As Pakistan votes, the military watches from its barracks

Updated 09 May 2013
Follow

As Pakistan votes, the military watches from its barracks

ISLAMABAD: When a rock-band song mocking Pakistan’s army was mysteriously blocked on Internet sites recently, no one was surprised. But, as political parties jousted their way to this Saturday’s elections, it was a small reminder of where power really lies.
There is no doubt that attempts to bury a legacy of decades of military rule have made headway in Pakistan, where — for the first time — a civilian government completed its five-year term and stood aside to allow voters choose its successor.
But it would be a mistake to interpret the army’s decision to stay put in its barracks throughout those five years as a sign that it has loosened its grip on power, or that civilian primacy has at last arrived in the nuclear-armed nation.
Whatever the make-up of the government that emerges from the general election, its powers will be heavily circumscribed.
The military will decide on foreign policy and security, including the volatile ties with Washington as NATO troops withdraw from neighboring Afghanistan, and it will still run the thorny relationship with old enemy and nuclear rival India.
“There is no new chapter in the history of Pakistan as far as civilian-military relations are concerned,” said Ayesha Siddiqa, an expert on Pakistan’s secretive army. “The military remains relevant to politics, and it has partnerships that allow it to remain outside but control the inside.” That the civilian government will still play second fiddle in Pakistan’s policy-making establishment raises questions about how far Pakistan’s young democracy has come and suggests that future coups cannot be ruled out.
Indeed, the prospect of election frontrunner Nawaz Sharif — who has crossed swords with the army in the past — returning as prime minister for a third time has raised concern that civilian-military distrust could erupt in open hostility.
“If Nawaz wins it will be a miracle if he completes five years,” said a senior journalist in Islamabad, who turned up the volume on his television during an interview with Reuters to muffle the conversation.
The military has ruled this South Asian nation for more than half of its history since independence in 1947, through coups or from behind the scenes.
The tentacles of the army reach into every corner of society, including the media and — thanks to a multi-billion-dollar business empire of its own — the economy. Its shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence arm has been dubbed a state within a state, and is believed to have vast influence over politicians.
Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Kayani, whose reputation as a cool-headed, thinking general sets him apart from some of his impetuous predecessors, has said repeatedly that soldiers have no business running the government.
“No doubt there is a lot of pressure on him from generals below to do something,” said Muhammad Malick, a news anchor on the Dunya TV channel. “But personally he is not someone who would like to intervene.” The army has good reason to want an amenable prime minister.
Kayani is due to retire this November, and the civilian government must at least nominally approve his successor. The new military chief will be in charge at a pivotal time as Western troops withdraw from Afghanistan, redrawing political and strategic alliances across a region that also includes Iran, India and central Asian states.
Some analysts say the preferred — and likely — election outcome for the army would be a parliament where no one party holds a majority, with the balance of power held by cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan.
Analysts say the military sees Khan as a useful foil to the main parties, whose corruption and incompetence in power has fueled a build-up of social tensions.

The military itself has lost much of its aura of invincibility within the country after a series of embarrassing setbacks since Kayani took over in 2007.
These have included brazen attacks by militants on key military bases and the surprise swoop in 2011 by US special forces on Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden’s hideout in a garrison town just 50 km up the road from Islamabad.
Meanwhile, the judiciary — long under the thumb of the military — has been flexing its muscles.
In 2007, Supreme Court Judge Iftikhar Chaudhry was removed from office after he opposed plans to extend the term of then- military leader Pervez Musharraf. He was reinstated after a rash of street protests by lawyers, and then last year Chaudhry ruled that the military should stop interfering in politics.
Musharraf, who seized power in a coup in 1999, resigned in 2008 and went into self-imposed exile abroad, returned to Pakistan in March to run in the election for a parliament seat.
Instead, he was arrested for his crackdown on the judiciary during his rule, and the astonished people of Pakistan watched on TV the ignominious spectacle of a former army commander fleeing from court and then being jeered by hundreds of lawyers.
“The military used to get cover from the judiciary,” said a retired military officer, who asked not to be named. “The difference between that time and now is the strength and independence of the judiciary.” Even the media, while still manipulated by the military, now finds the army “an easier morsel to chew,” says Dunya’s Malick.
But if the military has given some ground to democratic institutions, it remains a widely respected center of power that has the country’s politicians looking over their shoulders.
In a cryptic speech last month that has since been pored over by countless commentators, General Kayani took a swipe at the political class for its “self-aggrandizement” and “plundering (of) national wealth and resources.”
Many have taken his address as a warning to the incoming government that only by breaking with the corrupt and feckless ways of its predecessors can the country — as he put it — “end this game of hide-and-seek between democracy and dictatorship.”
Sharif, although a protégé of military dictator General Zia ul-Haq in the 1980s, was turfed from the prime minister’s office by Musharraf in 1999 and is still distrusted by the army.
He had his own warning for generals angling to succeed Kayani, pointing to Musharraf’s recent humiliating ordeal. “This accountability which is now taking place is itself a lesson to all those who have any such designs in the future,” he said.


Ukrainian drone attack sparks fire at industrial site in Russia’s Ryazan region, governor says

Updated 7 sec ago
Follow

Ukrainian drone attack sparks fire at industrial site in Russia’s Ryazan region, governor says

Feb 24 : Falling debris from destroyed Ukrainian drones sparked a fire at an industrial enterprise in Russia’s Ryazan region, the governor of the region southeast of Moscow said on Monday.
“According to preliminary information, there were no injuries, material damage is being assessed,” Governor Pavel Malkov said in a post on the Telegram messaging app.
Malkov did not say what enterprise was on fire. Baza, a news Telegram channel that is close to Russia’s security services, reported that Ukrainian drones targeted the Ryazan oil refinery, which is owned by Rosneft.
There was no immediate comment from Ukraine. Reuters could not independently verify the Baza report. (Reporting by Lidia Kelly in Melbourne; Editing by Sonali Paul)


Philippines, Japan agree to further enhance defense partnership

Updated 2 min 54 sec ago
Follow

Philippines, Japan agree to further enhance defense partnership

  • Japan, Philippines to enhance military exchanges and strategic dialogue
  • Security ties strengthened amid shared concerns over China’s regional actions

MANILA: Japan and the Philippines agreed on Monday to further deepen defense ties in the face of an “increasingly severe” security environment in the Indo-Pacific region, Japanese defense minister Gen Nakatani said on Monday.
Nakatani met his Philippine counterpart Gilberto Teodoro in Manila for a meeting in which the two ministers tackled regional security issues, including the maritime situation in the East and South China Seas.
“The security environment surrounding us is becoming increasingly severe and that it is necessary for the two countries as strategic partners to further enhance defense cooperation and collaboration to maintain peace and stability in Indo-Pacific,” Nakatani said through a translator.
Nakatani said the Philippines and Japan have agreed to deepen cooperation on military exchanges, establish a high-level strategic dialogue among its military and deepen information sharing.
Security ties between the two US allies have strengthened over the past two years as Japan and the Philippines share common concerns over China’s increasingly assertive actions in the region.
Last year, Manila and Tokyo signed a landmark military pact allowing the deployment of their forces on each other’s soil.
Japan and China have repeatedly faced off around uninhabited Japanese-administered islands that Tokyo calls the Senkaku and Beijing calls the Diaoyu.
The Philippines and China have also clashed frequently in the South China Sea around disputed shoals and atolls that fall inside Manila’s exclusive economic zone.
Nakatani visited military bases in the northern Philippines on Sunday, including a naval station that houses a coastal radar that Japan donated as part of its 600 million yen ($4 million) security assistance in 2023.
Manila was one of the first recipients of Tokyo’s official security assistance, a program aimed at helping boost deterrence capabilities of partner countries.
In December, the two countries signed a second security deal in which Japan agreed to provide the Philippine navy rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIB) and additional coastal radar systems.


US pressures Ukraine to nix its UN resolution demanding Russian forces withdraw

Updated 21 min 13 sec ago
Follow

US pressures Ukraine to nix its UN resolution demanding Russian forces withdraw

  • But Kyiv refused to pull its draft resolution, and the UN General Assembly will vote on it Monday
  • Trump administration is seeking a vote on its proposal in the more powerful UN Security Council

UNITED NATIONS: The US has pressured Ukraine to withdraw its European-backed UN resolution demanding an immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine in favor of an American proposal that does not mention Moscow’s invasion, a US official and a European diplomat said Sunday.
But Ukraine refused to pull its draft resolution, and the UN General Assembly will vote on it Monday, the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, two European diplomats said.
The 193-nation General Assembly then is expected to vote on the US draft resolution, according to the diplomats and the US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because private negotiations are still ongoing.
The Trump administration is also seeking a vote on its proposal in the more powerful UN Security Council. China, which holds the Security Council presidency this month, scheduled a vote on the US resolution for Monday afternoon.
The dueling resolutions – the first since the invasion – highlight the tension between the US, Ukraine and European countries in the five weeks since President Donald Trump took office and has opened talks with Russia after years of isolation in a bid to end the war. European leaders were dismayed that they and Ukraine were left out of preliminary negotiations between the US and Russia last week.
The General Assembly has become the most important UN body on Ukraine because the Security Council, which is charged with maintaining international peace and security, has been paralyzed by Russia’s veto power.
There are no vetoes in the General Assembly, and its votes are closely watched as a barometer of world opinion. However, its resolutions are not legally binding, unlike those adopted by the Security Council.
Since Russian forces crossed Ukraine’s border on Feb. 24, 2022, the assembly has adopted half a dozen resolutions condemning the war and demanding the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops.
The assembly votes have shown strong global opposition to Russia’s conflict, and the votes on the rival resolutions Monday will be closely watched to see if that support has waned – and to assess support for Trump’s effort to bring a speedy end to the war.
One European diplomat said there has been intense lobbying and arm-twisting on the rival resolutions. The US official said the US is trying to get Ukraine and the Europeans to back down on their draft. It comes as Trump plans to host French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday in Washington.
The United States believes “this is the moment to commit to ending the war. This is our opportunity to build real momentum toward peace,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement late Friday.
He said that “while challenges may arise, the goal of lasting peace remains achievable” and that the resolution would “affirm that this conflict is awful, that the UN can help end it, and that peace is possible.”
The Ukraine resolution, co-sponsored by the 27-nation European Union, refers to “the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation” and recalls the need to implement all previous assembly resolutions “adopted in response to the aggression against Ukraine.”
It singles out the General Assembly’s demand that Russia “immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders” and its demand to immediately halt all hostilities.
And it calls for “a de-escalation, an early cessation of hostilities and a peaceful resolution of the war against Ukraine.”
The very brief US draft resolution acknowledges “the tragic loss of life throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict” and “implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.” It never mentions Moscow’s invasion.
Russia’s UN ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, told reporters last week that the US resolution was “a good move.”
Russia also suggested an amendment, seeking to add the phrase “including by addressing its root causes” so the final line of the US resolution reads, “implores a swift end to the conflict, including by addressing its root causes, and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.”


Trump administration eliminating 1,600 USAID jobs in the US

Updated 32 min 3 sec ago
Follow

Trump administration eliminating 1,600 USAID jobs in the US

  • USAID said on its website that all direct hires except essential workers will be put on leave
  • An earlier notice sent to staff said about 2,000 US positions would be eliminated

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump’s administration said on Sunday it was placing all personnel at the foreign assistance agency USAID, except leaders and critical staff, on paid administrative leave and eliminating 1,600 positions in the United States.
Billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency has led an effort to gut the US Agency for International Development, the main delivery mechanism for American foreign assistance and a critical tool of US “soft power” for winning influence abroad.
“I regret to inform you that you are affected by a Reduction in Force action,” said an email sent to one of the workers being fired that was reviewed by Reuters. Those who got the note will be let go from federal service effective April 24, the email said.
USAID said on its website that just before midnight on Sunday US Eastern Time, all direct hires except essential workers will be put on leave and 1,600 USAID personnel in the US would be cut.
An earlier notice sent to staff and reviewed by Reuters said about 2,000 US positions would be eliminated.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
On Friday, a federal judge cleared the way for the Trump administration to put thousands of USAID workers on leave, a setback for government employee unions that are suing over what they have called an effort to dismantle it.
Two former senior USAID officials estimated that a majority of some 4,600 USAID personnel, career US Civil Service and Foreign Service staffers, would be placed on administrative leave.
“This administration and Secretary (of State Marco) Rubio are shortsighted in cutting into the expertise and unique crisis response capacity of the US,” said Marcia Wong, one of the former officials. “When disease outbreaks occur, populations displaced, these USAID experts are on the ground and first deployed to help stabilize and provide aid.”
Trump ordered a 90-day pause on foreign aid shortly after taking office on January 20, halting funding for everything from programs that fight starvation and deadly diseases to providing shelters for millions of displaced people across the globe.
The administration has approved exceptions to the freeze totaling $5.3 billion, mostly for security and counter-narcotics programs, according to a list of exemptions reviewed by Reuters that included limited humanitarian relief.
USAID programs got less than $100 million in exemptions, compared to roughly $40 billion in programs it administered annually before the freeze.


3 years after Russia invasion, UN faces difficult votes on Ukraine

Updated 24 February 2025
Follow

3 years after Russia invasion, UN faces difficult votes on Ukraine

  • To the delight of Russia, US under Trump calls for “swift end” to conflict but makes no reference to Ukraine's territorial integrity
  • To be adopted, a resolution needs the votes of at least nine of the 15 Security Council members

UNITED NATIONS: Defying Kyiv and its European allies, Washington plans on Monday to submit to the UN Security Council and General Assembly a draft text that calls for a “swift end” to the Ukraine conflict but makes no reference to its territorial integrity, in an early test of Donald Trump’s muscular approach to the crisis.
Since Russian forces invaded Ukraine three years ago, the balance of power at the United Nations has been clear: the General Assembly, representing all members, has clearly and overwhelmingly supported Ukrainian sovereignty, while the 15-member Security Council has been paralyzed by Russia’s veto power.
But Trump’s return to the White House last month has brought a dramatic reshuffling of the diplomatic cards, as he undertakes a clear rapprochement with the Kremlin while dismissing his Ukrainian counterpart, the severely pressured Volodymyr Zelensky, as a “dictator.”
Against this tense diplomatic backdrop, Ukraine and more than 50 other states are planning on Monday — the third anniversary of the Russian invasion — to introduce a text before the General Assembly saying it is “urgent” to end the war “this year” and clearly repeating the Assembly’s previous demands: an immediate cessation of Russian hostilities against Ukraine and an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops.
Amid heated speculation that the United States might abstain from the General Assembly vote — expected around midday — Washington generated widespread surprise Friday by proposing a competing text.
The US resolution is “simple (and) historic,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said late Friday, as he urged member states to approve it.

A group from the Russian community in Australia hold placards during a demonstration in central Sydney on February 24, 2025 marking the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. (AFP)

The tersely worded US draft “implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.”
It makes no reference to Ukrainian territorial integrity, a cornerstone of the previous resolutions passed by the Assembly, with the United States under former president Joe Biden among its strongest supporters.
For Vassili Nebenzia, the Russian ambassador to the UN, the American resolution is “a good move,” though he believes it should also “address the root causes” of the war.
According to diplomatic sources, the American delegation plans to submit that text to a Security Council vote set for 3 p.m. (2000 GMT) Monday, according to the Chinese presidency of the Council.
The vote will place European delegates in an awkward position.
To be adopted, a resolution needs the votes of at least nine of the 15 Security Council members — while not being vetoed by any of the five permanent members (the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China).
Even if the EU members (France, Slovenia, Denmark and Greece) along with Britain were to abstain, the resolution could still pass.
Would France or Britain be prepared to cast their first vetoes in more than 30 years — even as their respective leaders, Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer, are expected this week at the White House for key talks on Ukraine?
“I do not see how Paris and London can support a text that is so far from their stated positions on Ukraine, but I also do not see how they can veto it,” Richard Gowan of the International Crisis Group told AFP.
Predicting the outcome of the diplomatic confrontation in the General Assembly is not easy: While some Europeans are deeply unsettled by the American approach, several UN member states have grown tired of the constant attention to Ukraine, and some Arab countries have not forgotten Kyiv’s refusal to support their resolutions on Gaza.
For the Europeans, the competing votes will be “a test of their standing in the multilateral system.” At the same time, Kyiv could be left “increasingly isolated” if it draws too little support, Gowan said.
The votes also constitute “an early test of the Trump administration’s strong-arm approach to UN diplomacy,” he added.
With core principles of international law at stake, UN chief Antonio Guterres on Sunday called for a peace that “fully upholds Ukraine’s territorial integrity” and respects the UN Charter.