Debating the Pakistani National Interest
Introduction
On October 7, 2009, the Pakistani military took an
extraordinary step by expressing publicly its "serious concern"
over the civilian government's approval of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, a
U.S. aid program for Pakistan approved by Congress. The military
fears that its role will be curtailed if the bill comes into
effect. The debate, emerging out of the military's concern, also
reflects the complex nature of the Pakistani national
interest.
Broadly speaking, the military's intervention on a matter of
government policy has revealed concerns regarding: a) the Pakistan
Army's near-absolute control of power; b) strain in
military-government ties and the future of democracy in Pakistan;
c) opposition parties' view of a "strategic sell-out" to the U.S.;
d) Pakistani envoy to U.S. Husain Haqqani's alleged role, or lack
of it, in shaping the Kerry-Lugar Bill; e) Pakistan-U.S. relations
and Pakistan's role in defeating jihadists in Afghanistan-Pakistan
border region; and e) the nature of the Pakistani national
interest.
1. The Pakistan Army's Control of Power
Between July 2008 and October 2009, the Pakistan Army
has acted twice in a way that has sought to publicly undercut the
authority of the democratically elected government headed by
President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.
First, in July 2008, the Gilani government issued a notification
placing the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Intelligence
Bureau (IB) under the interior ministry's control. The move to
bring the country's military-led spy agencies under civilian
government's control was rebuffed within six hours, even as the
Pakistani prime minister was in the midst of a visit to Washington
DC. According to a Pakistani daily of July 28, 2008, "the military
leadership stood up and managed to reverse the government's
decision soon after the notification was issued."(1)
Second, the long-persisting view in Pakistan that the army
exercises near-absolute control on civilian state institutions was
demonstrated again on October 7, 2009, when the military leadership
took the unusual step of issuing a press statement, expressing
"serious concern" over the clauses regarding Pakistan's national
security in the Kerry-Lugar Bill.(2)
The Kerry-Lugar Bill, No. S.1707 - Enhanced Partnership with
Pakistan Act of 2009, seeks to triple American aid to Pakistan to
$1.5 billion annually for next five years. Under its Section 201
(4), the bill also aims to curtail the Pakistan Army's role in
politics by promoting "control of military institutions by a
democratically elected civilian government."(3) In the eyes of its
critics, the bill's provisions regarding the Pakistani military and
intelligence agencies are controversial, including references to
military-backed militant organizations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and
Jaish-e-Muhammad. The bill is also seen as a prelude to the
expansion of Pakistani military operation outside the tribal region
to Baluchistan and Punjab provinces. Under various sub-sections of
the Section 203 of the bill, aid to Pakistan is conditional upon
the U.S. Secretary of State certifying that:
a) Pakistan is taking steps "to dismantle supplier networks
relating to the acquisition of nuclear weapons-related
materials";"
b) Pakistan "has demonstrated a sustained commitment to and is
making significant efforts towards combating terrorist
groups";
c) the extent to which Pakistan has made efforts on "ceasing
support, including by any elements within the Pakistan military or
its intelligence agency, to extremist and terrorist groups,
particularly to any group that has conducted attacks against United
States or coalition forces in Afghanistan, or against the territory
or people of neighboring countries"; and
d) Pakistan's progress in "preventing Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and
associated terrorist groups, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and
Jaish-e-Mohammed, from operating in the territory of Pakistan,
including carrying out cross-border attacks into neighboring
countries, closing terrorist camps in the FATA [Federally
Administered Tribal Areas along Afghan border], dismantling
terrorist bases of operations in other parts of the country,
including Quetta [capital of Baluchistan province] and Muridke
[near Lahore in Punjab province]."(4)
The military's statement over the proposed U.S. legislation was
seen as a rebuff to the civilian government of President Zardari
and Prime Minister Gilani, both of Pakistan People's Party (PPP).
The statement issued by the military's Inter-Services Public
Relations department noted that Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Gen.
Ashfaq Kayani expressed his concerns in an address to the October
7, 2009 Conference of Corps Commanders. It added: "The COAS, in his
opening remarks, [expanded] upon various issues related to national
security and impending challenges faced by the country. The COAS
reiterated that Pakistan is a sovereign state and has all the
rights to analyze and respond to the threat in accordance with her
own national interests. The Kerry-Lugar Bill also came under
discussion during the conference. The forum expressed serious
concern regarding clauses impacting on national security. A formal
input is being provided to the government."(5)
2. The Future of the Democratic Government
The present government of Prime Minister Gilani came
to power after the Pakistan People's Party emerged victorious in
the February 2008 polls. The elections were seen to have put
Pakistan on a long, fragile path of transition to democracy after
eight years of military rule. However, the Pakistani military's
extraordinary criticism of the Kerry-Lugar Bill has now raised
questions over the survival of elected leaders in power. The army's
move to provide "formal input" to the government is seen in public
eyes as an extra-constitutional step, potentially leading to a
coup.
In its statement, the military went on to add, "it is the
parliament that represents the will of the people of Pakistan,
which would deliberate on the issue, enabling the government to
develop a national response."(6) Notwithstanding the military's
comforting words on the authority of parliament, there is a new
concern that the gulf between the Pakistan Army and the civilian
government is widening. In an editorial, the Urdu-language
newspaper Roznama Jasarat made a prescient observation:
"Though the top military leaders have said that the parliament is
supreme in this regard, this is a matter of long debate as to who
is supreme. However, the kind of reaction that has come from the
military causes concern that a big disagreement [conflict] can
develop between the government and the army."(7)
The concern is that the Pakistani state may unravel if the
government and the military are not on the same wavelength. In an
editorial, the liberal newspaper Dawn noted that the
debate on Kerry-Lugar Bill is turning out to be "democracy versus
national security," observing also that "intertwining them runs the
risk of undermining the transition to democracy."(8) The newspaper
criticized the civilian government for not consulting with all the
stakeholders on the U.S. aid bill, but added: "The fact that...
[the military] has chosen to make its reservations public as
opposed to going through private governmental channels is
regrettable."(9)
The editorial, expressing "support for the democratically elected
government against extra-constitutional intervention," further
observed: "Right or wrong, wise or unwise, the bill must not become
the basis for fresh cleavages between the army and the political
opposition on one side and the government on the other. The
national security-democracy debate is not an either/or issue -
national security can and must be protected through the democratic
process."(10) The significant point here is also the fact that the
military and the country's main opposition Pakistan Muslim League
(PML-N), a center-right party, are on the same side.
Other reasons for concern in Pakistan are the timing of the
military's intervention on the Kerry-Lugar Bill, whose text has
long been available on Internet for anybody to read, and media
reports of a secret meeting recently between Gen. Kayani and
Shahbaz Sharif, the Chief Minister of Punjab province and leader of
PML-N, the main opposition at federal level.
Nawaz Sharif, the senior opposition leader and chief of PML-N
party, has not commented on the Kerry-Lugar Bill. However, reports
of his brother Shahbaz Sharif's meeting with Gen. Kayani have led
to speculation about likely extra-constitutional intervention. On
October 6, 2009, Shahbaz Sharif answered journalists' queries about
his secret meeting with the army chief and a likely military coup
in Pakistan, stating: "We... cannot make a justification for
dictatorship, but we will not allow anybody to play with Pakistan's
dignity and reputation."(11) The word "dignity" is understood as
the military in this context. Shahbaz Sharif added: "I will not
confirm or deny press reports about my meeting with the army
chief."(12)
Significantly, during his midnight meeting with Gen. Kayani,
Shahbaz Sharif had been accompanied by Chaudhry Nisar Ahmad, leader
of the Opposition in the National Assembly, the lower house of the
Pakistani parliament.(13) Chaudhary Nisar Ahmad leads the
opposition viewpoint in Pakistani parliament.
3. Opposition Criticism: Strategic Sell-Out of Pakistani
Sovereignty
The response of opposition religious and political
parties to the proposed U.S. legislation has been similar to that
of the military. Stepping up the opposition criticism after his
meeting with the army chief, Chaudhary Nisar Ahmad told the
National Assembly, "Under the Kerry-Lugar Bill, the command of the
Pakistan Army will, instead of remaining under the president and
the prime minister, be under the American chairman, Joint Chiefs of
Staff."(14)
Syed Munawwar Hasan, the Emir of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, has
announced that his party will hold a countrywide referendum, asking
the people to vote in favor or against the acceptance of
Kerry-Lugar Bill by Pakistan.(15) The religious leader described
the proposed U.S. legislation as insult to Pakistan, adding: "The
U.S. has started tightening the noose around Pakistan. Its freedom,
sovereignty and national dignity are being traded for aid. The
conditions of Kerry-Lugar Bill are insulting."(16)
Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, deputy emir of Jamaat-e-Islami in North West
Frontier Province (NWFP), warned: "The Kerry-Lugar Bill is a
conspiracy for Saqoot-e-Pakistan (Fall of Pakistan)."(17) The term
Saqoot-e-Pakistan resonates with the popular expression
Saqoot-e-Dhaka, i.e. the Fall of Dhaka that led to secession of
Eastern Pakistan, now Bangladesh, in 1971. Another religious
leader, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, whose Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (F) party
shares power in the federal governing coalition, has warned that
"any aid that opens the path for foreign intervention [in Pakistan]
cannot be accepted. The parliament should defend the army's
reservations over the Kerry-Lugar Bill."(18)
Chaudhary Shujaat Hussain, the leader of Pakistan Muslim League
(PML-Q), the PML-N's breakaway group that supported Gen. Pervez
Musharraf's eight-year military rule, also criticized the proposed
U.S. legislation, describing it as a victory for India.(19) The
statement came in the backdrop of the fact that anti-India jihadist
organizations Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad found mention in
the Kerry-Lugar Bill.
According to a report in the leading daily The News, the
opposition parties have seen the U.S. legislation as the "strategic
sell-out of Pakistan's sovereignty."(20) Faisal Saleh Hayat, the
parliamentary leader of PML-Q, urged the parliament to reject the
Kerry-Lugar Bill "to give a strong message to the U.S.," adding
that through this bill, the "sell-out of the national institutions"
and "insult of the armed forces" would not be accepted.(21)
Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, the leader of Pakistan People's Party
(Sherpao), also urged the parliament not to accept the U.S. aid
bill. He added: "It would not be beneficial for the U.S. either, as
it will fuel hatred against Washington. Parliament should send a
strong message to the U.S. and the government should disassociate
itself from this bill; and we should go with the public
opinion."
Strangely, a proposed U.S. legislation has come up for debate in a
foreign legislature, i.e. on the floor of the Pakistani parliament
where it cannot be defeated, as the ruling Pakistan People's Party
enjoys majority support.
4. The Pakistani Envoy to the U.S. and His
Book
The influential Pakistani Ambassador to the United
States Husain Haqqani, and his recent book, Pakistan between
Mosque and Military, have also come under searing scrutiny in
Pakistan, for his role, or the lack of it, in the writing of the
Kerry-Lugar Bill.
Opposition leader Chaudhry Nisar Ahmad noted that it is not the
U.S. but "our own people" who have ensured the inclusion of
conditions in the Kerry-Lugar Bill regarding Pakistani Army's
interference in civilian affairs with consequences for the
country's national politics.(22)
Faisal Saleh Hayat of PML-Q party referred to excerpts from
Haqqani's 2006 book, accusing the ambassador of advising the U.S.
to use its aid as a weapon against Pakistan, noting: "So when the
country's ambassador is suggesting such things, what can we expect
from others?"(23) Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, the former federal
interior minister, also questioned the role of the Pakistani envoy,
wondering "what Pakistan's ambassador and lobbyists were doing when
the bill was being presented in the U.S. Congress."(24)
The daily The News published a report, blaming Husain
Haqqani and his book for the conditionalities in the Kerry-Lugar
Bill with regard to the requirement of curtailing Pakistan Army's
role in civilian affairs. It quoted Haqqani as writing that "the
United States must use its aid as a lever to influence Pakistan's
domestic policies... Washington should no longer condone the
Pakistani military's support of Islamic militants, its use of its
intelligence apparatus for controlling domestic politics, and its
refusal to cede power to a constitutional democratic
government."(25)
The report quoted from the book: "Because Washington has attached a
few conditions to U.S. aid, the spending patterns of Pakistan's
government have not changed significantly. The country's military
spending continues to increase.... Unlike governments in other
Muslim countries like Egypt and Turkey, Pakistan's government -
particularly its military - has encouraged political and radical
Islam, which otherwise has a relatively narrow base of
support."(26)
According to The News, the book says: "The United States
can help contain the Islamists' influence by demanding reform of
those aspects of Pakistan's governance that involve the military
and security services.... Washington should no longer condone the
Pakistani military's support of Islamic militants, its use of its
intelligence apparatus for controlling domestic politics, and its
refusal to cede power to a constitutional democratic
government."(27)
The civilian government is under pressure to change the Pakistani
ambassador in Washington. According to a report in The
Nation daily, President Zardari has defended ambassador
Haqqani, but Maleeha Lodhi, who has served as Pakistani ambassador
to London and Washington, has been sounded out to be "on standby as
Haqqani's replacement."(28)
5. Pakistan-U.S. Relations
On October 6, 2009, i.e. a day before the Corps
Commanders' Conference, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani met with U.S. Gen.
Stanley McChrystal, Commander of International Forces in
Afghanistan, in the GHQ (Gen. Headquarters) in Rawalpindi, the twin
city of Islamabad.
Gen. Kayani told the U.S. general: "Like the Pakistani people, the
military and intelligence services are furious at the observations
made on Pakistan's security establishment in the Kerry-Lugar
Bill.... Gen. McChrystal returned from the GHQ with an unambiguous
message that the terms set in the Kerry-Lugar Bill on the national
security interests of Pakistan are insulting and are unacceptable
in their present formulation."(29)
In an editorial titled "Just for the Sake of $1.5 Billion," the
Karachi-based Urdu-language daily Roznama Ummat warned
that the U.S.'s real targets are Pakistan's nuclear assets, noting
that the proposed legislation's objective "is to snare Pakistan in
chains of such conditions that can pave the path for intervention
in its military, judicial and other government spheres. The targets
of the U.S.'s last and real hit are its atomic assets."(30)
Outlining Pakistani national interests, the daily added: "The armed
forces of Pakistan would not have expressed any view with regard to
the Kerry-Lugar Bill if there were no concerns about its impacts on
the military institutions and atomic assets. Included in their
duties is the task of defending the nation from internal and
external threats, in addition to securing the country's ideological
and geographical borders."(31)
The public criticism in Pakistan over the Kerry-Lugar Bill is part
of a series of growing diatribes against the U.S. Over the past few
months, public anger against the U.S. has been mounting with regard
to a number of issues. Maulana Fazlur Rahman, whose Jamiat
Ulema-e-Islam party is part of the federal governing coalition, has
criticized the expansion of the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, accusing
the U.S. of creating a "mini-Pentagon" in the Pakistani
capital.(32)
Police have raided the offices of private security firm Inter-Risk,
reportedly contracted by the U.S Embassy. The firm, run by retired
military commando Capt. (retired) Syed Ali Jaffar Zaidi, was
disbanded by the Pakistani interior ministry.(33) Pakistani
parliament has constituted a committee to probe the presence and
role of Blackwater, a private U.S. security firm also identified
with another name, XE Worldwide, in Pakistan.(34) The legislature
of North West Frontier Province (NWFP) has debated the role of
Blackwater in the province.(35) DynCorp International was ordered
to stop its activities after the Pakistan Army and the
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) expressed "reservations that the
activities of the U.S. security company are a source of concern for
the country's security network."(36)
Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's Islamic nuclear
bomb, has accused the U.S. of eyeing the Pakistani bomb, noting:
"The real aim of anti-Pakistan forces, including the U.S., is to
deprive it of its nuclear weapons. They do not want a Muslim
country to have a nuclear arsenal, as it is a direct threat to
Israel's superiority in the Middle East."(37) Lt.-Gen. (ret) Hamid
Gul, the former chief of ISI, has said the U.S. is working for a
new chief of Pakistan Army to be appointed "as per its own
liking."(38) Jamaat-e-Islami chief Syed Munawwar Hasan has
described the U.S. aid as a "gallows for Pakistan" and as "threat
to the security" of the country.(39)
Rejecting concerns that elements in Pakistani military and its
military-led intelligence Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) are
involved in supporting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, Ahmad Shuja Pasha,
the ISI's director-general, asserted on October 1, 2009: "The ISI
is a professional agency and does not have links with any militant
outfit, including the Taliban."(40) Pasha's statement was preceded
by media reports that quoted former intelligence official Khalid
Khwaja as saying that the ISI had arranged several meetings between
Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and the country's center-right
politician Nawaz Sharif.(41)
Rejecting media reports that the ISI protects the Taliban Shura
(executive council led by Mullah Omar) in the region of Quetta, the
capital of Baluchistan province, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood
Qureshi has said: "The American leadership should decide explicitly
whether they consider the ISI as a friend or foe."(42)
6. The Pakistani National Interest
There are two sections of the Pakistani opinion over
the Kerry-Lugar Bill: First, religious parties, opposition
political leaders and the military who view the proposed U.S.
legislation as a strategic sell-out that will negatively impact
Pakistan's national interests; and, second, the ruling Pakistan
People's Party and the tiny liberal elite who think that the
Kerry-Lugar Bill will assist Pakistan on a path of economic and
educational development while simultaneously strengthening the
civilian government's ability to exercise control on military. The
second group points out Section 201 (4) of the Kerry-Lugar, which
seeks to "strengthen the institutions of democratic governance and
promote control of military institutions by a democratically
elected civilian government."(43)
Writing in Dawn, Pakistani television journalist Gul
Bukhari noted the "factual nature of Pakistan's transgressions in
the past based upon which the bill places restrictions upon the
country" and scoffed at the critics of the Kerry-Lugar Bill,
saying: "None deny Pakistan's past role in nuclear proliferation;
none deny Pakistan's past misuse of American aid towards aiding and
consolidating Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives; none now deny the
involvement of Pakistanis in the Mumbai attack; and none deny the
presence of the Taliban in south Punjab. Moreover, none disagree
that today Pakistan is on a precipice, gazing down into a void due
to these very reasons."(44)
In an article in the mass-circulation Urdu-language newspaper
Roznama Jang, columnist Agha Masood Husain pointed out
that the bill's three provisions are "in exact accordance with
Pakistani national interest": Pakistan's compliance in preventing
nuclear proliferation; preventing use of Pakistani soil for terror
attacks against any country; and the army not being party to end of
democratic rule in Pakistan.(45)
Sardar Assef Ahmad Ali, chairman of Pakistan's Planning Commission,
added that the U.S. apprehensions outlined in the Kerry-Lugar Bill
are not misplaced in view of the nuclear proliferation track record
of Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the first Islamic atom
bomb. Ali added: "U.S. apprehensions [about Pakistani nuclear
proliferation] are well placed. One should not forget what Dr. A.
Q. Khan, [who is] considered a national hero, did by exporting
nuclear material to other countries [by the] planeload."(46)
Farahnaz Ispahani, a top aide to President Zardari, has insisted
that the standards presented by the bill are reasonable and that
the language had actually been softened through the various
versions.(47) Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani too has described
the proposed U.S. legislation as a "victory for democracy" in
Pakistan.(48)
After the military expressed its "serious concern" over the
proposed U.S. aid bill for Pakistan, President Zardari's spokesman
Farhatullah Babar asked the army not to interfere on a subject of
the government's prerogative and instead remain within its
limits.(49) "The army should voice its reservations through a
proper channel," the presidential spokesman said, noting: "The
Supreme Commander of all the three armed forces is the Head of the
State, Asif Zardari. There are forums in which such issues can be
raised [by the army]."(50) In an editorial, the Urdu-language
newspaper Roznama Jasarat expressed concern that if the
Kerry-Lugar Bill is approved by the Pakistani parliament, where the
government has necessary majority, a new tussle for control of
power will begin between the military and the civilian
executive.(51)
Amid the growing confrontation between the civilian executive and
the military establishment, President Zardari, Prime Minister
Gilani and Army Chief Gen. Kayani held an extraordinary
reconciliatory meeting in Islamabad on October 10, 2009. The
meeting was joined midway by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi
and Lt.-Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the ISI chief. According to a
report in The News, it was decided to ask the Obama
administration through diplomatic channels to address Pakistani
concerns, "particularly those pertaining to the controversial
clauses relating to national security."(52) The report, titled "The
Presidency Blinks," noted further: "It was also decided to 'try
convincing' the majority of the parliamentarians to desist from
rejecting the bill outright and, instead, to pass a resolution that
would suggest its acceptance provided the controversial clauses
were redrafted [by the U.S.] in a satisfactory manner."(53)
However, two days after this meeting, Pakistan's mass-circulation
Urdu-language newspaper Roznama Jang published a report,
noting: "The [military] establishment, without bothering about the
anger of the Presidential Palace, will defend the [national]
interests."(54)
Farman Nawaz, a columnist with Peshawar-based daily The
Frontier Post, has made the following observation on the
bill's importance to Pakistan: "Some of the clauses of Kerry-Lugar
Bill are the requirement for reforming our system, for example a
free judiciary, no intervention of the army in politics, and
monitoring of foreign funds. In reality, these are the flaws of our
system, and politicians have suffered a lot because of these
problems."(55) He added: "The powerful hands are setting one
against the other to try to modify the clauses relating to the
prevention of interference of [the military] establishment in
politics... In a way, it is the first violation of Kerry-Lugar
Bill."(56)
*Tufail Ahmad is the director of MEMRI's Urdu-Pashtu Media
Project.
Endnotes:
(1) Daily Times, Pakistan, July 28, 2008.
(2) www.dawn.com, Pakistan,
October 7, 2009.
(3) The Library of Congress http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c111:./temp/~c111cAWqO0,
United States, accessed October 11, 2009.
(4) The Library of Congress http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c111:./temp/~c111cAWqO0,
United States, accessed October 11, 2009.
(5) www.ispr.gov.pk, No.
396/2009-ISPR, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(6) www.ispr.gov.pk, No.
396/2009-ISPR, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(7) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(8) Dawn, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(9) Dawn, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(10) Dawn, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(11) The News, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(12) The News, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(13) The Frontier Post, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(14) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(15) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(16) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(17) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(18) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(19) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(20) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(21) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(22) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(23) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(24) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(25) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(26) The News, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(27) The News, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(28) The Nation, Pakistan, October 11, 2009.
(29) Roznama Jang, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(30) Roznama Ummat, Pakistan, October 10, 2009.
(31) Roznama Ummat, Pakistan, October 10, 2009.
(32) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, September 6, 2009.
(33) The News, Pakistan, September 27, 2009.
(34) Daily Times, Pakistan, September 30, 2009.
(35) Roznama Mashriq, Pakistan, October 6, 2009.
(36) Roznama Islam, Pakistan, October 7, 2009.
(37) Haftroza Al-Qalam, Pakistan, Vol. 5, Issue 9,
October2-8, 2009.
(38) Roznama Nawa-i-Waqt, Pakistan, October, 1,
2009.
(39) Roznama Islam, Pakistan, September 28, 2009.
(40) Daily Times, Pakistan, October 2, 2009.
(41) Roznama Ausaf, Pakistan, September 9, 2009.
(42) www.dawn.com, Pakistan,
October 4, 2009.
(43) The Library of Congress http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c111:./temp/~c111cAWqO0,
United States, accessed October 11, 2009.
(44) Dawn, Pakistan, October 10, 2009.
(45) Roznama Jang, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(46) Daily Times, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(47) The Frontier Post, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(48) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(49) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(50) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 9, 2009.
(51) Roznama Jasarat, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(52) The News, Pakistan, October 11, 2009.
(53) The News, Pakistan, October 11, 2009.
(54) Roznama Jang, Pakistan, October 12, 2009.
(55) The Frontier Post, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.
(56) The Frontier Post, Pakistan, October 8, 2009.