Gorakhpur, April 5

With Beijing scuttling India’s latest bid to have JeM chief Masood Azhar designated as a terrorist by the UN, Union Minister VK Singh has warned that the day is not far when China would have to pay a heavy price once it gets hit by Pakistan-backed terrorism.“The friendship between China and Pakistan appears to be very strong but the day is not far when China too gets affected by Pakistan-backed terrorism,” Singh, who is here to take part in a function at the Gorakhnath temple, told reporters last night.“When such a situation arises, China will have to pay a heavy price,” the Minister of State for External Affairs said, adding, “Pakistan has an important place in Chinese diplomacy…China’s intervention in that case must be seen in this context.” — PTI

Afghan security personnel keep watch at the site of an attack in front of the Indian consulate in Jalalabad on March 2, 2016. — AFP

Jalalabad/New Delhi, March 2

India’s Consulate in Afghanistan’s Jalalabad city was attacked on Wednesday with a suicide bomber blowing himself up during the terror strike but all Indians at the mission were safe, Indian foreign office said.

One local staff sustained minor injuries in the attack, nearly two months after a similar assault was carried out by terrorists on the Indian mission in Mazar-i-Sharif in January.

“Indian Consulate in Jalalabad has been attacked. One suicide bomber blew himself up in front of the mission. All Indians in the mission are safe, while a local staff has sustained minor injuries,” External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Vikas Swarup said in New Delhi.

The Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) fired after they detected some movement and gunfire near the consulate complex at about 1:30 pm IST, according to officials.

On January 3, heavily-armed terrorists carried out an attack on the Indian mission in Mazar-e-Sharif which lasted for over 25 hours with all the attackers who attempted to storm the building getting killed by the Afghan security forces.

Soon after that also in January, Islamic State jihadists claimed responsibility for a deadly gun and bomb siege targeting the nearby Pakistani consulate in Jalalabad.

Afghan forces have killed four militants involved in the attack. However, an exact number of attackers was not immediately known.

The combing operation is on after the attackers were killed, sources said.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack. — PTI

Masood Azhar, who indoctrinated a million militants, was freed by India in 1999. This is a reflection of the inertia in the system and a misreading of the national security situation. It also reveals the lack of a firm policy against terrorism and perpetrators of terrorism.

Maulana Masood Azhar. PTI

Before he founded the terror outfit, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Maulana Masood Azhar was a prisoner in the Kot Bhalwal jail in Jammu. On the night of December 30, 1999, mandarins from New Delhi, including the former RAW Chief  A.S. Dulat,  flew to Jammu to persuade the then Jammu and Kashmir chief minister  Farooq Abdullah to order Masood Azhar’s release.The soul of pan-Islamic militancy in South Asia, the urgency to secure his release was because Harkat-ul-Mujahadeen men, in connivance with  Lashkar-e-Toiba, an  off-shoot of  the Al-Qaida, had hijacked the Indian Airlines airbus IC 814  on its way from Kathmandu to Delhi. There was pressure on the NDA government, led by Atal Behari Vajpayee, to free Masood Azhar and two others, Mushtaq Zargar of Kashmir, and Ahmad Omar Sayeed Sheikh of Pakistan. Omar later killed Wall Street Journal’s South Asia Bureau Chief Daniel Pearl in Karachi.Twice  before Masood Azhar’s  men had attempted to   secure his release. In 1994,  it was done  by a group called Harkat-ul-Ansar. Two  Britishers, including the son of a British journalist based in Delhi, were kidnapped from the woods of Pahalgam. And, in July 1995, an hitherto  unknown group Al-Faran had kidnapped six foreigners from Aaroo on the upper reaches  Pahalgam  in South Kashmir. The demand in both the cases was for the release of Azhar Masood. The Indian Airlines plane was hijacked in December 1999 to achieve the same objective. On the night of December 30, Farooq Abdullah had refused to release Azhar but yielded after pressure from Delhi, especially from the then Union Home Minister  L K Advani and Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh.Incidentally, Masood Azhar’s arrest in 1994 was accidental. He was caught  while travelling in an autorickshaw in Anantnag. Why was Azhar so important for the  militant groups and the ISI  that had sent him to Jammu and Kashmir on a fake Portuguese passport?   Radha Vinod Raju, a brilliant investigator and founder of the NIA, the then Inspector General of Police, Jammu, explained,  “Azhar is a strategic asset for Pakistan’s ISI. They can afford to get any number of militants killed, but they need someone who can motivate the young to pick up guns to kill or die. They are cannon fodder. He is an ideologue. That’s the difference.” Before ordering the release of Azhar,  the  chief minister who had taken a similar stand against the release of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front  men  to secure the release of  then Union Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed’s youngest daughter  Rubaiya Sayeed, had warned of big trouble once Azhar was released. Delhi  did not heed the advice. The impression was that Farooq Abdullah was not interested in saving  the lives of crew and passengers of the hijacked aircraft parked in Kandahar, the capital of Taliban  in Afghanistan .Azhar had founded Jaish-e-Mohammad when he reached  Pakistan soon after his release. He was the mastermind of many terror attacks, including the one on the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001. After the attack on the Pathankot Air Force base,  there is a  sudden urgency in  getting the custody  of the Jaish-e-Mohammad chief. This is necessitated by the national security and foreign policy imperatives. The Indian establishment is haunted by the fear that the idea of Masood Azhar could spell more disasters. A terror group that could reach a high-value asset like the Air Force base, is capable of doing anything. Now China too has come to the aid of Pakistan.  China has blocked the Indian  request to declare Azhar as a terrorist so that UN sanctions can be  imposed on him. But the Chinese  Permanent Representative at the U N  Liu Jieyi  said that Azhar did not qualify as a terrorist. Though in reel-life, getting Masood Azhar like Hafiz Sayeed  could be the storyline of a Bollywood thriller, in reality untold damage  has been done. It is a classic case of the  flip-flop policy of the government. At the time of Masood’s  release, India secured the release of  165 crew members and  passengers of the hijacked plane. There is no count of the many more who have been killed in the attacks sponsored by Jaish-e-Mohammad since the release. He was on trial in a Jammu court, but he could not be convicted. Instead, men who escorted him  to  the court, believed that he had spiritual powers and asked him for a taweez (amulet)  to guard against evil spirits and help to solve their domestic and professional  problems. Such was the aura of Masood Azhar among his jail mates  and others .Without going into details about how the Indian system succumbed to the hysterical images of the relatives and friends of the captive passengers flashed by TV channels, the fact is that  even if the terror mastermind is handed over to India — which in any case would never happen — there is no guarantee that the Indian leadership and bureaucratic system will not repeat the mistake as they had done on December 31, 1999.  On the eve of the millennium In India, there were celebrations over the release of a man who had motivated militants. Can there be a more tragic  story  than this?

ajoshi57@gmail.com

During its recent deployment in Haryana, the Army was constrained to carry placards to identify itself since all Central Armed Police Forces (CASF) wear army-like uniforms, virtually making it indistinguishable from the others. The Army is the last pillar of state authority and it must inspire respect and awe in the citizens and fear in the enemies/rioters. If the CASF and others dress like the army, the latter loses its identity and with it this vital element of awe and fear.  The Army authorities must convince the central government to prohibit wearing of the army-like uniforms by the others. Even the Indian Penal Code makes wearing army-like uniforms a criminal offence.

Brig Harwant Singh (Retd), Mohali

PUBLISHED Today 27 Feb in The Tribune

The panel, in its report, has criticised the defence services for passing such orders in, essentially, what are private matrimonial disputes. –

The Army, Navy and the Air Force Acts provide that the competent authority can impose a cut upto 33 per cent on pay and allowances which can be paid to the wife as maintenance on her application.

A panel of experts of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has slammed the defence services for passing orders granting maintenance allowance to wives of military personnel from their salaries, especially in Army, without due investigation and scrutiny.

The panel, in its report, has criticised the defence services for passing such orders in, essentially, what are private matrimonial disputes. The Army, Navy and the Air Force Acts provide that the competent authority can impose a cut upto 33 per cent on pay and allowances which can be paid to the wife as maintenance on her application. With growing matrimonial disputes, the number of such applications has increased in the last few years especially with the Army granting maintenance to the spouses on almost all applications through non-speaking orders without providing reasons.

An expert committee constituted by the Defence Minister on litigation has however observed that the exceptional provisions are being invoked in a routine manner by defence authorities. It has also found that the system does not have the wherewithal or ability to examine the veracity or truthfulness of the allegations and counter-allegations of both parties which is basically a matter of evidence that can only be weighed and dealt with by civil courts under law legislated for this specific purpose. The panel has said that this exercise can only be carried out under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the relevant Marriage Acts, rather than the defence services getting into what may fundamentally be a civil or private dispute between a husband and his wife. The panel has also observed that even the Army HQ has expressed concern on the issue and that maintenance is meant to tide over a difficult financial situation and not to lead life on someone else’s expense. It has recorded that the award of maintenance results in grave civil consequences for an individual wherein a cut is imposed on his pay and should be taken as a serious matter and not routine. Moreover, it may not be initiated on the fact whether the spouse is working or not but whether she has the capacity to work or not, further adding that a situation cannot be allowed to prevail wherein an otherwise qualified/educated spouse stops working or refuses to take up a job in order to claim maintenance. The Panel has stated that though defence personnel have a bounden duty to maintain their families, such issues should be left to Courts to decide based on evidence. Surprised at the acceptance of an unusually high number of applications by the Army, the committee has questioned, “does it mean that it was found that out of the total applications received, such a high percentage of officers were found wanting in their familial and marital obligations? If yes, then what were the tools available to reach that conclusion?” There has been a rise of litigation on the subject in the past. Recently, a Lt Col had averred that his wife held a Doctorate and also working in a real estate firm but still was awarded maintenance by the Army. Another officer had stated that his wife had a degree of MSc as well as BEd and was earning a huge amount from tuitions and he had elderly parents to look after but still deduction of arrears of maintenance had resulted in disbursement of more than Rs 30,000 to the wife per month while he was being disbursed a amount of just Rs 6000. Another serving Colonel had stated that was being expected put his earnings at the disposal of his wife who was fully qualified and competent to work and was actually working.

New Delhi: The Seventh Pay Commission award becomes boon for central government employees, is not going to be implemented before the implementation of One Rank One Pension (OROP).

Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Friday ruled that only Pervez Musharraf should be tried for treason for subverting the Constitution in 2007, one day after the former president went to court to seek permission to go abroad for medical treatment. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa set aside a special court’s order calling for re-investigation of the high treason case against Musharraf. High treason is punishable with death if proved. Musharraf has pleaded non-guilty. The SC accepted former chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar’s appeal to exclude him from the investigation into the treason case launched against Musharraf in 2013 for imposing emergency in 2007, when he was president.

Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar. Reuters file photo

United Nations, April 2

Clinging to its pro-Pakistan stance, China has asserted that JeM chief and Pathankot terror attack mastermind Masood Azhar does not qualify to be nailed as a “terrorist” to face UN sanctions as his case “did not meet” the Security Council’s requirements.

“Any listing would have to meet the requirements” for blacklisting, Chinese Permanent Representative to the UN Liu Jieyi told reporters yesterday in response to questions over China’s decision to place a ‘technical hold’ on designating Azhar in the UN Sanctions Committee.

“It is the responsibility of all members of the council to make sure that these requirements are followed,” he said, but gave no further details.

Liu’s comments came on a day when China, one of the five permanent members of the 15-nation Council, assumed the rotating presidency of the UNSC for April.

India has reacted strongly to China’s blocking of its bid at the UN to ban the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) chief, saying that the sanctions committee was taking a “selective approach” in tackling terrorism.

In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei on Friday defended China’s decision, saying that it acts on such issues based on facts and rules in an “objective and just manner”.

“We always deal with the listing issue (banning militant groups and their leaders) under the UN Security Council committee established under resolution 1267 based on facts and relevant rules of procedures in an objective and just manner.

“The Chinese side has always been in communication with relevant parties on the listing issue,” he said, hinting that China is also in touch with India on the issue.

India yesterday said it is disappointed that a “technical hold” has been put on its application to include Azhar in the UN sanctions list, terming the move “incomprehensible” that this is despite the JeM being listed in the UN Security Council Committee as far back as 2001 for its known terror activities and links to al-Qaeda.

This is not the first time China has blocked India’s bid to get Pakistan-based militant groups and leaders proscribed by the UN.

The UN had banned the JeM in 2001 but India’s efforts for a ban on Azhar after the 2008 Mumbai terror attack also did not fructify as China, which has veto powers, did not allow the ban apparently at the behest of Pakistan again.

Last July, China had similarly halted India’s move in the UN to take action against Pakistan for its release of Mumbai terror attack mastermind Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, saying that its stand was “based on facts and in the spirit of objectiveness and fairness”, with Beijing again claiming at the time that it was in touch with New Delhi. — PTI