 1994, one year after he lost an election and

became leader of the opposition. Durrani and Beg will deny the allegations.

Both will have retired from these jobs by the time the allegations are made.

The Washington Post will comment in 1994, It has been rumored for years

that Pakistans military has been involved in the drug trade. Pakistans army,

and particularly its intelligence agency is immensely powerful and is known


4/37

for pursuing its own agenda. The Post will further note that in 1992, A

consultant hired by the CIA warned that drug corruption had permeated

virtually all segments of Pakistani society and that drug kingpins were closely

connected to the countrys key institutions of power, including the president

and military intelligence agencies. [Washington Post, 9/12/1994]

Entity Tags: Pakistan Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, Aslam Beg,

Nawaz Sharif, Asad Durrani

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

Bookmark and Share

Why don't moderate Muslims speak up?

aslam.jpeg

General Aslam Beg

"Why don't moderate Muslims speak up in favor of US President George W.

Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair when they resolve 'to crush global

terrorists who hate freedom?'" Arnaud de Borchgrave asks this question,which has occurred to many of us.

Then he supplies a disquieting answer from Pakistani General Aslam Beg:

"One of Pakistan's most respected former army chiefs supplied a chilling

explanation this week: Because the 'terrorists' are the 'freedom fighters' of a

'Muslim world facing unprecedented oppression and injustice.' . . .

"In a lengthy e-mail, Beg said the Bush-Blair 'strategy to combat globalterrorism' is 'a declaration of total war on freedom movements, and it is the

Muslim world that will be at the receiving end.'"

It's one thing when a radical Muslim member of a terrorist group spouts this

sort of thing (thanks to nicolei for the link), but Beg holds a position of


5/37

influence in Pakistan's government and he is by no means singular in his

views. Says Borchgrave: "The anti-coalition resistance in Iraq and

Afghanistan, as seen by Beg, is 'a new reality emerging a surging tide of

their lan and vitality.' By the standards of Pakistan's coalition of six politico-

religious parties that govern two of Pakistan's four provinces and hold 20

percent of the seats in the federal assembly, Beg is a moderate."

"Musharraf estimates that the number of extremists in Pakistan amounts to

'no more than 1 percent of the population.' That's 1.5 million religious

fanatics who are holding, according to Musharraf, '99 percent of the

population hostage.' But what happens when the moderates speak only to

echo the extremists? That certainly appears to be the case of Beg, a soft-

spoken man who is a leading geopolitical thinker in a country that is one of

nine nuclear powers in the world. Pakistan is also a Muslim nation where anti-

Americanism is the issue that unites all shades of political opinion.

"Beg argues that it is the United States that originally sponsored the rent-a-

jihadi, or holy warrior, when the CIA sought the support of jihadis from all

over the Muslim world to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the

1980s. Some 60,000 mujahideen passed through a system that was

sponsored by the US, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Their numbers are now

growing daily, says Beg, and they 'form the core of the global Muslim

resistance... engaged in fighting in Chechnya, the Palestinian territories,

Kashmir, Afghanistan, and Iraq.'

"'They are highly motivated, selfless, and fearless people, obeying no earthly

authority,' he says, 'they are hard to subdue by military force, and recognize

no international borders in pursuit of their goals... they have frustrated the

designs of the two superpowers and are surging forward to carve out their

own destiny.' The Bush administration dismisses the 'Islamic resurgence' by

'maligning such liberation movements as terrorism.' But, adds Beg, the

United States will soon find that Iraq and Afghanistan are 'quagmires' from

which 'safe exits' will become increasingly difficult. As for Osama Bin Ladenand Al Qaeda, 'all wars of liberation have splinter groups who lose sense of

direction and indulge in wanton acts of terrorism.' But the United States has

only itself to blame. . . ."

Beg, according to Borchgrace, speaks of American "anomie": "For Beg, this


6/37

'anomie' stems from America's alleged lack of ethical values, which, in turn,

begets violence, ergo Bin Laden is not responsible for 9/11; America is. This is

a switch on the still widely held belief in the Muslim world that the CIA and

Mossad were co-conspirators in the 9/11 plot, whose objective was to provide

a rationale for military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq. This taradiddle

also had its roots in Pakistan when Gen. Hamid Gul, a former head of theInter-Services Intelligence agency and a classmate of Beg, said he had

evidence that the US Air Force was also involved in the plot (the fact that no

US fighter planes took off to shoot down the hijacked aircraft). Both Beg, the

head of a think tank, and Gul, who is 'strategic adviser' to politico-religious

parties, are held in high regard by the Pakistani military.

"Either way, the warped, apprentice-sorcerer thinking goes a long way to

explaining the recent Pew Foundation's survey on global attitudes toward the

United States: As a trustworthy leader, Bin Laden scored higher than Bush inmost Muslim countries.

"There are no quick fixes for change. Despite all the constantly repeated

assurances given to the United States about reform, Pakistan's madrassas, or

religious schools, are still churning out 750,000 jihadi-prone male teenagers a

year. The madrassas were the spawning grounds of the Taliban. Today, a

resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan continues to enjoy the same logistical

support and casualty insurance."

Posted by Robert on December 6, 2003 10:05 AM | 5 Comments

Print | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us | Buzz up!CONSCIENTIOUS

OBJECTOR

GENERAL MIRZA ASLAM BEG: GENERAL McCHRYSTAL THE CONSCIENTIOUS

OBJECTOR

July 1, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff 5 Comments

General McChrystal The Conscientious Objector

By General Mirza Aslam Beg for Veterans Today and Opinion Maker

A soldier has the right to disagree with the higher civil and military

command, but there is a method in doing so, and the way General McChrystal


7/37

expressed his dissent, was no doubt, unbecoming of an officer. Perhaps, he

lost his sense of discretion, under influences, beyond his control, as one of his

close associates remarked: he worked in a very right inner circle, doing

every thing together including getting drunk. However, there are some

important aspects, connected with this incident, which need to be analyzed.

President Obama, as we all know had promised, while campaigning for the

presidential elections that he will pull out troops from Afghanistan, engaged

in a purposeless war and also made a firm commitment to address the

Kashmir issue, but on assuming the office of the president, he reneged on

both the issues. He caved-into pressure by the military high command and

the defense industries lobby for a military solution and a troop surge,

although it was easy for him to say: President Bush has accomplished the

mission in Afghanistan, and therefore, I have decided to withdraw our troops

from Afghanistan. The Americans and the NATO allies would have hailed thisdecision. On Kashmir, the Indian lobby forced him to restrict Holbrooks

responsibility to Afghanistan and Pakistan only. Now, Obama is in a stronger

position, to carve-out a realistic exit-strategy.

McChrystal, no doubt, was frustrated at his failure to achieve military

success, whereas, General Petreaus was able to achieve a degree of success

in Iraq. General Petreaus exploited the ethnic divide in Iraq and mounted a

successful strategy to divide the Shia-Sunni population, through a process of

ethnic cleansing, ethnic riots and target killings, using Black water securityagency. On the contrary there is no such ethnic divide in Afghanistan. The

Pakhtuns are fighting the invaders, while the Northern Alliance, consisting of

the minorities mainly supported the invaders and rode the American tanks to

occupy Afghanistan in 2001. Together with the occupation forces, they also

stand defeated.

The Afghans have won, and therefore peace conditions are to be established,

on this ground reality. David Miliband rightly suggests: The legitimate tribal

and ethnic groups must be given real stake in the political process, a peacesettlement in which we include the vanquished, as well as the victors.

Obama, therefore has to initiate the political process, for the peaceful

settlement of the eight year long, purposeless and brutal war, and the step

that, he has to take, must be well-considered and appropriate. As the first

step he must engage and enter into dialogue with the Taliban, under Mullah

Umar and remove the trust deficit and reach agreement on the basic issues,

such as: Time frame of withdrawal of the occupation forces; declare


8/37

ceasefire; remove the ban on Taliban freedom movement; release all Taliban

prisoners, and negotiate a political settlement, with full realization that,

trying to establish a democratic authority on a country with a tradition of

decentralized governance, would prove counter productive.

The Karzai government at best can act as the facilitator, for the negotiations

with the Taliban who may be willing to call a Loe Jirga to decide the formation

of a national government, and the new constitution of the future political

setup. Other important issues such as these must also be considered and

consensus arrived at:

* The status of US-Afghan relations, in the post independence period.

* Guarantees for no-use of Afghan territory for militants activities againstother countries.

* Firm commitments from the UNO, USA. NATO and Russia to pay for the

war damages and a Marshal Plan to rebuild Afghanistan.

* Complete independence and freedom for the future Afghan government,

to establish diplomatic, economic and socio-cultural relations with all

countries of the world.

Pakistan has had the best of relations with Afghanistan, during the 80s, butdistrust, doubts and apprehensions were created in Afghans mind, when

Pakistans ISI, which had supported and conducted the war against Soviet

occupation, was pulled-out of Afghanistan during the 1990 under the

American pressure. In the second phase, ISI was purged of all such operators,

who had good contact with the Mujahideen, but the greatest damage to

Pakistans security was caused in 2003, when Musharraf, pulled-out the ISI

and other intelligence agencies from our own tribal areas of Swat, FATA and

Balochistan, and the space so created was handed over to CIA, to be joined

by the Indian spy network established in Afghanistan, with the result that, our

entire border region was infested with foreign spies, agents and saboteurs,who fomented trouble in our tribal belt, threatening Islamabad and Peshawar

and an out right rebellion in Balochistan, thus creating a very serious security

lapse for Pakistan. The new government formed in 2008, therefore, decided

to restore the writ of the government, in these areas and ordered steam-

roller military actions in Swat, Dir, Bajaur and South Waziristan.


9/37

Pakistan Army actions could succeed only with full intelligence support, which

meant, re-claiming, the territories, lost, to CIA, RAW and Mossad under

Musharraf regime. Now our intelligence is well established in these areas and

therefore, the tirade against it, for having established contact with the

militants. This was an essential operational demand for the success of the

military operations. But I am not sure, how far such contacts have helped,narrow-down the trust deficit between Afghan Taliban, Pak Army and our

intelligence agencies. Taliban are one, under Mullah Umar, who is

sympathetic to Pakistan, despite betrayals, but the young Taliban under him

do not trust the Pakistan government, the Army and the ISI. What leverage

does Pakistan therefore has to bring the Americans and Taliban, on the

negotiations table? Minimal!! The much needed trust therefore must be re-

established, to play a positive role in determining the peace parameters in

Afghanistan, as the exit process of occupation forces begins. Unfortunately,

scope and options are limited for Pakistan.

Thank you General McChrystal, for having facilitated the exit and the hurtling

down of the rolling stones down the rocky mountains of Afghanistan. If I am

not wrong, perhaps, it were you, who remarked a few years back: every

thing is so hard about the Afghans their mountains, the people and their will

to resist. You have proved right!!

General Mirza Aslam Beg is former Chief of Army Staff who was heavily

involved in Afghan Operation during USSRs occupation and thereafter. Nowhe has established his Think Tank FRINDS in Rawalpindi. He is a regular

contributor to www.opinion-maker.org

* Share/Bookmark

Filed under AfPak, America at War Tagged with

Get Your Loan Now Get Your Loan Now Get Your Loan Now Get Your LoanNow Apply for your VA Home Loan Now Apply for your VA Home Loan Now

Apply for your VA Home Loan Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now

Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com

Now Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now Join a Winning Team Join a

Winning Team Join a Winning Team Honor and Remember our Veterans Get

Educated at Excelsior College Get Educated at Excelsior College Get

Educated at Excelsior College Military collectibles
http://www.opinion-maker.org/http://www.opinion-maker.org/


10/37

Comments

5 Responses to GENERAL MIRZA ASLAM BEG: GENERAL McCHRYSTAL THE

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR

1.

henry says:

July 1, 2010 at 2:44 am

outstanding analysis obama & mcchrystal are both fantasists obama

wanted to leave afghanistan by winning mcchrystal sold obama on a

fantasy of easy victory mcchrystal was fated to be the first to bark his

shins on reality obamas next

Reply

2.

Musashi says:

July 1, 2010 at 1:23 pm

I must say a well written opinion and some excellent points. For sure theprescence of wisdom and common sense. Although for discussion, I dont

agree with this statment Guarantees for no-use of Afghan territory for

militants activities against other countries.

Now dont get me wrong, we should of course get approval of the country

we are planning and executing military action againstI just feel this would

not be in the USs best interest. We will still have other obstacles to clear

before we can just step away.

Reply

3.

Dublinmick says:

July 1, 2010 at 8:03 pm


11/37

We certainly have a lot on our plate lately, what with world war III and an

extinction level event in the gulf. I have had an amazing amount of posts

disappear on the VT lately.

When The Forces Of Raunch & Decay Are On The March The

London Corporation Can Soon Be Found Not Far Behind

http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-

decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-

behind/

In 1743 Mayer Amschel Bauer, born Frankfurt, Germany, the son of Moses

Aschel Bauer, a money lender and the proprietor of a counting house. Over

the entrance door he places a red sign. This sign is a red hexagram (which

geometrically and numerically translates into the number 666) which under

Rothschild instruction will end up on the Israeli flag some two centuries later.

Business flourished and Mayer went on to become the keeper of

Napoleons fortune and after being told by President Andrew Jackson thecentral bank charter would not be renewed stated Either the application for

renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved

in a most disastrous war.

Jackson responded by saying You are a den of thieves vipers, and I

intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out. There was

later an attempt on Jacksons life but both pistols failed to go off. Jackson had

it engraved on his grave stone, I killed the bank.

Of course there were others throughout history who opposed central

banking. William McKinley, Abraham Lincoln, Czar Nicholas, John Kennedy

and Jesse James come to mind. They were all killed. Jesse James whose

mothers farm was burned down by the Pinkerton contractors was shot in the

back. Anyone ever see the movie Ned Beatty?
http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/http://dublinmick.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/when-the-forces-of-raunch-decay-or-on-the-march-the-london-corporation-can-soon-be-found-not-far-behind/


12/37

At the time of Jesse James the Harrimans, Goulds and the Rockefellers

were the dominant financial and railroad enterprises in America. The

Rockefellers are Rothschild descendants through a female bloodline that

stretches all the way to William Clinton.

The Rothschild controlled IBM business machines were supplied to the

Nazis and were recently contracted to the U.S. government to handle the

census.

Maria Anna Schickelgruber became pregnant while working in the

Rothschild mansion. She is better known as Adolph Hitlers grandmother.

While being funded by Prescott Bush Nazi soldiers were busy killing

American soldiers during world war II. His company was seized under the

trading with the enemy act.

It was Rothschilds couriers who got through first with news the British

had defeated Napoleon and he instructed his all his workers on the floor of

the exchange to begin selling consuls as to make it appear a certain British

defeat. Most saw this and followed his lead. When they hit rock bottomRothschild bought them all up again at a 20 to 1 profit. He was now in

complete financial control of the British empire.

100 years ago Englishman William Knox DArcy struck a deal with Iran to

pay them 16% of all oil found there and he became the sole owner of all

Iranian oil. Soon afterwards the British government bought the company and

it became the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. The British empire, the land on

which the sun never sets, was financed to a large extent on Iranian oil.

After the war however the Iranian Mohammad Mossadegh decided Iran

was not getting a fair shake and oil profits would be better used to develope

Iran than to fuel Britain. After withdrawal of funds and U.N. resolutions failed

to disrupt this avenue, the British turned to Washington to overthrow this

madman.


13/37

The CIA managed in 1953 to overthrow their first government thereby

installing the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. Operation Ajax had

long repercussions however. Democracy was finished and repression was the

order of the day ending in the rise of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Iran hasbeen ruled by the Ayatollahs ever since. It is doubtful that Iranians are at all

surprised to see relations between British Petroleum and the American

people taking a turn for the worst!

That brings us to the ongoing oil disaster now ongoing in the Gulf of

Mexico where BP has apparently drilled into an methane/tar/oil volcano.

We now know, through witness testimony, that there were cracksreported in the drill casing two weeks prior to the disaster. Goldman Sachs

sold 44% of their total holdings, 4,680,822 shares of BP stock in the first

quarter of 2010. Goldman Sachs earned about $ 266 million on the sale.

Apparently, Halliburton also had some psychic insight on what was soon

to come. Eleven days before the explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon,

Halliburton purchased an oil spill prevention firm. Halliburton was the lead

company in charge of cementing the Deepwater rigs as well.

We must also look into what organizations the major players belong too.

It now appears that there are too many interlocking connections for this to be

a coincidence. British Petroleum has ties to the Queen of England. The C.E.O.

of BP Pacific, Peter Sutherland is a Trilateral Commission member, a

Bilderberg member and a financial adviser to the Vatican. Tony Hayward has

also attended numerous meetings of the world elite and was caught selling

his stock in BP justweeks before the disaster.

Next one must look at the CIA, Evergreen Air, and their connection to

chemtrail spraying and the Gulf oil spill. The following is an excerpt of an

article we did that linked Evergreen Air to the spraying of Corexit, the deadly

chemical being sprayed over the spill by the cover of night. This was

documented in the article BP Crop Dusting U.S. Population Under Cover of

Night.


14/37

Vanguard FTSE Social Index Fund and Vanguard 500 Index Fund handles

the funds of Barack Obama. They unloaded 1.5 million shares of stock

miraculously just before the blowout saving their investors millions of dollars.

Their largest stockholder is Exxon Mobil and BP has hired Goldman Sachs

to advise them on their next course of action. The 3 accounts with

Vanguard should earn Barack Obama $100 million over the next ten years in

the event lady luck smiles on him and Exxon buys BP and as another stroke

of good luck BP has just hired Goldman Sachs to advise them on the next

course of action.

An added bonus in all this is the social security and welfare recipientsalong the gulf coast are going to fall over dead in the next several years most

likely. The U.S. will move forward with the cap and trade. If the pressure is

equalized down the road the well should stop and prime land eventually will

sell for rock bottom prices along the gulf coast. That is unless something goes

horribly wrong with this attempt to play God such as a triggering of the New

Madrid fault which sits just north of the gulf of Mexico and extends as far as

Illinois. Should this giant rift be activated it could knock out the two mile

sandstone barrier separating Great Lakes from the Chicago River which feeds

into the Mississippi. Should they empty into the gulf we could see a giant

house cleaning for this body of water. Unfortunately it could destroy most of

the east coast and break the continent in half.

So here we are in the 13th section of the Mayan calendar which began

5123 years ago. A final step in the rise of consciousness where ethics are said

to overcome power constructs. How are we doing? You can judge how we are

doing by broaching the above treatise to a fellow denizen of the west. Most

anywhere in the west, who is the victim of a controlled media and dumbed

down educational process which has left them with the mind of a child even

as they enter adulthood.

Of course this process has been aided by the addition of almost every

contaminant known in the diet such as fluoride, aspartame, MSG,

vaccinations which there is no study by the way to prove a vaccination of pig

DNA, timersol, mercury and aluminum every protected anyone against

anything. Fluoride especially attacks and calcifies the pineal gland which is


15/37

instrumental in the area of intuitive thought.

No most likely you will get wrong link dude, you sound like a

liberal/conservative or you must be on drugs. These are the standard stock in

trade references we will see mostly on the internet used by the paidemployee/enforcers of the new world order and of course the average citizen

who is too dumbed down to think of anything original himself. It is obvious

they are not very good at hiring talent.

Asphalt Volcano & BP

Intel Hub, Gulf Spill Well Organized Plan

There Is Gold In Those Sachs, Raw StoryThe Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Will Collapse FAU

Geologist Believes Origin Of Last Madrid Quake Lies Under Gulf

House Of Rothschild

What Time Is It?

Asia TimesGENERAL MIRZA ASLAM BEG: AMERICA AND THE FUTURE OF

AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN

June 18, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff 38 Comments

Securing Pakistan Iran Afghanistan Future

By General Mirza Aslam Beg (ret) for Veterans Today and Opinion Maker

former Chief of Staff, Army of Pakistan

Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan


16/37

Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan are passing through a very historic moment,

as their future is being challenged by forces of aggression, attempting to

weaken their commitment to their value system, and national purpose.

Their struggle against the forces of evil, for the last thirty years in particular,

has determined the threshold of their tolerance and resistance against such

threats. They have made great sacrifices, now culminating into a new era,which promises a bright future for them. A few incidents of the recent past

would explain the point.

In 1979 encouraged by the West, Iraq invaded Iran, to defeat the Islamic

Revolution. General Zia called an emergent meeting of the cabinet, to

formulate Pakistans foreign policy options. I was called to attend the

meeting, to represent GHQ, in my capacity as the Chief of the General Staff.

The discussion lasted for over three hours and general consensus emerged

that: Iraqi armed forces would sweep across Iran, defeating the resistanceand the Islamic Revolution, in a matter of days, and therefore Pakistan should

be prepared to deploy a peace keeping force in Iran, under the UN mandate.

I had not spoken by then, and sought the permission of the chair to put

forward my argument. I said:

* The war is not going to end in a matter of days or weeks, rather it

would be a long protracted war, lasting over several years, with Iran

emerging as the victor, and the Revolution would consolidate. The famous

Chinese saying will prove right: Never take-on the revolutionaries unless youhave an ideology stronger than theirs. And there is no ideology stronger

than the ideology of Islam.

* Historically, the Iranians have always stood united against foreign

aggression. No doubt Raza Shahs armed forces have been dismantled and

are locked-up in their barracks, but they will rise, as one, to defend the

country, supported by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, who would avail the

opportunity to consolidate the Revolution.

* The Iraqi armed forces, no doubt, have a modern military machine, but

their higher military leadership, lacks the professional ability of the GermanGeneral Staff, to launch breakthrough battles and blitzkrieg operations deep

into the enemy territory. The boggy areas in the South and the mountainous

region in the north would restrict deep maneuvers. Thus there would be no

major gains or losses and only slow slogging series of battles causing heavy

casualties.

* In the first few days of war, Iraqi armed forces will lose sight of the main


17/37

objective of war, i.e., to defeat the Iranians, while the Iranians will continue to

fight with greater resolve and on a high moral ground, i.e., to defeat the

aggressor. Ultimately the Iranians would emerge victorious. I therefore

submit that, we formulate our policy for both the options, i.e., a short war

ending into Iraqs victory and a long war, with Iran emerging as the victor.

General Zia listened to my arguments attentively, gave a broad smile and

said: I agree with you. We prepare for boththe eventualities. And there was

the silence of the lamb. No one spoke and the meeting ended.

Eight years later, Iranian armed forces crossed Shatt-el-Arab and as they

concentrated in the Fao peninsula, poised for offensive towards Basra,

Saddam attacked with chemical weapons, provided by the civilized West. Iran

suffered heavy casualties and having no defense against this weapon, calledfor seize fire. Ever since, Iran has remained under great pressure on one

issue or the other. Now the UNSC has imposed sanctions, for the fourth time,

testing the national resilience of Iran. The Israelis are provoking Iran, by

deploying their nuclear submarine in the region. This provocation resembles

the Indian nuclear intimidation of 1974 and 1998, which left no option for

Pakistan, but to prepare for retaliation with overt posture. What are the

options for Iran now?

September 2001, General Musharraf succumbed to Richard Armitagesundiplomatic warning and sheepishly accepted all the conditionalities to join

the American war on Afghanistan. Having taken this decision, he decided to

call the politicians, scholars, media men and diplomats in groups, to explain

and justify the decision. I was invited, with one such group for the 22

September 2001 meeting. His monologue and the discussion lasted for over

four hours. I had not spoken. He invited my comments. I said:

* You have taken the decision and therefore there is no point in justifying

it now. The critical issue is, of joining the war, having no moral or ethicalground. The Afghans have never done any harm to us, nor do we have a

defense pact with America to join them. We have to see how far we can go,

so that the red line is not crossed to harm our national interests.

* In a matter of weeks, the invading forces will occupy Afghanistan and

the Taliban will fall back to the line Jalalabad Kandahar, from where they

had started in 1996, and would link-up with their support bases in Pakistan.


18/37

Ultimately they will regroup, forming an alliance with the old Mujahideen and

supported by the new grown up lot from Pakistan and other countries, will

build-up a formidable resistance against the occupation forces.

* As the resistance develops, the conflict zone would expand to our

border region, reversing the war on Pakistan. This would be a difficult periodfor Pakistan, facing a two-front war.

* No doubt the Americans and their allies will take full control of

Afghanistan in a matter of weeks but ultimately it will turn into Vietnam for

them. They cannot win. They will lose the war.

* The Afghans, Pakistani jihadis and many freedom fighters, from many

countries of the world, have embraced Shahadat for the Afghan cause. For

Pakistan to join the American war in Afghanistan, would amount to

compromising and bartering away the blood and sacrifices of the martyrs

(Shuhada) an unforgivable sin and God knows, how to punish the sinner.

On hearing my comments, General Musharrafs face turned pale. He

mumbled something which I could not comprehend. The meeting ended,

abruptly. That was my last meeting with him. We never met again, as we

were two poles apart.

The Afghan freedom movement now has reached a point where the

occupation forces are suffering from failure of nerves, inducting more troopsonly to reinforce their defeat. The irony is that the occupation forces, which

stand defeated, are trying to lay down the conditions for peace, which is the

privilege of the Taliban, who have emerged as winners. It would, therefore be

proper to focus on Afghanistan, the people, their culture, their national ethos,

their sense of honour and value system, which lend resilience to the cause of

freedom. The occupation forces must accept the reality that they have failed

to read the complex tribal and societal relationship of the Afghans. They must

not repeat the mistakes of 1990 and 2001, of denying the fruits of victory to

the Afghans, i.e., to share power and form a government. There will be no

peace, if any other course is adopted. Taliban are now strong enough to

snatch away their freedom, which they have won with such a great sacrifice.

The people know the predicament of the occupation forces and the

tenuousness of the routes of supply to Afghanistan. The attack on the NATO

supply convey near Islamabad and the turmoil in Kyrgyzstan to disrupt the

daily supply of over forty five thousand liters of oil daily from the Manas air


19/37

base, is meant to check-mate the occupation forces. Who is responsible for

these acts? Certainly, not the Taliban from Afghanistan or the American

haters of Pakistan! Not difficult to make a fair guess!!

The Americans and the allies have to take a bold decision in Afghanistan,same as years earlier, wisdom demanded that timely intervention in Bosnia

was necessary to check the spread of jehadism in Europe. In Afghanistan, the

Americans themselves have become part of the problem, yet it is not too late

to intercede now. Jehadism is a phenomenon by itself, which needs to be

understood. It has special message for the believers in the ideology of Islam:

Nothing should stop the believers from reaching out to protect the helpless

men, women and children being brutalized, who are crying for help to Allah,

to send the redeemers. The redeemers who converged on to Afghanistan,

Iraq, Somalia, Chechnya, Palestine and Kashmir, will return to their hearth

and home, only when brutality comes to an end. Jehadis pose no threat toother ideologies, civilizations or culture. And yet there is the element of

Terrorism, growing out of this movement, over the years, which is the

common threat for all, but will gradually fade away, as occupation,

oppression and injustice come to their logical end.

The momentous decision, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan, now have to jointly

take, is a comprehensive strategy to revitalize the war ravaged Afghanistan.

The occupation forces have no option but to exit, creating a power vacuum,

which they will try to fill with the proxy power, like India. This must beprevented at all cost, as our joint responsibility, ensuring that:

* Afghanistan returns to their people, to let them govern the country as it

suits them.

* Help the Afghans, establish peace, as the prelude to regional stability.

* Demand from the Americans, their allies and the Russians, to pay for the

war damages to the Afghans.

* Join the world community to rebuild Afghanistans basic infrastructures

for speedier economic recovery.

At this juncture, Pakistans hands are full, dealing with insurgency along the

borders with Afghanistan and the turmoil within, between the judiciary and


20/37

the executive, while the democratic order struggles to find its right bearing.

Very challenging times indeed, to carve-out a destiny for the nation. The

pressures from USA are mounting to undertake operations in North

Waziristan and having failed in their effort, they now have made the crude

attempt of blaming the President of Pakistan to have secretly met the Taliban

leaders in custody and a charge sheet has been framed against PakistansInter Services Intelligence, for providing extensive support to the Afghan

Taliban.

These are lame excuses, which betray their frustrations, as they continue to

suffer losses at the hands of the Taliban. Defeat is staring in their face.

General Petraeus, the hero of Iraq, who was tasked to turn the tide on the

Taliban, collapsed and fainted, while briefing the Defence Committee of the

Senate, last Tuesday. The Peace Jirga held at Kabul last week also suggested

reconciliation with the Taliban, because military defeat cannot be averted.The best option, therefore is to follow the Soviet example make a clean

break and withdraw. The Taliban and Pakistan will provide the safe exit, as

they did in 1989-90. And leave Afghanistan to the Afghans, who will take care

of themselves. The proxy forces India or any other cannot withstand

Afghans absolute love for total freedom.

The year 2010 is a momentous period of opportunity and action, which has

occurred after twenty two years since 1988, when conditions were ripe for

Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan, to form an Alliance, (PIAA), to secure nationalsecurity interests and to repel aggression. This alliance was to emerge on the

basis of strategic consensus, forging unity as the main element of Strategic

Depth of security interests of the three countries. In 1988, the obtaining

conditions were ideal.

Pakistan had returned to democracy after eleven years of military rule; Iran

has emerged victorious after eight years of brutal Iraqi war; Afghanistan was

free, after eight years of Soviet occupation. The dawn of freedom and

democracy thus provided an opportunity to PIAA countries to forge unity, butAlas! it was not to be. The idea of alliance, seeking Strategic Depth was

ridiculed by foreign proxy scholars and some of our own. The argument was

twisted to mean, that Pakistan needed territorial depth of Afghanistan, to

retreat in case of Indian aggression. This was a preposterous and nave

notion because Pakistans military strategy envisages no such withdrawal or

retreat. Our mission is very clear. While defending the territories of Pakistan,

armed forces will contain the offensive, and carry the war into the enemy


21/37

territory, to capture and hold vital areas, so as to enable the government to

negotiate peace from a position of strength.

Pakistan has won the war on our territory, turned on it by the occupation

forces in Afghanistan. Thus the scourge of terror that we faced from thenorth-west is relatively under control, and soon will be eliminated as the

occupation forces leave Afghanistan, because foreign occupation is the

cause of all evil. For the last thirty years, the Afghans have been fighting

for their freedom and have defeated two super powers. As winners, they have

been cheated twice in 1990 and 2001, by denying them power-sharing in

their country. They cannot be hoodwinked again, and as winners, it is they

who would lay down the conditions for peace in Afghanistan. The Iranians,

since 1979, have faced foreign aggression, military and economic

intimidation, embargos and sanctions, but have triumphed, through national

unity, over all such machinations. The very fact that, Iran-Pakistan gaspipeline project has been signed and sealed, serves as a rebuff to the powers

wanting to forestall this deal.

The destiny repeatedly points towards gravitation of PIAA, to build a climate

of trust and forge unity, fortifying their resolve and resilience, to deter and

defeat aggression and establish peace in the region. Afghanistan has been

badly ravished. Two generations have lost their youth and civilized living.

They have seen only war, death and destruction. It is our fault that we failed

to provide the protective shield to them. The greed-oriented nations withimperial mindset may now be converging on Afghanistan to seize their

mineral deposits, worth trillions of dollars. This wealth belongs to the Afghans

and is to be exploited for the good of Afghans and shared with the rest of the

world. The dynamics of time demand that we honour our shared

responsibility to protect ourselves, against aggression, exploitation and

hegemony.

General Mirza Aslam Beg is former Chief of Army Staff who has been deputy

to General Zia and assumed the command after General Zias death. He isthe founding Chairman of FRIENDS, a Think Tank established in Rawalpindi.

He has a complete grasp over the situation in the region and reads the

situation well. He is called upon by various TV Channels both Pakistani and

Foreign for his expert views.


22/37

He is a regular contributor to www.opinion-maker.org and

www.veteranstoday.comGeneral Mirza Aslam Beg

Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan are passing through a historic moment, as

their future is being challenged by forces of aggression, attempting to

weaken their commitment to their value system and national purpose.

Their struggle against the forces of evil, for the last 30 years in particular, has

determined the threshold of their tolerance and resistance against such

threats. They have made great sacrifices, now culminating into a new era,which promises a bright future. A few incidents of the recent past would

explain the point.

In 1979, encouraged by the West, Iraq invaded Iran to defeat the Islamic

Revolution. General Zia called a meeting of the Cabinet to formulate

Pakistans foreign policy options.

I was called to attend the meeting in my capacity as the CQAS. Thediscussion lasted for over three hours and a general consensus emerged:

Iraqi armed forces would sweep across Iran, defeating the resistance and

the Islamic Revolution, in a matter of days and therefore Pakistan should be

prepared to deploy a peacekeeping force in Iran, under the UN mandate.

I had not spoken by then and sought the permission of the chair to put

forward my argument. I said: The war is not going to end in a matter of days

or weeks, rather it would be a long protracted war, lasting over several years,

with Iran emerging as the victor and the Revolution would consolidate. Thefamous Chinese saying will prove right: Never take on the revolutionaries

unless you have an ideology stronger than theirs. And there is no ideology

stronger than the ideology of Islam.

In the first few days of war, Iraqi armed forces will lose sight of the main
http://www.opinion-maker.org/http://www.veteranstoday.comgeneral/http://www.opinion-maker.org/http://www.veteranstoday.comgeneral/


23/37

objective of war, i.e., to defeat the Iranians, while the Iranians will continue to

fight with greater resolve and on a high moral ground, i.e., to defeat the

aggressor. Ultimately the Iranians would emerge victorious.

I therefore submit that, we formulate our policy for both the options, i.e., ashort war ending into Iraqs victory and a long war with Iran emerging as the

victor.

Zia listened to my arguments and said: I agree with you. We will prepare for

both the eventualities. No one spoke and the meeting ended.

Eight years later, Iranian armed forces crossed Shatt al-Arab and, as theyconcentrated in the al-Fao peninsula, poised for offensive towards Basra,

Saddam attacked with chemical weapons, provided by the civilised West.

Iran suffered heavy casualties and having no defence against this weapon

called for ceasefire. Ever since, Iran has remained under great pressure on

one issue or the other. Now the UNSC has imposed sanctions, for the fourth

time, testing the national resilience of Iran. The Israelis are provoking Iran, by

deploying their nuclear submarine in the region.

This provocation resembles the Indian nuclear intimidation of 1974 and 1998,

which left no option for Pakistan, but to prepare for retaliation with overt

posture. What are the options for Iran now?

In September 2001, Musharraf succumbed to Armitages undiplomatic

warning and sheepishly accepted all the conditionalities to join the American

war on Afghanistan.

Having taken this decision, he decided to call the politicians, scholars, media

men and diplomats in groups, to justify his decision. I was invited, with one

such group for the September 22, 2001, meeting. His monologue and the

discussion lasted for over four hours.


24/37

Then he invited my comments and I said: You have taken the decision and

therefore there is no point in justifying it now. The critical issue is, of joining

the war, having no moral or ethical ground. The Afghans have never done

any harm to us, nor do we have a defence pact with America to join them. We

have to see how far we can go, so that the red line is not crossed to harm our

national interests.

In a matter of weeks, the invading forces will occupy Afghanistan and the

Taliban will fall back to the line Jalalabad-Kandahar, from where they had

started in 1996 and would link up with their support bases in Pakistan.

Ultimately they will regroup, forming an alliance with the old mujahideen and

supported by the new grown up lot from Pakistan and other countries, will

build up a formidable resistance against the occupation forces. As theresistance develops, the conflict zone would expand to our border region,

reversing the war on Pakistan. This would be a difficult period for Pakistan,

facing a two-front war.

No doubt the Americans and their allies will take full control of Afghanistan

in a matter of weeks but ultimately it will turn into Vietnam for them. They

cannot win. They will lose the war. The Afghans, Pakistani jihadis and many

freedom fighters, from many countries of the world, have embraced

Shahadat for the Afghan cause.

For Pakistan to join the American war in Afghanistan, would amount to

compromising and bartering away the blood and sacrifices of the martyrs

(Shuhada) an unforgivable sin and God knows, how to punish the sinner.

On hearing my comments, Musharrafs face turned pale. He mumbled

something which I could not comprehend. The meeting ended, abruptly. That

was my last meeting with him. We never met again, as we were two poles

apart.

The Afghan freedom movement now has reached a point where the

occupation forces are suffering from the failure of nerves, inducting more

troops only to reinforce their defeat.


25/37

The irony is that the occupation forces, which stand defeated, are trying to

lay down the conditions for peace, which is the privilege of the Taliban, who

have emerged as winners. It would be proper to focus on Afghanistan, the

people and their values, which lend resilience to the cause of freedom.

The occupation forces must accept the reality that they have failed to read

the complex tribal and societal relationship of the Afghans. They must not

repeat the mistakes of 1990 and 2001, of denying the fruits of victory to the

Afghans, i.e., to share power and form a government. There will be no peace,

if any other course is adopted.

The Afghans now know the predicament of the occupation forces and thetenuousness of the routes of supply to Afghanistan. The attack on the NATO

supply convey near Islamabad and the turmoil in Kyrgyzstan to disrupt the

daily supply of over 45,000 litres of oil daily from the Manas air base, is

meant to checkmate the occupation forces.

Who is responsible for these acts? Certainly, not the Taliban from Afghanistan

or the US haters of Pakistan! Not difficult to make a fair guess!

The US and its allies will have to take a bold decision.

The US has become part of the problem. Jihadism is a phenomenon by itself,

which needs to be understood. It has a special message for the believers in

the ideology of Islam: Nothing should stop the believers from reaching out to

protect the helpless men, women and children being brutalised, who are

crying for help to Allah, to send the redeemers. Jihadis pose no threat to

other ideologies, civilisations or cultures. And yet there is the element of

terrorism, growing out of this movement, over the years, which is thecommon threat for all, but will gradually fade away, as occupation and

injustice will come to its logical end.

The momentous decision that Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan will now have to

jointly take is a comprehensive strategy to revitalise the war ravaged


26/37

Afghanistan. The occupation forces have no option but to exit, creating a

power vacuum, which they will try to fill with the proxy power, like India. This

must be prevented at all cost, as our joint responsibility, ensuring that:

? Afghanistan returns to its people, to let them govern the country as it suits

them.

? Help the Afghans establish peace, as the prelude to regional stability.

? Demand from the US, its allies and the Russians, to pay for the war

damages to the Afghans.

? Join the world community to rebuild Afghanistans basic infrastructures for

speedier economic recovery.

At this juncture, Pakistans hands are full, dealing with insurgency along the

borders with Afghanistan and the turmoil within, between the judiciary and

the executive, while the democratic order struggles to find its right bearing;

very challenging times indeed to carve out a destiny for the nation.

The pressures from the US are mounting to undertake operations in North

Waziristan and having failed in their effort, they now have made the crudeattempt of blaming the President of Pakistan to have secretly met with the

Taliban leaders in custody and a charge sheet has been framed against

Pakistans 1S1, for providing extensive support to the Afghan Taliban.

These are lame excuses, which betray their frustrations, as they continue to

suffer losses at the hands of the Taliban. Defeat is staring the US in the face.

The peace jirga held at Kabul suggested reconciliation with the Taliban,

because military defeat cannot be averted. The best option therefore is to

follow the Soviet example make a clean break and withdraw.

The Taliban and Pakistan will provide a safe exit, as they did in 1989-90 and

leave Afghanistan to the Afghans. The proxy forces, India or any other,

cannot withstand Afghans absolute love for total freedom.


27/37

The year 2010 is a momentous period of opportunity and action, which has

occurred after 22 years since 1988, when conditions were ripe for Pakistan,

Iran and Afghanistan to form an Alliance (PIAA) in order to secure national

security interests.

This alliance was to emerge on the basis of strategic consensus, forging unity

as the main element of Strategic Depth of security interests of the three

countries. In 1988, the conditions were ideal Pakistan had returned to

democracy after 11 years of military rule; Iran had emerged victorious after

eight years of brutal Iraqi war; and Afghanistan was free after eight years of

Soviet occupation.

The dawn of freedom and democracy thus provided an opportunity to PIAA

countries to forge unity, but it was not to be. The idea of alliance, seekingStrategic Depth was ridiculed by foreign proxy scholars and some of our

own. The argument was twisted to mean that Pakistan needed territorial

depth of Afghanistan to retreat in case of Indian aggression.

This was a preposterous notion because Pakistans military strategy

envisages no such withdrawal. Our mission was very clear: While defending

the territories of Pakistan, armed forces will contain the offensive and carry

the war into the enemy territory, to capture and hold vital areas, so as to

enable the government to negotiate peace from a position of strength.

Pakistan has won the war on our territory, turned on it by the occupation

forces in Afghanistan. Thus the scourge of terror that we faced from the

northwest is relatively under control and soon will be eliminated as the

occupation forces leave Afghanistan. For the last 30 years, Afghans have

been fighting for their freedom and have defeated two superpowers.

As winners, they have been cheated twice in 1990 and 2001; they cannot be

hoodwinked again. So now they should lay down the conditions for peace.

Moreover, the Iranians, since 1979, have faced foreign aggression, military

and economic intimidation, embargos and sanctions, but have triumphed,

through national unity, over all such machinations.


28/37

The very fact that, Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project has been signed and

sealed, serves as a rebuff to the powers wanting to forestall this deal.

The destiny repeatedly points towards gravitation of PIAA, to build a climate

of trust and forge unity, fortifying their resolve, to defeat aggression andestablish peace in the region. Afghanistan has been badly ravished. Two

generations have lost their youth and have seen only war, death and

destruction. It is our fault that we failed to provide the protective shield to

them. The greedy nations with imperial mindset may now be converging on

Afghanistan to seize their mineral deposits, worth trillions of dollars. This

wealth belongs to Afghans and is to be exploited for their good.

Nevertheless, the dynamics of time demands that we honour our shared

responsibility to protect ourselves, against aggression, exploitation andhegemony.

The writer is a former COAS, Pakistan

Email: friendsfoundation@live. co. uk

The Nation columns

VOICES FROM THE WHIRLWIND: Assessing Musharraf's Predicament

Ahmed Rashid

Critical Journalist

Jugnu Mohsin

Newspaper Editor

"Shahzad"

An Underground Militant

Lieutenant General Hamid Gul


29/37

Defender of Islam

General Mirza Aslam Beg

Former Army Foe of Musharraf

Sherry Rehman

Opposition Parliamentarian

Sami ul-Haq

Powerful Religious Leader

The voices of opposition and dissent are closing in on General Pervez

Musharraf, the embattled president of Pakistan. He rescued Pakistan from the

brink of political collapse, only to find himself threatened by a rising tide ofopposition from both Islamic fundamentalist groups and liberal political

parties, who view his military rule as a betrayal of the nation. While fending

off these dissenting factions, Musharraf also must struggle to balance a hefty

load of explosive issues. His historic peace accord with India has averted the

threat of nuclear war, but it ignited the ire of radical Pakistani groups who lay

claim to Kashmir. He is cooperating with the international community to

dismantle the nuclear weapons black market, but having to confront

emerging revelations about Pakistan's central role in the growing nuclear

scandal. FRONTLINE/World reporter and producer Sharmeen Obaid journeyed

across her native Pakistan in early 2004, talking with people on the groundabout the president's predicament. The following interview excerpts,

featuring some of Pakistan's leading voices, illuminate the complexities and

contradictions playing out inside Pakistan and the razor's edge on which its

president is now walking.

Ahmed Rashid: Critical Journalist

Ahmed Rashid Ahmed Rashid is an internationally known Pakistani journalistand an authority on Muslim extremist groups. He is a correspondent with the

Far East Economic Review as well as the author of Jihad: The Rise of Militant

Islam in Central Asia and Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in

Central Asia. In this interview, Rashid traces the roots of Pakistan's internal

struggles to Musharraf's contradictory policy toward extremist groups that he

once supported but now has outlawed. "He has banned them and restricts

them," Rashid tells FRONTLINE/World reporter and producer Sharmeen Obaid.


30/37

"At the same time, the intelligence services have worked with them very

closely, especially in Kashmir and backing the Taliban.... I think all these

chickens are coming home to roost now."

Jugnu Mohsin: Newspaper Editor

Jugnu Moshin Jugnu Mohsin is the publisher of the Friday Times Newspaper,

one of Pakistan's leading liberal newspapers. In this interview, Mohsin

explores the personal contradictions of Musharraf the man as a way to

understand the current contradictions in Pakistani policy. Musharraf, she

says, is molded in the staunch, authoritarian traditions of the military, yet has

a progressive, open-minded worldview. He is at once a dyed-in-the-wool

soldier and a "regular, liberal guy," Mohsin tells FRONTLINE/World. As a

consequence, Pakistan is struggling to reconcile the security-obsessed andinsular worldview of the Pakistani army with the openness and transparency

demanded by the age of globalization. Musharraf "could do better," in this

regard, Mohsin says, principally by scaling back the military's role in

government. But, she maintains, "... it would be tragic for Pakistan if at this

juncture he wasn't there to lead us. I think he must lead us to the other

side ... to the safe side."

"Shahzad": An Underground Militant

Shahzad "Shahzad," whose true identity is concealed, is an outlawed jihadi

fighting for Kashmir's independence from India. This interview takes us inside

the struggle for Kashmir, illuminating the conflict and its effect on Pakistan's

stability. Jihadis support Musharraf's efforts to broker peace with India,

Shahzad tells FRONTLINE/World, but Kashmiris must be consulted in the

peace talks if the violence is to end. He maintains that recent assassination

attempts on Musharraf had nothing to do with Kashmiris, who see the

president as an ally. "[I]t is my opinion that Mr. Musharraf is our Muslim

brother and he will never betray the trust that the Kashmiris have vested inhim. He is a patriot, a Pakistani, and will never betray the blood which has

been spilled in Kashmir."

Lieutenant General Hamid Gul: Defender of Islam


31/37

Lieutenant General Hamid Gul Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, retired, was the

director of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan's military intelligence

agency, from 1987 to 1989, during the time of the rise of the Taliban. He is

known for his sympathies to Islamic radicals, and in this interview withFRONTLINE/World, he defends the rights of militants to fight for an Islamic

system of government. Pakistan would become an Islamic state, Gul argues

in this interview, if it were not for the United States. "[It] ... is part of the

global design of the imperialist powers that Pakistan should not be a

democracy. Because whenever it becomes democracy, it will be an Islamic

democracy. And that is what the Americans don't like."

General Mirza Aslam Beg: Former Army Foe of Musharraf

General Mirza Aslam Beg General Mirza Aslam Beg, retired, was the chief of

staff of the Pakistani army from 1988 to 1991. Many accuse him of being on

the inside of Pakistan's underground nuclear proliferation program, an

allegation he denies in this interview with FRONTLINE/World reporter and

producer Sharmeen Obaid. "If my government wasn't aware, how was I

aware?" General Beg asks, adding that the United States and England should

be held responsible for failing to reveal what they knew about Pakistan's

nuclear activities. "They are a party to the crime that was committed," he

says, "by not revealing the facts to the responsible people in Pakistan either."

Sherry Rehman: Opposition Parliamentarian

Sherry Rehman Sherry Rehman is a liberal parliamentarian as well as an

outspoken critic of President Musharraf. In this interview, she argues that

more robust democratic institutions, and not continued military rule, are

necessary to guide Pakistan through the current political crisis. Rehman

acknowledges that in the wake of 9/11, Pakistan was faced with extraordinarychallenges requiring strong leadership. And she concedes that Musharraf

served his nation well during that difficult time. But that time has now

passed, and, she says, military authority still goes unchecked and must be

replaced with the electoral process. "What happens with us," she tells

FRONTLINE/World reporter and producer Sharmeen Obaid, "is the military

establishment takes control and therefore becomes accountable to no one."


32/37

Sami ul-Haq: Powerful Religious Leader

Sami ul-Haq Sami ul-Haq is a senator and founding member of MuttahidaMajlis-e-Ama (MMA), otherwise known as the United Action Front, a coalition

of religious parties that gained unprecedented victories in 2003 elections. Ul-

Haq, who still supports Taliban ideology, is best known for his madrassah, or

religious school, which is considered the most famous in Pakistan for having

trained thousands of students who went to fight in Afghanistan and Kashmir

as jihadis. In this interview, ul-Haq tells FRONTLINE/World that Pakistan's

enemies object to the country's possession of nuclear weapons, but that "If

we gave it to Libya, then what is the crime? If all of Europe can share this

technology between them, then it is the duty of all Muslims to share any

technology or knowledge they possess."

General Mirza Aslam Beg General Mirza Aslam Beg, former chief of staff of

the Pakistani army, discusses Pakistan's growing nuclear scandal and his own

alleged involvement. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Do you think the United States has designs on [Pakistan's] nuclear

capabilities?

... [T]hey've had designs on our program since 1974, [when] India exploded

the device and then Pakistani prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto declared ...

[that] Pakistan would build that capability to correct the imbalance -- and

that's what he did. And since then, Pakistan [has] been working to acquire

nuclear capability, and this was an open secret. ... The program that we

started in 1976 achieved its purpose in about 12 years' time. ... The American

and [British] agency had been working on Pakistan's nuclear program and

probably picked up some evidence of some scientist trying to sell nuclear

secrets to other countries. But they never informed Pakistan.

I mean if they were monitoring our program for the last 15 years, they should

have told us 10 years or 12 years back so we could have checked these

wrong practices much earlier than doing it now. What I am trying to say is

that they are parties to the crime.


33/37

It's been said that you were aware of the nuclear proliferation. How do you

comment on that?

If my government wasn't aware, how was I aware? I was army chief from

1988 to 1991. If we were never told what was happening beneath the surface

when the Americans knew, when the British agencies knew, when they have

claimed they have penetrated the entire system including Pakistan -- so are

they not guilty?

A number of reports are putting you against Musharraf and [make] it seem

you are in opposition to him. Why do you think it might be the case?

I am sorry -- I have not been arrested; I have not been put behind bars ... .

[Those reports are the work of] the American lobby within the country and

outside ... .

You've been quoted as saying that there were newspaper advertisements in

the Pakistani newspapers in 2000 that elicited bids for enriched uranium.

It's not a secret. It was a full one-page ad given by the government of

Pakistan. And there is nothing wrong with it -- because what they wanted to

sell has been authorized by the international community and by the

international atomic agency. Pakistan had all those items, which were offered

for sale, which are not banned. And all the requirements were met for any

one who wanted to see. So what was wrong with it?

Members of the Pakistani army have been arrested regarding the nuclearproliferation as well -- so would it be safe to say that the Pakistani army knew

about the nuclear proliferation?

[The] Pakistan army, if they deputized a person to be responsible at the site

about the security of the project or the program, they were made responsible

to the boss, that is [Dr. Abdul Qadeer] Khan [the head of Pakistan's nuclear


34/37

research program]. They were not responsible to the army chief -- not before,

not after me, or to another army chief. They reported directly to the KRL

[Khan Research Laboratory, Pakistan's nuclear research laboratory] and its

director, Khan. And it has come out they were getting paid by him. So [the]

army as such was involved in decision-making policy -- but not directly

responsible for all that was happening within the Kahuta lab [the site ofPakistan's KRL].

Do you believe that Dr. Qadeer Khan is responsible for nuclear proliferation or

that he's been made a scapegoat?

[A] scapegoat on the basis of all that's been said by the government. Perhaps

he was involved. But including myself -- I am also being blamed -- I have also

claimed that unless there is an open judicial inquiry, unless all those who areblamed are given a chance to clear their reputation, the real facts will not

come out. And people will have a degree of doubt and a credibility gap will be

there.

Do you think Dr. Qadeer Khan's confession has humiliated the country?

Of course. Yes, it has humiliated the country. It has humiliated everyPakistani, and we are feeling so sorry and sad about it.

What kind of repercussion will this kind of revelation have on Pakistan and

the Pakistani army in the future?

Well, the Pakistani nation, the Pakistani army, [is] really sad to see what [has

happened] to Dr. Khan, who is held in such high esteem by everybody. It will

have an impact. And I think that is a major crisis that President Musharraf andthe government is facing. But the problem, I think, that Pakistan is facing is

the nuclear program itself. ... There are actually pressures building up to

have Pakistan sign the NPT treaty [an international treaty established by the

United Nations in 1970 to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons]. But once

we sign that without India also signing, the pressure to open up our facilities

for inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency -- that is the kind of

pressure we are facing.


35/37

President Musharraf recently said there were certain generals who were

making comments that they are trying to get into the media. Do you think he

was talking about you at all?

Perhaps my name is also included. I have been talking. I have been making

statements and writing about the policy of nuclear program and nuclear

propriety. I have my papers written some eight years back, nine years back.

And I gave a paper at a conference in Lahore just last year. So ... what I say

now I have been saying for many years based on my assessment and studies

with other scholars. Anything people think is new is not. I have been talking

about it for a long time.

Why haven't you been arrested?

Just to disappoint you and many. My American friends and their stooges here

in Pakistan want to see me behind bars for sins which I have not committed.

And I am very confident that nobody can harm me because I have committed

no crime.

If you speak about President Musharraf -- what kind of pressures do you thinkhe is under now?

I have listened to his speech to the assembly ... after this Qadeer Khan

episode and all that. He is under tremendous pressure. And one more

pressure is physical pressure, the attempt on his life. I think it is part of a

plan to extract maximum concessions from him on issues which they want to

be settled on their terms. The Kashmiri issue on Indian terms; the nuclear

issue on American terms, I think; and the Pakistan government's full support

to the United States fighting against the terrorists on the so-called India-Pakistan border.

Do you think that once President Musharraf has served the role he is

supposed to, that he will be disposed of?


36/37

Who will dispose him?

Perhaps the West, after he's serving their interests now?

Why should they dispose him now? He's accepted by elected parliament; he

has been voted as the president by the parliament. But god forbid the

attempts on his life -- who is behind it, it is very difficult to say. It is part of

the aura of conspiracy put upon him to extract concessions ... .

Who is behind this conspiracy?

Your guess is as good as mine. ...

Ahmed Rashid: Critical Journalist

Jugnu Mohsin: Newspaper Editor

"Shahzad": An Underground Militant

Lieutenant General Hamid Gul: Defender of Islam

General Mirza Aslam Beg: Former Army Foe of Musharraf

Sherry Rehman: Opposition Parliamentarian

Sami ul-Haq: Powerful Religious Leader

Return to Introduction

back to top


37/37

HOME STORIES REACT WATCH ABOUT EDUCATORS

DISPATCHES NEWSLETTER CONTACT US FRONTLINE

Privacy Policy 2002-2010 WGBH Educatio

general aslam beg on current situation in pakistan

Documents