The Kerry-Lugar Bill

What is the Kerry-Lugar bill ?
The Kerry-Lugar bill is essentially a nonmilitary aid package granted to Pakistan by the U.S. in view of its precarious economic condition due to its indulgence in the "War on Terror" as a front line allied state.
This bill grants Pakistan 7.5 billion dollars over the period of five years (1.5 billion annually) and comes along with stringent conditions on how to distribute and invest this money.
The conditions along with this bill come in the shape of military as well as economic checks which have instigated a lot of debate in this country and agitated its bloggers as well.
Note: I think the bill has now been revised to eliminate a lot of the conditions.
What is the response to the Kerry-Lugar bill in Pakistan and the U.S. ?
Well, from what I've seen so far, Pakistan is pretty divided in their response. Some view it as an insult, while others claim it is "fair payment" for all the services they have performed for the U.S.
In the U.S., on the other hand, the response I've seen is overwhelmingly negative toward the bill. Many people are opposed to our government spending still more money it doesn't have, especially for a foreign country.
~Lady Liberty~

Education is thought of as one of the fundamental parts of life in America, however, in other parts of the world this is not so. For instance, in Pakistan, the best education that exists happens inside the walls of the seclusive Madrassahs. The word madrassah is derived from the word "wazn " and "mafʻal" , translating to mean "a place where learning/teaching is done" Currently, Pakistani public schools suffer from no funding, horrible attendance, and non educated teachers. Because of this, parents have begun to turn towards sending their children to a Madrasah. Currently, with 50000 Madrasahs in the country, parents can easily find a school, and drop their children off forever. What most americans fail to grasp, is the concept that these children, although well educated in the Koran, virtually nothing else gets taught. Many believe that the numerous madrassahs in Pakistan contribute to the success of the Taliban. Although the schools themselves to not endorse the Taliban publicly, they teach a world-view that makes militancy possible A researcher named Salman Abid that lives in Punjab stated " The mindset wants to stop music, girls schools, and festivals... Their message is that this is not the real life, Real life comes later- after death" If one were to walk around every day with the mind set that they were not really living, it certainly makes it plausible to volunteer for battle, terrorism, and criminal acts. Looking from the mindset of these people, does it not seem reasonable to be the perpetrator of a car bomb, or other criminal act, when nothing is being lost, and eternal life is being gained?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/04/world/asia/04schools.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

Picture: http://img7.travelblog.org/Photos/100965/429780/f/4183485-Ulugbek-Madrassa--Bukhara-1.jpg

Information taken from Wikipedia, and NY times

posting for pakistan study week

what is the connection between pakistan and afghanistan from a conflict perspective.

they started having skirmishes on may 13th 2007 when the Afghan national army open unprovoked fire, says military spokesman major-general waheed arshad.. They alledgedly opened their fire on 5 or 6 pakistan border posts. They have been having small battles ever since because they cannot figure out who caused it and thus, it never ends. It is definitely a high-pressure zone in which citizens do not want to get involved.

The Use of Drones in Pakistan

The recent use of drones (flying robots used as assassins; no joke) that the United States has sent to Pakistan is a source of great conflict and debate both ethically and logistically. America is responsible for 42 recent strikes targeting the Taliban and Al Queda leaders (more were carried out over the past several years). Approximately half a dozen heads of militant groups plus hundreds of people under them and have been killed along with some civilians, according to CNN. A poll conducted in August shows that only 9% of Pakistanis approved of the strikes while 2/3 remained in opposition. (1) The already flagrantly negative view of Americans held by most Pakistanis has only been worsened by this policy of blind murder. My conclusion would be that although we may have contributed to security by taking out these terrorists, we could be putting ourselves in more danger by making an enemy. But, hey, what do I know, right?

These machines are, on the other hand, an amazing feat of modern technology. They do save our troops from having to go from the frying pan and into the fire. It would be nearly impossible for our men to go into terrorist camps, kill the leaders, and come out alive. We are simply spread out too far in our occupations of other countries to send more men into more locations. These drones can save lives and be very practical if you squint your eyes and stand on one foot.


However, Phillip Alston, a human right investigator for the United Nations, has said that targeted assassinations that "accidentally" (big oops) get civilians is most likely a violation of international law (who would've thought?!). Two counter-insurgency experts wrote in the New York Times in May that drone attacks "killed some 700 civilians. This is 50 civilians for every for every militant killed, a hit rate of 2%." According to them, 98% of the targets were innocent civilians. On the flip-side, Bill Roggio, the editor of Long War Journal, has maintained that only 10% of those killed were civilians. (1) CNN's report indicates that 760-1,000 people have been killed, only 20 being leaders of Al Queda. They believe that perhaps 260-320, or one-third, were civilians. A possible reason for these contadictory analyses is that not all militants are wearing uniforms but appear to be ordinary citizens. However, it's obvious that certain people would rather tone down the numbers to paint a rosier picture. In either case I think it's safe to assume that the cost of taking a life (militant or not) should be paid by having to live with that memory. The process of sending out machines to do your dirty work for you seems to violate war ethics by giveing people the ability to kill haphazardly without knowledge of who they are going to hit or what they even looked like. If we are going to try to justify murder in the name of national security and justice then we should at least be forced to hear our enemies' last words and see the look on their faces as they are about to be slaughtered.

"Can anything be more ridiculous than that a man has a right to kill me because he lives on the other side of the water, and because his ruler has quarrel with mine, although I have none with him?"~Blaise Pascal

1. CNN News "Pakistan drone war takes a toll on militants- and civilians" by Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann October 29, 2009

what Pakistan's border is like

(This information from MSNBC) KABUL, Afghanistan - In a recent debate leading up to the presidential elections here, the first question was not about terrorism, or violence, or even opium. It was about how candidates viewed a jagged line casually drawn on a map 115 years ago by British colonial rulers.

For the West, this border separates Afghanistan from Pakistan, and it is a source of great frustration that neither country seems able or even willing to enforce it. But for many Pashtuns, the most powerful ethnic tribe here, the line runs through what they call "Pashtunistan" and is no more legitimate than the border that once divided East and West Germany.

in 1893 the Durand line was drawn right through the pashtun tribal lands who have been fighting ever since.

Pakistani Jihadis on Kerry-Lugar Bill, Nobel Prize

Pakistani Jihadis on Kerry-Lugar Bill, Nobel Prize

Posted using ShareThis

What is the relationship between Taliban in Pakistan and the Taliban in Afghanistan? Is the ISI involved with the Taliban in Afghanistan?

Regular reporting indicates Pakistan provides both military and financial assistance to the Taliban. Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, primary goals are to achieve strategic depth with regard to India, and securing access to Central Asian Trade Routes. Cultural ties also exist between the Taliban leadership and Pakistan where several Taliban leaders lived for many years following the 1979 Soviet Invasion. Pakistan fears a complete Taliban victory may incite irredentist aspirations within its own Pashtun population, and will likely attempt to pressure the Taliban into moderation of some of its policies.

The Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996 until 2001. They came to power during Afghanistan’s long civil war. Although they managed to hold 90% of the country’s territory, their policies-including their treatment of women and support of terrorists- ostracized then from the world community. The Taliban was ousted from power in December 2001 by the U.S. military and Afghani opposition forces in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S.

There is a deep history between Taliban and the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) since the Taliban was assisted in their creation solely by the ISI to thrust their influence upon neighboring Afghanistan. Pakistan agreed to suspend military offensives and impose Islamic law in part of the northwest region known as the Malakand region. Among the participants in the agreement were pro Taliban clerics who authorities said would return to ISI and tell militants there to disarm, although there was no mention in the agreement for extremists to give up their weapons. In all reality ISI is the first official region of the future Taliban government that will take over more areas of Pakistan.

 

Sources:

Infoplease.com: “Who Are The Taliban?” by: Laura Hayes, Borgna Brunner, and Beth Rowen

National Security Archives: Pakistan: “The Taliban’s Godfather?” posted- August 14, 2007, edited by: Barbara Elias

Terroristplanet.com