The Other Kashmir – Occupied & Forgotten

The contrast could not be starker. In the throes of its first election to the assembly that stands dissolved and the statehood itself annulled, myriad issues are being debated in Jammu and Kashmir. Among them are the return to statehood, the special status it enjoyed under Article 370 of the Constitution, its people’s peace and economic prosperity, the threat from militancy within, and the dark shadow of the influx of terrorists from the neighbourhood.

To parties from the Kashmir Valley seeking a return to the special status, the Union government, apparently enthused by the 58 per cent voter turnout in the Lok Sabha elections, says statehood when feasible, but no special status.

Talking to Pakistan? Yes, no, not now, or never? Not till peace is restored? Does New Delhi admit that it has failed to achieve it in the last five years? Leave all these and more to the outcome of the most crucial election in the life of one of the world’s most militarized and India’s most troubled places – where tourists go despite the terror threat.

Now, look at the conditions across the Line of Control (LoC) that separates the territory in dispute for 77 years, and counting. Retired Indian diplomat Dinkar P. Srivastava aptly calls it the “Forgotten Kashmir” in his book that focuses on the other side of the LoC.

Reports from Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir/Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan constantly speak of public protests over food shortages, and forced migration. It is ruled directly from Islamabad with the Pakistan army calling all the shots.

But viewed from the outside, the absence of democracy for one, is ignored for the most part by the flag-bearers of democracy, especially the former colonial masters who laid the ground for the dispute in the first place for their larger geostrategic interests.

Strangely, even in India which claims the entire territory and sovereignty over it, the discourse rarely looks across the LoC. It is mostly Jammu versus the Valley, more polarized than ever in recent times.

Strangely again, but not surprisingly, it is forgotten by the Pakistani people also. The people of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir have “neither azadi nor autonomy”, Srivastava says, “They do not figure in the discourse of Pakistani leaders. They are forgotten in their ‘obsession’ with the Kashmir cause.” Srivastava bemoans the shedding of much blood for this ‘cause’ which has Pakistan waging four bloody conflicts with India with clear objectives and plans, of ‘conquering’ Kashmir.

Only, the world is losing interest in Pakistan’s ‘cause’. The Muslim brethren Iran and Saudi Arabia and even China, the “all-weather friend”, have of late asked for a “peaceful resolution through talks”.

Unlike in the past, resolutions blaming India by the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) have become fewer. The last one, passed in 2022 was because Pakistan was hosting the meet. This was after chiding in the Pakistani media that the world community was ignoring the ‘cause’ and even the Muslim Ummah was eager to “do business” with India.

Pakistan is in a prolonged political and economic mess. But even otherwise, people in PoK/AJK either have no jobs or lose them to “reliable Outsiders” from other provinces. The government prosecutes the ‘nationalists’ while the population, shifted frequently as part of combating militancy, is targeted by the militants as well.

Srivastava says the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) entering through the territory which Pakistan had illegally ceded to China may promise prosperity to Pakistan, but it has turned Gilgit Baltistan, known for beautiful mountains and river systems into a cluster of military garrisons.

His book meticulously goes into the minutiae of constitutional developments as well as governance in both Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan and details how the people in the area have been systematically denied their fundamental rights and ruthlessly exploited by Pakistan.

Human Rights Watch (HRW), the global rights watchdog has covered the situation inside POK in its report With Friends Like These…. It states: “In practice, the Pakistani government in Islamabad, the Pakistani army and the Pakistani intelligence services (Inter-Services Intelligence) control all aspects of political life in Azad Kashmir-though Azad means free, the residents of Azad Kashmir are anything but.

“Azad Kashmir is a land of strict curbs on political pluralism, freedom of expression, and freedom of association; a muzzled press; banned books; arbitrary arrest and detention and torture at the hands of the Pakistani military and the police; and discrimination against refugees from Jammu and Kashmir state.”

ALSO READ: Pakistan Army Wins Election In PoK

HRW scathingly records: “Singled out are Kashmiri nationalists who do not support the idea of Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan. Anyone who wants to take part in public life has to sign a pledge of loyalty to Pakistan, while anyone who publicly supports or works for an independent Kashmir is persecuted. For those expressing independent or unpopular political views, there is a pervasive fear of Pakistani military and intelligence services and of militant organizations acting at their behest or independently.”

Ironically, POK/AJK generates over a third of Pakistan’s around 8,000 MW hydropower. But it has neither political power, nor does it benefit from the power (energy) it generates. It has to pay a steep tariff, higher than other provinces, amidst power cuts and breakdowns.

Pakistan assumed direct powers within the POK after the 13th Amendment to the PoK Constitution in 2018. Going deeply into how Pakistan has colonised the PoK/AJK, Srivastava brings out that the situation of Gilgit-Baltistan is much worse than that of PoK. While elections based on the adult franchise were held in PoK in 1970, the Northern Area, now called Gilgit-Baltistan, had to wait till 2009 before it got an elected assembly.

Gilgit-Baltistan Order of 2009 gave limited autonomy and allowed the local assembly to legislate on 161 subjects. The entire list was abolished under the Gilgit-Baltistan Order of 2018. There were popular protests, and the G-B Supreme Appellate Court set aside the Order, much to Islamabad’s discomfiture. With these far-reaching internal changes within PoK and G-B, both are integrated in Pakistan in all but name. This was done by Pakistan a year before the deletion of Article 370 by India.

Professor Ishtiaque Ahmed, a renowned Sweden-based Pakistani scholar, although disagreeing with Srivastava on some points, commends his effort: “The most impressive feature of the book is that it relies heavily on Pakistani source material. Also referenced are reports of the International Crisis Group (ICG). I checked some of the material used and found that the references to Pakistani and international sources were indeed correct.”

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Many A Bump On India-Middle East-Europe Corridor

The initial response was positive. Israel’s Benyamin Netanyahu called the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) as the “largest cooperation project in history”. In a deft move, the United States dispatched its envoy to Pakistan to visit Gwadar Port, at the southern end of the rival China-Pakistan Corridor (CPEC). All applauded the MOU signed alongside the G20 summit, from Joe Biden to host Narendra Modi.

Undoubtedly, because it was floated by Biden, the idea was widely welcomed. The ceremony was attended by the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, the European Union, Italy, France and Germany. Everyone keen to ‘contain’ China joined what would now need a closer look and a coherent, collective follow-up.

Connecting an emerging powerhouse like India with Europe is a dream that has been nurtured for centuries. Linking it further across the Atlantic would be a win-win for all. But ifs and buts have cropped up way too soon about the feasibility of the nascent project.

While diplomatic analysts visualise numerous strategic and territorial obstacles, the economists find it is not feasible. Better and cheaper alternatives, are already available along the waterways or can be forged without cutting through mountains on the Arabian Peninsula to reach Greece, one of the weakest of European economies. All trade between India and Europe, anyway takes place via the sea route, passing through the Suez Canal. Questions arise about whether this corridor can better the Suez route or can attract more takers than the CPEC that it is widely perceived as competing with.

Unlike the BRI, which is aimed at securing China’s access to natural resources and building more direct trade and transport links among countries in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Middle East, IMEEC is much smaller in scale and so far, does not include African, Central Asian, Southeast Asian or other South Asian countries besides India.

The “new spice route” is a bridge too far. It is even a “bridge too late” and could duplicate the BRI’s effort. In its 10th year, BRI has seen more than 150 countries and upward of 30 international organizations sign cooperation agreements with China. The CPEC, its flagship, is also ten years old. Despite mutual disputes, slow and lopsided progress in Pakistan and security challenges for both, have at least met China’s objective of accessing the energy-rich Gulf. Assuming the IMPEEC takes off, its success will largely depend upon how many BRI members will be ready to switch to it to make it cost-effective.

ALSO READ: Belt Road Initiative – A Blessing or A Curse?

Undoubtedly, India stands to gain. For one, it can hope to circumvent the ‘wall’ of the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan to reach West and Central Asia. But it has also to circumvent the objections, real or subtle, of its Western allies.

Take Chabahar Port which has languished because the Americans do not like Iran’s Ayatollahs. The US not only curbed the Indo-Iran ties but also scared away Japan and the ADB who were keen to invest in this corridor at one stage. The new corridor will require billions in consistent investment, over a long period to fructify and bring benefits to all participants.

At the diplomatic level, is a highly polarised world ready for it? Is the proposed corridor an American / Western response to China’s brokering peaceful ties between Riyadh and Tehran?

India has good ties with the Middle East and would need to stay neutral against the moves of those more powerful. The IMPEEC favours the UAE (Jebel Ali) and Israel (Haifa) but keeps out Egypt and Iran, two major players in the region. At the ground – or sea level — for India, loading-off-loading would mean multiple handling and container charges, among other levies, at every terminal and transhipment point.

At the political level, both Biden and Modi are looking at elections next year. Is the MOU a diplomatic harbinger for mutual political benefits? Modi is forever looking to consolidate his political domination to win a third term. Biden, while battling China in the global arena, needs to score a major point, especially after China took credit for the Saudi-Iran rapprochement in what was once an Anglo-American backyard. Although a Trump legacy, Biden has yet to live down the cumbersome evacuation from Afghanistan that has weakened the Western presence in the region.

As for India, to be able to see through a multi-billion project like the IMPEEC from its end, it has to constantly worry about its allies even more than its adversaries. The US/West have constantly pushed it to the defensive on human rights issues. Ukraine remains a major irritant, despite the G20 resolution, as India will continue to trade with Russia. Not strictly an ally, Turkey’s Erdogan, while at G20 lent qualified support to India getting a permanent place on the UN Security Council. But within days, he attacked India, yet again, on the Kashmir dispute.

Think of developments across this month. Emerging from the success of the G20 summit (and of its moon mission), India has been pilloried by these very allies in the new confrontation with Canada. Like Ukraine, this is not likely to go away anytime soon.

The world is informed daily of the counter-offensive against the Russians in Ukraine. The US-led alliance is keeping its war-like determination and its chin up. If it doesn’t produce the desired results, will “Ukraine fatigue”, like it had happened in Afghanistan, set in at some stage?

Beyond the initial official enthusiasm, it is not surprising to see a more considered response that underscores patience and the need to invest wisely in this long-term project.  India has seen interest in many transnational projects like the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas grid rise and fade with shifting economic interests and changing strategic goalposts. Economists have already dampened the diplomats’ enthusiasm, for politicians to take note. Overall, it means putting the money where the mouth is.

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Shehbaz To Visit China Next Week To Meet Xi Jinping

Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will visit China next week along with a high-level delegation, including Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping, and hold delegation-level talks with Premier Li Keqiang.

This would be Shehbaz’s first visit to China since assuming office in April this year and follows his meeting with Xi in Uzbekistan in September.
“Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif will visit China on 1-2 November at the head of a high-level delegation, including Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. The Prime Minister is undertaking the visit at the invitation of H.E. Li Keqiang, Premier of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China,” the Pakistan Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

It added that the Pakistan PM will be among the first leaders to visit China following the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, where Xi secured his third term as the leader of the party.

“On behalf of the entire Pakistani nation, I congratulate President Xi Jinping on his reelection as CPC General Secretary for the 3rd term. It is a glowing tribute to his sagacious stewardship and unwavering devotion to serving the people of China,” the Pak PM said in a congratulatory tweet on Sunday.

The Pakistan Foreign Ministry said Sharif’s visit represents the continuity of frequent leadership-level exchanges between the two countries.

“The Prime Minister will meet with President Xi Jinping and hold delegation-level talks with Premier Li Keqiang. The two sides will review the All-Weather Strategic Cooperation Partnership and exchange views on regional and global developments,” the Pak foreign office said.

“The visit is also expected to advance the wide-ranging bilateral cooperation agenda with the conclusion of a number of MoUs/Agreements in diverse areas, and consolidate the momentum of CPEC cooperation in the wake of the 11th meeting of the CPEC Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) on 27th October 2022,” it added.

Earlier this week, media reports said Pakistan and China are set to start three new corridors in addition to the multi-billion-dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

The formal launch of the projects, which include health and digital corridors, could take place during Shehbaz Sharif’s China visit, according to The News International newspaper.

Citing unidentified sources, the Pakistan daily said the new corridors would become sources of strengthening Pakistan-China ties and would provide a new unshakable bond of the proximity of the two nations. (ANI)

Read More:http://13.232.95.176/

Chinese Projects In South Asia Facing Hurdles: Report

After the initial fanfare about Chinese projects in South-Asian countries, the much-touted infrastructure deals in nations like Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal are reportedly stuck in limbo by delays, complications and increased costs.

China’s highly-touted Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) seems to be losing its sheen everywhere, as various issues including work at slow pace and terror attacks slow down the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) progress. Beijing is much concerned about the CPEC, which is the centrepiece of the BRI. The sluggish pace of work, frequent terror attacks, and incidences of corruption have slowed it down.

Last month, a Pakistan Senate panel had expressed concern over the slow pace of development on the CPEC and dissatisfaction being expressed by Chinese companies, Dawn reported. Besides Pakistan, Bangladesh authorities too have expressed concern over the slow progress of Chinese assisted infrastructure projects agreed under the bilateral MoUs in 2016.

A report by The Singapore Post stated that over two dozen MoUs/agreements which were signed during the October 2016 visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Dhaka, has not materialised.

The report said that China has been very slow in completing the financial modalities and pursuing the implementation of these projects despite Bangladesh’s repeated requests. “In Nepal too, Chinese involvement in hydro-power projects is reportedly mired in controversies,” the report added.

BRI promises to create opportunities for South Asia to facilitate a sustainable growth model but it also implies significant environmental risks, apart from economic, legal and sovereignty issues.

South Asia is amongst the main regions likely to be hit severely by the negative environmental impact of climate change. BRI announced by Beijing in 2013, will exacerbate these trends, reported European Foundation for South Asian Studies (EFSAS).

Furthermore, a research report has revealed that BRI has left scores of lower- and middle-income countries (LMIC) saddled with “hidden debts” totalling USD 385 billion.

The findings are part of a report published by AidData, an international development research lab based at the College of William and Mary in Virginia. According to this report, China has used debt rather than an aid to establish a dominant position in the international development finance market.

The report has analysed more than 13,000 aid and debt-financed projects worth more than USD 843 billion across 165 countries. According to AidData, over 40 LMIC now have levels of debt exposure to China higher than 10 per cent of their national gross domestic product.

The number of “mega-projects”–financed with loans worth USD 500 million or more–approved each year tripled during the first five years of BRI implementation. Despite larger loans and expanded loan portfolios, BRI has not led to any major changes in the sectoral or geographical composition of China’s overseas development finance program, the report said. (ANI)

Is China-Iran Axis A Myth Or Gamechanger?

On 27 March Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his Iranian countarpart Mohammad Javad Zarif signed in Tehran a Comprehensive Strategic Cooperation Agreement between the two countries, expressing a desire to increase cooperation and trade relations over the next 25 years.

This Agreement has been described as a massive change in Sino-Iranian relations that, according to media reports, may see China invest about USD 400 billion in Iran. The question arises- is this a myth or a real game-changer in regional relations?

The document signed between the two sides is an expanded version of a statement made during the visit of Chinese Leader Xi Jinping in Tehran back in 2016, pledging bilateral cooperation on political, cultural, energy, trade, security and defense issues over 25 years.

At that time, the two countries signed 17 agreements and also agreed to increase bilateral trade more than ten-fold to USD 600 billion in the next decade, as China pursues its BRI (One Belt One Road Initiative).

The BRI is an ambitious network of road, rail and port routes that will connect China to Central Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. It should be noted, however, that China’s pledge to increase investment tenfold has little to show five years later.

An 18-page draft of the agreement published by The New York Times last summer listed nearly 100 projects to be funded by Chinese investments and are expected to be a part of Xi’s ambitious BRI, extending China’s strategic influence across Eurasia.

These 100 projects include airports, high-speed railways and subways, that will improve the lives of most Iranian citizens. In return, Iran is to provide regular and heavily discounted oil supplies to China for 25 years.

Despite a lot of press reports, there is no mention in the Strategic Cooperation Agreement about a specific amount to be invested by China in Iran. The document is by and large a list of areas in which China will engage with Iran during the next 25 years.

Zhao Lijian, the Spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, replying to a question about the agreement, said: “The plan focuses on tapping the potentials in economic and cultural cooperation and charting the course for long-term cooperation. It neither includes any quantitative, specific contracts and goals nor targets any third party, and will provide a general framework for China-Iran cooperation going forward.”

The Strategic Cooperation Agreement between China and Iran could change the assumptions of the West about Chinese ambitions in the Middle East region and may lead to a weakening of US influence in this volatile region of the world. Iran, which has been severely affected by US sanctions and international isolation, sees China as throwing it a lifeline and views the agreement as the beginning of mutually beneficial relations.

Some analysts describe the Strategic Cooperation Agreement as “destabilizing” and “a direct threat to US goals in the Middle East”, while others started calling China and Iran “the new Axis of Evil.”

The fact that China is a world power that can afford to defy the US and can ignore sanctions imposed by the US Administration is something that worries President Joe Biden. According to US officials, the agreement could also make way for Chinese military bases in Iran, fundamentally changing the region’s geopolitics.

Some press reports claim that the new US Administration is trying to rally allies against China, something which Secretary of State Antony Blinken has described as the world’s “greatest geopolitical test.”

In the strategic realm, the proposed draft talks about deepening military cooperation, with “joint training and exercises”, “joint research and weapons development” as well as intelligence sharing.

In an interview with Al-Arabiya, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stressed that “China is consistent in opposing the unreasonable unilateral sanctions imposed on Iran by other countries, because they violate the international law and are an affront to human conscience”.

Wang added that China stands ready to work with Iran and other countries to jointly oppose the acts of bullying by powers, uphold international equity and justice and defend the basic norms of international relations.

Dr William Figueroa, a specialist in Sino-Iranian relations, points out that while China remains Iran’s top oil importer, “Chinese firms have not increased investment, imports, or exports at the exponential levels pledged in 2016, and are not likely to do so in 2021 either. The deal is unlikely to fundamentally threaten the balance of power in the Middle East. China tends to choose stable relations with geostrategic advantages over volatile ones likely to spark conflict. For all its propaganda, China, like Iran, is more interested in its immediate geopolitical goals than a revolution.”

Several experts on Sino-Iranian relations, like Jonathan Fulton, senior fellow at Atlantic Council, describe the Agreement as “a list of things Iran and China hope to do, under perfect conditions”, while Lucille Greer and Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, said that the agreement is “not as alarming as it sounds.”

In conclusion, it can be said that relations between China and Iran are going to improve due to the agreement is not a myth. It will give the Iranian side some breathing space, helping it break somewhat the diplomatic isolation imposed by the US.

At the same time exaggerated concern that the agreement will change the geopolitical map of the region are most probably unfounded.

(The views and ideas expressed in the article are solely of the author. – ANI)

Pakistan, A State Run By Parasite Capitalism

The already bad reputation caused by corruption in Pakistan took a turn for the worse with the publication of an investigative report by Ahmed Noorani. The report revealed that Lt. Gen (Retd) Asim Saleem Bajwa’s family was in possession of assets worth millions in Pakistan and abroad.

Asim Bajwa is the chairman of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) as well as the special assistant for information to Prime Minister Imran Khan, a portfolio that carries the protocol of a federal minister.

The report claims that Lt. Gen (r) Bajwa’s brothers, wife and two sons own a business empire, which has set up 99 companies in four countries including a pizza franchise with 133 restaurants worth an estimated USD 39.9 million. The revelation is disastrous for Imran Khan since he is desperately trying to garner international support among foreign investors and encouraging them to bring their capital to Pakistan.

But Pakistan is a state that is dying by a thousand cuts and the most recent cut, the revelations regarding Lt. Gen (r) Asim Bajwa’s assets in foreign lands, seems to have landed right on the jugular vein of Pakistan’s campaign to attract foreign investment. If the top ranking ex-military general turned bureaucrats do not trust their home economy to generate satisfactory profits, then why would one expect a foreigner to do so.

ALSO READ: Pakistan In A Tight Spot Over Dawood

That corruption is rampant in Pakistan is no more a hidden fact. During Gen Zia Ul Haq’s martial law (1977- 1988), it was common knowledge that one could get their sentence reduced by one year by bribing the military judge with one lakh rupees. The (bribe) monies were paid after the sentence was awarded and during the appeal process. The civil police who would normally escort the prisoner collected money before passing it on to the military judge.

Lashes were bought off the sentence for Rs 15,000 each. Hence there was frenzy among military courts to award long sentences and 10 to 15 lashes to each political activist that was apprehended under the martial law regulations.Today, corruption is rampant in Pakistan Army. A soldier bribes the subedar if he needs to visit his family in the village. From universities to science research labs, to electricity power companies to museums and parks, there is hardly any civil institution that is not headed by an ex-military officer.

It was during the Afghan war (1979-1989) that Pakistan military generals developed a fondness for sleazy money. Foreign aid arriving through western governments and consortiums plus the side business of cultivating and selling heroin brought a qualitative change in the manner Pakistan army business operated. Not only that it developed itself into a business conglomerate but also turned itself into a drug cartel that would supply heroin to the rest of the world.

Although the Pakistan Army’s involvement in the business is as old as the country itself, however, it was during the 1980s that its business empire expanded at a breathtaking rate reaching its zenith during General Musharraf’s tenure (1998-2008). In her book Military INC, Ayesha Saddiqa estimated the military business to be worth more than 10 billion euros in 2007, which was roughly four times the total of direct foreign investment in the same year. She claimed that 100 top military generals had a collective wealth of 3.5 billion euros.

Pakistan Army, Air Force and Navy each own the three largest conglomerates Fauji Foundation, Shaheen and Bahria Foundations. The Army Welfare Trust (established in 1971) runs the country’s largest lenders, the Askari Bank. The military National Logistic Cell (NLC) is Pakistan’s largest shipper and freight transporter. It was reported that on retirement a Maj. General can get 240 acres of prime farmland worth more than half a million pounds as well as an urban real estate plot of land worth 700,000 euros.

The rise of Pakistan Army as a usurper of the market economy has brought her into direct conflict with the local civilian investor and industrialist. It is in this background that former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and military generals came to loggerhead on the issue of allocation of billions worth of contracts of the CPEC. The military would not allow the Nawaz Sharif or the parliament to be the sole in charge of this multi-billion-dollar project.

ALSO READ: Chine Sidelines Pak Govt Over CPEC

Hence, they removed him through a controversial general election and brought in a political novice Imran Khan into power. Lt. Gen. (r) Bajwa was made Chairman of CPEC. But the military does not trust Imran Khan either and, therefore, a few months ago they forced him to sack Firdous Ashiq Awan, the special assistant to the Prime minister for information, and replaced her with the same guy (Asim Saleem Bajwa) who is the chairman of the CPEC.

Pakistan’s military has totally lost its credibility in the eyes of the common man and woman in the country. People despise the army and consider the plunder and perks awarded to the army as directly responsible for their sub-standard living conditions and general poverty in the country. The stubbornness, with which the Pakistan Army is stealing the natural resources of the provinces has brought them into direct-armed conflict with Baloch and Sindhi nationalists. Their demand for more autonomy has now converted into a demand for total independence from the federation.

Lack of a profitable small industrial base has led the Pakistan Army deeper into corruption and kickbacks. The recent revelations regarding Lt. Gen. (r) Bajwa do not come as a surprise but as a confirmation of the suspicion, the general public has held for decades about its army that Pakistan military no longer considers Pakistan a productive economy. The only way to generate profit for them is to strip Pakistan of all its natural resources and invest in foreign countries that can promise an uninterrupted flow of revenue.

None other than those who in the first place was supposed to protect it from the enemy is beating blow-by-blow Pakistan to the ground. The inability of a market economy has forced its men in uniform to consume whatever is left of the country’s resources. Hence, failing to become innovative entrepreneurs the Pakistan Army has become a parasite and Pakistan has turned into a state that is run by the rules of parasite capitalism.

The author is a human rights activist from Mirpur in PoK. He currently lives in exile in the UK. (ANI)