My Weblog

READ AND PLEASE PASS IT ON TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS AND FORUMS. AND DO TRY TO ACT UPON ONE OR TWO POINTS IF NOT ALL. YOU CAN HELP YOUR COUNTRY AND THE WORLD. YOU CAN SAVE ELECTRICITY AND WATER – YOU WILL HAVE MORE FOR THE FUTURE. PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS TOO!

DO READ IT AS YOU WILL IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH SIMPLE STEPS AND ALSO LOWER YOUR OWN ELECTRICITY BILLS! FORWARD IT TO ALL!

SAVING WATER

1. Never put water down the drain when there may be another use for it such as watering a plant or garden, or cleaning.

2. Don’t flush the toilet unless you have to. Don’t throw rubbish into toilet to flush. Flushing uses a lot of water.

3. Don’t leave tap on as you brush teeth or wash your face. Close the tap to save water.

4. Store drinking water in the refrigerator rather than letting the tap run every time you want a cool glass of water.

5. If you pour yourself a glass of water and don’t finish it, instead of pouring it down the drain, find another use for it such as watering a plant.

6. Turn taps tightly so does not leak.

7. Don’t over water your lawn. Lawns need to be watered 5-7 days in summer and 10-14 in winter. Don’t water if it has rained.

8. Water lawns during the early morning hours when temperatures and wind speed are the lowest. This reduces losses from evaporation.

9. Use a brush to clean your path and driveway and not water.

10. Use a bucket when washing the car rather than a hose.

11. Collect rainwater and use it to wash the car, water the lawn,

Why we should Plant Trees

1. Trees filter pollution from the air and absorb carbon dioxide so make the atmosphere cooler

2. Trees help recycle water

3. Trees prevent soil erosion and flooding

4. Trees provide shade which is much needed in summer – especially on roads

5. Trees can shelter you from wind and rain

6. Trees are a home to animals, birds ..who live and eat there

7. Trees are attractive and improve the look of an area

Energy and Electricity

1. Unplug chargers when not in use

2. Turn off lights when leaving rooms

3. If it is cold then wear more clothes rather than turn up the heating.

4. Don’t leave appliances on standby – switch them off!

5. Turn off mobile phones overnight, if you are not setting an alarm or using it throughout the night – the battery will last longer and you will spend less charging it up

6. Cover pots and pans when cooking – they will boil a lot quicker

7. If you have relatives in developed countries then try to enquire about solar panels used for heating and lighting. Solar energy is free and only needs warm sunshine to charge it. You will lessen the burden on electricity generators and lower your bills.

8. Only use AC when you really need it. Use it half the time you need it.

NOW PLEASE FORWARD IT TOO ALL ON YOUR LIST, WHO KNOWS YOU COULD CHANGE THE AREA YOU LIVE IN, YOUR COUNTRY OR EVEN THE WHOLE WORLD!

As we celebrate 62nd Independence Day of our great nation, all Pakistanis must loudly reject fundamentalism that is destroying our beloved nation. We can’t let the extremists, the jehadis, the suicide bombers destroy our lives. No more can we let them tie bombs to the belly of our youth…no more can we let them hide our women behind veil. No more can they deprive us of art, culture, science, and humanity. No more!

No more can we dilute our debate by blaming external conspiracies; imperial design, Zionist strategy, Hindutva resurgence etc. Our enemies are within… Jihadis are the enemies no matter what cause they represent; Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Kashmir etc. No land, no territory, no nation, no state, no freedom, no independence can justify violence. No more can we tolerate those who preach violence.

Majority of the Pakistanis like me have resigned ourselves to the fate of oppression. We have been fearful of the extremists. Instead of outright rejecting the authority of religion in our daily lives, we acquiesce. No more can we surrender to the oppressive religious zealots of our society.

Celebrating Pakistan’s independence simply means celebrating the secular leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah; rationale guidance of Allama Iqbal, and the vision of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

“If we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor… you are free- you are free to go to your temples mosques or any other place of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the state… in due course of time Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to Muslims- not in a religious sense for that is the personal faith of an individual- but in a political sense as citizens of one state”
Quid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Karachi, August 11, 1947

In respect of Quiad, Allama and Sir Syed we must re-write our constitution. Our constitution must represent two principles; people belonging to different faiths and sections of society should be equal before the law, the constitution and government policy. Secondly, separation of state and religion. We must modify our constitution to limit the realm of validity of religion in the public arena and society.

We should recall what Allama Iqbal taught us: democracy does not become inclusive merely by giving everyone the right to vote; its institutions must be even-handed as well.

In memory of Sir Syed we should understand that the struggle against militancy should go beyond a security response to providing justice, economic and political, to all.

It’s time now to recognize that growth with welfare is the only long-term bet against religious extremism.

It’s time now to promote a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life.

It’s time now to reject authoritarian beliefs.

It’s time now to take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live.

It’s time now to emphasize reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.

It’s time now to reject violence.

It’s time now to act!

Tribal legends claim that in the foothills of the Afghan mountains, Cain (Qabil), an arable farmer, committed the first murder by killing his brother Abel (Habil), the shepherd. Cain and Abel have long been understood as the first and second sons of Adam and Eve in the religions of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Their story is told in the Bible and Torah at Genesis 4:1-16 and the Qur’an at 5:26-32. Although their story is cited in the Quran, neither of them is mentioned by name.

In present-day Afghanistan, this story comes to life in a figurative sense:  Cain, the poppy-growing farmer, continues to kill Abel, the shepherd who lives in the mountains. Even leaving myths and fables side, sons of Afghanistan have been killing each other, albeit with external assistance, for thirty years.

But things may change for better—or worse—on Thursday, when Afghanistan holds its second democratic presidential election; its first democratic election in 2004 yielded Hamid Karzai as president. In preparation for this historical event, President Barack Obama has ordered 17,000 US troops to Afghanistan since assuming the office of President in January 2009. Obama had hoped to head off as much insurgence as possible before the election, thereby assuring a mostly peaceful vote that can be viewed as legitimate, both by Afghans and the international community.

The likelihood of a nonviolent Afghanistan on August 20 seems a bit much to ask for. The Taliban has already promised forceful opposition to the election, threatening to cut off the ink-stained fingers of those who cast their votes. Taliban leaders across Afghanistan have asked true followers of Islam to boycott the election, and foreign and local troops alike are ramping up security around polling centers in anticipation of potential unrest. However, the possibility remains that Taliban threats will keep people away from the polls on Thursday, and this eventuality could mean problems for Afghanistan in the future.

This election is critical not only for Afghanistan but for all stakeholders including the United States, Pakistan, India, and Iran; and not for the same reason. One cannot be certain that this election will optimize governance model or reduce corruption or for that matter enhance security posture: all inter-related variables, all necessary for a stable Afghanistan.

Our friend at Carnegie Council Mr. David Speedie who has just released four policy papers on Afghanistan points out that “the U.S./NATO and Russia have clear and urgent common interests in promoting long-term stability in Afghanistan, yet cooperation between Russia and the West is “episodic,” rather than strategic or systematic.” Speedie advises us to look at Afghanistan in the broader context of Central Asia and feels that current challenges facing NATO may render it “obsolete in its present form.”

For Pakistan this election is critical because it will determine how Afghanistan is positioned in the geo-political landscape. First of all, if Afghanistan is decoupled from its South Asian neighbor and aligned with Central Asian states, Pakistan will loose leverage.  But an unstable Afghanistan, the status quo, is detrimental for Pakistan as well. Secondly, if Afghanistan continues to develop deeper ties with India it will create imbalances in the region. It is no secret or exaggeration that India’s growing influence in Afghanistan comes at the expense of Pakistan’s interest. Exploiting the post 9/11 situation and piggy backing on the US invasion, India has accelerated its own presence and influence in Afghanistan. Outcome of the election will determine which direction this tide will turn.

In an August 13 question-and-answer session, Karin von Hippel, codirector of the Post-Conflict Reconstruction Project at Washington D.C.’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, responded to questions about the fate of Afghanistan in the face of these elections. When asked about the possible outcomes of voting, von Hippel described a few different scenarios, the first being that incumbent Hamid Karzai would win by a small percentage over 50%, which is what he needs to win without a runoff with another opponent. Von Hippel thinks this will most likely create the least amount of instability, since any large margin of victory for Karzai might cause “accusations of fraud, public challenges by competing candidates, and potentially widespread violence in the north and in Kabul where many Tajiks live.”

Another possible development involves a runoff, most likely between Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah, a half-Tajik, half-Pashtun doctor who is widely considered to be Karzai’s biggest competition. This situation might also lead to hostility, since a strong Taliban presence in majority Pashtun districts might lead to a low voter turnout in areas where Karzai, an ethnic Pashtun, has the biggest following. In the case of a runoff, most polls predict a win for Karzai.

Whatever the outcome of the election, von Hippel feels “the results will be considered a positive step for Afghanistan if they are perceived as mostly free and fair,” although at the moment a free and fair outcome does not seem highly probable. In Kabul on August 17, Abdullah told a crowd of supporters that his victory was ensured, as long as the election was fair and no fraud was committed. In a country like Afghanistan where tension runs high and a governmental shift could mean the difference between life and death for many people, these statements are highly inflammatory. In fact, some fear that Abdullah’s talk of election fraud will cause his supporters to riot if he does not emerge victorious.

To be fair, Abdullah’s allegation of fraud is not the mere blathering of a man desperate for power. Indeed, there have been rumblings of discontent with the voting process from many corners over the past few weeks. In addition to the discovery of thousands of fake voter registration cards across the country, as many as 700 of 7,000 planned polling locations are expected to be shut down due to violence, particularly in Taliban strongholds in the south. If this is the case, it is no wonder many cannot bring themselves to hope for a truly democratic election.

Karzai and Abdullah have stolen much of the international media spotlight aimed at Afghanistan in the weeks preceding the election, but there are in fact two other contenders who are seen as potential dark horses in the upcoming race. Ramazan Bashardost, an ethnic Hazara with a formidable education, is making headway in the election, gaining approval as an outspoken opponent of the current corruption and abuse of power that exists in Afghanistan’s government.

Ashraf Ghani, an ethnic Pashtun and respected scholar, is a former Afghan finance minister and World Bank senior analyst. Ghani enjoys a great deal of popularity on the international level as a result of his thoughts on state building, and his campaign has focused on terminating governmental corruption in Afghanistan and developing a strong infrastructure for Afghanistan.

Neither Bashardos nor Ghani are expected to win a large amount of votes on Thursday, but their presence in the election is vital, if only as obstacles to a runoff-free win for Karzai.

Regardless of outcome, Thursday’s elections will be a huge milestone for Afghanistan, and an event that will determine not only its president, but also the outlook for the future.

India is already hoping for a Karzai win: President Karzai who studied in Indian University and has enjoyed living there during his youth fully embraced India in his last term. India is looking for access to the energy-rich Central Asian states like Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan and views Kabul as a gateway. India is also eager to neutralize Pakistan’s influence. But India that has historically supported Northern Alliance, Rasheed Dostum and other anti-Pushtoon elements is bound to change the eco-system of the region. Even after US leaves, Afghanistan will have to deal with this regional hegemony.

On August 30, 2009, the New York Times ran a story about an allegation coming from the US Congressional sources that Pakistan has reverse-engineered and optimized an American legacy Harpoon missile bought by Pakistan in the 1980s. The timing of this article is rather curious; the story was leaked by anonymous sources on the same day that Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani left for a three-day visit to Libya on an invitation from the Libyan government.

Pakistan’s US Ambassador in Washington, DC, Hussain Haqqani, quickly dismissed this story, saying: “The accusations are incorrect and based on wrong intelligence. We will make sure that the US understands the correct picture and we will fight back periodic efforts to falsely blame Pakistan, which remains a critical US ally in fighting terrorism. Instead of false accusations, US media should help Pakistan secure the help it needs to fight our common enemy, viz terrorism.”

The most questionable aspect of this story is the source itself; without naming names, the New York Times makes assertions that can neither be proved nor disproved. Over the years this daily has accumulated a bulging clippings file full of splashy, yet often maddeningly unverifiable exposés alleging various shenanigans. How can we forget New York Times’ “exclusive” on the presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq?

The story’s unidentified congressional source also requires some attention. When the Congress and Senate resume fall session shortly, they are scheduled to debate a $7.5 billion aid package for Pakistan. Before the House went on summer vacation, there were clear signs that this much-discussed civilian aid will be approved and Pakistan will start seeing money as early as October 2009, which is when the 2010 fiscal year begins for the US government.

This story is possibly a leak from the members of the India Caucus, the largest foreign country caucus in the US Congress. Democrat Congressman Jim McDermott from Washington and Republican Congressman Edward Royce from California are its co-chairs, and its mission states: “The objective of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans is to push the Indian American community’s agenda on the Hill.”

When the NYT story about Pakistan’s alleged reverse engineering is read with all this background information in mind, perception shifts a bit. Especially, when you consider that India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna are back-pedaling from their Sharm el-Shaik joint statement, it seems plausible that this story is a plant and the brainchild of Indian lobbyists.

As a nation, India’s insecure “Everyone is looking at me! Everyone is talking about me!” attitude is leading its government to involve itself with every aspect of Pakistan’s affairs. If a Pakistani sneezes, India will assume it is because there was a high pollen count in India that day.

There is another, more ominous possibility, though. Perhaps the Obama administration is persisting in the tradition of a popular Bush camp negotiating tactic, and the NYT story is the “stick” that follows promises of aid and engagement with Pakistan’s civil society. This is a high stake “tactic” that was used by the Bush administration; dates of events and the names of people and places, would continuously transform along a trajectory of a lethal narrative. The particular narrative I speak of now is, of course, the war on terrorism. Somehow, the identities of the main players manage to elude the mesmerized spectators, who watch an endless cast of characters all playing the same role of “evildoer” in “multiples theaters of wars.” In an instant, a cave-dwelling religious fanatic becomes a nationalist dictator. In an instant, an ally becomes an enemy.

Citing unnamed sources, the New York Times writes, “There’s a concerted effort to get [Pakistan] to slow down. Their energies are misdirected.”

This is a good-news, bad-news paradox. As a Pakistani-American, I am encouraged that Pakistanis seem to be rapidly moving north in pursuit of technology. The bad news, however, is more intricate. Pakistan bought Harpoon missiles from the United States in the 1980s—when Pakistan was ruled by dictator General Zia-ul-Haq—as a gesture of America’s gratitude for assistance in fighting America’s covert war in Afghanistan. Harpoons use active radar homing and a low-level, sea-skimming cruise trajectory to increase lethality. Although Pakistan owns these antiship missiles, any modification would be a violation of the United States Arms Control Export Act.

Has Pakistan really become so technologically sophisticated that it is able to reverse-engineer American Harpoon missiles and P-3C aircrafts? I recently interviewed Peter Singer, author of Wired for War, who is an internationally recognized authority on the use of robotics in warfare. He suggested that Pakistan is also working on drone and robotic technologies. I must ask, though, if Pakistan has so much technical prowess, why doesn’t the government commission experts to reverse-engineer wind turbines and solar technologies to produce much needed electricity?

This is a critical issue and if Pakistan fails to defend itself straightaway, repercussions could be serious. The speed with which the Pakistani embassy in Washington, DC jumped on this issue was a good start. I’m hoping in next couple of days, Pakistan’s government will be able to put everyone at ease.

In the past, Indians who found true love with Bush have been able to put Pakistan on the defensive. And, the Bush administration also talked from both sides of their mouths, maligning Pakistan through leaks in the media while simultaneously supporting Pakistani army generals.

One hopes that the Obama administration recognizes the role Pakistan is playing in the fight against extremism. With any bit of luck, the US government is also cognizant of a long history of friendship with Pakistan: from opening a back-door diplomacy channel with China to assisting in defeating the Soviet Union, Pakistan has delivered everything America has ever asked for. We can only hope that unlike the Clintons and Bushes, the current administration will not be enamored by the Indians. I am confident because at the end of the day, Americans are fair people. They recognize Pakistan’s contribution and understand that aberrations from established norms do exist, and government policy is completely separate from individual acts.