Benazir Bhutto assassination: How Pakistan covered up killing

Benazir Bhutto was the first woman to lead a Muslim country. The decade since an assassin killed her has revealed more about how Pakistan works than it has about who actually ordered her death.

Bhutto was murdered on 27 December 2007 by a 15-year-old suicide bomber called Bilal. She had just finished an election rally in Rawalpindi when he approached her convoy, shot at her and blew himself up. Bilal had been asked to carry out the attack by the Pakistani Taliban.

Benazir Bhutto was the daughter of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan’s first democratically elected prime minister. His political career was also brought to a premature end when he was hanged by the military regime of General Zia-ul Haq. Benazir went on to become prime minister twice in the 1990s, but she was always distrusted by the military, which used corruption allegations to remove her from power.

At the time of her death she was making a bid for a third term as prime minister. The assassination caused widespread civil unrest in Pakistan. Bhutto’s supporters took to the streets, putting up road blocks, lighting fires and chanting anti-Pakistan slogans.

The general and the ‘threatening’ phone call
A decade later, the general in charge of Pakistan at the time has suggested people in the establishment could have been involved in her murder.

Asked whether rogue elements within the establishment could have been in touch with the Taliban about the killing, General Pervez Musharraf replied: “Possibility. Yes indeed. Because the society is polarised on religious lines.”

And, he said, those elements could have had a bearing on her death.

It’s a startling statement from a former Pakistani head of state. Normally military leaders in Pakistan deny any suggestion of state complicity in violent jihadist attacks.

Pervez Musharraf denies threatening Bhutto in a phone call
Asked whether he had any specific information about rogue elements in the state being involved in the assassination, he said: “I don’t have any facts available. But my assessment is very accurate I think… A lady who is in known to be inclined towards the West is seen suspiciously by those elements.”

Musharraf has himself been charged with murder, criminal conspiracy for murder and facilitation for murder in relation to the Bhutto case. Prosecutors say that he phoned Benazir Bhutto in Washington on 25 September, three weeks before she ended eight years in self-imposed exile.

Long-serving Bhutto aide Mark Seighal and journalist Ron Suskind both say they were with Bhutto when the call came in. According to Seighal, immediately after the call Bhutto said: “He threatened me. He told me not to come back. He warned me not to come back.

Musharraf said he would not be responsible for what would happen to Bhutto if she returned, Seighal told the BBC. “And he said that her safety, her security was a function of her relationship with him.”

Musharraf strongly denies making the call and dismisses the idea that he would have ordered her murder. “Honestly I laugh at it,” he recently told the BBC. “Why would I kill her?”

The deadly plot
The legal proceedings against Musharraf have stalled because he is in self-imposed exile in Dubai. Benazir Bhutto’s son and political heir, Bilawal, has rejected his denials out of hand.

“Musharraf exploited this entire situation to assassinate my mother,” he said. “He purposely sabotaged her security so that she would be assassinated and taken off the scene.”

The shot at Bhutto was followed by a bomb blast, which killed her.

While Musharraf’s case is on hold, others have been acquitted of the crime. Within weeks of the assassination, five suspects had confessed to helping the 15-year-old Bilal assassinate Bhutto at the behest of the Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda.

The first person to be arrested, Aitzaz Shah, had been told by the Pakistan Taliban that he would be the suicide bomber chosen to kill Bhutto. Much to his annoyance he was kept in reserve in case the attempt failed.

Two others, Rasheed Ahmed and Sher Zaman, confessed they were mid-ranking organisers of the conspiracy and two Rawalpindi-based cousins, Hasnain Gul and Rafaqat Hussain, told the authorities that they provided accommodation to Bilal the night before the killing.

Even though these confessions were subsequently withdrawn, phone records showing the suspects’ locations and communications in the hours before Bhutto’s murder seem to corroborate them. Hasnain Gul also led the police to some physical evidence in his apartment.

DNA from Bilal’s body parts gathered after his attack and tested in a US lab matched the DNA on some training shoes, cap and a shawl Bilal had left behind in Hasnain’s residence when he put on his suicide vest.

Five alleged plotters were acquitted earlier this year but remain in detention

Just a few months ago prosecutors were confident these alleged plotters would be convicted. But in September the case collapsed, with the judge declaring that procedural errors in the way the evidence was gathered and presented to the court meant he had to acquit them.

A dominant figure in Pakistani politics, Ms Bhutto served twice as the country’s prime minister, from 1988 to 1990 and from 1993 to 1996.

Young and glamorous, she successfully portrayed herself as a refreshing contrast to the male-dominated political establishment.

But after her second fall from power, she became associated in the eyes of some with corruption and bad governance.

Ms Bhutto left Pakistan in 1999, but returned in October 2007 after then-President Musharraf granted her and others an amnesty from corruption charges.

She was set to take part in an election called by Mr Musharraf for January 2008.

But her homecoming procession in Karachi was bombed by suspected militants. She survived the attack, which killed well over 150 people, but would be assassinated two months later.

The husband who became president
In Pakistan it is commonplace to hear people accuse Benazir Bhutto’s widower Asif Zardari of having organised the assassination. The claim is normally based on the observation that since he became president after her death he was the one who benefited most.

The conspiracy theorists, however, have not produced a single shred of evidence to indicate that Asif Zardari was in any way involved in his wife’s death. He has denied the allegation in the strongest possible terms. Those who make the allegation, he said, should “shut up”.

Asif Zardari faces another accusation: that despite having the powers of the presidency, he failed to properly investigate his wife’s murder.

Secret official documents relating to the investigation and obtained by the BBC show that the police inquiries were so poorly managed as to suggest they never wanted to find guilty parties beyond the low-level plotters they had already arrested.

The inadequacies of the police investigations were especially apparent after an unsuccessful attempt on Bhutto’s life on 18 October 2007 – two and a half months before she was killed.

Two suicide bombers attacked her convoy and killed more than 150 people. It remains one of the deadliest attacks ever mounted by violent jihadists in Pakistan.

The police work was so half-hearted that the bombers were never even identified.

The leader of the inquiry, Saud Mirza, has said that one man he established to have been a bomber had distinctive features, suggesting he came from a long-standing but small Karachi-based community of people of African descent.

This potentially significant clue about the suspected bombers identity was never released to the public.

Former President Zardari answers criticisms about the thoroughness of the police work by pointing out that he encouraged the work of Scotland Yard in relation to the murder and secured the appointment of a UN commission of inquiry to examine the circumstances of her death.

That inquiry, however, says it was repeatedly and blatantly blocked not only by the military but also Zardari’s ministers.

“There were many people in the establishment that we wanted to interview but they refused,” said Heraldo Munoz, the head of the UN commission.

And he said some of the obstacles came from the politicians as well as the military.

As the investigation progressed, he said, the safe house the UN team used was withdrawn, as were the anti-terrorist personnel who were protecting the UN staff.

A trail of dead people…

That there was a cover-up is beyond doubt. A BBC investigation found evidence suggesting that two men who helped the teenage assassin reach Benazir Bhutto were themselves shot at a military checkpoint on 15 January 2008.

A senior member of the Zardari government has told the BBC that he believes this was “an encounter” – the term Pakistanis use for extra-judicial killings.

Nadir and Nasrullah Khan were students at the Taliban-supporting Haqqania madrassa in north-west Pakistan. Other students associated with the seminary who were involved in the plot also died.

One of the most detailed official documents obtained by the BBC is an official PowerPoint presentation given to the Sindh provincial assembly.

It names Abad ur Rehman, a former student at the madrassa and bomb-maker who helped provide the suicide jacket used to kill Benazir Bhutto. He was killed in one of Pakistan’s remote tribal areas on 13 May 2010.

Then there was Abdullah who, according to the Sindh assembly presentation, was involved in the transportation of the suicide vests ahead of the Rawalpindi attack that killed Bhutto.

He was killed in Mohmand Agency in northern Pakistan in an explosion on 31 May 2008.

One of the most high-profile deaths related to the assassination was that of Khalid Shahenshah, one of Bhutto’s security guards. Shahenshah was within a few feet of Bhutto as she made her final speech in Rawalpindi.

Phone footage shows him making a series of strange movements for which no one has offered any reasonable explanation.

Although he kept his head completely still, he raised his eyes towards Bhutto while simultaneously running his fingers across his throat. Pictures of his gestures went viral and on 22 July 2008 Shahenshah was shot dead outside his home in Karachi.

The next victim was the state prosecutor, Chaudhry Zulfikar. A lawyer with reputation for high degrees of both competence and doggedness, he told friends he was making real progress on the Bhutto investigation.

Special prosecutor Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali was killed in the capital

On 3 May 2013 he was shot dead on the streets of Islamabad as he was being driven to a legal hearing on the case.

… and one who turns out to be alive
Finally, there is a man who was said to be dead but, in fact, is still alive. In their confessions the alleged plotters said that on the day of the murder a second suicide bomber named Ikramullah accompanied Bilal. Once Bilal had succeeded in his task, Ikramullah’s services were not required and he walked away unharmed.

For years Pakistani officials insisted that Ikramullah had been killed in a drone strike. In 2017 chief prosecutor Mohammad Azhar Chaudhry told the BBC evidence gathered by Pakistani investigating agencies, relatives and government officials established that “Ikramullah is dead”.

In August 2017, however, the Pakistani authorities published a 28-page list of the country’s most wanted terrorists.

Coming in at number nine was Ikramullah, a resident of South Waziristan and involved, the list said, in the suicide attack on Benazir Bhutto.

The BBC understands that Ikramullah is now living in eastern Afghanistan where he has become a mid-ranking Pakistan Taliban commander.

So far the only people punished in relation to the murder of Benazir Bhutto are two police officers who ordered the murder scene in Rawalpindi to be hosed down.

Many Pakistanis regard those convictions as unfair, believing that the police would never have used the hoses without being told to do so by military.

It suggests, once again, a cover-up by Pakistan’s deep state – the hidden network of retired and serving military personnel who take it upon themselves to protect what they consider Pakistan’s vital national interests.

Trump looks to the sky to force Taliban to the table

KABUL: The war in Afghanistan may be entering its 17th year, but screams of military jet engines in the twinkling skies above Bagram Airfield show no sign of quieting.

This city-scale military base just north of Kabul has — like similar facilities in Kandahar and Jalalabad — become central to Donald Trump´s promise to succeed where his predecessors failed, and end the Afghan war on favorable terms.

Trump concluded a months-long strategy review in August. During that soul searching, the White House came to believe that the Obama administration underutilized America´s total aerial superiority.

The skies, they believe, could hold one key to unlocking the conflict.

Trump will likely send a few thousand more troops to the country — a development sure to grab the headlines — but the days of having 100,000 US military personnel in the country are over.

The ground war is likely to fall more and more to Afghan government forces, and early political efforts will be trained, in part, on getting Pakistan to stop providing safe havens for jihadists across the border.

But the first tangible moves have been a significant increase in the tempo and intensity of airstrikes, an effort to take the war to the Taliban.

The US, which is the only foreign force in Afghanistan carrying out airstrikes, targeted the Taliban and Islamic State group militants with 751 bombs and missiles in September, the month after the strategy review.

That was up 50 percent from August and the highest since October 2010, according to US Air Force data.

US Air Force personnel on the ground in Afghanistan report a significant shift in how airpower is being used.

Before, jets patrolled for up to four hours waiting to provide air support to ground forces. But they often returned to Bagram without having fired a shot in anger.

Chocks away
Today, according to Captain Lyndsey Horn, they are much more likely to come back having engaged the Taliban, the Islamic State group or having targeted an opium production facility.

“For a long time here we stagnated,” said a second officer. “The effects so far are positive, the long term effects are harder to tell.”

Vice President Mike Pence, who on Thursday became the most senior member of the Trump administration to visit Afghanistan, says the strategy is starting to make a difference in Taliban morale.

“President Ghani informed me that in 2017 we have eliminated more senior leaders of the Taliban than were eliminated in all the prior years combined,” Pence said after his meeting in Kabul.

“They have begun to see a sea change in the attitudes among the Taliban” he added. The Taliban “are now beginning to question their future, and our hope is, as we take the fight to the enemy… that eventually the enemy will tire of losing and will be willing to come forward.”

Lofty claims of progress are hard to verify, and the Taliban were able to lift their momentum even after the deaths of their first two chiefs, including Mullah Akhtar Mansour who was killed by a US drone strike in 2015 ordered by Trump´s predecessor Barack Obama.

Afghan forces, beset by desertions and corruption, have seen casualties soar to what a US watchdog has described as “shockingly high” levels since NATO forces officially ended their combat mission in 2014, and the figures are now classified in an effort to save morale.

The Taliban continue to control or contest 45 percent of the country´s territory, according to a September analysis by the respected Long War Journal, and have stepped up raids on security installations across Afghanistan.

No recent arrival at Bagram, and certainly not Trump´s Afghan-savvy former generals who had a hand in the new strategy — namely National Security Advisor HR McMaster and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis — believe the Taliban is about to surrender wholesale.

But the White House hopes overwhelming force will exacerbate divisions in the Taliban ranks and help lure more members to the negotiating table, where America´s diplomats will be waiting.

Officials admit the US strategy is not without risk, and the longer it runs the more costs will accrue.

More bombing almost invariably means more civilian casualties, which could further mobilize Afghans against the United States.

And while the US recently wiped out 10 Taliban labs used to process opium into heroin, counter-narcotics experts believe three million Afghan farmers make their living from the crop, which has been described as “a low-risk crop in a high-risk environment.”

UN Jerusalem vote by country: What countries voted against US call on Israel’s capital?

An overwhelming majority of United Nations member states opposed the United States regarding the disputed status of Jerusalem on Thursday.

In what was seen as a massive blow to the US, a total of 128 of the 193-member UN General Assembly agreed to resolve the Holy City dispute through “negotiations in line with relevant UN resolutions”.

The vote followed President’s Trump decision on December 6 to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
The official UN position is that East Jerusalem is part of the occupied Palestinian territory – a sore point of contention for Israel. In 2008 the UN called on for a dual-capital solution.

US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said that the vote “disrespected” America and President Trump
Ms Haley later announced that the US will go ahead with moving its embassy to the disputed city regardless of the vote.

She said: “That is what the American people want us to do and it is the right thing to do.

“This vote will make a difference in how Americans look at the UN.

Adding that the US will “remember this day” when it was “singled out for attack”.

The UK, France, China and Germany were among those who voted in favour of the non-binding motion. Only nine voted against and 35 abstained.

Jerusalem vote: A majority of UN states voted in favour of the motion against the US

Here are the countries that voted in favour of the UN motion:
A: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan
B: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi
C: Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica
E: Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia
F: Finland, France
G: Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guyana
I: Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy
J: Japan, Jordan
K: Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan
L: Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg
M:Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique
N: Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway
O: Oman
P: Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Portugal
Q: Qatar
R: Republic of Korea (South Korea), Russia
S: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria
T: Tajikistan, Thailand, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tunisia, Turkey
U: United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan
V: Venezuela, Vietnam
Y: Yemen
Z: Zimbabwe

Pakistan Church Attacked by 2 Suicide Bombers

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Two suicide bombers attacked a church packed with worshipers on Sunday in southwestern Pakistan, killing at least nine people and injuring at least 35 others, several critically, officials said.

The Islamic State, also known as ISIS, claimed responsibility for the attack in Quetta, the capital of the restive Baluchistan Province, in the country’s southwest. The group’s Amaq News Agency posted a statement online Sunday that said attackers had stormed a church in Quetta, but gave no further details.

The assault raised concerns about the security of religious minorities, especially Christians, in a country with a dismal record when it comes to the treatment and protection of religious minorities, analysts say.

Pakistani officials denied that ISIS had an organized presence in the country, however, even though the terrorist group has claimed responsibility for several other attacks in Baluchistan in recent years.

“Law enforcement agencies have badly failed in protecting common citizens, and minorities in particular,” said Shamaun Alfred Gill, a Christian political and social activist based in Islamabad.

“December is a month of Christian religious rituals,” Mr. Gill said. “We had demanded the government beef up security for churches all over the country. But they have failed to do so.”

Christians make up at least 2 percent of the country’s population of about 198 million. Most of them are marginalized and perform menial jobs.

The attack, a week before the Christmas holiday, unfolded in the early morning hours at Bethel Memorial Methodist Church. About 400 people had gathered for Sunday service when an assailant detonated his explosives-laden vest near the door to the church’s main hall.

Another attacker failed to detonate his suicide jacket and was shot by security forces after an intense firefight, officials said.

Sarfraz Bugti, the provincial home minister, said the death toll could have been higher had the attacker managed to reach the main hall of the church, which is on one of the busiest roads in the city and near several important public buildings.

Local television networks broadcast images of terrified worshipers running out of the church as the attack was underway. Several young girls, wearing white frocks and holding red bags, could be seen fleeing the compound.

Witnesses told local news outlets that people, panicked and frightened, had rushed out after hearing a loud explosion, followed by the sound of gunfire outside.

As security forces moved inside the main hall after the attack, they were confronted by a scene of bloody destruction. Several benches and chairs were overturned. Musical instruments were turned upside down.

A Christmas tree with decorative lights stood at one corner, and blood was outside the door where the suicide bomber had detonated explosives.

Two women were among the dead, and 10 women and seven children were among the injured, hospital officials said.

Most of the injured were taken to the Civil Hospital nearby.

Quetta has been the scene of violent terrorist attacks recently, and a large number of military and paramilitary troops, apart from the police, have been deployed to maintain security.

Officials have repeatedly claimed that they have reduced violence in Baluchistan, a rugged and resource-rich province bordering Afghanistan and Iran. But the ease with which the attackers managed to carry out their assault on Sunday seemed to belie those claims.

“The army repeatedly claims that it has broken the backbone of terrorism in the country,” Mr. Gill said. “But terrorism is still very much present and destroying the lives of common people.”

An insurgency by Baluch separatists has long simmered in the province, and the Taliban and other militants maintain a presence in the region.

Some officials were quick to shift blame toward Afghanistan, pointing to the presence of havens there for militants.

“The terrorists have safe sanctuaries across the border in Afghanistan,” said Anwar-ul Haq Kakar, a spokesman for the Baluchistan government. “They have become a major source of terrorism inside Baluchistan.”

Many minority leaders, however, stressed that there was a bigger need to look inward to ensure security for religious minorities, especially Christians.

“This attack is a serious breach of security,” Mr. Gill said

From Trauma to Inspiration- Three years later APS survivor ready to change the world

Three years after the Army Public School Peshawar attack that claimed life of 144 students, the world might have moved on but not the families and victims of the massacre.

Labelled as the bloodiest attack in the country’s history, it is hard to imagine the struggle of the victims despite moving three years down the memory.

On the night of 15th December 2014, Ahmad Nawaz and his younger brother Haris Nawaz went to bed together, hardly realizing that it would be the last time both of them are sleeping together in a room.

Haris was reluctant to go to school next day but agreed upon his dad, Mohammad Nawaz’s insistence, an agreement that was to haunt Mohammad for years to come.

Haris kept whining all the way to school about how he could have stayed at home and slept.

Ahmed Nawaz, Mohammad Nawaz’s eldest son, aged fifteen at the time, was in the main auditorium of the school, attending a first-aid training session in which they were being taught about how to deal with a calamity in case one happens. It was 10 am and no one had any idea of what may precede.

Mohammad Nawaz was headed toward his car workshop around 10:30 am when he received a phone call informing him about the attack on the school that his two sons had gone to. Not caring much, he continued to go about his daily business, trying to recover from the death of his close relative.

An hour later, he received another phone call which told him about the rising number of casualties being reported from the attack.

Pakistan marks the third anniversary of militant raid on Army Public School
Two of his sons had gone to school that day. He didn’t want to contemplate the options that the situation was presenting to him but pretty soon he was rushing behind the ambulances that were taking injured and dead people from Army Public School to various hospitals in the city.

When the ambulances stopped at one of the hospitals, he started frantically searching for his missing sons.
His phone rang and this time it was his eldest son, Ahmed Nawaz talking to him in a stable voice and telling him of his whereabouts.

Six hours had passed and still no clue was to be found of his second son, Haris Nawaz whom Mohammad had forcefully sent to school in the morning.

His son who was known for having a heart of gold, who would go out of the way to help others and would get stressed when he would see the plight of Muslims abroad, was nowhere to be found.

Mohammad received another call around 4 pm. This time it was his brother asking him whether his younger son wore a watch to school that day.

Surprised, Nawaz checked with his wife who said he didn’t but younger son, Umar Nawaz informed them that he had taken his black watch and worn it to school that day.

The wrist watch became the source through which Haris Nawaz’s mutilated dead body was recognized by his immediate family.

The wrist watch was still clinging on to his chubby wrist when his family found him, as his face was unrecognizable from being blown up with a Kalashnikov.

Hospitals were echoing with crying and screaming mothers, fathers, and relatives of the children whose dead bodies were being brought in by the ambulances.

Body parts belonging to different bodies were scattered everywhere, heads were squished from being blown up by Kalashnikovs.

On December 16, 2014, it was 10 am in the morning and Ahmad and his school mates were gathered in the auditorium where they were being taught about first-aid training.

The first gun shots were heard from near the main hall in the front. Everybody got confused but the training officers assured the students to not worry and continued with the training.

Few minutes later, the door was knocked open by black turban wearing militants who shouted Allah-o-Akbar and opened fire on the hall full of students aged 13 to 16. The otherwise quiet hall turned into a room echoing with gun fires, screams of children, flying furniture and dead bodies falling to the floor.

Ahmad crouched lowest in his seat and tried to make sense of his surroundings. He assumed the situation was part of the first-aid training but the assumption was short-lived when he saw dead bodies falling and blood pouring all around him. Ahmad hid under his chair along with his other friends but their secret was short-lived as the terrorists discovered their hiding place and shouted to each other, “These scums are hiding under their seats. Kill each one of them.”

Ahmad said his last prayers and got ready to embrace death. A man wearing black turban neared the row of chairs under which Ahmad and his friends were hiding and started shooting at the exposed heads and bodies of the children.

Ahmad’s friend was hiding under the chair beside him. The terrorist approached him and fired shots aimed at his head.

Blood, flesh and gunpowder came flying on Ahmad’s face. Now it was Ahmad’s turn to leave the world but as luck had it, Ahmad’s head was hidden under the chair so he received shots in his left arm as the terrorist hurriedly walked by trying to kill ‘every hiding scum’.

The blood pouring from Ahmad’s hand covered his head in a puddle of blood. As soon as the terrorists left, Ahmad along with a few other injured students, who were alive, got up and tried to hide in the dressing room beside the stage.

Ahmad dropped himself at the door of the dressing room as he couldn’t walk any further. The room was full of children and a teacher who were moaning under the excruciating pain of injuries. Just when they thought that the terrorists would not return, they actually did.

This time they not only fired at the injured students but set the little room on fire too. Ahmad who was lying on the floor near the room stayed very still, making no noise and pretending to be dead. The terrorists stepped on him and walked out of the hall.

Ahmad had survived for the second time and was hoping to get rescued before a third encounter and his prayers got answered as he heard the rescue team approaching and hoisted himself up with the remaining energy in his body and reached Lady Reading Hospital in an ambulance full of dead bodies.

A year later admitted in Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, England, Ahmad would wake up at night and tell his parents to close all doors and check the cupboards because ‘black turban wearing men are hiding in it with guns

Ahmad had his first longest surgery to save his arm that lasted for sixteen hours in which the veins of his injured arm were stretched and sewn together to enable it to work normally in future.

Laying on his hospital bed under agonizing pain and trying to come to terms with the loss of a younger brother and pain of an operated arm, Ahmad discovered through Television that about 800 children in UK have left for Syria, Libya, and Iraq to join the militants.

This came as disturbing news to the young lad who would still wake up from dreams shouting and crying and asking ‘the men in black to leave him alone.

It was Ahmad’s moment of realisation as he told his father about how he wishes to spread awareness and tell students in UK about how he has been victim of these militants and how they are not connected to Islam in any way. His dad profusely encouraged him.

Soon afterwards, Ahmad was on his way to physical and psychological recovery with the help of a supporting community at his school, family and friends.

Taking inspiration from his traumatic experience, Ahmad took up the campaign of educating UK students about the terrorist militants who were responsible for taking lives of 144 students in the APS school attack.

With the help of Anne Frank Organization, in September 2015 Ahmad started a campaign on education to reach and aware young students in UK about the curse of militants that is, Taliban.

Ahmad shared his story wherever he went and became a source of inspiration for young school children. Ahmad was called-in by British Prime Minister Theresa May, Speaker of House of Lords Mrs. D’Souza and various other ministers and officials in the House of Commons and House of Lords to encourage and acknowledge his bravery and spirit to make the world a better place.

Three years to the horrific event, Ahmad now stands tall and determined as ever to lead the world toward literacy, peace, and acceptance. He is serving as the youth ambassador of World Merit Organisation, and the Anne Frank Organisation. He has been presented the Award of Bravery and Resilience by Government of Pakistan, and UK and Europe young person of the year award.

Having given speeches as key note speaker at United Nations and attended Estoril conference of the Nobel Prize laureates’ fame, Ahmad is on a mission to make the world a peaceful and safe place for future generations so no other child has to watch their friends and teacher get shot and burned alive to death or wake up at night screaming from nightmares of their murderer’s faces

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/256898-from-trauma-to-inspiration-three-years-later-aps-survivor-ready-to-change-the-world

Pakistan Currency Slides in Effective Devaluation: Rupee falls to near four-year low against the dollar

Pakistan’s rupee slumped to a near four-year low against the U.S. dollar Tuesday, the latest move downward in an effective devaluation of the currency that had been kept steady against the greenback for much of the past two years.

The rupee’s slide began Friday and continued after Pakistan’s central bank signaled a drop in its value would help the country’s economic growth. In all, the rupee has fallen 2.7% in the past three trading days, with one U.S. dollar buying 109.25 rupees in recent action, according to Thomson Reuters data.

With the exception of a short-lived plunge in July, the Pakistani rupee had held at around 105 to the dollar since late 2015, with the State Bank of Pakistan regularly intervening to maintain the currency’s value by selling down its foreign-currency reserves to buy rupees, analysts said.

But the policy has proved difficult to sustain as the country’s trade deficit has widened, thanks to a surge in imports. Net foreign-exchange reserves held by the central bank slumped to their lowest level in at least a year at the end of November.

“They have allowed [the rupee] to devalue,” said Umair Naseer, deputy head of research at Topline Securities, a brokerage firm based in Karachi, referring to the central bank.

The Pakistani rupee’s woes stand out in a year in which many emerging market currencies have performed strongly, thanks to robust global growth and relative dollar weakness as the Federal Reserve refrains from sharp interest rate increases. The Korean won has surged nearly 11% this year, while the Indian rupee has gained more than 5% against the dollar.

Until recent days Pakistan’s government has resisted calls to allow the rupee to fall, hoping that a stable currency would increase confidence in the South Asian nation’s economy. A steady exchange rate has also been seen as a way to encourage the thousands of Pakistanis who work abroad to send money home: Pakistan received $19.8 billion in foreign remittances in 2016—equivalent to 6.9% of the country’s GDP—making it the fifth-largest destination of such flows globally, according to the World Bank.

“A stable currency is seen as an electoral winner … so the authorities have been very reluctant to allow it to sell off,” said Charlie Robertson, global chief economist at Renaissance Capital. Pakistan is set to hold national elections in 2018 and has been plagued by political scandals, including one that led to the ouster of the prime minister in July.

But a sharp rise in imports in the fiscal year ended June, driven by increased shipments of petroleum, machinery and transport equipment, and a decline in exports, have led to a widening of Pakistan’s current account deficit. The Pakistani rupee could be overvalued by around 25%, Mr. Robertson estimates.

The International Monetary Fund in June called for Pakistani officials to allow for greater flexibility in the country’s exchange rate. Typically, a weaker currency makes a country’s exports cheaper globally and makes it more expensive for local residents to buy foreign goods, which should help narrow its trade deficit.

“There was a lot of pressure on the government to loosen its grip on the currency,” said Ruchir Desai, senior investment analyst at Asia Frontier Capital Limited in Hong Kong.

IMF officials are currently in Pakistan for discussions with the country’s leaders. Miftah Ismail, special assistant to the prime minister on economic affairs, said the devaluation has “no relation at all with the IMF.”

Pakistan’s political turmoil has sapped investor demand for the country’s stocks, even after they were admitted to MSCI’s popular index of emerging-market shares this year: The benchmark KSE 100 has dropped 20% this year. The country recently tapped the international bond markets, raising $2.5 billion.

The Asian Development Bank expects Pakistan’s GDP to grow by 5.3% in 2017 and 5.5% in 2018, slightly lower than the averages for developing Asian economies in both years.

—Saeed Shah contributed to this article.

US seeks to quell global outrage over Jerusalem: ‘The sky hasn’t fallen’

Two days after America’s closest allies denounced it in the United Nations, a day after an Israeli air strike killed two in Gaza and hours after protests erupted near the US embassy in Lebanon, Donald Trump’s ambassador to the UN relayed his message to the world: “The sky’s still up there. It hasn’t fallen.”

Nikki Haley echoed that message across three televised appearances on Sunday, four days after the president announced that the US recognizes Jerusalem as capital of Israel. The declaration broke with international consensus, rattled allies across the Middle East, inspired riots and ended decades of US policy in pursuit of a peace agreement between Israeli and Palestinian leaders.

Sporadic violence has broken out in the region since the announcement and four people have been killed, two in an air strike and two in clashes with the Israeli army.

On Friday, 14 of the 15 members of the United Nations security council, including close friends such as Britain and France, excoriated the president’s decision. The US found no solace with allies in the Arab League, which condemned the decision as a “dangerous violation of international law” that “deepens tension, ignites anger and threatens to plunge region into more violence and chaos”.

Allies in the Middle East warned of dramatic consequences. “Mr Trump, Jerusalem is a red line for Muslims,” Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said before the announcement. “This could lead us to break off our diplomatic relations with Israel.”

A few days later, leaders with close ties to the US began to spar. In a speech, Erdoğan called Israel a “terrorist state” for its policies in Palestinian territories.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded on Sunday: “Mr Erdoğan has attacked Israel. I’m not used to receiving lectures about morality from a leader who bombs Kurdish villages in his native Turkey, who jails journalists, helps Iran go around international sanctions and who helps terrorists, including in Gaza.”

Vice-president Mike Pence is due to visit the region later this month. Both the head of Egypt’s Coptic Church and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, have decided not to meet him. Alyssa Farah, a spokeswoman for Pence, said on Sunday it was “unfortunate that the Palestinian Authority is walking away from an opportunity to discuss the future of the region”.

“The administration remains undeterred in its efforts to help achieve peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” Farah said.

Haley argued that the decision has realpolitik logic. She suggested Israeli settlements and Palestinian poverty do not weigh as heavily on the minds of Middle East allies, especially Saudi Arabia, as does Iran’s growing influence in the region.

“We have a whole lot more in common with the Arab League than we have ever had before and mainly that’s because of our fight with Iran,” Haley told CNN’s State of the Union. “What they mostly care about and what is their top priority is Iran, and we are in lockstep with them.”

Asked about fears that the decision, an explicit step in favor of Israel, might inflame extremists in the region, Haley said: “I have no concern.”

The Trump administration and Saudi Arabia’s royals have courted each other since King Salman and the young crown prince gave the president a gilded reception in May.

Trump has continued Barack Obama’s military support for the kingdom’s war in Yemen, with a $110bn arms deal and generally supported the prince’s power plays at home and abroad. Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, made an unannounced visit to the royals in October.

Kushner is tasked with leading peace talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders and visited Israel in June and August. Israel and Saudi Arabia have tentatively stepped into a more collaborative relationship, largely in response to Iran.

Haley argued that the president’s decision reflected his appreciation for facts on the ground. “You’ve got the parliament, the president, the prime minister, the supreme court [in Jerusalem], so why shouldn’t we have the embassy there?”

She insisted, without offering details, that the decision would advance peace talks. “When you recognize the truth, when both parties recognize reality, peace comes,” she told CBS’s Face the Nation. “We are living in the reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.”

Making a similar argument that the Obama administration used in its decision to re-establish relations with Cuba, Haley argued that change for its own sake would be more productive than the status quo.

“The last 22 years, that was a bargaining chip and it got us nowhere closer to peace,” she said. “What if this actually moves the ball forward?”

In the two years after the 2014 Gaza conflict, in which the UN tallied 2,104 Palestinians and 72 Israelis killed, the Obama administration failed to resurrect peace talks. In his 2015 re-election campaign, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu abandoned his call for a two-state solution, then later took it up again while supporting new settlements.

In a February press conference with Netanyahu, Trump dithered on US policy, saying: “I’m looking at two-state and one-state and I like the one that both parties like. I’m very happy with the one that both parties like.”

On Sunday, Haley said Trump administration policy was deliberately vague. “We did not talk about boundaries or borders for a reason,” she said. “Whatever is East Jerusalem or any other part, that’s between Palestinians and Israelis, that is not for Americans to decide.”

Yet she asserted that the president’s announcement “will go down in history” as “the move that finally got the two parties to come to the table”. Skeptics should return in five or 10 years to ask about the peace talks, she said, adding: “I’ll come back and tell you I told you so.”

‘Rid Karachiites of water tankers’: SC says as CM Murad, Kamal appear in unsafe water case

Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah, former Karachi mayor Mustafa Kamal and Karachi police chief Mushtaq Ahmed Mahar appeared before the Supreme Court on Wednesday for a hearing on a plea concerning provision of clean drinking water and safe environment in the province.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar, a three-judge bench at the SC Karachi registry is hearing the constitutional petition of Shahab Usto, a concerned citizen and lawyer, against the provincial government’s failure to provide potable water, better sanitation, environment and associated issues.

The court on Monday had directed Shah to appear in court as the provincial government’s “satisfactory reply” on the issue of provision of clean drinking water and safe environment was not forthcoming.

The court had also directed Kamal, who was the mayor from 2005 to 2010, to appear in court to clarify who he had asked before allotting the 50 acres reserved for the Mehmoodabad treatment plant allegedly to some misplaced people.

When the provincial chief minister appeared at the rostrum at the outset of the hearing on Wednesday, the chief justice remarked that the court had summoned him [Shah] with great respect and dignity.

“Our objective is only to rid people of this polluted water,” he said.

Kamal, who is the chief of Pak Sarzameen Party (PSP), is accompanied at the court by PSP leader Anis Qaimkhani. Advocate general Sindh, the home secretary and managing director of the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB) are also present in the court.

Justice Nisar said he was deeply saddened by the state of affairs and the court wanted to change the situation.
“If you say, you and I can travel to Mithi and both of us will drink a glass of water from the stream,” he said.

A documentary film was then shown in the court about the issue of unsafe drinking water.

The chief justice told Shah the provincial government could seek help from the court if need be and “we will fully assist you”.

Justice Nisar said he wished PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari was present in the court to witness the situation.

“Bilawal Bhutto would also find out the state of affairs in Larkana,” he remarked.

” title=”“>

Documentary shown in court about effluent discharge in Sindh.

Six-month deadline
Addressing the chief minister, Justice Faisal Arab said, “You were elected [by the people] to solve issues,” adding that people turn towards court due to failure of the administration. “The court has no desire of using the administration’s authority.”

The apex court is ready to lend its support to the provincial government, but the chief minister will have to give a guarantee of accomplishing the task, the chief justice remarked.

Justice Nisar inquired as to how much water from the Indus River falls into the sea annually and why this water could not be used to meet the needs of Karachiites.

The chief minister responded that the level of water in the Indus River is very low.

“Badin and Thatta are being destroyed due to shortage of water,” Shah said.

When the CJP proposed a six-month deadline to solve the unsafe drinking water issue, Shah said the task could not be accomplished in six months.

At this, justice remarked that the administration should act and an extension could be given if asked for.
The chief minister assured the court that he would devise an executable plan and fully implement it, but requested time to resolve the issue.

Being the chief minister of Sindh, you will have to submit an affidavit to the court stating the time required for the task, the CJP told Shah. He recommended that Shah should not simply form a committee and leave it on its own.

Shah said he would give the court a time-frame about the plan of action, methods, finances and resources needed for the job.

“You received votes from the people, and you are the one who is answerable [to them],” the CJP said, addressing Shah.

Shah informed the court that Rs3.5 billion are required to clean the effluent that falls into the Indus River.
He said he would try to solve the issues that he has committed to, but the task that belongs to the executive should be left for the executive to do.

“Some court decisions are impacting the performance of the executive,” Shah alleged.

The CJP offered Shah to use the court’s “shoulders” to resolve the issues at hand.

Justice Nisar asked Shah where he resided — at his house or the Chief Minister House.

The chief minister responded that he lives in the Cantonment area and gets water at his house via tankers.

“Shah sahib, rid the lives of Karachiites from tankers,” the CJP urged the chief minister.

Justice Nisar reminded Shah that under the Constitution, the water and sanitation issues fall into the domain of fundamental rights.

“The court has the authority to intervene if the executive does not fulfill its duties,” he stressed.

Justice Nisar said the court will not interfere in the powers enjoyed by the executive and neither was the court expecting overnight improvement.

The court directed the Sindh government to submit a comprehensive plan about the provision of clean drinking water and treatment of sewerage to the court within 15 days.

‘Providing water is local govts’ job’
Former Karachi mayor Mustafa Kamal claimed before the court that Karachi is being provided 1.51 per cent of the water from Sindh’s share.

Kamal said providing safe water and solving sewerage issues is the job of local governments — not the chief minister’s.

He said the population of Karachi will exceed 30 million by 2020 and the city demands 1,250 million gallons of water on a daily basis.

Kamal recommended that water supply projects K-I, II and IV be started simultaneously to save costs.

He said he had drafted the legal master plan of Karachi in 2007, which did not exist earlier.

Addressing the issue of Mehmoodabad treatment plant land, Kamal denied allotting the land to anyone, saying he didn’t have the powers to do so.

The 149.1 acre land was allotted with the approval of the City Council.

The court directed the local bodies secretary to submit a detailed report about the allotment of land meant for Mehmood treatment plant for residential purposes.

‘91% water is contaminated’
The bench had earlier constituted a judicial commission, headed by Justice Iqbal Kalhoro of the Sindh High Court, to probe the government’s failure in providing safe water to the people of the province.

Advocate Usto had informed the judges during the last hearing that the people in 29 districts across the province were drinking contaminated water which was absolutely not fit for human consumption.

“Ninety-one per cent water in Karachi, 85pc in Hyderabad, 88pc in Larkana and 78pc in Shikarpur is contaminated,” he had said, while quoting the reports of the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources.
Waste from hospitals, industries and municipalities was disposed of in rivers across Sindh without proper treatment as the three treatment plants were also not functional, he had added.

“Those who are responsible for this, why aren’t they doing anything?” the CJP had questioned, asking that those who went to people and promised them that they would do this and that, why had they turned a blind eye towards this.

“Such people make big claims but they cannot supply clean water to the nation. Is there anyone who can solve the problems of the nation?”

“We are not the people who bear any grudge against anyone,” the CJP had said, adding that the judges only wanted solution to the problem.

CJP Nisar had said if the issue was not resolved this way, then the court would issue orders. “We can’t stay quiet over the prevailing danger to human lives.

Steve Edwards’s Reviews > Aboard the Democracy Train: A Journey Through Pakistan’s Last Decade of Democracy

Light on character development and providing few insights into the why? of deeply ingrained cultural traditions that superficially at least appear discriminatory, running contrary to values held dear by liberal “westernized” elites from democratic societies.
Otherwise, for the outsider, an exposition of the defacto politics, current affairs and attitudes of a troubled region in the midst of fracticious change and shifting tribal and international allegiences, that resists the tendancy to sensationalise and benefits from the biographical viewpoint of the writer, who should be commended for her bravery, integrity and unwavering dedication to the journalistic profession as a cause for good.

Pakistan is making concessions to religious extremists. What’s the cost?

ISLAMABAD — In the past 10 days, two dramatic events — the government’s capitulation to a violent protest by radical Muslims and the release from house arrest of an anti-India militia leader — have crystallized the sway that hard line Muslim groups increasingly hold in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state whose military leaders claim to be fighting extremist violence.

The freeing of Hafiz Saeed, a Islamist cleric accused of masterminding a deadly rampage in Mumbai nine years ago, came as no surprise. Although denounced as a terrorist by the United Nations and the United States, Saeed enjoys a large following in Pakistan as a fiery champion of Muslim rights in Kashmir, the disputed border region with India. He has been repeatedly detained and released by the courts, a sign of Pakistan’s often-contradictory efforts to secure both domestic Muslim loyalty and international support.

In contrast, the chaotic scenes in late November of angry Muslim demonstrators throwing stones at police near the capital, then rising up across the country to protest a minor change in an electoral law, shocked the nation and raised the specter of mass religious unrest — a permanent worry in an impoverished nation of 207 million, 95 percent of whom are Muslim, most from the same Sunni branch as the protesters.

But the quick resolution of the problem also raised worrisome questions about the long-term capability of the Pakistani government, a fragile democracy whose prime minister was recently ousted, to push back against religious extremism and the risks of bringing in the powerful military to settle civilian disputes.

Saeed was released Nov. 24 after a provincial court found “insufficient evidence” to link him to the four-day Mumbai terror spree in 2008 that killed 164 people. This time, the court action came amid intense pressure from the Trump administration on Pakistan to prove it is not harboring Islamist militias. It also met with especially sharp denunciations from India, an archrival whose Hindu nationalist prime minister has developed a warm relationship with the new administration in Washington.

American officials demanded that Saeed — who was detained in January under U.S. pressure — be arrested again. The U.S. Embassy here expressed “serious concerns” over his release and charged that his now-disbanded militia, Lashkar-e-Taiba, was responsible for the deaths of “hundreds of innocent civilians” in numerous terrorist attacks. Six victims in the Mumbai bombing and shooting attack, which Indian and U.S. officials believe was carried out by Lashkar-e-Taiba commandos, were U.S. citizens.

In Pakistan, though, Saeed remains a force to be reckoned with and a political survivor who has continually reinvented his movement, changing its name and founding a charitable offshoot that helps people in emergencies. In October, after years of denouncing electoral politics, he also formed a political party, and its candidate performed better than expected in a race for parliament. After he was released, he triumphantly returned to his Friday pulpit in Lahore and demanded that his name be removed from the U.N. sanctions list.

While Saeed’s supporters were celebrating his return to the public arena, a tense drama was playing out in the capital between another religious firebrand and government security forces. The confrontation that erupted early on Nov. 25 quickly escalated into a nationwide protest surge and ended 24 hours later in triumph for the protesters and embarrassment for the government, which accepted virtually all of their demands.

In contrast to Saeed, a well-established though controversial leader in Pakistan, the recent protests thrust a little-known, rabble-rousing cleric into the news. Within 48 hours, Khadim Hussain Rizvi had exhorted his supporters to violence, sparked mini-protests across the country, stared down civilian officials, bargained hard with the army — and became a household name.

Unlike Saeed, Rizvi is not associated with armed militant groups. His movement is built around reverence and love for Muhammad as Islam’s final prophet. On Friday night, just one week after the angry protests subsided, Pakistani Muslims everywhere jubilantly celebrated Muhammad’s birthday, thronging streets hung with dazzling lights and gathering around tents where devotees recited chants glorifying him.

But Rizvi’s movement is also harsh and extreme in its views. It has built a cult around a man who assassinated a provincial governor for religious reasons, believes blasphemers should be executed and crusades against Ahmedis, a small religious minority that follows a later prophet. The protests were raised against a change in electoral laws that softened requirements for candidates to avow Muhammad as the final prophet — a move that Rizvi’s group suspected was aimed at increasing the political participation of Ahmedis.

The price of pacifying Rizvi and his followers, many Pakistani leaders and commentators said, may be the emboldening of other fanatical Muslim groups, a further weakening of civilian authority, an increased potential for the military to intervene, and a rise in both sectarian hatred and conflict between rival Sunni schools. Some warn that the foundations of Pakistan’s fragile democracy have been shaken.

“This is a steep descent into a bottomless pit for the state and society,” said Faratullah Babar, a liberal senator. “It is the abject surrender of the constitutional government to a lawless mob” whose leaders seek to gain power through the “facade of religion.”

Others suggest that the episode signifies a growing confluence of interest between hard line religious groups and the military, whose leaders have vowed to stay out of politics but are known to be unhappy with both the ruling party and its top electoral rival, the movement led by cricket legend Imran Khan.

Imtiaz Alam, writing Thursday in The News International newspaper, noted that the state, which once encouraged militant groups like Saeed’s to fight in India and Afghanistan, has now abetted the domestic agenda of a fanatical strain within Pakistan’s large, mainstream Sunni group, the Barelvis. “The law of the jungle is to prevail,” he warned. “The state has left its citizens . . . at the mercy of demons.”

Much of this drama will play out in Punjab province, the country’s most populous and wealthy region, and its capital, Lahore. Punjab is the home base of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League, headed by the former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif. The party has been riven by divisions and disarray since Sharif was ousted by the Supreme Court in July and will be fighting for its political life next year.

The Lahore area is also the headquarters of Saeed’s operations, as well as Rizvi’s smaller Movement in Service to the Messenger of God. The provincial government and courts have long been criticized for coddling Islamic extremists — allowing Saeed to preach freely, radical Islamic students to intimidate university campuses, and hard line sectarian groups to operate. Recently authorities agreed to allow Rizvi’s group to influence school curriculums and blasphemy cases.

But that policy of appeasement may have backfired. Both Saeed and Rizvi fielded candidates in the October race to fill Sharif’s seat in parliament — and both won far more votes than expected. Now, the successful protests have put Rizvi’s group in a position to challenge the Sharifs on their home turf and play a central role in next year’s polls.