Islamabad, December 22

A global watchdog for terror financing has sought more clarifications and data from Pakistan on actions taken by it against madrassas belonging to the banned outfits, weeks after Islamabad submitted a report to the Paris-based body detailing steps taken by the country to curb terrorism and money laundering.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which kept Pakistan on the Grey List for an extended period till February 2020, had warned in October that Islamabad would be put on the Black List if it did not comply with the remaining 22 points in a list of 27 questions.

Pakistan submitted a report comprising answers to 22 questions to the FATF on December 6.

In response to the report, the FATF’s Joint Group has sent 150 questions to Pakistan, seeking some clarifications, updates and most importantly actions taken against the madrassas belonging to the proscribed outfits.

“We did receive a response from the FATF on our compliance report through an email in which they raised a set of 150 questions. Some of them are seeking more data, some clarifications, and most importantly questions related to madrassas and actions taken against them having affiliation with proscribed outfits,” The News quoted a top official source as saying.

According to officials, Mumbai terror attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed-led Jamat-ud Dawah’s network includes 300 seminaries and schools.

In March 2019, Punjab police said that government seized control of 160 madrassas, 32 schools, two colleges, four hospitals, 178 ambulances and 153 dispensaries associated with the JuD and its so-called charity wing Falah-i-Insaniat Foundation (FIF) in province.

At least 56 madrassas and facilities being run by the JuD and FIF in southern Sindh province were also taken over by authorities in the same month.

Saeed-led JuD is believed to be the front organisation for the Lashkar-e-Taiba which is responsible for carrying out the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The US declared the LeT as a foreign terrorist organisation in June 2014.

Pakistan has been given January 8, 2020 deadline to respond to the 150 questions, the official said on Saturday.

The next FATF meeting is scheduled to be held from January 21 to 24 in Beijing where Pakistan will be given an opportunity to defend the points in the report.

Pakistan expects another relaxation probably up to June 2020 in the FATF’s upcoming plenary review meeting, as the February deadline is too short a period for Islamabad to comply with the remaining 22 action plans.

The FATF in its previous statement had said, “Should significant and sustainable progress not be made across the full range of its action plan by the next plenary, the FATF will take action, which could include the FATF calling on its members and urging all jurisdictions to advise their FIs (financial institutions) to give special attention to business relations and transactions with Pakistan”.

Earlier, the FATF had asked 27 questions pertaining to Pakistan’s efforts to stop terrorism financing. But Islamabad managed to satisfy the global watchdog over just five of them.

Pakistan was placed on the Grey List by the FATF in June last year and was given a plan of action to complete it by October 2019, or face the risk of being placed on the blacklist with Iran and North Korea.

The FATF said Pakistan must demonstrate effective implementation of targeted financial sanctions against all UN designated terrorists like Lashkar-e-Toiba founder Hafiz Saeed, Jaish-e-Mohammad founder Maulana Masood Azhar, and those acting for or on their behalf.

The FATF is an inter-governmental body established in 1989 to combat money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. — PTI

Talking to The Indian Express, Defence PRO, Jammu, Lt Col Devender Anand, said: “We only requested and persuaded them against seeing that sight because due to a heavy explosion at the place of the cross-border firing, the body was badly damaged. The family would not have been in peace after seeing it.

At Sukhwinder Singh’s native Fatehpur village in Talwara under the Mukerian subdivision of Hoshiarpur. (Express photo)

More than twenty-four hours after mortal remains of her son, Rifleman Sukhwinder Singh (21), were consigned to flames, Rani Devi says she has a gnawing ache of not even being able to her son’s face one last time. The mother says that Army officials present during the final rites had requested her not to see her martyred son’s face.

Talking to The Indian Express, Defence PRO, Jammu, Lt Col Devender Anand, said: “We only requested and persuaded them against seeing that sight because due to a heavy explosion at the place of the cross-border firing, the body was badly damaged. The family would not have been in peace after seeing it.”

Swaran Singh, the uncle of Sukhwinder Singh, said: “Maybe it was good for us or for the Army. The Army is a better judge.”

Sukhwinder Singh hailed from Fatehpur village in Talwara under the Mukerian subdivision of Hoshiarpur. He was killed in an unprovoked ceasefire violation by Pakistan at Sunderbani Sector of Rajouri district.

Cabinet Minister Sunder Sham Arora, who is from Hoshiarpur, visited the soldier’s place on Thursday. Arora too said that the Army had not shown the body to the family because of the damage it suffered in the attack.

Arora said that he will take up the case with Punjab CM Captain Amarinder Singh so that family can be supported in every way possible.

“This village belongs to soldiers and I am thinking of making some memorial in their name here including the village gate and a road to the village,” said Arora.

The comparative figures in the number of militants killed in 2016 and 2017 were, respectively, 130 and 200, and going up to 246 in 2018.

The unprecedented communications shutdown in Kashmir has hit the government’s counter-militancy operations, according to top J&K Police officials. A total of 82 operations took place in J&K so far this year, including two in Jammu region, down from 97 anti-militancy operations conducted in 2018.

Data accessed by The Indian Express shows this years’ figures for the number of militants killed are at a three-year low.

Since the beginning of the year, 155 militants have been killed in the Valley in these 82 operations, a sharp decline from last year’s figure of 246. A majority of these 155 militants — approximately 120 — were killed up to the end of July, before the lockdown began on August 5 with the announcement of scrapping of the state’s special status under Article 370.

The comparative figures in the number of militants killed in 2016 and 2017 were, respectively, 130 and 200, and going up to 246 in 2018.

Director-General of J&K Police Dilbag Singh told The Indian Express, “Communication does affect anti-militancy operations, so partially, yes, it is that. But this dip is also because of the police’s preoccupation with law and order duties during this period (since August 5, when special status to the erstwhile state under Article 370 was scrapped).”

According to officials, the figures are “relatively low” also owing to the fact that operations at the Line of Control (LoC) saw a sharp decline. “Compared to approximately 30 operations last year along the LoC, this year there was only one operation, in which two militants were killed,” a source said.

D-G Dilbagh Singh had told The Indian Express in September that lack of communication was affecting anti-militancy operations in the Valley. “The police also work with sources (informers), but if the sources’ phones are not functional how do we speak to them? To some extent, yes, information is a little delayed. But it is reaching us,” Singh had said.

Meanwhile, sources said 608 individuals are currently under “preventive detention” in J&K, including those booked under PSA, and more than 200 people are held in jails outside. “Not more than 1,400 individuals are in Kashmir jails, and that includes (people accused in) all crimes,” a police source said.

In terms of ‘law and order incidents’, police records show 310 incidents recorded since August 5, including 240 in Srinagar alone. In comparison, more than 1,500 law and order incidents were reported from Kashmir in 2016 in the uprising following the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen militant Burhan Wani.

The administration has claimed that no lives have been lost in action by security forces in Kashmir since suspension of special status. In comparison, 62 civilians lost their lives in the unrest in 2016.

Wang’s visit to India will be the first high-level one from China after the Modi-Xi informal meeting in October as well as after New Delhi pulled out of the RCEP following a meeting of the group’s leadership in Bangkok recently.

Doval and Wang are the designated Special Representatives of the two countries for the boundary talks.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval will hold boundary talks here on Saturday under the framework of Special Representatives dialogue, the Ministry of External Affairs has said.

Wang’s visit to India will be the first high-level one from China after the Modi-Xi informal meeting in October as well as after New Delhi pulled out of the RCEP following a meeting of the group’s leadership in Bangkok recently.

“The 22nd meeting of the Special Representatives (SR) for India-China boundary question will be held in New Delhi December 21,” an MEA statement said.

Doval and Wang are the designated Special Representatives of the two countries for the boundary talks.

Sources said the two sides are likely to review implementation of decisions taken at the second informal summit between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping in October. Wang was to visit India for the SR talks in September but the trip was postponed then.

The two sides have already held over 20 rounds of talks under the framework of SR dialogue which was set up to find an early solution to the border dispute.

The India-China border dispute covers 3,488-km-long Line of Actual Control. China claims Arunachal Pradesh as part of southern Tibet while India contests it.

Both sides have been asserting that pending the final resolution of the boundary issue, it is necessary to maintain peace and tranquility in the border
areas.

Today’s air wars are indeed perception affairs. Recall the first real media intensive air war portrayed during Gulf War-I and the perception impact of the destruction of airfields, oil facilities and vehicles on the ‘highway of death’. Air strikes need to be not only accurately effective but also must be ‘seen’ to be effective. It’s a means of ‘political signalling’ to tell the adversary that you better change your behaviour or else!

Group Captain Murli Menon (Retd)
Defence analyst

Notwithstanding her erudition, and Pentagon/CIA linkages, Christine Fair is no military expert. It was somewhat confounding, therefore, to hear her articulating the improbability of an Indian F-16 kill on May 27. Quite clearly, her judgement is coloured by vested interests back home, of commercial considerations of the US military-industrial complex, perhaps, though there’s no gainsaying that Americans would have, in any case, had a role in ascertaining the veracity of the IAF kill, with their general ‘look-through’ capability into the F-16 fleets of Pakistan Air Force, its numerical strength and health.

But Christine does have a point in averring that a holistic analysis by experts is in order to derive appropriate military lessons, more so because the battle damage assessment for the strike on the terror camp was non-existent and on-board recordings of Abhinandan Varthaman’s kill could not be obtained as his aircraft crashed inside Pakistani territory. After the strike, many western think tanks and experts went to town about likely errors in targeting by the Indian attacking aircraft with some highly suspect deductions.

The vagaries of an aerial engagement between the opposing fighter fleets is not something to be glossed over in the media by generalists who cannot fathom the intricacies of an air combat situation. An entire panoply of aspects, such as related radiotelephony and radar imageries authenticating relative positions of aircraft, are there in the engagement.

Given that unfortunately more authentic on-board technical inputs were not available both for the terror camp strike and Abhinandan’s kill, the IAF had to go by these other corroborative inputs from its own AWACS/AEW/IACCS and associated communications. There may well be several air situations during a hot air war wherein the ideal set of corroborative battle damage assessments or recorded evidence may not obtain. In the case of Abhinandan’s kill, the IAF Phalcon AWACS and radars integrated into the Integrated Air Defence Control System (IACCS) defence statedly monitored the disintegration of the F-16.

In the event of the Balakot air strike, the IAF purportedly had to go by signal intelligence inputs of cellphones in operation picked up by the National Technical Reasearch Organisation (NTRO) to deduce the number of casualties of Jaish terrorists in the camp and may be human intelligence inputs from friendly agencies across the border or from satellite inputs from suitably positioned assets of friendly nations. Most of these sources cannot be divulged for obvious reasons.

All these inputs would ultimately have constituted what is called a ‘mission debrief’ to tell the participants the degree to which their mission objectives had been achieved, including hits on ground targets and aerial kills. Own vulnerabilities that played out are also brought out clearly during a mission debrief. In the Abhinandan air battle, the ‘ blue on blue’ air situation of the fratricidal downing of the Mi-17 chopper over the Srinagar airfield would have added to the ‘ fog of war’ mix in the Kashmir skies that day.

Of course, no Su-30 fell prey to any PAF aerial weapon, as claimed. On the contrary, the Sukhois overcame the PAF’s AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile) threat with credit by appropriate tactical action and proof of the missed missile debris was shown to the media. Also, no gun camera clips or radar recordings were produced by the PAF. Abhinandan being hit by a PAF AMRAAM is also unlikely as his prey, the PAF F-16, would have been in the line of fire for any other F-16 attacking him from his rear quarters. This further points to some other aerial weapon hitting Abhinandan’s MiG, possibly a Pak surface-to-air missile (SAM), as suggested by some observers. Further, the confused tweet by the DG, Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), about ‘two’ Indian pilots being captured points to the second pilot being the unfortunate PAF F-16 flier.

Christine Fair’s opinion on the Spice 2000 bomb damage criteria may not be quite true. The Spice knows only one way of operating over the target: by going in through a clean hole on the concrete and then causing damage below it by what is known technically as ‘heave’ effect . The bomb does not differentiate between the Pentagon brick work, as she says, and the terror camp building in Balakot, which also, incidentally, was brick and mortar. Also, the PAF F-16s sport both the Pratt & Whitney 100 and General Electric engines. As many as 75 per cent of all F-16s have the GE engines.

I had occasion to meet a senior USAF functionary in New York after the Balakot operation and he told me how he had recently gone to Sargodha to train PAF pilots in the latest Block 60 F-16s, which most likely have the GE engines. The strike on the camp and Abhinandan’s kill do suffer from inadequate corroboratory on-board and associated evidence. Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa may be right in claiming that since details are still ‘classified’, he would not have attempted to win the ‘perception battle’.

But today’s air wars are indeed perception affairs. Recall the first real media intensive air war portrayed during Gulf War-I and the perception impact of the destruction of airfields, oil facilities and vehicles on the ‘highway of death’. Air strikes need to be not only accurately effective but also must be ‘seen’ to be effective. It’s, after all, a means of ‘political signalling’ to tell the adversary that you better change your behaviour or else..!

This brings us to the undeniably mandatory prerequisite of modern warfighting — no-nonsense and professional military leadership. The politician should get to do that much and no more and the overall national military objective has to carry the day, come hell or high water!

The pronouncement of death sentence on General Musharraf is a blow to the military’s image and decisions, and it is unlikely that the military will not take steps to do damage control. The judgment seems to be a result of an old tussle between the judiciary and Musharraf. Outgoing Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa’s commitment to conclude the case before he retires played a critical role in the verdict.

Shalini Chawla

Distinguished Fellow, Centre for Air Power Studies

General Pervez Musharraf’s death sentence in a high treason case by a Special Court of Pakistan has generated strong reactions. The development is indeed historic in a military-dominated state where the stature of the armymen is guarded above all institutions and circumstances. The ascendancy of the Pakistan military does not flow only from the barrel of the gun but also its deep involvement in all facets: its corporate interests and its ability to dictate democratic terms which distinguish the institution from other forces of the world.

Musharraf, who came into power through a military coup in 1999, has been found guilty of suspending the constitution in 2007 and imposing extra-constitutional emergency from November 3 to December 15, 2007. Musharraf resigned in August 2008 in the wake of the nationwide mass protests led by lawyers following the suspension of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, and the agreement amongst the opposition parties, including the PPP and PML-N, to launch impeachment proceedings against him. On July 31, 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that the November 3, 2007 acts of Musharraf were unconstitutional. In 2013, charges of high treason were filed by Sharif’s party — the PML-N — whose scars of humiliation (in 1999) and blow to his political career never healed. The General’s death sentence is being rejoiced by opposition parties which blame Musharraf for pushing the country under a prolonged stint of dictatorship and denting their political designs, and the judiciary, which seems to be more confident after playing an assertive role in challenging the extension of army chief, General Bajwa. The judiciary appears to be contented with its supreme position and having finally punished Musharraf, who challenged its authority and fired several prominent judges in November 2007.

The military has reacted to the judgment with a ‘lot of pain and anguish’. The ISPR press release stated: “An ex-Army chief, Chairman Joint Chief of staff committee and President of Pakistan, who has served the country for over 40 years, fought wars for the defence of the country can surely never be a traitor. The due legal process seems to have been ignored, including constitution of special court, denial of fundamental rights of self defence, undertaking individual specific proceedings and concluding the case in haste. Armed Forces of Pakistan expect that justice will be dispensed in line with Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”

This has been the case in Pakistan, where the military has innovatively altered the constitution to align it with its ambitions to gain and expand power.

The direct military rule in Pakistan is traced to the late 1950s when President Iskander Mirza realised his incapability to cope with the discontent in West Pakistan where the separatist forces were asserting themselves. Consequently, the 1956 constitution was abrogated and martial law imposed on October 7, 1958, as a joint decision of President Mirza and Gen Ayub Khan. The 1958 coup was conducted secretly and came unannounced for the people and policy-makers. The commanders-in-chief of the air force and the navy were also informed only after arrangements were finalised. Ayub Khan assumed presidency in October 1958. The office of the prime minister was abolished and the cabinet sworn in as a presidential cabinet.

This resulted in the dismissal of the democratic forces that were emerging on the eve of first General Elections. Ayub worked on multiple spheres and appointed 23 commissions to report on a variety of issues, including constitutional and legal reforms. The new constitution in 1962 institutionalised the military’s role in the power structure and Ayub adopted the approach of ‘basic democracy’ which allowed a controlled participation of the electorate.

After losing credibility, Ayub Khan handed power to the Army Commander-in-Chief, General Yahya Khan, in 1969, stating that the military represented “the only effective and legal instrument, to take over full control of the affairs of this country.”

In 1977, General Zia-ul-Haq led a coup and the judiciary gave sanction to the military regime under the infamous ‘doctrine of necessity’. Substantial changes were made in the constitution, handing over enormous powers to the president and Zia got himself elected as president in a fraudulent referendum held in 1984. The Eighth Amendment provided the president discretionary powers and suggested that the president had the power to return the recommendations made by the prime minister regarding the appointment of the judges to the federal court and high court.

Most important during Zia’s tenure was the build-up of the image of the military as the guardian of not only the territorial boundaries but also the ideological boundaries. The democratic regimes between 1988 and 1999 were unstable and changed frequently, especially, if the agenda of the elected governments challenged the power and functioning of the army. There were four elections and both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif returned to power twice and there were four caretaker governments inbetween.

The 1999 coup by General Musharraf was condemned at the international level, but within Pakistan, Nawaz’s corruption details and mammoth wealth worked in favour of the military’s return to power. Musharraf, like his predecessors Ayub and Zia, institutionalised the military control over state politics.

After General Musharraf, the military under Generals Kayani, Raheel Sharif and Bajwa has restrained from direct political control and discreetly maintained the red lines for the elected leaders. Critical matters of national security remain exclusively under the military’s domain: defence budget; nuclear arsenal, including the programme, doctrine and strategy and; foreign policy vis-à-vis India and Afghanistan.

The military’s position was challenged during the judicial proceedings over General Bajwa’s extension.Reports suggest that the process has been manipulated by a coterie of disgruntled generals whose ambitions have been dented by Bajwa’s three-year extension granted by Prime Minister Imran Khan, who owes his success in the 2018 elections to General Bajwa. But the fact remains that the judiciary did challenge his extension and the episode undermines General Bajwa’s credibility, the military’s position and projects underlying tensions amongst the military’s top brass.

The judgment of Musharraf’s death sentence is unprecedented and a blow to the military’s image and decisions, and it is unlikely that the military will not take steps to do damage control. Image management, along with threat management, is critical for military’s position within and outside Pakistan. The current judgment seems to be a result of an old tussle between the judiciary and Musharraf. The outgoing Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, who is applauded for fair trials was displeased by the undue interference of the high courts in the case. His commitment to conclude the case before he retires played a critical role in the verdict.

Musharraf’s case also represents a measure of tensions between the civilian government and the judiciary as the PTI government was attempting judicial moves to stop the special court from announcing the verdict. Given the history of Pakistan’s military, the judgment should not be seen as an indicator of alteration in the power dynamics of Pakistan. How the military will deal with the pain and anguish caused by the judgment and how it will ensure its continued dominance remains to be seen.

Sandeep Dikshit

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 19

The second India-US two plus two meeting held in Washington on Wednesday saw progress in closer ties in three areas — defence interoperability, people to people and regional cooperation — besides inking a new agreement on science and technology.

The simultaneous meeting of Defence and Foreign Ministers of both countries is seen as a high watermark that aims to translate the strategic convergence between the two countries into tangible outcomes.

In defence, the meeting touched five areas: Enhanced exercises, greater information sharing, expanded defence trade, placement of liaison officers and defence enabling agreements.

It decided to match cooperation between the Armies and Air Forces to the level achieved by the navies that included a recent group sail in South China Sea and has been bolstered by secure hotlines with a secure communications agreement (COMCASA).

As Defence Minister Rajnath Singh pointed out, the meeting dwelt on further developing the military liaison relationship in tune with India’s expanded concept of a maritime domain stretching from the east coast of Africa to the India-Pacific.

These include a link between the naval headquarters and US INDOPACOM and posting an Indian liaison officer at the US Navy’s Central Command.

A hotline between Singh and his US Secretary of Defense is already operational. The theme of a free, open and inclusive Indo-Pacific region girded the discussions.

The other aspect in defence is pushing more US products in the IAF.

Under the rubric of regional cooperation, the meeting decided to jointly train peacekeepers in the Indo-Pacific, expand judicial training to countries in the Indo-Pacific, capacity building in third countries, disaster relief and addressing the health of oceans. The meeting was satisfied with “tangible results” in the Quad meeting of cyber experts and a counter-terrorism tabletop exercise which is aimed at “aligning like-minded powers behind the principle of a free and open Indo-Pacific”.

The people-to-people aspect saw both sides agreeing on new exchange programmes for parliamentarians and young innovators (besides 2 lakh Indian students currently studying in the US contributing about $7 billion to US economy.

Both Singh and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar had bilateral meetings with their respective counterparts.

Tribune News Service
New Delhi, December 20

The next round of India-China borders talks will be held here on Saturday, the Ministry of External Affairs said on Friday.

Special Representatives of both countries—Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval—were to earlier meet in September but the interaction was called off amidst tensions following the reorganisation of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories.

Wang will be the first high ranking Chinese leader to visit India after the Modi-Xi informal meeting in October in Mammalapuram. It is also the first after India decided not to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) with 15 other countries including China.

India and China have held over 20 rounds of talks at the Special Representative level to resolve their dispute over nearly 4,000 km of boundary.

Islamabad, December 19

Pakistan’s special court which sentenced former military ruler Pervez Musharraf to death in its detailed judgment on Thursday said his body should be dragged to the central square in Islamabad and hanged for three days if he dies before his execution.

The 167-page detailed judgment was authored by Peshawar High Court Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth, who headed the three-member court that sentenced Musharraf to death on Tuesday for subverting the Constitution.

“As a necessary corollary to what has been observed we find the accused guilty as per charge. The convict be hanged by his neck till he dies on each count as per charge,” the verdict said.

Justice Seth wrote that Musharraf should be hanged even if he dies before his execution.

“We direct the law enforcement agencies to strive their level best to apprehend the fugitive/convict and to ensure that the punishment is inflicted as per law and if found dead, his corpse be dragged to the D-Chowk, Islamabad, Pakistan and be hanged for 3 days,” he wrote.

The verdict was split by 2-1 as Justice Shahid Karim of the Lahore High Court supported the death sentence while Justice Nazar Akbar of the Sindh High Court disagreed and wrote a dissenting note. — PTI