India
No, Pakistan's non-Muslim population didn't decline from 23% to 3.7% as BJP claims
During the debate on the Citizenship Amendment Bill in Parliament, the BJP repeatedly claimed that population of religious minorities in Pakistan has declined from 23% in 1947 to 3.7% in 2011. Analysis of official data however shows this argument is faulty.

Mukesh Rawat New Delhi December 12, 2019 UPDATED: December 12, 2019 23:59 IST


It is a fact that religious minorities have been persecuted and face discrimination in Pakistan and Bangladesh, but the figures quoted by the BJP are untrue. (Photo: Reuters file)

While moving the Citizenship Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha on Monday, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said at the time of Independence, non-Muslims comprised 23 per cent of Pakistan's population and that by 2011 their share was reduced to 3.7 per cent.

With regards to Bangladesh, he claimed that in 1947, non-Muslims comprised 22 per cent of its population and their share in 2011 fell to 7.8 per cent.

Amit Shah's verbatim quote in Hindi: "1947 main Pakistan ke andar alpasankhyakon ki aabadi 23 pratishat thi, aur 2011 main wog ghat kar 3.7 pratishat ho gayi. Bangladesh main 1947 main aplsankhyakon ki aabadi 22 pratishat thi aur 2011 main wo kam ho kar 7.8 pratishat ho gayi. Kahan gaye ye log? Ya toh unka dharm parivartan hua. Ya wo maar diye gaye, ya bhaga diye gaye, ya Bharat aa gaye."

(Refer to Amit Shah's speech from the video on his Twitter profile below from 9min 40sec onwards for this quote.)
Replying on Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2019 in Lok Sabha. https://t.co/L2A9ZcbCny
Amit Shah (@AmitShah) December 9, 2019

On Wednesday, while moving the Citizenship Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha, Amit Shah reiterated his claim, saying Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen a decline of up to 20 percentage points in their populations of religious minorities.

"Whan ke alpshankyak kahan gaye? Ya toh vo maar diye gaye, ya unhone Bharat main sharan liya (Where did the minorities disappear in Pakistan and Bangladesh? Either they were persecuted or they took shelter in India)," Amit Shah said in the Rajya Sabha.

This has been a position maintained by the Bharatiya Janata Party and its supporters. To highlight the persecution of religious minorities in Pakistan (particularly of the Hindus), the BJP and right-wing Hindu organisations in India have been citing similar figures to argue that non-Muslims were brutally persecuted in an Islamic Pakistan after the Partition of 1947.

But how true are these numbers? Has population of non-Muslims in Pakistan really shrunk to 3.7 per cent today from a high of 23 per cent? What is the basis of this claim?

IndiaToday.in's analysis of Pakistan's Census data shows that these claims are faulty.


TRACING PAKISTAN's NON-MUSLIM POPULATION

Pakistan got its identity as a separate nation on August 14, 1947. Back then, Pakistan also included present-day Bangladesh which was known as East Pakistan. These two territories were carved out as a new independent nation with Islam as its state religion.

There is no authentic and reliable official data on the religious composition of Pakistan's population in 1947. While presenting the data on religious composition of Pakistan in 1947 in his speech, Home Minister Amit Shah did not mention his source either. A similar figure was mentioned in an article published by the Hudson Institute in 2013. The artilce 'Cleansing Pakistan of Minorities' was written by Farahnaz Ispahani, former member of Pakistan's Parliament. But she too did not mention the source of her figures.

The preceding figures on Pakistan's religious composition that are available are from Census 1941. But since it was conducted in an undivided India, referring to it is futile as it doesn't reflect the ground situation created just after the bloodied Partition in 1947.

After its formation, the first census in Pakistan was carried out in 1951. This census included both East and West Pakistan.

As per this census, the share of Muslims in Pakistan's overall population in 1951 was 85.80 per cent, while the share of non-Muslims was 14.20 per cent. (Pakistan here refers to East and West Pakistan taken together).

What is important to note in Census 1951 is that Pakistan's non-Muslim population wasn't evenly distributed.

In West Pakistan, the non-Muslim population was just 3.44 per cent, while in East Pakistan (today's Bangladesh) they had a significant share comprising 23.20 per cent of the population therein.

As per Census 1951, share of Muslims in Pakistan's overall population was 85.80%, while share of non-Muslims was 14.20%.

To understand the change in population of religious minorities in present-day Pakistan, we need to separately analyse the trends in West Pakistan and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).

WHAT HAPPENED IN WEST PAKISTAN

In 1951, Muslims comprised 96.56 per cent of the total population in the territory that is today known as Pakistan. The table below details the religious composition of each of Pakistan's five provinces.

The next census in Pakistan was carried out in 1961 which said the non-Muslim population in West Pakistan had reduced to 2.83 per cent of West Pakistan's total population.

By 1972 when Pakistan carried out its third census, East Pakistan had been liberated and was now known as Bangladesh.

The 1972 census shows non-Muslims in Pakistan comprised 3.25 per cent of the total population. This was higher than their share in 1961. By the time the next census was carried out in 1981, Pakistan's non-Muslim population saw a miniscule rise--from 3.25 per cent in 1972 to 3.30 per cent in 1981.

Following Census 1981, Pakistan did not carry out a fresh census for more than 15 years and the next census was carried out in 1998.

As per this census, Pakistan's non-Muslim population was 3.70 per cent of the total population in 1998.

Recently, though Pakistan carried out a fresh census in 2017 but its religious data is yet to be released.

ALSO READ | Abduction, oppression and forced conversion is fate of Hindus in Pakistan

Thus in a nutshell, based on Pakistan's census data we find:

1) Population of non-Muslims was never 23 per cent of Pakistan's total population.

2) Even in undivided Pakistan, share of non-Muslim population never even touched the 15 per cent mark. (The highest was 14.2 per cent in 1951.)

3) When it comes to today's Pakistan (i.e. erstwhile West Pakistan), non-Muslims comprised 3.44 per cent of the region's population in 1951.

4) Census data show that share of non-Muslims in Pakistan has hovered around 3.5 per cent over the decades.


THE SITUATION IN EAST PAKISTAN (today's BANGLADESH)

Now, since the trend of non-Muslim population in the region that comprises Pakistan today is clear, we shall look at what happened in East Pakistan, which in 1971 became Bangladesh.

Pakistan's census data show that non-Muslims formed 23.20 per cent of East Pakistan's total population in 1951.

Over the years, this share has indeed reduced significantly, but still not as much as the BJP has claimed.

By 1961, share of non-Muslims in East Pakistan had reduced to 19.57 per cent, In 1974 it further reduced to 14.60 per cent; in 1981 to 13.40 per cent; in 1991 to 11.70 per cent and in 2001 to 10.40 per cent.

Bangladesh's latest census carried out in 2011 revealed that the share of non-Muslims has gone below 10 per cent of the country's overall population. In 2011, non-Muslims comprised 9.60 per cent of Bangladesh's population.

Thus, between 1951 and 2011, population of non-Muslims shrunk from a high of 23.20 per cent to a low 9.40 per cent.

ALSO READ | 1,792 persecutions on minorities in 11 months in Bangladesh, claims Hindu alliance

WHERE BJP'S CLAIM IS WRONG

Having separately examined the trend in population change in the regions that are today known as Pakistan and Bangladesh, let's examine the claims made by the BJP.

The BJP has claimed:

1) Population of non-Muslims in Pakistan has reduced from 23 per cent at the time of Independence to 3.7 per cent in 2011.

2) Population of non-Muslims in Bangladesh was 22 per cent at the time of Independence and has been reduced to 7.8 per cent in 2011.

3) This decline in population share of non-Muslims in these two Islamic countries was due to widespread religious persecution.

As discussed earlier, there is no official data on the religious composition of Pakistan at the time of Partition (then including today's Bangladesh). The closest official figures available are from Census 1951. What happened between 1947 and 1951 is subject to individual interpretation.

It is a fact that thousands of non-Muslims were persecuted in Pakistan at the time of Partition in 1947 (just as thousands of Muslims were persecuted in India). Besides this, thousands of Hindus and other religious minorities left Pakistan and entered India in 1947 and thousands of Muslims left India to become Pakistani citizens. This widespread migration and killings did alter the religious composition of the regions concerned in comparison to the situation before Partition. But the exact scale of these persecutions and migration remains unknown in absence of data, and hence the population share of non-Muslims in Pakistan in 1947 remains unknown.

Taking Pakistan's Census 1951 as benchmark for our analysis, we find that while raising the issue of religious persecution in Pakistan and Bangladesh, the BJP mixed-up data for the two regions.

Firstly, it said non-Muslims once comprised 23 per cent of Pakistan's population. The fact rather is that non-Muslims comprised 23 per cent of only East Pakistan's population, not the entire country. Taken together (East plus West Pakistan), share of non-Muslims was 14.20 per cent (the highest ever) in 1951.

Secondly, the BJP claimed that share of non-Muslims reduced from 23 per cent to 3.7 per cent in Pakistan. This too is incorrect because share of non-Muslims in Pakistan has hovered around 3.5 per cent from the first census onwards.

1951: 3.44 per cent

1961: 2.80 per cent

1972: 3.25 per cent

1981: 3.33 per cent

1998: 3.70 per cent

Thirdly, the BJP is correct in saying that the percentage share of non-Muslims has decreased significantly in Bangladesh. But it is wrong in saying that the decline was from 22 per cent to 7.8 per cent. As per official census data, the decline was from 23.20 per cent in 1951 to 9.40 per cent in 2011.

Fourthly, BJP has argued that religious persecution was the reason for decline of non-Muslim population in Bangladesh. There is no denying that religious minorities were brutally persecuted for decades in East Pakistan and later also in Bangladesh. It is a fact that hundreds of them were raped, murdered and forcibly converted into Islam.

But besides religious persecution, there were other strong factors that contributed in out-migration of non-Muslims from Bangladesh, which too resulted in decline of their share in population.

Persecution based on language in Bangladesh and greener economic opportunities in India have been strong push factors in Bangladesh for thousands of illegal immigrants who entered and settled in India.

These illegal immigrants are not just Hindus, but also comprise a sizable number of Bengali Muslims. Thus out-migration from Bangladesh has been a multi-factored phenomenon. Ascribing it entirely to persecution of religious minorities is erroneous.

This, however, does not reject the fact that religious minorities have been persecuted, raped and forcibly converted in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In many instances, such prosecution had explicit or tacit approval of the government in power.

This was particularly true in during decades of military rule and even after 1971 when East Pakistan was liberated and Bangladesh formed.

In summation, it appears that while championing the cause of religious minorities in Bangladesh and Pakistan, the BJP has used the 23 per cent figure of non-Muslims in Bangladesh (erstwhile East Pakistan) in 1951 and compared it with the 3.7 per cent figure of non-Muslims in Pakistan in 1998.

The result of this mix-up is a narrative that says population share of non-Muslims has been reduced from 23 per cent to 3.7 per cent in Pakistan.

(NOTE: An earlier version of this article had a line which said "Census data show that share of non-Hindus in Pakistan has hovered around 3.5 per cent over the decades". This line was part of the four bullet points just above the sub-head 'The situation in East Pakistan'. Instead of 'non-Hindus', the term should have been 'non-Muslims'. The error is regretted and has been corrected.)


FROM OUR ARCHIVES | Hindu refugee influx from Bangladesh fuels tension in West Bengal


ALSO WATCH | Is Citizenship Amendment Bill against Constitution? Watch SC lawyer Harish Salve's take

Pakistan celebrates 75th Independence Day with patriotic enthusiasm

This year also marks 75 years of bilateral relations between the United States and Pakistan.

By ARSHAD MEHMOOD/THE MEDIA LINE
Published: AUGUST 15, 2022 

People are silhouetted as fireworks explode to celebrate on the eve of Pakistan's 75th Independence Day, in Peshawar, Pakistan, August 13, 2022.
(photo credit: REUTERS/FAYAZ AZIZ)

[Islamabad] Pakistan is celebrating its 75th Independence Day full of enthusiasm and national spirit.

The country came into being after gaining independence from Britain on August 14, 1947. In celebration, national green crescent flags have been hoisted on government buildings in all cities including the federal capital, Islamabad.

The Independence Day celebrations began early Sunday morning with a 31-gun salute in the federal capital and a 21-gun salute in all provincial capitals. The main feature of the celebrations was the flag-hoisting ceremony at the president’s house in Islamabad.

Pakistan’s President Arif Alvi was set to confer civil awards on Pakistani citizens and foreign nationals for showing excellence and courage in their respective fields.

Customary ceremonies for the changing of the guards also were scheduled for the shrines of the founder of the nation Muhammad Ali Jinnah in Karachi, and for national poet Allama Muhammad Iqbal in Lahore.

Pakistan's national flag flatters during a ceremony to celebrate Pakistan's 75th Independence Day, at the Mausoleum of Muhammad Ali Jinnah in Karachi, Pakistan, August 14, 2022. (credit: REUTERS/AKHTAR SOOMRO)

At 8:00 a.m. sirens sounded across the country, stopping traffic, while a moment of silence was observed. Senior officials laid wreaths on the graves of those killed during the struggle for independence, while prayer ceremonies also were organized across the country.

All public and private buildings were set to be illuminated at night.

In connection with Independence Day, Pakistani embassies around the world planned to organize special events. Such special events are meant to pay homage to those people who lost their lives in the struggle for freedom.

History

Pakistan separated from India in 1947, and was named the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Before the partition of India and Pakistan, the subcontinent was called British India, and it was a British colony ruled by the British East India Company. Prior to British rule, the Mughal Empire governed the sub-continent for centuries. In the 18th century, the land became part of British India.

Under the partition plan proposed months before it took place, British India was to be split into two dominions, a Muslim majority Pakistan and a secular state of India. What followed was months of bloodshed along the borders of the two newly-formed nations. About 15 million people became refugees.

As the clock struck midnight on August 14, 1947, the British colonial government was drowned out by the screams of millions of people walking through the corpse-strewn landscape of an emerging Pakistan. The migration of tens of millions of people between India and Pakistan that came with the partition has been called the largest migration in history.

During the migration, thousands of innocent Muslims were killed by Hindu and Sikh mobs; meanwhile, tens of thousands of Muslim women were raped.

Pakistan is the seventh largest country in the world and the only Muslim-majority country to possess nuclear weapons.

Nation in crisis

“Indeed, Pakistan is currently going through the worst crisis in its history and now the nation is in desperate need of the same spirit with which it gained freedom from British slavery 75 years ago.”Riffat Ayesha, historian

Pakistan has been suffering from a severe political and economic crisis in recent months. The daily fall in the currency has significantly increased inflation, leading to increased difficulties for the average citizen.

Riffat Ayesha of Sargodha in Punjab province, a scholar who holds a master’s degree in history, told The Media Line: “Indeed, Pakistan is currently going through the worst crisis in its history and now the nation is in desperate need of the same spirit with which it gained freedom from British slavery 75 years ago.”

“In 1947, the whole nation needed a country, now the country needs the same resolute nation that gained independence from Britain with immense difficulties and without resources,” she added. “Our nation has to repeat the same determination to rebuild a strong Pakistan.”

“On this Independence Day, the nation has to take a pledge once again that without any racial, color or religious discrimination, everyone has to work together to get Pakistan out of political and economic challenges,” she said, calling on the country “to unite and initiate the teachings of peace, brotherhood and love.”

In addition to Independence Day celebrations, the country also is celebrating the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Pakistan and the United States.

The United States recognized Pakistan as an independent state on August 15, 1947.

Military relations between the US and Pakistan have been consistently close and, during the US-led invasion in Afghanistan, Pakistan was declared a frontline ally in the war on terror.

Ahead of Pakistan’s Independence Day, US Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome visited the mausoleum of Pakistan’s founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah in Karachi on Thursday and laid a wreath there.

The ambassador signed the guestbook on behalf of the US Embassy in Islamabad. “The US shares Mohammed Ali Jinnah‘s vision of a Pakistan at peace with itself and its neighbors, a Pakistan of religious tolerance, economic prosperity, and social inclusion. On behalf of the American people, I offer Pakistan warm congratulations on its 75th Independence Day,” Blome wrote, according to the embassy

The embassy said in a statement that: “This year marks 75 years of bilateral relations between the United States and Pakistan. The United States values our long-standing cooperation with Pakistan and has always viewed a strong, prosperous, and democratic Pakistan as critical to US interests.”

“We support strengthening economic ties between our two countries by expanding private sector trade and investment, which benefits both countries,” the statement also said.

The Pakistan-US relationship has fluctuated over the years, analysts told The Media Line.

Naeem Khalid Lodhi, a retired three-star general and Pakistan’s former defense minister, told The Media Line that “America is a super power and likely to stay so for the foreseeable future. Pakistan did well by aligning itself with the US from its very inception.”

He added that “there have been ups and down in these relations mainly due to misunderstandings and at times because of divergent interests.”

Lodhi also said that “Pakistan’s inability to spell out clearly or accurately its own inalienable rights and interests has at times soured the relationship, but generally relations remained good even during difficult times, within workable limits.”

Lodhi said that the relationship currently is experiencing a “difficult phase” due to issues including internal disharmony, the situation in neighboring Afghanistan, and issues in dealing with China, including the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor. Despite the current difficulties, “Pakistan’s main economic, social and political interests are still firmly embedded in the West, Middle East and the US,” he said.

Lodhi said that “to reinvigorate the shaky relations, the two countries’ foreign offices and leadership must sit down and resolve the present and future cooperative model.”

Most of the US-Pakistan relationship has been focused on defense and humanitarian issues, Irina Tsukerman, a New York-based national security and south Asian analyst, told The Media Line.

The peak of the relationship has been Pakistan’s role in assisting the US efforts against the former Soviet Union in the 1980s, particularly in the transfer of arms and the training of the mujahedeen. “The same role later caused tensions with Pakistan choosing to arm hardliners, and the US more recently distancing itself over the failure to handle extremism,” she said.

The circumstances surrounding the assassination of Osama bin Laden also led to some level of diplomatic tensions, Tsukerman said.

“US humanitarian support for Pakistan was largely tied to Pakistan’s regional security role,” she added.

“The US has repeatedly expressed concern over human rights issues in Pakistan, particularly over religious freedom issues, but has also expressed support for initiatives related to women's rights, such as education,” Tsukerman said.

She noted that “the US has focused on keeping regional balance and stability, but as other countries have surpassed Pakistan as mediator and power brokers on key issues such as the peace process with the Taliban, Pakistan drifted further into China's and Russia's sphere of influence. Although after Imran Khan's departure Pakistan has tried to pivot back to its traditional relationship with the US.”

Tuskerman also told The Media Line that Pakistan's “political fictionalized and popular sectarianism makes it a complicated landscape to navigate for the US, and the level of distrust between the countries is high”.

“US officials are reluctant to return to reliance on Pakistan security services. The relationship needs to be rebuilt on other principles,” she added.

Lieutenant General (ret) Abdul Qayyum, former military secretary to the late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, a former senator, and the chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Defense Production, told The Media Line that, “barring few exceptional periods like President Eisenhower’s era, unfortunately, the US used Pakistan to thwart communism through Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO)/Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) pacts and the Afghan war but could not stop India’s naked aggression against former East Pakistan.”

Qayyum also said that “during Afghanistan’s invasion, the US-led forces frequently utilized Pakistan’s soil, but Pakistan was never paid any compensation to ensure the repatriation of Afghan refugees.”

He told The Media Line that Pakistan was “severely punished” for becoming a frontline ally in the US-led war on terror. As a result, he said “the local supporters of the Afghan Taliban formed armed organizations and started terrorist attacks in Pakistan; as a result, more than 70,000 Pakistani citizens lost their lives while the infrastructures were severely destroyed. Moreover, the US never extended its moral and diplomatic support to stop Indian atrocities in Jammu and Kashmir.”

Qayyum said that the “US should realize the importance of Pakistan’s pivotal strategic location, which provides a safe gateway to Central Asian Republics and the Middle East.”

He also stressed that Pakistan’s “relationship with the US cannot come at the expense of our historically deep relationship with China, and if we buy cheap Russian oil or Iranian gas to meet our energy needs, the US should not have any objection."

PAKISTAN
THE ROOTS OF THE RAGE AGAINST AMERICA

Zahid Hussain
Published May 1, 2022 


LOANG READ

The crowd of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) supporters at the Islamabad rally on March 27 was already charged — their party leader seemed to be on his way out, and various other politicians and stakeholders had clearly banded together to ensure his ouster.

The crowd wanted to know what their leader had in store for them. Imran Khan had promised them a revelation, and he surely delivered.

The then prime minister pulled out a paper that would further electrify this crowd. He brandished before them a ‘letter’, evidence of an ‘American-sponsored conspiracy’ to oust his government. What came next was all too familiar to anyone who has lived in, or observed, Pakistan over the decades. Chants of ‘down with America’, and a doubling down of the foreign conspiracy mantra.

Given deep-rooted anti-American sentiments in Pakistani society, the public response to the conspiracy narrative has not been surprising. The narrative of a ‘foreign conspiracy’ may have failed to prevent the unravelling of the former ruling coalition, but a populist, ultra-nationalist rhetoric has galvanised Khan’s supporters.


Weeks after former Prime Minister Imran Khan first claimed an American conspiracy to oust his government, he and his party continue to stick doggedly to the narrative — even in the absence of evidence. What do politicians hope to gain from inflaming anti-American sentiments? And why does this narrative continue to resonate in Pakistan?

Interestingly, as is now clear, the allegation has been built around a cable from the outgoing Pakistan ambassador to Washington, based on his conversations with senior-level US State Department officials. It is simply a diplomat’s analysis of the existing views in Washington regarding the Khan-led government.

A file photo shows an anti-US and anti-Israel protest in Karachi | White Star

Imran Khan’s move to weaponise this and whip up nationalist sentiments has dangerously polarised the country. It has not been uncommon in Pakistan’s power game to use the ‘anti-state’ label against political rivals. Almost every political leader in the country has, at one time or the other, been branded a traitor.

But Khan has taken this to a new level. He has declared himself the sole defender of national interests, while painting all his opponents as ‘American agents’.

It is not only the opposition. Journalists and members of the civil society have also been constantly targeted in this ongoing campaign orchestrated by the party’s top leadership. Even social interactions with foreign diplomats have been labelled as anti-state. (Khan’s own recent meeting with a US Congresswoman has been an exception, of course).

Khan is back on the proverbial container, marking the beginning of what he describes as a “freedom struggle” against a “foreign conspiracy of regime change.” He vows to bring down the so-called “imported government”.

The long history of external involvement in Pakistani politics — particularly the decades-long Pak-US relations rollercoaster ride, which has certainly had its ups and downs — has made it easier to whip up anti-American sentiments.

This is what makes the ‘imported government’ narrative such a powerful tool.

The National Security Committee has recently reiterated that there was no foreign conspiracy to topple the Khan-led government. But it hardly matters. PTI supporters and the party leadership have stuck to the narrative.

The distrust towards America strengthens this narrative. Indeed, this distrust has built up over decades. Here we journey back to see why.

DISENCHANTED ALLIES

A 2006 file photo shows US President Bush with President Pervez Musharraf

 at the Oval Office | AFP



The history of US-Pakistan relations is full of paradoxes. After gaining independence, Pakistan decided to join the US-led Western alliance against the Communist bloc. And in 1954, Pakistan and the US signed a Mutual Defence Assistance Agreement. In the same year, Pakistan also joined the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (Seato), a US-sponsored security alliance.

Because of its geostrategic location, Pakistan became an important cog in America’s regional security strategy to contain communism.

Although there was no assurance for Pakistan of the alliance coming to its help against any aggression from its arch-enemy India, the military aid it received from the US helped strengthen its defence. The US financial aid also provided economic stability to the country. In 1955, Pakistan also joined the Baghdad Pact, later known as the Central Treaty Organisation (Cento).

A new cooperation signed between the two states in 1959 was perhaps the most significant up until that time. Under the treaty, the US was required to assist Pakistan if the country was attacked by any regional power. Pakistan’s decision to join the US-led defence pacts was justified on the grounds that the country faced threats from India on its eastern borders and Afghanistan on the west. But it was mainly meant to improve the country’s defence capabilities against India.

The US supplied a wide range of military hardware, including Patton tanks, artillery, helicopters, bombers, high-level long-distance radars, frigates and submarines. Pakistan also received substantial US aid for infrastructure development. On the other hand, the defence pacts allowed the US to set up a secret intelligence base under the cover of a communication centre at Badaber, near Peshawar.

This centre also served as the base for high-level U-2 ‘spy in the sky’ surveillance aircraft for illegal flights over the erstwhile Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Pakistan, however, paid a heavy price for this alliance. It antagonised the Soviet Union. And it also fuelled anti-American sentiments at home.

Then the Sino-Indian War in 1962 drastically changed regional geopolitics. As the US sided with India, it heralded a new period in Pakistan’s relations with China. As Pak-China relations strengthened, there was a steep increase in US military and economic aid to India.

Finally, the 1965 war between India and Pakistan lent a serious blow to Islamabad’s relations with Washington. Instead of helping Pakistan, the US stopped all military assistance to the country. The US action was regarded as a stab in the back.

CHANGING TIDES

Then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif greets visiting US Secretary 

of State John Kerry in 2013 | White Star


The 1971 war brought further Pakistani resentment and US restrictions on Pakistan. A popular feeling of the time was that while the nearby American Sixth Fleet could have intervened in the East Pakistan fighting against India, it did not. This compelled Pakistan to review its foreign and security policy, which was heavily tilted towards the US. There was a realisation among Pakistani policymakers that they could not rely on the US for their nation’s security.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who took over power in the truncated Pakistan after the 1971 war, pulled Pakistan out of the defence pacts. He diversified Pakistan’s foreign policy by improving ties with China and the USSR.

In February 1975, following the Washington visit of then prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the US administration lifted its embargo on the supply of arms to Pakistan.

But the Pakistan-US relationship started to deteriorate once again in 1976, when the Ford administration exerted unprecedented pressure on Pakistan to abandon the negotiations concerning the purchase of a nuclear reprocessing plant from France. In 1979, President Carter cancelled American aid to Pakistan, having successfully pressed France to break this nuclear deal.

Pakistan’s nuclear programme, started by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1975, remained a major point of conflict between Islamabad and Washington. But two key regional developments in 1979 — the Islamic revolution in Iran and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — compelled the US to review its policy towards Pakistan. The two erstwhile allies got back together to stop the Soviet advance.

The international response to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan was sharp and swift. US President Jimmy Carter, reassessing the strategic situation in the region in his State of the Union Address in January 1980, identified Pakistan as a “frontline State in the global struggle against communism.” Setting aside the sanctions imposed on Islamabad for its nuclear programme, the US offered massive military and economic aid to Pakistan.

The Soviet invasion ended the decade-long estrangement between the two erstwhile allies and brought them together to help the Afghan ‘Mujahideen’ fight the occupation forces. Pakistan once again became the linchpin in the West’s battle against communism. The American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) collaborated in conducting the biggest covert war ever in global history.

The Afghan War placed enormous resources at the ISI’s disposal. Weapons provided by the CIA were channelled to Afghan fighters through the ISI.

By the mid-1980s, every dollar given by the CIA was matched by another from Saudi Arabia. The funds, running into several million dollars a year, were transferred by the CIA to the ISI’s special accounts in Pakistan. The backing of the CIA and the funnelling of the massive amounts of US military aid helped Pakistan expand its defence capabilities. The ISI-CIA covert operations eventually forced the Soviet forces to leave Afghanistan in 1989.

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in 1990 also gave birth to a new world order. The US walked out of the region after the Soviet forces pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989. And Pakistan was no more as important for the US, which had emerged as the world’s sole superpower.

Relations between the two countries went into deep freeze after the US clamped multiple sanctions against Pakistan once again for developing nuclear weapons. More sanctions came after Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in 1998, in response to India’s tests. Pakistan was further punished after the 1999 military takeover of Gen Musharraf.

From being a close ally in the 1980s, Pakistan had become a pariah nation. The sanctions had hurt military to military relations the most, which had been the pivot of the relationship between the two countries.

This marked yet another period of separation between the two Cold War era partners, causing a deep sense of betrayal in Pakistan. During the 1990s, Pakistan suffered banishment from American favours.

From Pakistan’s perspective, the legacy of the country’s relations with the US during the Cold War has been generally negative. The left in Pakistan had always viewed the state’s tilt towards imperial America with hostility, since they saw US support as bolstering dictatorships such as that of Gen Ayub and Gen Zia. But now a similar hostility also began to be expressed within the establishment and by its allied conservatives. A sense of bitterness and distrust towards the US began to pervade Pakistani society. And clearly, this bitterness continues to persist.

AFTER SEPTEMBER 11

The 9/11 attacks again changed the world. Within hours of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers, the Bush administration declared a war against Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda and Afghanistan. Rarely had the world witnessed such unanimous international support. Nations stood behind President Bush in what he had described as the ‘War on Terror’. A UN Security Council resolution bound all nations to support the US action.

The events of 9/11 also, once again, ended Pakistan’s international isolation.

Gen Musharraf had realised, within hours of the September 11 attacks, that the US would accept nothing short of complete compliance from his government on the US war plans. Denying support did not seem like a viable option. Musharraf was apprehensive that the Pakistani military could be completely destroyed in a confrontation with the world’s greatest superpower. His other fear was that the country’s weak economy would not be able to withstand international sanctions. His greatest concern, however, was about US forces using Indian bases in case of Pakistan’s refusal to cooperate.

And just like that, Pakistan and the US were back together after a decade of estrangement.

Pakistan’s policy volte-face after 9/11 was more of an expediency. Ironies abounded in the new relationship. After having spent the past seven years helping the Taliban, Pakistan was required to help the US dislodge the hardline Islamist government that was seen by Pakistan’s military establishment as critical to the country’s security.

Pakistan’s vast cache of intelligence information on Afghanistan was seen as crucial by the US for taking military action against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. But the turnaround was not easy.

It was the most difficult moment for Gen Musharraf when, in an address to the nation on September 19, 2001, he tried to explain why he had decided to side with the US in the so-called ‘War on Terror’. He justified his decision to support the US saying it was necessary to save the country’s strategic assets, safeguard the cause of Kashmir and prevent Pakistan from being declared a terrorist state.

Gen Musharraf was, perhaps, more concerned about the reaction within the military than the general public. He had a tough time in convincing his generals of, once again, getting into a partnership with the US. At least four commanders, including the Vice Chief of Army Staff General Muzaffar Usmani, were opposed to abandoning the Taliban. Musharraf had to walk a very difficult tightrope.

A strong argument in support of the change of policy direction was that the US could obliterate Pakistan if it did not cooperate. India had already offered logistic support and use of all their military facilities to the US. And India had even cleared its air base at Farkhor, near Dushanbe in Tajikistan close to the Afghan border, for American forces to operate from. The fear of an American-Indian alliance, that could lead to Pakistan being declared a terrorist state, finally swung the decision.

Nevertheless, antipathy towards the US ran deep in Pakistan. It was the beginning of an extremely uneasy relationship. There was deep distrust of the US.

This distrust was at the very foundation of this relationship. This new phase of the US-Pakistan partnership was seen as a good opportunity to join the international community, but there was also a vote of caution.

It was another war in Afghanistan that became the pivot around which the new US-Pakistan partnership was built. The circumstances of the two unisons were, however, very different. While there was a strong convergence of interest that had bound the two nations in a strategic relationship in the 1980s, the alliance that emerged after 9/11 was more out of expediency and compulsion. Although it was projected as a strategic partnership, in reality it was a transactional relationship from the outset.

While Pakistan’s support was critical to the US’s war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the new partnership brought an end to Pakistan’s international isolation. The removal of multiple sanctions revived the flow of US financial and military aid to Pakistan. It almost felt like the country had returned to 1979, when the Soviet invasion had ended the estrangement between the two erstwhile allies.

AN INCONVENIENT PARTNERSHIP

A 2019 file photo shows US President Donald Trump with then

 Prime Minister Imran Khan in New York | AFP

The post 9/11 US-Pakistan partnership remained full of ironies. While the cooperation between Washington and Islamabad against Al Qaeda remained extremely effective, that understanding was missing when it came to taking action against the Taliban leadership residing in Pakistan’s border regions.

Meanwhile, the sanctuaries in Pakistan and support from their allies among Pakistani Islamist groups helped the Taliban reorganise. Within a few years, the Taliban had turned into a formidable resistance force challenging the occupation forces.

Increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan was one of the reasons for the Pakistani security agencies not acting against the Taliban safe havens on its soil. The Pakistani military establishment viewed the expanding Indian presence in its ‘backyard’ as a serious threat to the country’s own security. The expanding Indian presence in Afghanistan had compounded Islamabad’s fears of being encircled.

Some of Pakistan’s security concerns were legitimate, but the fears of encirclement verged on paranoia. It also resulted in Pakistan’s continuing patronage of some Afghan Taliban factions, such as the Haqqani Network, which it considered a vital tool for countering Indian influence, even at the risk of Islamabad’s relationship with Washington.

Worsening US-Pak relations had also seriously affected America’s war efforts in Afghanistan. A series of incidents in 2011 had brought an already uneasy alliance to a breaking point.

The Raymond Davis episode in January 2011 exposed the CIA’s secret network operating in Pakistan. The scandal revealed the widening trust gap between the two allies. The crisis was deescalated by both sides taking a step back, but the damage had already been done.

The unilateral raid by the US Special Forces on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad on May 2, 2011, further strained the relations between Washington and Islamabad. The US action on Pakistani soil was seen as a national humiliation. But the fact that the world’s most wanted terrorist was living in a garrison town close to the Pakistan Military Academy had put Pakistan in a very embarrassing position.

Pakistan faced many questions. Was this just an intelligence failure? Or was there anything more to the presence of the Al Qaeda leader in a high security zone?

But the most serious blow to the alliance came on November 29, 2011, when US Air Force jets bombed a Pakistani border post at Salala in the Bajaur tribal region, killing several soldiers. It was an inflection point in the rocky relationship. The Obama administration’s reluctance to even offer an apology to the killing of soldiers of an allied country made things worse.

For seven months, Pakistan closed down the vital ground supply line to Nato forces in Afghanistan. The stalemate was finally broken after Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said the magic word: sorry.

But by now the cracks in the alliance had become irreparable. The Salala incident led to a resetting of the relationship. Now there was not even a pretence of a strategic alignment.

There was nothing much left in the partnership, wrecked by allegations of double games and deceit. Almost all US military aid to Pakistan had been stopped and only a trickle of civilian assistance continued.

Yet, a complete rupture was not a choice for either side. Pakistan was still critical for the US to extricate itself from its longest war. While the illusion of any strategic convergence has been absent for long, the mutual interest in ending the war in Afghanistan kept relations alive.

END OF THE WAR

With the end of America’s war in Afghanistan, the post post-9/11 US-Pakistan relations have come full circle.

There is no indication yet of any major shift in Washington’s policy towards Pakistan. The cold response from the Biden administration and some unnecessary rhetoric from Pakistani leaders has made it difficult to move forward.

Indeed, Khan’s attempts to get Biden on the phone last year yielded no results. And surely, the former prime minister’s insistence on igniting anti-US sentiments has not gone unnoticed internationally.

Nonetheless, for the past several years, Washington has seen Pakistan purely from the Afghan prism. There is no indication that the Biden administration will be deviating from that policy approach.

Meanwhile, changing regional geopolitics have created a new alignment of forces. The growing strategic alliance between the US and India on one side, and the China-Pakistan axis on the other, reflect these emerging geopolitics. Pakistan’s growing strategic relations with China and the escalating tension between Washington and Beijing too cast a shadow over future US-Pak relations.

The changing regional geopolitics and consequent realignment of forces have brought China and Pakistan closer. The cooling of Pakistan’s relations with the US, and the rising tensions with arch-rival India, have given further impetus to Pakistan to lean towards China.

BREAKING A PATTERN

Historically, the engagements between Washington and Islamabad have been narrowly framed, dictated either by short-term security interests or the imperative to deal with a common challenge. Resetting the relationship would need this pattern to be broken.

Pakistan says it seeks to have a broad-based relationship with the US. Now that the US military mission is over, there is a need to build a relationship beyond counterterrorism and Afghanistan.

For Pakistan, the US remains an important trading partner. The US is Pakistan’s largest export market and a major source of foreign remittances. Pakistan certainly needs US support to achieve economic stability. The country also has a growing technology sector that could be developed with US support.

But resetting the relationship will not be easy.

Public opinion in Pakistan about the US is not favourable. This is backed by a decades-long history — a history not only of the volatile relations between the two countries, but how these sour relations have been leveraged within Pakistan for political mileage.

Khan may be the latest politician to decry a foreign conspiracy, but he is far from the first. And in all likelihood, he will not be the last to invoke this tried-and-tested narrative.

The writer is an author and journalist.
He tweets @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, EOS, May 1st, 2022

MAKING SENSE OF THE PAK-IRAN STAND-OFF

Why, when its list of allies is already so thin, did Iran choose to venture down this seemingly ill-conceived path?

Ejaz Haider 

Published January 28, 2024


In what was widely described as a surprise attack, Iran fired missiles at a compound in Sabz-Koh, a hamlet about 45 kilometres from the Pakistan-Iran border, on the night of January 16. After the declared attack, Iran’s foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, stated that Iran had targeted, “The so-called Jaish al-Adl group, which is an Iranian terrorist group.”

He further added while at the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, “On Pakistan, none of the nationals of the friendly and brotherly country of Pakistan were targeted by Iranian missiles and drones.”

Just hours before the attack, Amir-Abdollahian had had a bilateral meeting with Pakistan’s caretaker prime minister, Anwaarul Haq Kakar. Earlier, on January 16, Pakistan Navy had held a joint day-long exercise with Iran’s navy, which a Tehran Times report described as “demonstrating their commitment to enhancing cooperation and strengthening relations.”

Amir-Abdollahian also made it clear that the attack on “Pakistan’s soil” was in response to the Jaish al-Adl group’s recent attack on the Iranian city of Rask, in the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan, stating, “The group has taken shelter in some parts of Pakistan’s Balochistan province. We’ve talked with Pakistani officials several times on this matter.”

Iran’s post-attack position was that, while it respected the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan, it would not “allow [Iran’s] national security to be compromised or played with.”


As Pakistan and Iran attempt to patch up their relationship in the aftermath of Iran’s unprovoked missile attack on Pakistani soil on January 16, one question remains unanswered: why, when its list of allies is already so thin, did Iran choose to venture down this seemingly ill-conceived path?

The logic did not wash with Pakistan. Pakistan downgraded its diplomatic relations with Iran, summoned Iran’s chargé d’affaires (since Iran’s ambassador was in Iran), issued a démarche and told the Pakistani ambassador to Iran, who was in Islamabad on official business, to not return to his post.


After this non-kinetic escalatory response, however, Pakistan decided to respond with a measured kinetic action, the reasons for which we shall discuss later. On January 18, Pakistan used drones and stand-off munitions to strike a compound in the village of Haq Abad in Saravan district in Iran’s Sistan-Baluchestan province.

Underlying factors in Balochistan on Pakistan’s side and Sistan-Baluchestan on Iran’s side will continue to sour relations unless the two sides cooperate | AFP


Pakistan’s official statement said that the action was carried out on credible intelligence of an impending terrorist attack inside Pakistan by Baloch saramchar [fighters]. Iran also conceded that the 10 people killed in the three strikes were foreign nationals. To give Iran an off-ramp, Pakistan did not target any Iranian military facilities or missile launch sites.

While the international media made big of the exchange, since Iran had also struck targets in Syria and Iraq, the phone call between the two countries’ foreign ministers helped defuse tensions and the situation was de-escalated (more on that in a subsequent section).

Does this mean all is now well? Yes and no. ‘Yes’ because the signal to Iran is clear: if Pakistan’s territorial integrity is compromised, Islamabad will respond. Any escalation will then be the adversary’s option, who must understand the dynamics of escalation dominance.

‘No’ because the underlying factors in Balochistan on Pakistan’s side and Sistan-Baluchestan on Iran’s side would continue to sour relations unless the two sides cooperate and address them seriously. For that, one has to understand the ecosystem.

THE ECOSYSTEM OVERVIEW — IRAN’S CONCERNS

On December 15 last year, Jaish al-Adl (JaA), a reincarnation of the banned militant group Jundallah, in an early morning raid at a police station in Rask, killed 12 Iranian policemen and wounded eight.

Later the same day, Nasser Kanaani, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, “strongly condemned the crime by separatist terrorists and mercenaries of foreign adversaries of Iran.” Kanaani also promised that “the Foreign Ministry and other relevant bodies in Iran will act in concert to go after the murderous terrorists and bring them to justice.”

While JaA has been attacking Iran’s security forces on and off since 2013, when it reassembled in its present incarnation from Jundallah, the Rask attack was far more intense than anything in the previous years. The other three intense attacks were in 2013 (14 Iranian soldiers killed in an ambush) and April 26, 2017, when 10 Iranian border guards were killed in the town of Mirjaveh. The worst attack came in February 2019, when a suicide bomber killed 27 Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) personnel.

At the time of the 2017 attack, the Iranian state media quoted police officials as saying that “the Pakistani government bears the ultimate responsibility of [sic] the attack.”

Two weeks after the attack, Maj Gen Mohammad Bagheri, an IRGC commander who serves as Chief of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces, threatened to strike inside Pakistan: “We expect Pakistani officials to control the borders, arrest the terrorists and shut down their bases… If the terrorist attacks continue, we will hit their safe havens and cells, wherever they are.”

Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) summoned the Iranian ambassador over Bagheri’s ultimatum and noted that his comments went “against the spirit of brotherly relations.” Efforts were made at the diplomatic and military levels to defuse the tension and work out mechanisms for cooperation. When on October 16, 2018, JaA abducted 12 Iranian security personnel, including IRGC intelligence officers, Pakistan helped Iran to secure the release of at least five of them.

After the 2019 attack, IRGC Commander-in-Chief Mohammad Ali Jafari had issued Pakistan an ultimatum: “If Pakistan fails to punish them in the near future, Iran will do so based on international law and will retaliate against the terrorists.”

In the same statement, as reported by Al Jazeera, Jafari said Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are “conspiring” with the United States and the “Zionist regime” to foment attacks. “The patience that we have practised in the past towards Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who commit these actions, will change,” Jafari stated. Interestingly, Jafari’s comments came as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman landed in Pakistan on February 17 on a two-day official visit.

People gather near rubble in the aftermath of Pakistan’s strike on militant hideouts in an Iranian village near Saravan in Sistan-Baluchestan: Pakistan’s response was measured and targeted insurgents and not the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps launch pads | Reuters

REWINDING TO THE NOUGHTIES

Iran’s troubles in Sistan-Baluchestan are not new. The Sunni minority makes up about 10 percent of Iran’s population. While the majority of the Sunnis live in the Kurdish north, the Sunnis of Sistan-Baluchestan have traditionally faced persecution.

The area is underdeveloped and poor and religious freedom is restricted. For instance, while Christians and Zoroastrians have official prayer places in Tehran, the Sunni minority (about one million residents of Tehran) does not have a single official mosque in the city. Although they have several prayer places in the city, none is recognised as a mosque.

Tensions have always simmered in Sistan-Baluchestan, but the situation took a different turn in 2003 with the appearance on the scene of Jundallah, the precursor of JaA. Jundollah mounted a number of hit-and-run attacks on Iran’s security forces in the southeast, including in Zahedan.

The group’s young leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, became known as an elusive daredevil. As Alex Vatanka notes in his Iran and Pakistan: Security, Diplomacy and American Influence, Jundallah adopted radical Sunni slogans as part of its resistance to Shia Iran. Rigi himself had studied at a seminary and later at the Binori Town Mosque in Karachi. The noughties, with Al Qaeda, its various franchises across the Muslim world and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s borderlands, provided the radical Sunni habitat for Jundallah’s fight.

With Jundallah’s violent actions — resistance and Sunni radicalism — began the trouble between Pakistan and Iran. After the initial attacks, the IRGC decided to adopt a soft, two-pronged approach: reaching out to Sunni tribal elders and managing the border jointly with Pakistan. The first was also aimed at development initiatives. The second proved tougher, given clan linkages on both sides of the border and due to the activities of smugglers and other crime syndicates.

Vatanka notes that, while Iranian officials had begun to point fingers at Pakistan, “No one in Tehran could pinpoint the exact identity of the Pakistani backers of Jundallah, and Tehran never put forward concrete evidence to corroborate the charges levelled against Islamabad.”

Then came the assassination of Nur-Ali Shushtari, the deputy commander of the ground forces of IRGC. Shushtari had been given the task of dealing with Jundallah. On the morning of October 18, 2009, as he sat in a tent in Pishin, a town close to the border, meeting with local tribal leaders, a suicide bomber blew himself up, killing Shushtari, along with four other IRGC senior officers. The total toll was 41 dead.

As Vatanka narrates, IRGC Commander-in-Chief Jafari “issued a blanket indictment against the United States, Israel and Britain as the culprits.” He also said that, “Rigi took his orders not only from Pakistan but from [the] intelligence services of Britain and the US.” Later, Iran also threw Saudi Arabia and the UAE into the mix. Pakistan’s response was that it would help Iran in unearthing the people responsible.

After this attack, Iran “ratcheted up the pressure on Pakistan.” Iranian media also reported that Iran had shared evidence with Pakistan of the “links between Pakistani intelligence services and Jundallah.”

Pakistan refuted these allegations. It had its own concerns with Iran.

ECOSYSTEM — PAKISTAN’S CONCERNS

For all the outward rhetoric about brotherly relations, Pakistan has had many concerns with Iran since the revolution. Three stand out.

As part of ‘exporting the revolution’ with its Shia theocratic overtones, Iran has been reaching out overtly and covertly to Shia populations in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the greater Middle East. This, along with the rise of Sunni radicalism because of the Afghan wars, has introduced violent sectarianism in Pakistan. While Iran’s support for radical Shia groups goes back to the early ’80s, the IRGC and its Quds Force have added another element to it since the civil war in Syria: recruitment of Shia fighters from Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The rivalry in Afghanistan is another sore point, with Iran supporting the erstwhile Northern Alliance in that country. It is instructive that, after the American invasion of Afghanistan which ousted the Taliban, Pakistan was kept out of the Bonn process, while Iran was an essential part of the process, its delegates led by former foreign minister Kamal Kharazi.

James Dobbins, a former American ambassador and assistant secretary of state, notes, “In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, bilateral US-Iranian contacts produced the most significant cooperation since the 1979 revolution, as Iranian officials helped the US form a new Afghan government.”

Iran, Russia and India were the main backers of the Northern Alliance and Iran was in an excellent position to help with the Bonn Process and the formation of the new Afghan government. Later, as Dobbins states, Iran even offered to train the Afghan security forces. Tehran also tried to engage the US in stabilising Iraq, but the Bush administration spurned Tehran.

Iran’s close ties with India are another Pakistani concern. These ties have both broader implications for Pakistan-Iran relations and are also Balochistan-specific. Pakistan has repeatedly engaged Iran on the issue of Tehran’s support for Baloch sub-nationalism and about giving space to Indian intelligence agencies on its soil (especially through its consulate in Zahedan) to fund Baloch militant groups.

However, with the exception of one instance, unlike official Iranian statements, Pakistan has mostly discussed these issues with their Iranian counterparts behind closed doors. That one instance was in March 2016, during a visit to Pakistan by Iran President Hassan Rouhani.

Rouhani met the Pakistani leadership and also the then Chief of Army Staff, Gen Raheel Sharif. After he left for the airport to board the flight back to Tehran, former Lt Gen Asim Bajwa, who was then Director-General Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), tweeted that, during the meeting, Gen Sharif had told President Rouhani: “There is one concern that RAW [Indian external intelligence agency] is involved in Pakistan, especially in Balochistan, and sometimes it also uses the soil of our brother country Iran.”

This was an egregious miscalculation. As the late Sartaj Aziz, then adviser to the prime minister on foreign affairs, told me in a private meeting, the tweet took the civilian government by surprise. Aziz said, “We had to try and defuse the situation.” Rouhani, for his part, “rejected the claim that the issue of the Indian spy agency’s involvement in Pakistan was discussed during his meeting with the country’s leadership.”

The fact is that Pakistan had discussed the activities of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). That was inevitable. Earlier, on March 3, a Pakistani counter-intelligence team had apprehended Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian naval officer, from Mashkel in Pakistani Balochistan. Jadhav had a passport that identified him as Hussain Mubarek Patel. He confessed to running agents in Balochistan and planning and handling subversive activities.

Pakistan has given dossiers to Iran, including one that was handed over by Shah Mehmood Qureshi in his last official appointment as foreign minister. India’s activities in assassinating people on foreign soil are no more a secret, after two cases in Canada and the US. Last year in October, a court in Qatar sentenced eight former Indian naval officers to death, on charges of spying for Israel. After much hectic diplomatic activity between Qatar and India, these sentences have been reduced, but India has refused to divulge any further details.

Pakistan, on its part, has handed over two dossiers to Western capitals and the United Nations on India’s state-sponsored terrorism inside Pakistan. There have also been increasing numbers of assassinations of Kashmiris on Pakistan’s soil. The essential point about referencing India is to establish that Pakistan’s concern over India-Iran relations in the context of Balochistan and Afghanistan is fact-based and not a case of paranoia.

It is important at this point to note that January 16 was not the first time Iran attacked a target inside Pakistan. Iran has done that before too, firing mortars and mounting shallow raids. But this was the first time that it used missiles and, more importantly, declared the attack.

Iran argues that the missile attack was in response to Jaish al-Adl’s recent attack on the Iranian city of Rask in Sistan-Baluchestan | Jaish al-Adl

WHY THE LATEST DECLARATORY ATTACK

One question that continues to bother Pakistan is about Iran’s calculus in conducting the January 16 attack. As noted above, Iran has previously fired mortars in Pakistani territory and occasionally mounted shallow raids inside Pakistani territory. But this was the first time that it used short-range missiles and also the first time it chose to go on record about having done so, invoking its sovereign right to defend itself.

Nor does Iran’s logic become any less opaque going by Tehran’s statements. It claimed that it struck terrorist cells of JaA, which it says has havens in Pakistani Balochistan. Iran also mentioned, as has been its motif, that JaA is linked with Zionists, even though it is a US-designated terrorist organisation.

It later said that the strike was made preemptively. That doesn’t square with the statement about the attack in Rask, which happened last year. That JaA enjoys sanctuaries in Pakistan, with alleged help from state actors hostile to Iran, has also been, as noted, a motif with Iran.

So, what changed?

One can only speculate. One possibility is that the operation was undertaken by some elements within the IRGC, without necessarily running it up the food chain. The IRGC is a parallel force and is responsible for recruiting and managing Iranian proxies in West Asia and the Mena (Middle East and North Africa) region. The nature of its work means giving its commanders carte blanche.

Iran had earlier struck targets in Syria and Iraq, justifying the strikes as a national security imperative. In combination with the factors mentioned above, someone decided to throw Pakistan into the mix. There’s also the possibility, in tandem with these factors, that Iran decided to put Pakistan on notice regarding its alignment with the US — especially with developments in the Middle East.

Be that as it may, it is still difficult to rationalise Iran’s action. One thing, though, is clear: in lumping Pakistan with Syria and Iraq, Iran miscalculated in a big way. As I wrote elsewhere, “Did Iran convince itself that Pakistan would not respond? If so, then Tehran obviously thought that its strategic objectives were holier than Pakistan’s. That’s magic, not policy.”

COULD PAKISTAN HAVE DONE WITHOUT A KINETIC RESPONSE?

The short answer is no. Here’s the long answer.

Over the past three to four years, relations between Pakistan and Iran have improved. Generally speaking, the two sides have had functional ties, neither always cold nor very warm. On the plus side, Iran and Pakistan began on the right foot with Iran recognising Pakistan immediately after the latter’s formation. This was vastly different from Afghanistan’s inimical behaviour.

Again, unlike Afghanistan’s continued irredentism regarding the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, Iran and Pakistan managed, rather amicably, to delineate their border after two years of negotiations. The two sides signed the agreement on February 6, 1958. Before that, leaving aside some hilarious ups and downs, the two sides signed a Treaty of Friendship in May 1950.

The situation took an undesirable turn after the 1979 revolution, as indicated above. But despite running issues on both sides, much good work has been done since 2020. Pakistan did not object to Iran building a wall on the border in early 2007. Pakistan has also begun to build a wall on its side. There are easement gates on both sides for the locals to pass through.

Taftan used to be the only crossing point between Pakistan and Iran. Two other crossing points have been added at Gabd (between Gwadar and Chahbahar) and Mand (between Gabd in the south and Taftan in the north). These points are official crossings with immigration facilities.

Six border sustenance marketplaces have been agreed upon, one of which is already functional. In May 2023, former Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi jointly inaugurated the Mand-Pishin Border Sustenance Marketplace and the 220 kV Polan-Gabd Electricity Transmission Line project.

Cooperation has increased across the entire spectrum of bilateral relations, including the political, economic, energy and cultural domains. As Pakistan’s MoFA notes, “Both countries are committed to increas[ing] economic cooperation…by leveraging existing institutional mechanisms, such as [the] Joint Economic Commission (JEC), Joint-Border Trade Committee (JBTC), Joint Trade Committee (JTC) and Joint Border Commission (JBC).”

To circumvent sanctions against Iran, the Quetta and Zahedan Chambers of Commerce have been declared the clearing agents for barter trade. The statutory regulatory orders (SRO) and the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the decision have been established and the cabinet has approved them.

On the diplomatic front, Pakistan has backed Iran at the UN rights bodies and whenever it gets into hot waters, which is generally frequently. On the security side, mechanisms (hotline etc) have been established for cooperation across a wide spectrum, including counter-terrorism.

This is not an exhaustive list of measures at multiple levels — from mid-ranking officials in the field to the highest levels of civilian and military leadership. Pakistan’s response, therefore, has to be seen in a context.

Put yourself in the position of the policymakers. Do you face a dilemma? The attack risks setting a dangerous precedent by violating Pakistan’s sovereignty, through Iran’s action on the ground, its public declaration of the attack and its iteration that it reserves the right to safeguard its security (in other words, a repeat). Two, India in the east is already publicly wedded to a muscular policy towards Pakistan and, in 2016 and 2019, has aggressed against Pakistan.

On the other hand, the borders with India and Afghanistan are already unstable and hostile. Do you want to add to that the Pakistan-Iran border too? Wouldn’t it complicate relations with all the neighbours, except China in the north? If you escalate against Iran, wouldn’t it get Pakistan into a three-front problem and bring Iran closer to India (India’s official statement supported the Iranian strike)?

Policymaking isn’t easy, after all! But in taking any course of action, it is important to understand that no policy is without a cost. What’s important is to balance the pluses with the minuses. For instance, it was important to show resolve, not just to signal to Iran but also to India, while giving the former the choice to escalate or quit.

For its part, Pakistan’s response was measured and targeted Pakistani Baloch insurgents and not the IRGC launch pads. That was both to manage escalatory pressure and give Iran an off-ramp. Iran understood the signal. Most probably also because, higher up the food chain, there was a better understanding of what was/is at stake. Does Iran want to go for escalation while Mena is already loaded against it? Clearly not.

As things stand, the ambassadors will be back at their stations by January 26 and, at the invitation of Pakistan’s caretaker foreign minister Jalil Abbas Jilani, the Iranian foreign minister will be visiting Pakistan on January 29.

Improved relations between Iran and Pakistan are an imperative for both sides. Given the situation in the Mena region, it’s time to close ranks. Equally, both sides need to sit down in earnest to address each other’s complaints on the thorny issues. That is the only way forward.

The writer is a journalist interested in security and
foreign policies. X: @ejazhaider

Header image: Iranian clergymen watch a missile being fired by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps: January 16 was the first time that Iran fired short-range missiles on Pakistani territory and also the first time it chose to go on record about having done so| AFP

Published in Dawn, EOS, January 28th, 2024

Factbox-Why is Pakistan deporting over a million undocumented Afghan immigrants?

Reuters
Thu, November 2, 2023 

Pakistan gives last warning to undocumented immigrants to leave, in Nowshera


KARACHI, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistan's midnight deadline for undocumented foreigners to leave expired on Thursday, as more than 140,000 migrants, mostly Afghans, were estimated to have left voluntarily.

Authorities rounded up people to temporary holding centres a day earlier, ahead of Wednesday's deadline, set a month ago, to leave or face expulsion. Some who have spent decades in Pakistan crammed into trucks queued on the border.

WHY IS PAKISTAN DEPORTING FOREIGNERS?

The sudden expulsion threat came after suicide bombings this year that the government said involved Afghans, though without providing evidence.

Pakistani authorities said Afghan nationals were found to be involved in attacks against the government and the army, including 14 of this year's 24 suicide bombings.

Islamabad has also blamed them for smuggling and other militant attacks as well as petty crimes. Kabul rejects the accusations.

Pakistan has brushed off calls to reconsider its decision from the United Nations, rights groups and Western embassies, who have urged it to incorporate into its plan a way to identify and protect Afghans facing the risk of persecution at home.

HOW MANY FOREIGNERS ARE THERE?

The vast majority of undocumented foreigners in Pakistan are Afghans, and, while authorities have not yet provided official data, only a few would comprise people from Iran and some central Asian countries, among others.

Pakistan is home to more than 4 million Afghan migrants and refugees, about 1.7 million of them undocumented, Islamabad says, although many have lived in Pakistan for their entire lives.

About 600,000 Afghans have crossed into neighbouring Pakistan since the Taliban took over in 2021, joining a large number there since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and the ensuing civil wars.

Islamabad says deportation will be orderly, carried out in phases and start with those who have criminal records. Authorities have threatened raids in areas suspected of housing "undocumented foreigners" after Wednesday.

WHAT IS AFGHANISTAN SAYING ABOUT THE DEPORTATION?

Afghanistan's Taliban-run administration has dismissed Pakistan's accusations against Afghan migrants.

It has asked all countries hosting Afghan refugees to give them more time to prepare for repatriation.

"We call on them not to deport forcefully Afghans without preparation, rather give them enough time and countries should use tolerance," the administration said in a social media post on Afghans in Pakistan and elsewhere.

It assured Afghans who have left over political concerns that they could return and live peacefully in the country.

(Reporting by Ariba Shahid in Karachi; Writing by Shivam Patel; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)


Border crossing with Afghanistan swamped by Afghans after Pakistani expulsion order

Mushtaq Ali
Updated Thu, November 2, 2023 

Pakistan gives last warning to undocumented immigrants to leave, in Chaman


By Mushtaq Ali

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (Reuters) -Thousands of people swamped Pakistan's main northwestern border crossing seeking to cross into Afghanistan on Thursday, a day after the government's deadline expired for undocumented foreigners to leave or face expulsion.

Pakistani authorities began rounding up undocumented foreigners, most of them Afghans, hours before Wednesday's deadline. More than a million Afghans could have to leave or face arrest and forcible expulsion as a result of the ultimatum delivered by the Pakistan government a month ago.

Scrambling to cope with the sudden influx, the Taliban-run administration in Afghanistan said temporary transit camps had been set up, and food and medical assistance would be provided, but relief agencies reported dire conditions across the border.

"The organisations' teams stationed in the areas where people are returning from Pakistan have reported chaotic and desperate scenes among those who have returned," the Norwegian Refugee Council, Danish Refugee Council and International Rescue Committee said in a joint statement.

The Pakistani government has brushed off calls from the United Nations, rights groups and Western embassies to reconsider its expulsion plan, saying Afghans had been involved in Islamist militant attacks and in crime that undermined the security of the country.

BORDER BOTTLENECK

More than 24,000 Afghans crossed the northwestern Torkham crossing into Afghanistan on Wednesday alone, Deputy Commissioner Khyber Tribal District Abdul Nasir Khan said. "There were a large number waiting for clearance and we made extra arrangements to better facilitate the clearance process."

Authorities had worked well into the night at a camp set up near the crossing, he added. The border, at the northwestern end of the Khyber Pass on the road between Peshawar in Pakistan and Jalalabad in Afghanistan, is usually closed by sundown.

Khan said 128,000 Afghans had left through the crossing since the Pakistani government issued its directive.

Others were crossing the border at Chaman, in Pakistan's southwestern province of Balochistan.

Major roads leading to border crossings were jammed with trucks carrying families and whatever belongings they could carry.

Aid agencies estimated the number of arrivals at Torkham had risen from 300 people a day to 9,000-10,000 since last month's expulsion decree.

Some Afghans who have been ordered to leave have spent decades in Pakistan, while some have never even been to Afghanistan, and wonder how they can start a new life there.

Of the more than 4 million Afghans living in Pakistan, the government estimates 1.7 million are undocumented.

Many fled during the decades of armed conflict that Afghanistan suffered since the late 1970s, while the Islamist Taliban's takeover after the withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition forces in 2021 led to another exodus.

Aid agencies warned that the mass movement of people could tip Afghanistan into yet another crisis and expressed "grave concerns" about the survival and reintegration of the returnees, particularly with the onset of winter.

International humanitarian funding for Afghanistan dried up after the Taliban took over and imposed restrictions on women.

SHORTAGE OF TRANSPORT

Over 1,500 undocumented Afghans were being brought to the southwestern Chaman crossing after being rounded up in police raids in different areas of Pakistan, including the major port Karachi, Balochistan Information Minister Jan Achakzai said.

People crossing from Chaman into Afghanistan's Spin Boldak have run into trouble finding transport to their final destinations, said Ismatullah, a bus service operator.

"A huge number of people are coming from Karachi but face a shortage of buses and trucks," he told Reuters by phone from Spin Boldak. "Obviously in such situations the fares have increased. The (Afghan) government is helping people according to its ability, but it is not enough."

(Reporting by Mushtaq Ali in Peshawar, Gibran Peshimam in Islamabad, Saleem Ahmed in Quetta and Mohammad Yunus Yawar in Kabul; Writing by Asif Shahzad and Gibran Peshimam; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore)

Aid agencies warn of chaotic and desperate scenes among Afghans returning from Pakistan

Associated Press
Updated Thu, November 2, 2023 











1 / 14
A Police officer checks documents of a resident during a search operation against illegal immigrants, at a neighborhood of Karachi, Pakistan, Thursday, Nov. 2, 2023. Pakistani security forces have rounded up, detained and deported dozens of Afghans who were living in the country illegally, after a government-set deadline for them to leave expired, authorities said. 

(AP Photo/Fareed Khan)

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Major international aid agencies on Thursday warned of chaotic and desperate scenes among Afghans who have returned from Pakistan, where security forces are detaining and deporting undocumented or unregistered foreigners.

The crackdown on illegal migration mostly affects Afghans because they are the majority of foreigners living in Pakistan, although the government says it is targeting all who are in the country illegally.

Three aid organizations — the Norwegian Refugee Council, Danish Refugee Council and the International Rescue Committee — said many people fleeing the Pakistani crackdown arrived in Afghanistan in poor condition.

“The conditions in which they arrive in Afghanistan are dire, with many having endured arduous journeys spanning several days, exposed to the elements, and often forced to part with their possessions in exchange for transportation,” the agencies said in a statement.

Between 9,000 and 10,000 Afghans are now crossing the border every day from Pakistan. Previously it was around 300 a day, according to agency teams on the ground.

Returning Afghans have nowhere to go and the agencies said they fear for people's survival and reintegration in a country overwhelmed by natural disasters, decades of war, a struggling economy, millions of internally displaced people and a humanitarian crisis.

Salma Ben Aissa, the International Rescue Committee's country director in Afghanistan, said returnees face a bleak future, especially if they lived in Pakistan for decades.

Afghanistan's Taliban authorities say they have prepared temporary camps for Afghans in border areas, providing people with food, shelter, health care and SIM cards.

On Thursday, Pakistan's Interior Minister Sarfraz Bugti said he assured the Taliban's top diplomat in the country, Ahmad Shakib, that Afghan women and children will be exempt from biometric tests like fingerprinting to facilitate their return.

Bugti told Shakib that Afghans will be treated with the utmost respect and dignity, according to a ministry statement. No action is being taken against those who have been registered as living in Pakistan or have an Afghan citizen card, he added.

Pakistani police are carrying out raids across the country to check foreigners' documents.

Authorities demolished mud-brick homes on the outskirts of the capital of Islamabad earlier this week to force Afghans to leave the area. Household items were buried under rubble after heavy machinery pulled down the makeshift dwellings.

Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghans over the decades, including those who fled their country during the 1979-1989 Soviet occupation.


Thousands of Afghans forced to return as Pakistan’s anti-migrant deadline ends

Arpan Rai
Wed, November 1, 2023 

Afghan families wait in Karachi, Pakistan for transport to take them to their homeland (Associated Press)

More than 100,000 undocumented Afghan nationals have left Pakistan and returned to Afghanistan through the northwestern Torkham border crossing as the deadline for anti-migrant crackdown looms.

These hundreds of thousands Afghan nationals travelled from across Pakistan cities to reach the border crossing, deputy commissioner Abdul Nasir Khan said on Wednesday.

The deadline imposed by Pakistan for deportation or forced removal of all undocumented immigrants, including Afghan nationals who had fled the Taliban, expired on Tuesday night.

On Wednesday, dozens of Afghans were rounded up, detained and deported after they were found to be allegedly living in Pakistan, authorities said.

“Today, we said goodbye to 64 Afghan nationals as they began their journey back home,” Pakistani interim interior minister Sarfraz Bugti said.

“This action is a testament to Pakistan’s determination to repatriate any individuals residing in the country without proper documentation.”

The crackdown took place in Pakistan’s port city of Karachi, the garrison city of Rawalpindi, and in various areas in the southwestern Baluchistan and northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces, which border Afghanistan, officials said.

This week saw undocumented Afghans in Pakistan rushing to the country’s border with Afghanistan.

Thousands of Afghan nationals had escaped to Pakistan in the months following the Taliban’s takeover of the country in August 2021. The Afghans had left their home country to escape the militant group’s wrath.

More than two million undocumented Afghans currently live in Pakistan, of which 600,000 had fled after the Taliban’s takeover, according to UN agencies.

Scores of the undocumented immigrants are now staring at the deadline set by the Pakistani government underits new anti-migrant crackdown.

Officials in Islamabad have said undocumented Afghans living in the country will face arrest and deportation after Wednesday.

The crackdown has left the Torkam and Chaman border crossings, in the north and west sides respectively of the countries’ shared border, open beyond their daily 4pm deadline hour to permit those who wish to leave from these points.

Pakistani officials said more than 200,000 Afghans have left the country since the crackdown was launched. The sharp surge was also confirmed by UN agencies.

The deportations will be carried out in a “phased and orderly” manner, Pakistan has claimed.

The move impacts thousands of Afghans waiting in Pakistan for international agencies to clear their asylum applications. Thousands who fled the country after August 2021 are also waiting for relocation to the US under a special refugee programme.

The rules for the US application required them to relocate to a third country to process their cases.

Several embassies of Nato members in Islamabad, along with the UN’s refugee agency, are lobbying with officials in the Pakistan government at the highest levels to seek exemption from deportation for the thousands of Afghans waiting to be resettled to Western countries.

A US diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, explained Washington’s priority was to facilitate the safe and efficient resettlement and relocation of more than 25,000 eligible Afghans in Pakistan.

“We are in the process of sending letters to those individuals that they can share with local authorities to help identify them as individuals in the US pipeline,” the diplomat said.

Pakistan’s crackdown has drawn widespread criticism from UN agencies, rights groups and the Taliban-led administration in Afghanistan.

Officials in the Western embassies and the UN have asked Pakistan for a way to identify and protect thousands of undocumented migrants to prevent them from persecution at the hands of the Taliban.

“We are asking the government to come up with a comprehensive system and... mechanism to manage and register people at immediate risk of persecution if forced to return,” said Qaiser Khan Afridi, the spokesman for the UN refugee agency in Pakistan.

“Because they cannot return, they can’t go back to Afghanistan because their freedom or their life might be at risk.”

It is not immediately clear if Pakistan has agreed to take up the proposals by the UN and other embassies.

The campaign by Pakistan comes amid strained relations between it and the Taliban rulers next door.

Islamabad accuses Kabul of turning a blind eye to Taliban-allied militants who find shelter in Afghanistan from where they go back and forth across the two countries’ shared 2,611km-long border to stage attacks in Pakistan.

The Taliban deny the accusations.

Afghanistan is also one of the most economically poor countries in the world.

It has reeled under successive severe humanitarian crises, particularly for women and girls who are banned by the Taliban from getting an education beyond the sixth grade, and from most public spaces and jobs.

There are also restrictions on media, activists, and civil society organisations.

The country under Taliban’s rule has been hit by drought and earthquakes, with millions fearing the forthcoming winter season.


Afghan refugees fear as Pakistan prepares for deportations

Azizullah Khan & Kelly Ng - in Peshawar and Singapore

BBC
Wed, November 1, 2023 

Refugees arrive in trucks at the Pakistan-Afghanistan border


Thousands of Afghans living in Pakistan have raced to the border to beat a Wednesday deadline for undocumented foreigners to leave the country.

Pakistan says 1.7 million such people must leave by 1 November or face arrest and deportation. Most are Afghans.

Many refugees are terrified, having fled Afghanistan after the Taliban retook control in 2021. Others have been in Pakistan for decades.

The deadline to leave technically expired at midnight on Tuesday.

However Pakistani media report that those who are in transit to leave the country will be allowed to continue their journeys throughout the day.

"Where will we go if we are forced to leave Pakistan?" asked one young woman.

Sadia, who has been studying in Peshawar in north-west Pakistan, said she escaped Afghanistan two years ago for a chance at getting an education, after the Taliban government barred girls and women from school under its harsh version of Islamic law.

"I am studying here in Pakistan and I wish to continue my education here. If we are forced to leave, I will not be able to continue my study in Afghanistan. My parents, my sister and brother are scared about the future," she told BBC Urdu.

Tensions between the countries soared after a spike in cross-border attacks, which Islamabad blames on Afghanistan-based militants.

Afghanistan's Taliban government, who deny providing sanctuary for militants targeting Pakistan, have called the move to deport undocumented Afghans "unacceptable".

Throngs of refugees rushed to the border with Afghanistan on Tuesday - the last day for them to leave or be deported - on trucks overflowing with clothes and furniture.

Close to 200,000 Afghans have returned home as of Monday, Pakistan said. Reports said 20,000 journeyed to the border on Tuesday as time to leave ran out.

Eight in 10 who left said they feared being arrested if they stayed, according to a UN report.

Many of these refugees, who fled Afghanistan after the Taliban retook control of the government, fear that their dreams and livelihoods will be crushed - yet again.

But Pakistan, which has been wrestling with an economic crisis in recent years, is short of patience. In July, the Pakistani rupee saw its sharpest drop against the dollar since October 1998.

Afghans in UK visa limbo as Pakistan vows to expel migrants


What rise of Taliban means for Pakistan


Key moments in the crushing of Afghan women's rights

The UN's human rights office urged Pakistani authorities to stop deportations to avoid a "human rights catastrophe".

"We believe many of those facing deportation will be at grave risk of human rights violations if returned to Afghanistan, including arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, cruel and other inhuman treatment," said Ravina Shamdasani, spokeswoman of the UN's human rights office.

The Taliban government have all but broken their earlier promises to give women the right to work and study - the suppression of women's rights under their rule is the harshest in the world,

Girls in Afghanistan are only allowed to attend primary school. They are not allowed in parks, gyms and pools. Beauty salons have been shut and women are required to be dressed in head-to-toe clothing.

Pakistan said unauthorised refugees will be deported if they do not leave the country before 1 Nov

Earlier this year, the Taliban government also burned musical instruments, claiming music "causes moral corruption".

Afghan singer Sohail said he fled the Afghan capital Kabul "with only some clothes" the night the Taliban seized control of the city in August 2021.

"I cannot live as a musician in Afghanistan," said Mr Sohail, whose family of musicians have been trying to make ends meet in Peshawar.

"We are facing a critical time, as we have no other options, the Taliban do not accept music in Afghanistan and we have no other options for livelihoods," he said.

The Taliban government says it has set up a commission to provide basic services, including temporary accommodation and health services, to returning Afghans.

"We assure them that they will return to their country without any worries and adopt a dignified life," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Pakistan has taken in hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees over decades of war. About 1.3 million Afghans are registered as refugees while another 880,000 have received the legal status to remain, according to the UN.

But another 1.7 million people are in the country "illegally", Pakistan's Interior Minister Sarfraz Bugti said on 3 October, when he announced the expulsion order.

The UN's figures differ - it estimates that there are more than two million undocumented Afghans living in Pakistan, at least 600,000 of whom arrived after the Taliban returned to power.

People protest the deportation of Afghans from Pakistan

Mr Bugti's order came after a spike in violence near Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, often involving armed fighters including the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) - often known as the Pakistani Taliban - and the Islamic State militant group.

The minister claimed "14 out of 24" suicide bombings in Pakistan this year were carried out by Afghan nationals.

"There are no two opinions that we are attacked from within Afghanistan and Afghan nationals are involved in attacks on us... We have evidence," he said according to state media reports.

Unauthorised refugees will be deported if they do not leave, Mr Bugti said on Monday. He stressed the crackdown was not aimed at specific nationalities, but acknowledged that those affected are mainly Afghans.

Earlier in September, Pakistan was hit by two suicide bombings which killed at least 57 people. No group claimed responsibility for the attack, with the TTP denying involvement - though Mr Bugti said one of the suicide bombers had been identified as an Afghan national.

Afghan Refugees in Pakistan Return Home Ahead of Mass Deportation Deadline
Storyful
Tue, October 31, 2023



Thousands of Afghans left Pakistan on October 31, ahead of a midnight deadline for undocumented foreigners to leave the country.

More than 1.7 million Afghan refugees who live in Pakistan have been told they must leave by the first of November or they will be arrested and deported, local media reported, citing government officials.

Many fled Afghanistan after the Taliban retook control in 2021, others have been in Pakistan for decades.

This footage published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) was taken the day before the deportation deadline and shows refugees returning home across the border.

Afghan refugee Riaz Khan described the reality for himself and other displaced people, according to an RFE/RL translation.

“We don’t have any place to live [in Afghanistan.] We expect a lot of troubles there. You see the whole situation yourself. Many of those going back don’t have houses to live in and they will face problems,” he said.

In Karachi a holding center was set up to process Afghans for deportation.

In the RFE footage an URDU City Commissioner said those who had a residency of up to five years that had expired and those who had overstayed would be bound to go.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) urged authorities to halt deportations due to fears refugees would be at risk of human rights violations including arrest, detention, torture and other inhumane treatment. Credit: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty via Storyful

Dozens of Afghans who were illegally in Pakistan are detained and deported in nationwide sweeps

MUNIR AHMED and RIAZ KHAN
Updated Wed, November 1, 2023 



















1 / 25
Afghans wait for clearance to depart for their homeland at a deportation camp set up by authorities to facilitate illegal immigrants, in Chaman, a town on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, Wednesday, Nov. 1, 2023. Pakistani security forces on Wednesday rounded up, detained and deported dozens of Afghans who were living in the country illegally, after a government-set deadline for them to leave expired, authorities said. 

(AP Photo/Habibullah Achakzai)

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistani security forces on Wednesday detained and deported dozens of Afghans who were living in the country illegally, after a government-set deadline for them to leave expired, authorities said.

The sweep is part of a new anti-migrant crackdown that targets all undocumented or unregistered foreigners, according to Islamabad, though it mostly affects some 2 million Afghans in Pakistan without documentation.

The crackdown has drawn widespread criticism from U.N. agencies, rights groups and the Taliban-led administration in Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s interim interior minister confirmed that the deportations have begun.

“Today, we said goodbye to 64 Afghan nationals as they began their journey back home,” Sarfraz Bugti wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “This action is a testament to Pakistan’s determination to repatriate any individuals residing in the country without proper documentation.”

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is “very concerned about this forced movement of people” and would like Pakistan “not to go through with this,” U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said Wednesday.

Sending many Afghans who “are very likely refugees to a country that by most accounts isn’t ready to welcome them back,” and faces a dire humanitarian situation and serious human rights issues, including the Taliban's crackdown on women and girls who are only allowed an elementary education, shouldn't continue, Dujarric said.

The authorities said Wednesday's sweeps took place in the port city of Karachi, the garrison city of Rawalpindi, and in various areas in the southwestern Baluchistan and northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces, which border Afghanistan.

The crackdown has worried thousands of Afghans in Pakistan waiting for relocation to the United States under a special refugee program since fleeing the Taliban takeover. Under U.S. rules, applicants first had to relocate to a third country — in this case Pakistan — for their cases to be processed. Most of those awaiting relocation had worked for the U.S. government, non-government organizations and media organizations in the years before the Taliban returned to power and they fled fearing persecution at home. The Taliban-led administration later announced an amnesty, encouraging Afghans to come back.

On Tuesday, a U.S. official said Washington’s priority was to facilitate the safe and efficient resettlement and relocation of more than 25,000 eligible Afghans in Pakistan to the U.S.

On Wednesday, three Pakistani officials confirmed that Islamabad received the list of such Afghans, but they said the list “was flawed and contained incomplete information." The officials said the list was subsequently withdrawn by the U.S. officials to review and revise it before sending it again after Pakistan sought more clarity.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on the record.

There was no immediate response from the U.S. Embassy about it.

On Tuesday, thousands of Afghans had crammed into trucks and buses and headed to the two key border crossings to return home to avoid arrest and forced deportation.

According to the U.N. agencies, there are more than 2 million undocumented Afghans in Pakistan, at least 600,000 of whom fled after the Taliban takeover in 2021.

Human Right Watch on Tuesday accused Pakistan of resorting to “threats, abuse, and detention to coerce Afghan asylum seekers without legal status” to return to Afghanistan. The New York-based watchdog appealed for authorities to drop the deadline and work with the U.N. refugee agency to register those without papers.

In Afghanistan, Zabihullah Mujahid, the main spokesman for the Taliban government expressed concerns over forced expulsion of Afghans, saying that the past 45 years of wars and conflict in Afghanistan had forced millions to migrate.

The Afghan migrants have not created any problems in their host countries, he added. Without naming Pakistan, he urged host countries “to stop forcefully deporting Afghan refugees" and practice "tolerance based on Islamic and neighborly manners.”

Mujahid said that all Afghans who are in exile “due to political concerns” are welcome back and that the Taliban will provide a “secure environment in Afghanistan” for all.

Late Tuesday, a Taliban delegation traveled from the capital of Kabul to eastern Nangarhar province to find solutions for returning Afghans. Ahmad Banwari, the deputy provincial governor, told local media that the authorities are working hard to establish temporary camps.

Afghan returnees with families that have nowhere to go can stay in the camps for a month until they find a place to live, Banwari said.

Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan’s Taliban-led administration have become strained over the past two years because of stepped-up attacks by the Pakistani Taliban, a separate militant group that is allied with the Afghan Taliban.

The Pakistani Taliban, known as Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan or TTP, have found safe havens in neighboring Afghanistan, from where they sneak across the volatile border to launch deadly attacks on Pakistani forces.

Since the government deadline was announced on October 3, more than 200,000 Afghans have returned home from Pakistan.

Pakistan has said the deportations would be carried out in a “phased and orderly” manner and those detained during the crackdown would be treated nicely. However, authorities on Tuesday demolished several mudbrick homes of Afghans on the outskirts of Islamabad to force them to leave the country.

___

Khan reported from Peshawar, Pakistan. Associated Press writers Rahim Faiez in Islamabad and Abdul Sattar in Quetta, Pakistan, contributed to this report.


Hundreds of thousands of Afghan migrants face deportation from Pakistan

Mushtaq Yusufzai and Jennifer Jett and Samra Zulfaqar
Wed, November 1, 2023 

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Hundreds of thousands of undocumented Afghan migrants are facing deportation from Pakistan to the Taliban-ruled country that some of them have never even visited.

In a surprise announcement last month, the Pakistani government said it would arrest and deport an estimated 1.7 million unregistered or undocumented foreigners starting Nov. 1. Though Pakistan says the crackdown is not aimed at any particular nationality, most of the foreigners living there are from neighboring Afghanistan.

The United Nations’ human rights office said the move could give rise to a “human rights catastrophe,” as families could be separated and some of those sent back face possible arrest and torture in Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials have accused Afghan nationals of being involved in militant attacks, smuggling and other crimes, which the Afghan government denies.

“Regardless of whether they are playing a good or bad role in society, our system has no way of identifying these individuals,” interim Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar said in Lahore on Monday.

On Wednesday, dozens of Afghans were already being rounded up and deported after the expiration of an Oct. 31 deadline to leave.

“Today, we said goodbye to 64 Afghan nationals as they began their journey back home,” interim Interior Minister Sarfraz Bugti wrote in a post on X, accompanied by video footage. “This action is a testament to Pakistan’s determination to repatriate any individuals residing in the country without proper documentation.”


Fearing arrest, 140,000 Afghans have left the country in recent weeks, according to the Pakistani Interior Ministry. On Tuesday, thousands of vehicles loaded with household goods were moving slowly toward the border in Peshawar, a city in northwest Pakistan.

Many Afghans thought they would never go back and are worried about what will happen when they do.

“Afghanistan is our country, but I was born and raised in Pakistan,” Ilyas Khan, 37, told NBC News. “There is an uncertain future waiting for us in Afghanistan.”

Pakistan says the 1.4 million Afghans registered as refugees will not be affected. Those who are arrested will be sent to one of multiple deportation centers set up around the country, but no one will be mistreated, officials said.

“We will provide them with food, take care of their medical needs, but at the same time we highly recommend voluntary return,” Bugti told reporters last week.

Kakar said those who get deported would not necessarily be barred from Pakistan indefinitely, and that they should get proper visas.

“If they want to come back for educational purposes or business purposes or any other purpose, we will facilitate that process, but we want a regulated process,” he said.

More than 10,000 Afghans living in Pakistan rushed to the borders on October 31, just hours before a deadline for 1.7 million people to leave Pakistan voluntarily or face arrest and deportation.

 (Rizwan Tabassum / AFP via Getty Images)

Afghanistan, which has called Pakistan’s plan “unacceptable” and asked for the deadline to be extended, has set up a high commission to assist forcibly returned Afghan refugees with temporary accommodations and other services.

“We are here to welcome our Afghan brothers and sisters in their motherland,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said. “We will utilize all our resources to facilitate them in their rehabilitation.”

Activists, journalists, artists and people who worked as officials or soldiers for Afghanistan’s former U.S.-backed government are at particular risk, U.N. officials say. So are women and girls, whose rights to education, work and free movement have been rapidly rolled back under the Taliban.

“For an overwhelming majority of them, living and studying in Pakistan may be their only chance of gaining a formal education,” Amnesty International said in a statement Tuesday, calling on the international community to help Pakistan with the cost of hosting Afghan refugees.

More than 100 former U.S. leaders, diplomats and others also objected to the planned deportations of Afghans, thousands of whom fled Taliban rule and have been waiting for more than two years in Pakistan for U.S. visas.

“This decision would only cause chaos and make a bad situation worse,” they wrote in an open letter. “We urge Pakistan to work with us to resettle qualifying individuals in the U.S., not send them back to Afghanistan where they face certain doom.”

There are more than 2 million undocumented Afghans living in Pakistan, according to the U.N., at least 600,000 of whom arrived after the Taliban regained power in August 2021 amid the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces. Others fled while Afghanistan was occupied by the then-Soviet Union from 1979 to 1989 or after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The majority of those more recent arrivals are undocumented, according to Qaiser Khan Afridi, a spokesperson for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. If they return to Afghanistan, he said, “there are serious potential threats to their freedom and safety.”

Many also face major financial losses, since the Pakistani government is limiting the amount of cash migrants can take out of the country.

Habib Jan, 24, who works as a cook at a restaurant, said he and his father were both born in Peshawar and had never been to Afghanistan.

“I married a Pakistani woman and had two children with her,” he said. According to Pakistani law, however, a foreign man who marries a citizen isn’t entitled to citizenship, though a woman from another country is eligible if she marries a Pakistani man.

Habib Jan, 24, is working as a cook in Peshawar’s famous restaurant, famous for its delicious rice cooked in meat. He said he and his father were born in Peshawar but had never been to Afghanistan. “I am the only child of my parents. I married a Pakistani woman and had two children from her. We don’t have a single piece of land in Afghanistan and the second major problem is my wife doesn’t want to go to Afghanistan,” he said.

 (Mushtaq Yusufzai / NBC News)More

“We don’t have a single piece of land in Afghanistan, and the second major problem is my wife doesn’t want to go to Afghanistan,” Jan said.

Musafar Khan, who has a business selling fruits and vegetables with his brothers, said neither he nor any of his 11 siblings, all born in Peshawar, have ever been to their family's native village in Afghanistan’s eastern Nangarhar province. His family has proper documentation and does not plan to leave Pakistan, he said, but they worry they might be forced to, nonetheless.

“Pakistan is a remarkable country and the people are extremely welcoming and friendly,” Khan, 35, said. “We don’t even have a house in Afghanistan, so where would we be living if sent back?”

He added that his family has always considered Pakistan their home. Even so, he said, they decided to sell their house in case they get deported and need money.

“We have all the relevant documents to stay here, but we sold our house in Peshawar at a throwaway price as anything can happen to us,” Khan said.

Undocumented migrants in Pakistan are being deported as Afghanistan faces widespread hunger that is likely to get worse as winter approaches. The country is also still dealing with the aftermath of a series of earthquakes in October in the province of Herat, in which women and children made up more than 90% of deaths.

Tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan, which share a border of about 1,600 miles, have increased in the past two years over a surge in attacks on Pakistani security forces by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), or Pakistani Taliban. Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harboring Islamist militants from the group, which is separate from the Afghan Taliban but has a similar ideology.

Days before Pakistan announced the deportations, suicide bombings at two mosques in provinces bordering Afghanistan killed about 60 people. The TTP denied it was responsible.

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com