A day after the resignation of Pushpa Kumar Dahal, Nepal’s first Maoist Prime Minister, a video called "Prachandagate” is the talk of this Himalayan Republic.
All this doesn’t augur well for the peace process and India that has invested so much in it. New Delhi’s only recourse can be to keep its channels open with the Maoists and hope for the best. Named after Dahal’s nom de guerre (a fictitious name used when the person performs a particular social role), which means “the fierce one,” it shows Prachanda while addressing Maoist cadres, talking about how he hoodwinked everyone about the “real numbers” of his army.
"You also know we were just 7,000 to 8,000. But our strategy was to convince them that we were 35,000,” he is seen saying in the one-year-old video. “That way, we infiltrate more people into the Nepal Army.”
In the video, Dahal tells his troops that he wants control over the Nepal Army and eventually, he hopes to transform the country to a single-party rule. “That is our strategy.”
On a day where only sporadic incidents of protest were reported from Kathmandu, and a large number of political parties sat closeted inside a room trying to thrash out an alternative government, the video made top news.
Maoist leader Mohan Baidya, while confirming the genuineness of the tape, made light of it by saying this was “old strategy” and the thinking within his party had completely changed. “One should really investigate why has this tape suddenly surfaced after a year at this time,” he added.
Baidya’s hint is clear – he means the Indian government and its alleged Machiavellian role in Nepal’s politics. If Dahal was subtle in his resignation speech on Monday, his number two and the Finance Minister Baburam Bhattarai was bludgeon-like. “India was behind this. It is going to cost India dearly…” The Maoists, clearly, have decided to whip up the old anti-India blame game frenzy.
Right from the days of King Mahendra, the “blame India” game has been played out in Kathmandu’s corridors of power – often with justification. The role of the Indian Embassy here is always seen with intrigue and is considered a part and parcel of the power equation.
This time too, analysts say, Indians had a strong interest in ensuring Gen Rookmangad Katawal stayed on as Army Chief. First, Katawal has close contacts with India’s top military brass and secondly the man who would have succeeded him – Gen Kulbahadur Khadka — is seen to be close to the Maoists.
Besides, there was the China factor. Nepal’s “Big Red” neighbour usually always dealt with the royal palace. But now, after the abolition of monarchy, it has decided to increase its sphere of influence and is openly wooing Nepal’s political parties including the Maoists. In fact, had he not resigned, Prachanda was scheduled for a Beijing visit that could have led to the signing of the first Sino-Nepal Friendship Treaty. So what happens now? The 21 parties who met on Tuesday have already declared that they shall form a national government on consensus. The Nepali Congress Vice President Ram Chandra Poudel said, “We will try to form a consensual government within the time as asked by the President.”
That means as soon as Saturday, Nepal could have a new government.
But Dahal and his party, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal, are still sulking. The Maoists skipped the all-party meeting on Tuesday, instead demanding an apology from President Ram Baran Yadav for saving Gen Katawal. They have also vowed to stall proceedings in the House.
All this doesn’t augur well for the peace process and India that has invested so much in it. New Delhi’s only recourse can be to keep its channels open with the Maoists and hope for the best.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
It’s hands off mothers-to-be
Government-funded health workers often refuse to treat pregnant Dalit women. When they do, they demand bribes and then refuse to touch the patients while medically examining them. Even injections are administered without touching the women.
A survey by Jansahas, an NGO, and Unicef reveals these, and other, gruesome cases of caste discrimination in four districts — Jhabua, Sheopur, Katni and Ujjain —in Madhya Pradesh. Hindustan Times reported this first on Tuesday in a report titled Apartheid funded by the Indian tax-payer.
The survey has revealed that assistant nursing matrons (ANMs) or Asha Workers, who are responsible for delivering government-funded health benefits to poor people, seldom visit dalit localities. When they do, they don’t touch pregnant Dalit women while medically examining them.
And finally, Dalit women have to pay a major part of the monetary benefits they receive under the government’s Janani Suraksha Yojana (Mother Protection Scheme) as bribes to these ANMs and, sometimes, even to doctors.
The ANMs visit the villages once a month without intimation and examine pregnant women only in Anganwadi centres. “Since most of the Anganwadi centres are run from the homes of upper caste peoples, Dalit women, who are denied entry into these, are deprived of any medical attention,” Jan Sahas activist Ashif Sheikh told Hindustan Times.
In cases where they do receive treatment, Dalit women are the last to be examined — after the last non-dalit woman has left.
Then, even injections are administered without touching them, the survey showed. Injections administered in this manner increase the possibility of the needles breaking, thus, exposing the patients to medical complications.
“As many as 42 per cent of the young Dalit mothers surveyed claimed that they avoided visiting the Anganwadi centres because of caste discrimination,” he said, adding that 96 per cent of Dalit women surveyed said they had experience some form of discrimination, the most common being casteist abuses.
Around 23 per cent of Dalit women are deprived of the monetary benefits they are entitled to under the government’s Janani Surakhsa Yojana.
“Legally, they are entitled to free medical care during deliveries, but in practice, 86 per cent of Dalit women had to spend money,” said Sheikh.
courtsey: Hindusthan times
A survey by Jansahas, an NGO, and Unicef reveals these, and other, gruesome cases of caste discrimination in four districts — Jhabua, Sheopur, Katni and Ujjain —in Madhya Pradesh. Hindustan Times reported this first on Tuesday in a report titled Apartheid funded by the Indian tax-payer.
The survey has revealed that assistant nursing matrons (ANMs) or Asha Workers, who are responsible for delivering government-funded health benefits to poor people, seldom visit dalit localities. When they do, they don’t touch pregnant Dalit women while medically examining them.
And finally, Dalit women have to pay a major part of the monetary benefits they receive under the government’s Janani Suraksha Yojana (Mother Protection Scheme) as bribes to these ANMs and, sometimes, even to doctors.
The ANMs visit the villages once a month without intimation and examine pregnant women only in Anganwadi centres. “Since most of the Anganwadi centres are run from the homes of upper caste peoples, Dalit women, who are denied entry into these, are deprived of any medical attention,” Jan Sahas activist Ashif Sheikh told Hindustan Times.
In cases where they do receive treatment, Dalit women are the last to be examined — after the last non-dalit woman has left.
Then, even injections are administered without touching them, the survey showed. Injections administered in this manner increase the possibility of the needles breaking, thus, exposing the patients to medical complications.
“As many as 42 per cent of the young Dalit mothers surveyed claimed that they avoided visiting the Anganwadi centres because of caste discrimination,” he said, adding that 96 per cent of Dalit women surveyed said they had experience some form of discrimination, the most common being casteist abuses.
Around 23 per cent of Dalit women are deprived of the monetary benefits they are entitled to under the government’s Janani Surakhsa Yojana.
“Legally, they are entitled to free medical care during deliveries, but in practice, 86 per cent of Dalit women had to spend money,” said Sheikh.
courtsey: Hindusthan times
US regulators warn Procter & Gamble plant over unsanitary conditions at Puerto Rico plant
U.S. regulators warned Procter & Gamble Co. over unsanitary conditions at a plant that makes Olay skin care products and Vicks cold medicine in Puerto Rico, according to a letter released Tuesday.
The warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration said problems at the Olay LLC plant in Cayey may have caused contamination or threatened the health of consumers. It faulted failures in following procedures for cleaning maintenance equipment.
An inspection found over-the-counter drug products have been "prepared, packed and held under unsanitary conditions whereby they may have been contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health," said the letter.
Paul Fox, a spokesman for Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble, said none of the issues raised by the FDA compromised the safety of any products.
But he said FDA inspectors did identify areas "where we can and will make improvements," and the company has begun a review of the plant's manufacturing practices.
The FDA letter, dated April 24, described violations that inspectors found between August and November 2008. It told the company to respond within 15 days with a plan to bring the plant in line with federal regulations.
Among other problems the letter cited the plant for not investigating evidence of possible contamination, including "health effect-related complaints" for its Vick Sinex product.
Procter & Gamble, which has about 700 employees in this U.S. Caribbean territory, said last month it was cutting about 90 part-time jobs at the plant in the central town of Cayey as part of a broader restructuring.
The warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration said problems at the Olay LLC plant in Cayey may have caused contamination or threatened the health of consumers. It faulted failures in following procedures for cleaning maintenance equipment.
An inspection found over-the-counter drug products have been "prepared, packed and held under unsanitary conditions whereby they may have been contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health," said the letter.
Paul Fox, a spokesman for Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble, said none of the issues raised by the FDA compromised the safety of any products.
But he said FDA inspectors did identify areas "where we can and will make improvements," and the company has begun a review of the plant's manufacturing practices.
The FDA letter, dated April 24, described violations that inspectors found between August and November 2008. It told the company to respond within 15 days with a plan to bring the plant in line with federal regulations.
Among other problems the letter cited the plant for not investigating evidence of possible contamination, including "health effect-related complaints" for its Vick Sinex product.
Procter & Gamble, which has about 700 employees in this U.S. Caribbean territory, said last month it was cutting about 90 part-time jobs at the plant in the central town of Cayey as part of a broader restructuring.
Obama prepares to meet with leaders of Afghanistan, Pakistan
President Obama begins two days of talks Wednesday with the leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan to hastily overhaul a painstakingly developed security strategy that was unveiled only five weeks ago but is already badly outdated.
The three countries spent months developing the plan to combat an insurgency centered in eastern Afghanistan, near the Pakistani border. But they are being forced to switch focus because of growing militant activity in Pakistan that is emerging as Obama's first major foreign policy crisis.
U.S. officials fear the militants could fracture Pakistan, destabilizing the region and even posing potential risks to control of Islamabad's nuclear arsenal.
Obama today will press Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to intensify his country's fight against the insurgency, step up economic development efforts and reach out to political rivals to broaden the fragile government's base of support.
Yet U.S. officials acknowledge that their influence on the government is limited, consisting mostly of the money and arms they can supply. One sign of America's limited influence is that the Pakistani who has the most control over the country's military effort, army Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, won't be at the meetings.
Afghanistan, in contrast, seems more manageable: "By comparison, it looks like Canada," one U.S. official said in an interview.
The talks convene as intensified fighting rages in Pakistan's Swat Valley, near Islamabad, the capital. Officials had hoped to achieve a cease-fire there by agreeing to Taliban control over much of the area. But Taliban militants last month attempted to advance closer to the capital, igniting the military confrontation.
Obama announced his new Afghanistan-Pakistan security plan in March, pledging extra combat forces and training units for Afghanistan and aid to Pakistan. But the Taliban advances and subsequent fighting in Pakistan have overtaken that strategy.
Obama today will meet separately with Zardari and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and then will meet with them together.
The two-day talks will also bring together senior military, intelligence and political officials in working groups in an effort to better coordinate their activities.
At the same time, administration officials are seeking regional support for the new efforts. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, visiting Riyadh, the Saudi capital, appealed for Saudi Arabia's help in backing Pakistani efforts to repel the militants.
Both Karzai and Zardari met with top lawmakers and policy analysts in Washington today.
The job of the three leaders is complicated by intense Pakistani opposition to U.S. airstrikes by unmanned aircraft there and by rising Afghan frustration over civilian casualties.
In one acknowledgment of the anti-American sentiments, U.S. and Pakistani leaders will lay out plans at the talks to train Pakistani troops elsewhere in the region, discreetly out of sight.
The summit comes at a time of unusual friction in U.S.-Pakistani relations. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said last month that the Zardari government had "basically abdicated" to militants.
She and other U.S. officials have spoken openly about concerns over the security of Pakistan's estimated 60 to 100 nuclear weapons, a subject that previous U.S. administrations avoided in public.
Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, said the two countries were in agreement on the way forward, and predicted that in the talks "past recriminations about who is to blame will be replaced by plans for who will do what." Pakistani officials have complained that despite U.S. commitments, little new economic and military aid has been sent.
The Defense Department has proposed $400 million for military aid, and the State Department is pushing for $497 million for economic, law enforcement and humanitarian assistance. In addition, Obama's regional strategy proposed $1.5 billion a year for five years as part of a bill that also sets conditions for the aid.
Pakistanis dislike the conditions, saying they represent meddling and pose both political and operational problems.
Similarly, Pakistanis have objected to U.S. overtures to former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, a move the Obama administration has said is no different than contacts with opposition leaders in other countries but that Pakistanis fear is meant to undermine Zardari's government.
The security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is a particular concern of Obama's, officials said.
"The security of nuclear weapons in Pakistan, and the security of nuclear weapons throughout the world, is something that the president thinks is of the highest priority," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said.
However, Zardari said in a CNN interview that the nuclear weapons were "definitely safe" and that there was no risk the militants would take them over.
"It doesn't work like that," he said. "We have a 700,000-[man] army." Private analysts say Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is dispersed widely throughout the country but includes several top-secret facilities near the country's capital.
"Right now the security is pretty good -- and it's as good or bad as the Pakistani army," said Teresita Schaffer, director of the South Asia program for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "If down the road you see the Pakistani government become more shaky . . . that could be impaired."
To help counter the militants, U.S. officials would like Pakistan to draw from the force it has massed on its border with rival India.
Administration officials said Obama would avoid lobbying Zardari directly on shifting forces from the Indian border, or on other specific steps. But other U.S. officials have not avoided being blunt in their recommendations.
"We need to put the most heavy possible pressure on our friends in Pakistan to join us in the fight against the Taliban and its allies," Richard C. Holbrooke, Obama's representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan, said in testimony before a House committee Tuesday.
Like talks between Obama and Zardari, U.S. discussions with Karzai could be strained. U.S. officials have criticized his leadership and what many say is his tolerance of corruption.
Karzai's relationship with the administration has been notably cooler than the cordial bond he enjoyed with former President Bush. Heading into his election campaign, the Afghan leader has sought to distance himself from elements of the Western-led military effort.
Karzai has criticized Western forces over civilian casualties, but has also been critical of the effectiveness of development aid, asserting that Afghans had hoped they would be much better off by now, nearly eight years after the fall of the Taliban.
On the eve of his departure for Washington, Karzai named an ex-warlord as one of his two vice presidential running mates. The choice of Mohammad Qasim Fahim caused dismay among Western diplomats.
In an address Tuesday to the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, Karzai urged policymakers to be careful in the use of military force.
"In the longer term, the war on terrorism will succeed only if it is also addressed in a political manner," Karzai said. "It's not a military question at all. It's more a political question now."
The three countries spent months developing the plan to combat an insurgency centered in eastern Afghanistan, near the Pakistani border. But they are being forced to switch focus because of growing militant activity in Pakistan that is emerging as Obama's first major foreign policy crisis.
U.S. officials fear the militants could fracture Pakistan, destabilizing the region and even posing potential risks to control of Islamabad's nuclear arsenal.
Obama today will press Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to intensify his country's fight against the insurgency, step up economic development efforts and reach out to political rivals to broaden the fragile government's base of support.
Yet U.S. officials acknowledge that their influence on the government is limited, consisting mostly of the money and arms they can supply. One sign of America's limited influence is that the Pakistani who has the most control over the country's military effort, army Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, won't be at the meetings.
Afghanistan, in contrast, seems more manageable: "By comparison, it looks like Canada," one U.S. official said in an interview.
The talks convene as intensified fighting rages in Pakistan's Swat Valley, near Islamabad, the capital. Officials had hoped to achieve a cease-fire there by agreeing to Taliban control over much of the area. But Taliban militants last month attempted to advance closer to the capital, igniting the military confrontation.
Obama announced his new Afghanistan-Pakistan security plan in March, pledging extra combat forces and training units for Afghanistan and aid to Pakistan. But the Taliban advances and subsequent fighting in Pakistan have overtaken that strategy.
Obama today will meet separately with Zardari and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and then will meet with them together.
The two-day talks will also bring together senior military, intelligence and political officials in working groups in an effort to better coordinate their activities.
At the same time, administration officials are seeking regional support for the new efforts. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, visiting Riyadh, the Saudi capital, appealed for Saudi Arabia's help in backing Pakistani efforts to repel the militants.
Both Karzai and Zardari met with top lawmakers and policy analysts in Washington today.
The job of the three leaders is complicated by intense Pakistani opposition to U.S. airstrikes by unmanned aircraft there and by rising Afghan frustration over civilian casualties.
In one acknowledgment of the anti-American sentiments, U.S. and Pakistani leaders will lay out plans at the talks to train Pakistani troops elsewhere in the region, discreetly out of sight.
The summit comes at a time of unusual friction in U.S.-Pakistani relations. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said last month that the Zardari government had "basically abdicated" to militants.
She and other U.S. officials have spoken openly about concerns over the security of Pakistan's estimated 60 to 100 nuclear weapons, a subject that previous U.S. administrations avoided in public.
Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, said the two countries were in agreement on the way forward, and predicted that in the talks "past recriminations about who is to blame will be replaced by plans for who will do what." Pakistani officials have complained that despite U.S. commitments, little new economic and military aid has been sent.
The Defense Department has proposed $400 million for military aid, and the State Department is pushing for $497 million for economic, law enforcement and humanitarian assistance. In addition, Obama's regional strategy proposed $1.5 billion a year for five years as part of a bill that also sets conditions for the aid.
Pakistanis dislike the conditions, saying they represent meddling and pose both political and operational problems.
Similarly, Pakistanis have objected to U.S. overtures to former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, a move the Obama administration has said is no different than contacts with opposition leaders in other countries but that Pakistanis fear is meant to undermine Zardari's government.
The security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is a particular concern of Obama's, officials said.
"The security of nuclear weapons in Pakistan, and the security of nuclear weapons throughout the world, is something that the president thinks is of the highest priority," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said.
However, Zardari said in a CNN interview that the nuclear weapons were "definitely safe" and that there was no risk the militants would take them over.
"It doesn't work like that," he said. "We have a 700,000-[man] army." Private analysts say Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is dispersed widely throughout the country but includes several top-secret facilities near the country's capital.
"Right now the security is pretty good -- and it's as good or bad as the Pakistani army," said Teresita Schaffer, director of the South Asia program for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "If down the road you see the Pakistani government become more shaky . . . that could be impaired."
To help counter the militants, U.S. officials would like Pakistan to draw from the force it has massed on its border with rival India.
Administration officials said Obama would avoid lobbying Zardari directly on shifting forces from the Indian border, or on other specific steps. But other U.S. officials have not avoided being blunt in their recommendations.
"We need to put the most heavy possible pressure on our friends in Pakistan to join us in the fight against the Taliban and its allies," Richard C. Holbrooke, Obama's representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan, said in testimony before a House committee Tuesday.
Like talks between Obama and Zardari, U.S. discussions with Karzai could be strained. U.S. officials have criticized his leadership and what many say is his tolerance of corruption.
Karzai's relationship with the administration has been notably cooler than the cordial bond he enjoyed with former President Bush. Heading into his election campaign, the Afghan leader has sought to distance himself from elements of the Western-led military effort.
Karzai has criticized Western forces over civilian casualties, but has also been critical of the effectiveness of development aid, asserting that Afghans had hoped they would be much better off by now, nearly eight years after the fall of the Taliban.
On the eve of his departure for Washington, Karzai named an ex-warlord as one of his two vice presidential running mates. The choice of Mohammad Qasim Fahim caused dismay among Western diplomats.
In an address Tuesday to the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, Karzai urged policymakers to be careful in the use of military force.
"In the longer term, the war on terrorism will succeed only if it is also addressed in a political manner," Karzai said. "It's not a military question at all. It's more a political question now."
Pakistani Army Poised for New Push into Swat
Residents were flooding out of the Swat valley by the thousands on Tuesday as the government prepared to mount a new military operation against Taliban militants there after the collapse of a peace deal negotiated in February.
Residents fled aboard a bus leaving Mingora, the main town in the Swat Valley of Pakistan, on Tuesday after a government official urged residents in some neighborhoods to seek safety. More Photos >
For weeks the Taliban have flaunted their disregard for the February peace accord, and two weeks ago they used the territory all but ceded to them under the deal to launch an offensive into another district, Buner, 60 miles from the capital.
This week the Taliban reversed the only achievement of the deal, a ceasefire in the Swat district capital, Mingora, which they seized control of Sunday, when their turbaned fighters laid siege to several police stations, a local lawyer and resident of the town said.
The Taliban’s armed return to Mingora on Sunday signaled the final breakdown in the government’s efforts to negotiate a peaceful solution to two years of fighting that has costs thousands of lives and damaged homes and livelihoods the length of the once-prosperous farming valley of Swat.
The Pakistani military, which is fighting to clear militants from two other districts of the North West Frontier Province, Dir and Buner, now appears ready to push its operations into Swat once again.
But the question remains whether the military has the will and capability to sustain its operations in three districts. The task in Swat remains hugely difficult, not least because the Taliban were digging in and mining the streets, according to residents, and the military had already failed to drive out the Taliban before it agreed to the February accord.
But public opinion in Pakistan toward the Taliban has undergone an important shift since the deal, and has now apparently given the military more confidence to move with full force against the Taliban.
A recent video showing the Taliban flogging a young woman as the militants clamped down their version of Islam law on Swat shocked the nation. The government has taken great pains to show its efforts to make the Swat peace deal work.
Finally, the Taliban incursion into Buner two weeks ago solidified a growing consensus that the Taliban had gone too far and that the military needed to stand up to the insurgents, and it has provided the catalyst for the military to act.
The media, politicians and even religious leaders are now speaking out against the extremist position of Maulana Sufi Muhammad, the main negotiator on the Swat deal, and Mullah Fazlullah, his son-in-law, who has links to the Qaeda-backed Taliban movement based in Pakistan’s tribal areas.
Leaders of the Awami National Party, which governs the North West Frontier Province where all of the districts are located, still stand by the deal, which it says has been critical in winning people away from the militants and over to the side of the government.
The peace deal was popular among the people of Swat, who were desperate for peace and angered by the heavy-handed military campaign in the valley. But over the last three months of efforts to make the deal work, the Taliban have revealed that they have no intention of ending their insurgency. It has also become apparent that Maulana Muhammad is not able to control the militants, the politicians say.
There is no doubt that the military is fighting this campaign seriously, said Maulana Yousuf Shah, general secretary of the Jamiat-u-Ulama-i-Islam-S, a political party that is close to the Taliban and has helped negotiations between the two sides.
A Supreme Court lawyer Anees Jillani, who visited Swat recently, said the military remains divided and some have sympathy for the Islamists and are not willing to fight.
“When you ask them why are you not defeating them, they ask: ‘Why should we?’ and you ask about Sufi Muhammad, they say: ‘What’s wrong with him?’” he said.
On the ground, however, there has been a significant change in the military and paramilitary forces ranged against the Taliban.
Under the leadership of Maj. Gen. Tariq Khan, an energetic and determined commander, the Frontier Corps, the local Pashtun paramilitary force, has become better armed and equipped in recent months, with the help of the United States.
Supported by army units, it has proved itself better able to push back the Taliban, first in the tribal areas in Bajaur last year, and now in Buner, though at big cost to civilians caught up in the operations.
Anti-terrorist police units have also been deployed in the operations in some outlying districts, in police actions that are better suited to counterinsurgency operations.
Peshawar anti-terrorist police units have killed 88 suspected militants in the last four months, cracking down on the kidnapping and general lawlessness that were reaching right into the city, a senior police official said, asking not to be named because of the nature of his work.
“It is a manageable problem,” he said, when asked whether Pakistan can contain the militant threat. “It does not take much to dishevel them,” he said.
American support has been critical in the improvement of the Frontier Corps and the police are hoping for the same help, he said. “If Uncle Sam shows the same generosity to our force, I don’t see why we cannot be a good supporting force,” he said.
He said it was critical to have weapons and equipment that were better than those used by the militants.
“It’s a bad situation, but certainly not a lost situation,” he said. “It’s not false bravado, I have seen the small dent we have made in this area. That has made them more hesitant of operating in this area.”
Residents fled aboard a bus leaving Mingora, the main town in the Swat Valley of Pakistan, on Tuesday after a government official urged residents in some neighborhoods to seek safety. More Photos >
For weeks the Taliban have flaunted their disregard for the February peace accord, and two weeks ago they used the territory all but ceded to them under the deal to launch an offensive into another district, Buner, 60 miles from the capital.
This week the Taliban reversed the only achievement of the deal, a ceasefire in the Swat district capital, Mingora, which they seized control of Sunday, when their turbaned fighters laid siege to several police stations, a local lawyer and resident of the town said.
The Taliban’s armed return to Mingora on Sunday signaled the final breakdown in the government’s efforts to negotiate a peaceful solution to two years of fighting that has costs thousands of lives and damaged homes and livelihoods the length of the once-prosperous farming valley of Swat.
The Pakistani military, which is fighting to clear militants from two other districts of the North West Frontier Province, Dir and Buner, now appears ready to push its operations into Swat once again.
But the question remains whether the military has the will and capability to sustain its operations in three districts. The task in Swat remains hugely difficult, not least because the Taliban were digging in and mining the streets, according to residents, and the military had already failed to drive out the Taliban before it agreed to the February accord.
But public opinion in Pakistan toward the Taliban has undergone an important shift since the deal, and has now apparently given the military more confidence to move with full force against the Taliban.
A recent video showing the Taliban flogging a young woman as the militants clamped down their version of Islam law on Swat shocked the nation. The government has taken great pains to show its efforts to make the Swat peace deal work.
Finally, the Taliban incursion into Buner two weeks ago solidified a growing consensus that the Taliban had gone too far and that the military needed to stand up to the insurgents, and it has provided the catalyst for the military to act.
The media, politicians and even religious leaders are now speaking out against the extremist position of Maulana Sufi Muhammad, the main negotiator on the Swat deal, and Mullah Fazlullah, his son-in-law, who has links to the Qaeda-backed Taliban movement based in Pakistan’s tribal areas.
Leaders of the Awami National Party, which governs the North West Frontier Province where all of the districts are located, still stand by the deal, which it says has been critical in winning people away from the militants and over to the side of the government.
The peace deal was popular among the people of Swat, who were desperate for peace and angered by the heavy-handed military campaign in the valley. But over the last three months of efforts to make the deal work, the Taliban have revealed that they have no intention of ending their insurgency. It has also become apparent that Maulana Muhammad is not able to control the militants, the politicians say.
There is no doubt that the military is fighting this campaign seriously, said Maulana Yousuf Shah, general secretary of the Jamiat-u-Ulama-i-Islam-S, a political party that is close to the Taliban and has helped negotiations between the two sides.
A Supreme Court lawyer Anees Jillani, who visited Swat recently, said the military remains divided and some have sympathy for the Islamists and are not willing to fight.
“When you ask them why are you not defeating them, they ask: ‘Why should we?’ and you ask about Sufi Muhammad, they say: ‘What’s wrong with him?’” he said.
On the ground, however, there has been a significant change in the military and paramilitary forces ranged against the Taliban.
Under the leadership of Maj. Gen. Tariq Khan, an energetic and determined commander, the Frontier Corps, the local Pashtun paramilitary force, has become better armed and equipped in recent months, with the help of the United States.
Supported by army units, it has proved itself better able to push back the Taliban, first in the tribal areas in Bajaur last year, and now in Buner, though at big cost to civilians caught up in the operations.
Anti-terrorist police units have also been deployed in the operations in some outlying districts, in police actions that are better suited to counterinsurgency operations.
Peshawar anti-terrorist police units have killed 88 suspected militants in the last four months, cracking down on the kidnapping and general lawlessness that were reaching right into the city, a senior police official said, asking not to be named because of the nature of his work.
“It is a manageable problem,” he said, when asked whether Pakistan can contain the militant threat. “It does not take much to dishevel them,” he said.
American support has been critical in the improvement of the Frontier Corps and the police are hoping for the same help, he said. “If Uncle Sam shows the same generosity to our force, I don’t see why we cannot be a good supporting force,” he said.
He said it was critical to have weapons and equipment that were better than those used by the militants.
“It’s a bad situation, but certainly not a lost situation,” he said. “It’s not false bravado, I have seen the small dent we have made in this area. That has made them more hesitant of operating in this area.”
Charges Seen as Unlikely for Lawyers Over Interrogations
An internal Justice Department inquiry into the conduct of Bush administration lawyers who wrote secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations has concluded that the authors committed serious lapses of judgment but should not be criminally prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on a draft of the findings.
The report by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal ethics unit within the Justice Department, is also likely to ask that state bar associations consider possible disciplinary action, including reprimands or even disbarment, for some of the lawyers involved in writing the legal opinions, the officials said.
The conclusions of the 220-page draft report are not final and have not yet been approved by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. The officials said it is possible the final report might be subject to revision, but they did not expect major alterations in its main findings or recommendations.
The draft report is described as very detailed, tracing e-mail messages between Justice Department lawyers and officials at the White House and the Central Intelligence Agency. Among the questions it is expected to consider is whether the memos reflected the lawyers’ independent judgments of the limits of the federal anti-torture statute or were skewed deliberately to justify what the C.I.A. proposed.
At issue are whether the Justice Department lawyers acted ethically in writing a series of legal opinions from 2002 to 2007. The main targets of criticism are John Yoo, Jay S. Bybee, and Steven G. Bradbury, who as senior officials in the department’s Office of Legal Counsel were the principal authors of the memos.
The opinions permitted the C.I.A. to use a number of interrogation methods that human rights groups have condemned as torture, including waterboarding, wall-slamming, head-slapping and other techniques. The opinions allowed many of these practices to be used repeatedly and in combination.
Several legal scholars have remarked that in approving waterboarding — the near-drowning method that President Obama and his aides have described as torture — the Justice Department lawyers did not cite cases in which the United States government had prosecuted American law enforcement officials and Japanese interrogators in World War II for using the procedure.
In a letter made public on Monday, the Justice Department advised two Democratic senators on the Judiciary committee, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, that the former department lawyers who wrote the opinions had until Sunday to submit written appeals to the findings.
The draft report on the interrogation opinions was completed in December and has provoked controversy within counterterrorism circles, which has intensified since last month when the Obama administration disclosed four previously secret opinions written from 2002 and 2005, which for the first time detailed the approved procedures.
courtsey.the nytimes
The report by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal ethics unit within the Justice Department, is also likely to ask that state bar associations consider possible disciplinary action, including reprimands or even disbarment, for some of the lawyers involved in writing the legal opinions, the officials said.
The conclusions of the 220-page draft report are not final and have not yet been approved by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. The officials said it is possible the final report might be subject to revision, but they did not expect major alterations in its main findings or recommendations.
The draft report is described as very detailed, tracing e-mail messages between Justice Department lawyers and officials at the White House and the Central Intelligence Agency. Among the questions it is expected to consider is whether the memos reflected the lawyers’ independent judgments of the limits of the federal anti-torture statute or were skewed deliberately to justify what the C.I.A. proposed.
At issue are whether the Justice Department lawyers acted ethically in writing a series of legal opinions from 2002 to 2007. The main targets of criticism are John Yoo, Jay S. Bybee, and Steven G. Bradbury, who as senior officials in the department’s Office of Legal Counsel were the principal authors of the memos.
The opinions permitted the C.I.A. to use a number of interrogation methods that human rights groups have condemned as torture, including waterboarding, wall-slamming, head-slapping and other techniques. The opinions allowed many of these practices to be used repeatedly and in combination.
Several legal scholars have remarked that in approving waterboarding — the near-drowning method that President Obama and his aides have described as torture — the Justice Department lawyers did not cite cases in which the United States government had prosecuted American law enforcement officials and Japanese interrogators in World War II for using the procedure.
In a letter made public on Monday, the Justice Department advised two Democratic senators on the Judiciary committee, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, that the former department lawyers who wrote the opinions had until Sunday to submit written appeals to the findings.
The draft report on the interrogation opinions was completed in December and has provoked controversy within counterterrorism circles, which has intensified since last month when the Obama administration disclosed four previously secret opinions written from 2002 and 2005, which for the first time detailed the approved procedures.
courtsey.the nytimes
Swine flu plan to award GCSEs without exam
Exam boards are working on contingency plans to award children GCSE and A-level grades based on coursework marks if they are unable to attend an exam because of swine flu, the schools minister, Jim Knight, has revealed.
Five schools and a nursery have now closed after children were diagnosed with the H1N1 virus and some have had to urgently reschedule practical tests for art and music GCSEs scheduled for this week. There are now fears for the Sats tests, due to be taken by 600,000 11-year olds next week, and the GCSE and A-level exams, which are scheduled to run through to the end of June.
John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "Schools are extremely worried about the exams, GCSEs, AS and A-levels. They need to know what to do if one of the pupils or staff is ill. They want to know what the contingency plans are for external examinations."
One further person, an adult living in the south-east who has returned from Mexico, was confirmed to have swine flu by the Health Protection Agency today, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the UK to 28, with 333 still under investigation.
Knight said exam boards were considering new contingency plans but urged schools not to panic and rush to close unless they had received specific advice from the HPA. It comes after one school, Dolphin school in Battersea, south London and its nursery, closed without taking advice from the HPA.
Knight said: "I would be surprised if schools were to unilaterally decide to close without consulting the Health Protection Agency, who are experts in this matter.
"I don't advocate schools doing anything without reference to the HPA. The HPA has been thorough and professional in advice to schools on swine flu. Heads have a legal responsibility to make sure their children and staff are safe at school. I would encourage schools to take advice from the HPA before they make the decision to close."
He revealed that the exam boards were looking at expanding the system of giving "special consideration" to pupils who are sick at the time of their exams. Under the system, GCSEs, A-levels and other qualifications can be awarded on the basis of coursework grades and marks from modules already sat. Knight said: "There are already procedures in place if candidates can't sit their exams and are given special consideration. That can be put into action if things get worse. In contingency terms all these things are being discussed by exam boards."
Other options include looking at how pupils can sit exams in isolation even if a school is closed. The exams watchdog, Ofqual, said: "We are looking again at contingency plans to take coordinated action for the exam season if needed." The exam boards are due to meet on Thursday to discuss the situation as it unfolds.
Private schools have been issued with guidance advising them to expand their medical facilities to "quarantine" any infected pupils. The HPA said it was not advising the same to all schools.
It does not advise schools to close automatically as soon as a pupil is diagnosed with swine flu, but recommends a risk assessment to see if is is possible to limit the disruption to other children's education. Most schools affrected have called in the local authority's health protection unit to help them decide whether to shut their doors.
"All the schools that have closed did close on the advice of the health protection unit, apart from the Dolphin schools, where the board of governors made the decision to do so," the HPA said.
Though cases of swine flu have so far been mild in the UK, the HPA says it must be treated differently from seasonal flu.
"Although it would be unusual to close a school in response to a single case of flu, in the light of evidence emerging that swine influenza can spread rapidly in the school setting, it is recommended that, if a probable or confirmed case of swine flu occurs in a school setting, consideration should be given to closing the school temporarily (initially for a period of seven days)," the HPA guidance says.
Key to the decision to close is how easily the flu could spread. Staff should consider how long any sick child has been in school, for instance, and whether classes or year groups intermingle and all eat together.
No such precautions are recommended for offices and workplaces. The HPA said schools were a special case because children play together and are frequently in close physical contact. If an office worker gets swine flu, public health officials will trace his or her close contacts, who will include work colleagues. Only those who have been working within one metre of the affected person for an hour or more are considered sufficiently at risk to be given antiviral drugs such as Tamiflu, which can prevent them falling sick.
Tonight one flu expert warned that the UK's much-lauded drug stockpile might not be enough if people in contact with flu are given drugs, as children in UK schools have been. Dr John McConnell, editor of the Lancet Infectious Diseases journal, said in an online comment in the Lancet that 16 times as much antiviral medicine is needed to prevent illness as to treat people. "By this measure, the UK has stockpiles of oseltamivir [Tamiflu] sufficient to treat 30 million people (about half the population) but to prevent infection in only 1.9 million," he said.
courtsey:the guardian.com,uk
Five schools and a nursery have now closed after children were diagnosed with the H1N1 virus and some have had to urgently reschedule practical tests for art and music GCSEs scheduled for this week. There are now fears for the Sats tests, due to be taken by 600,000 11-year olds next week, and the GCSE and A-level exams, which are scheduled to run through to the end of June.
John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "Schools are extremely worried about the exams, GCSEs, AS and A-levels. They need to know what to do if one of the pupils or staff is ill. They want to know what the contingency plans are for external examinations."
One further person, an adult living in the south-east who has returned from Mexico, was confirmed to have swine flu by the Health Protection Agency today, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the UK to 28, with 333 still under investigation.
Knight said exam boards were considering new contingency plans but urged schools not to panic and rush to close unless they had received specific advice from the HPA. It comes after one school, Dolphin school in Battersea, south London and its nursery, closed without taking advice from the HPA.
Knight said: "I would be surprised if schools were to unilaterally decide to close without consulting the Health Protection Agency, who are experts in this matter.
"I don't advocate schools doing anything without reference to the HPA. The HPA has been thorough and professional in advice to schools on swine flu. Heads have a legal responsibility to make sure their children and staff are safe at school. I would encourage schools to take advice from the HPA before they make the decision to close."
He revealed that the exam boards were looking at expanding the system of giving "special consideration" to pupils who are sick at the time of their exams. Under the system, GCSEs, A-levels and other qualifications can be awarded on the basis of coursework grades and marks from modules already sat. Knight said: "There are already procedures in place if candidates can't sit their exams and are given special consideration. That can be put into action if things get worse. In contingency terms all these things are being discussed by exam boards."
Other options include looking at how pupils can sit exams in isolation even if a school is closed. The exams watchdog, Ofqual, said: "We are looking again at contingency plans to take coordinated action for the exam season if needed." The exam boards are due to meet on Thursday to discuss the situation as it unfolds.
Private schools have been issued with guidance advising them to expand their medical facilities to "quarantine" any infected pupils. The HPA said it was not advising the same to all schools.
It does not advise schools to close automatically as soon as a pupil is diagnosed with swine flu, but recommends a risk assessment to see if is is possible to limit the disruption to other children's education. Most schools affrected have called in the local authority's health protection unit to help them decide whether to shut their doors.
"All the schools that have closed did close on the advice of the health protection unit, apart from the Dolphin schools, where the board of governors made the decision to do so," the HPA said.
Though cases of swine flu have so far been mild in the UK, the HPA says it must be treated differently from seasonal flu.
"Although it would be unusual to close a school in response to a single case of flu, in the light of evidence emerging that swine influenza can spread rapidly in the school setting, it is recommended that, if a probable or confirmed case of swine flu occurs in a school setting, consideration should be given to closing the school temporarily (initially for a period of seven days)," the HPA guidance says.
Key to the decision to close is how easily the flu could spread. Staff should consider how long any sick child has been in school, for instance, and whether classes or year groups intermingle and all eat together.
No such precautions are recommended for offices and workplaces. The HPA said schools were a special case because children play together and are frequently in close physical contact. If an office worker gets swine flu, public health officials will trace his or her close contacts, who will include work colleagues. Only those who have been working within one metre of the affected person for an hour or more are considered sufficiently at risk to be given antiviral drugs such as Tamiflu, which can prevent them falling sick.
Tonight one flu expert warned that the UK's much-lauded drug stockpile might not be enough if people in contact with flu are given drugs, as children in UK schools have been. Dr John McConnell, editor of the Lancet Infectious Diseases journal, said in an online comment in the Lancet that 16 times as much antiviral medicine is needed to prevent illness as to treat people. "By this measure, the UK has stockpiles of oseltamivir [Tamiflu] sufficient to treat 30 million people (about half the population) but to prevent infection in only 1.9 million," he said.
courtsey:the guardian.com,uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)