US and Israel accused of cyber attack on Iran

I am pleased to post here a story published in eurasiareview. This is one of the proofs that United States and Israel were involved in cyber attack on Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment plant. The time has come to initiate investigations against these two countries for committing war crimes.

A group of 20 law and technology experts has unanimously agreed that the Stuxnet worm used against Iran in 2009-2010 was a cyber attack. The US and Israel have long been accused of collaborating on the virus in a bid to damage Iran’s nuclear program.

While those accusations against Washington and Tel Aviv have never been confirmed by either government, a NATO Commission has now confirmed it as an “act of force.”

Last year anonymous government officials came forward to tell The New York Times that researchers at the Idaho National Laboratory, which is overseen by the US Department of Energy, passed technical information to Israel regarding vulnerabilities in cascades and centrifuges at Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment plant.

That information, it is believed, was used to design the Stuxnet worm that set Iran’s nuclear program back an estimated two years.

“Acts that kill or injure persons or destroy or damage objects are unambiguously uses of force,” according to the Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare, which lead author Michael N. Schmitt said was written to outline “how does existing law apply to cyberspace.”

Schmitt told The Washington Times that “according to the UN charter, the use of force is prohibited, except in self-defense.” Under the guidelines detailed in the Manual, the concept of self-defense could include “anticipatory self-defense,” which would allow a nation an act of aggression in the event that it perceives a threat as imminent.

The 20 experts were drawn from around the world and took three years to complete the 300-page manuscript, which they were careful to note was not an official policy decision by NATO.

They disagreed over whether the Stuxnet attack qualified as an “armed attack,” which would constitute the beginning of wartime aggression that, under the Geneva Convention, could be followed by the use of force.

“We wrote it as an aid to legal advisers to governments and militaries, almost a textbook,” Schmitt told The New York Times. “We wanted to create a product that would be useful to states to help them decide what their position is. We were not making recommendations, we did not define best practice, we did not want to get into policy.”

US officials have continued to deny American involvement in the attack, but the timing specified by the anonymous sources coincides with an order from President Bush authorizing an increased information exchange with Israel over Iranian nuclear facilities.

During a 2009 conversation with The New York Times, an American official said any secret action against Iran would classify officially as “science experiments.”

US must accept its defeat in Syria

Some of the readers may find this particular blog a little different from those I have posted since June last year, around (80) eighty so far. As you can gather from my profile and other posts available on Google I am an economic analyst, who mostly covers Pakistan’s economy. This pushed me first to political economy then to geopolitics in the region and now to most horrendous imperialism of super powers.

The bottom line is that super powers create their hegemony by lodging and dislodging governments in countries which they consider important for enhancing their economic superiority, controlling energy and other mineral resources and above all creating conflicts so that their armament factories can operate over time.

They have been abusing the word democracy the most, because most of their ‘obedient servants’ are dictators; even though some of them claim to be elected representatives. These rulers can be termed ‘viceroys’ of the colonial era because of being subservient to external powers rather than looking after the interest of their own people.

Going through previous blogs one can also understand my point of view that United States has been fighting a proxy war in Syria. Rebels are improvised type of CIA agents and touts getting funds and arms from the United States. This fact also becomes evident when one reads US newspapers and listens to television networks.

The ongoing suggestions from elected US representatives, who own or have substantial stake in energy trade and armaments manufacturing, are the worst warmongers. They have sold the largest quantity of arms to Saudi Arabia and many other countries which even don’t have regular army or any face threat from any country.

Warmongers have completely brainwashed Saudis who now consider Iran a bigger threat as compared to Israel. The situation has not changed a bit from signing of Camp David agreement, which led to assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. However, some fears aroused when it was proved that Israeli army is no more invincible. That brought the change in US foreign policy and various uprisings were initiated in Arabian Peninsula, Middle East and North Africa, all aimed at installing new viceroys. 

Some of these may have yielded favorable results for the United States but many led to anti-US groups becoming the rulers. This led to second wave of toppling and installing in which Syria remains the biggest thorn, not because of its military might but because it is believed to be the first defence wall of Iran. In other words for demolish Iran, fragmentation of Syria is a must as all the attempts to create any uprising in Iran have failed.

And finally the cat has come out of the bag with the initiation of discussion regarding direct US air assault on Syria, this time once again the reason is ‘possible use of chemical weapons’. One can still recall that the prime reason for attack on Iraq was also ‘presence of weapons of mass destruction and allegations of use of chemicals weapons by Saddam Hussan, both of these allegation proved hoax calls.

Billions of dollars of tax payers have been used in these aimless wars and if one also adds Afghan, the amount runs into trillions of dollars. Despite spending this enormous amount, killing of hundreds and thousands of innocent men, women and children, sabotages are taking place everywhere in the world.

I am also concerned because of the hostilities growing in Pakistan’s neighborhood. Iran has been enduring economic sanction for more than three decades, war is being fought in Afghanistan for more than four decades and Pakistan and India are living in a constant state of war since independence.

Over the years India and Pakistan have spent trillions of dollars on accumulation of conventional, non-conventional arms and even atomic capabilities. It is true they can wipe out each other in seconds but what will they achieve? May be a huge piece of baron land and millions of crippled people but this is not the way of life. They should join hands and work for the prosperity of their people and if India has to grant independent status to Kashmir, it is worth doing as compared to accumulating arms.

Now I address my readers from United States directly and ask a question. Your country is the oldest democracy of the world. I strongly believe that you spend a lot on welfare of humanity and my mentor is Bill Gates. Have you ever asked your elected representatives why they are spending tax payers’ money on war rather than spending it on the welfare of US citizens?

Aren’t there any poor in the US? Is every US citizen one as rich as Cheney, Bush, Obama and other legislative members who are suggesting direct attack on Syria, because it is a threat for the US and the world?

Remember, no one is threat for the world except the war mongers. Please act before the world plunges into the third world war.

Celebrating Pakistan Day

Like every year the citizens are celebrating ‘Pakistan Day’ with great fervor. Politicians have issued loaded statements and tried to convince that the country is at crossroad and facing a bleak outlook.

In the alternate media all sorts of comments have already started appearing and regular media will print and broadcast all sorts of message today, which are customary.

However, the nation has a right to ask all, including themselves, are we behaving in the manner any patriotic citizen should behave?

The reply is simple but harsh; no one is behaving like a true patriotic Pakistani. At the best all of us are busy in achieving our selfish motives. The nation has reduced to highly fragmented groups and the sole motive remains how to maximize the wealth.

Majority of people belonging to lower strata is still patriotic but the higher one goes in the hierarchy, he/she becomes self centered and the only objective becomes, maximizing wealth, no matter how.

With due respect political leaders have failed in developing consensus on the name of caretaker prime minister, is it is not the height of apathy or self centeredness?

They have not been able to find a person who could assure that he/she would protect their interest in the best possible manner. If PML-N is never tired of saying PPP leadership is the most corrupt, it has supported this regime for five years only to remain in power in a province, which has 65% of total population of Pakistan.

In 1940 on this day Muslims of the subcontinent agreed to create a country where their rights would be protected, as they feared Hindus being in majority would exploit them.

Now most of the elites and even citizens are busy in looting and killing their own fellow citizens. This prompts a question, are the perpetrators Pakistanis? Unfortunately, the reply is no, else they should not be indulging in such activities.

Though, one hates to say it seems that agents of yesteryear East India Company have become active once again and are buying the soul and spirits of those who are ‘saleable commodities’.

This is not new such stories can be found in the history around the globe that foreign invaders have been doing this and they are once again active in Pakistan.

Many be the new generation does not have the slightest idea of what sort of sacrifices their forefathers had given in achieving independence from the British Raj.

Even after independence they have been giving scarifies but rulers have been accumulating wealth and transferring into foreign accounts.

It is often said that Pakistan’s accumulated debt exceeds US$50 billion but very few people may know that amounts kept in foreign banks is even ten times of this amount. If all this looted money is brought back into Pakistan it will be enough to give free education, medical care, building roads and bridges, power plants and dams and even the citizens will not have to pay any tax for rest of the lives.

This sounds like a fairy tale but it is the harsh reality on which every Pakistani has strong belief.

However, pulling out this money from foreign banks poses the real problem. At no stage these countries will be willing to give this money to Pakistan because, ultimately they will confiscate it. They have done this with many rulers, underworld kings and their own touts.

Pakistan: Installing an Interim Setup

One completely fails to understand why is installing a caretaker taking extraordinarily long time? A caretaker government is put in place to oversee fair, free and transparent general elections in the country. There is a growing perception ‘Too many hands are spoiling the curry’.

One wonders why no consensus can be developed on a person in a country that has a population of nearly 200 million people? It seems completely frustrating that those made responsible for finalizing the name of caretaker prime minister could not agree on one name.

Isn't a single trust worthy person in the country or an alien will come and occupy the PM House and rule the country during this interim period?

To be honest there are millions of good people in Pakistan who have the capacity and courage to run this country, which is often termed a failed state, even better than those who claim to be the whiz kids.

Though, I hate to say this but just can’t resist without saying this, “They are unable to agree on a name, which has the qualities of being ‘the most obedient servant'.

Ironically, they have pressure from inside as well as outside, which is an undeniable reality. Though, many may not accept but the name has to be acceptable to political leaders, establishment, National Security Council and the list may continue.

Added to this is the pressure from United States which also wants a man of confidence, simply because withdrawal of US-led Nato forces has started from Afghanistan and soldiers and hardware has to pass through Pakistan.

Selection of an interim government would have been much easier had there been no groups having vested interests. The situation becomes real difficult because Uncle Sam has to play the most decisive role.

Some of the fanatic Pakistanis may ask, what could be the potential role of the sole surviving super power in the politics of a third world country suffering from too many contentious problems?

However, only those who have seen planes of President Zia ul Haq and Air Chief Musif Ali Meer blowing up can see the gravity of the situation and repercussion of any decision that offends imperialists and warmongers.

Pakistan is not alone, such accidents have also been taking place in other countries, just to remind killing of Indra Ghandhi and her sons in India, Shaikh Mujeeb in Bangladesh, Qaddafi in Libya, Mrs. Aquino in Philippines and Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan and the list can continues.

It is also difficult to refute that 'change of regime movements' in many countries of Middle East, North Africa and other regions are also funded by the external elements.

The much talked about 'rebels' are provided funds, arms and media coverage by the 'embedded journalists'. The point to be remembered is that those nations which were strong i.e. Vietnam survived even the worst assaults because of their unity.

Pakistan's enemies have already fragmented the nation into ethnic and sectarian groups. The killers are killing people belonging to different groups, only to show that Pakistan is plunging deep into anarchy.

Though, those having vested interests are also playing the same mantra, general public can still identify the perpetrators. The only regret is that law enforcing agencies often fail in arresting the perpetrators and even if a few are rounded up, most of the accused are acquitted due to lack of evidence.

General public often feel that politicians have common objectives, top most being coming into power. In case they fail to get enough votes, they level rigging charges.

Citizens often complain that 'undesirable' candidates are elected. However, they tend to forget that on Election Day either they go for picnic or prefer to stay at homes, but just don’t bother to cast their votes.

The result is obvious, parties that can pull out voters from their home, offer them food and transport often succeed in filling the ballot boxes.

Unless the educated elites that prefer to keep quiet and take no part in demonstrations and sits in, convince tehmselves to exercise their power, the business will continue as usual. 

Pak-US Relationships: Shifting Paradigm

With the caretaker setup being installed, there is an urgent need to revisit Pakistan-US relationships. Analysis of the prevailing situation has becomes all the more important as critics seem to be divided into two distinct but opposite groups, one saying United States need Pakistan's support and second trying to prove that Pakistan needs US support to overcome internal and external threats facing the country.

However, both the groups strongly believe that musty relationship could prove detrimental for both the countries. After the commencement of withdrawal of US-led Nato troops and other hardware from Afghanistan, there is need for safe passage and speedy and cost effective movement.

No one can deny the fact that Pakistan offers the most cost effective route. Therefore, it is suggested that United States must avoid any encounter with the groups that consider it 'Occupier of Afghanistan'. However, the main concern remains fusty relationship between the US and Karzai administrations.

In such a prevailing scenario there are growing fears that some of the Afghan warlords may intensify their attacks on Nato troops and even on Afghan forces. One of the positive points is that both the US and Pakistan governments are trying to improve relationship by removing the irritants.

However, commencement of work on Pakistani portion of Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline has been taken by the US administration an act that makes Pakistan liable for imposition of economic sanctions. Most of the experts are of the consensus that since Pakistan needs to overcome its energy crisis US administration must not oppose this project.

The pipeline offers a reliable and cost effective solution for Pakistan’s looming energy crisis that is adversely affecting its economy and GDP growth rate. Experts are also of the consensus that an economically strong Pakistan can help in maintaining peace and also ushering economic activities in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of Nato forces.

Any adverse decision can intensify anti-US sentiments and imposition of economic sanctions on Pakistan could lead to poor law and order situation that may delay general elections in the country. Any unrest in Pakistan can also cause disruption in the movement of Nato troops and hardware through Pakistan.

Over the years Pakistan has been able to weed out militants and contain their movement across the border and any lapse could prove fatal for the three stakeholders: Nato, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Unfortunately, support of the rebel groups in Arabian Peninsula, North Africa and Syria has proved beyond any doubt that United States has been supplying funds and arms to the groups. Now it is also being said in Pakistan that United States is supporting those militant groups that are busy is creating ethnic divide and sectarian killing.

In fact there is complete consensus that those undertaking sabotage activities and killing people are funded by the external elements and often fingers are pointed at United States, India and Israel.

Some of the quarters have been demanding that United States should provide extra funds to Pakistan for purchasing arsenal to secure its common borders with Afghanistan and India.

As against this, there is a growing realization that improving relationship among Pakistan, Afghanistan and India is more important than accumulating arms. Living constantly under state of war and spending billions of dollars has yielded no result. The time has come to develop better understandings among these countries to ensure more spending on the welfare of people.

Iran Pakistan gas pipeline: Another point of view

I am pleased to place this article published in eurasiareview http://www.eurasiareview.com. Its title is Iran Viewpoint: Washington Angry over Tehran-Islamabad Gas Pipeline Agreement. It has been originally printed in Iran Review, a Tehran-based site that claims to be independent, non-governmental and non-partisan and representing scientific and professional approaches towards Iran’s political, economic, social, religious, and cultural affairs, its foreign policy, and regional and international issues within the framework of analysis and articles.

The final phase of the Iran – Pakistan gas pipeline project, which is to be built on the Pakistani soil, was launched in a ceremony attended by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Pakistani counterpart, Asif Ali Zardari, on Monday, March 11, 2013. The first section of the pipeline, which runs over 900 kilometers from Iran’s Assaluyeh region to the city of Iranshahr in Sistan and Baluchestan Province had been inaugurated about one and a half years ago. Construction of the second section of the pipeline with the total length of 120 km, which runs from the southeastern Iranian city of Iranshahr to Pakistani border, started last year. The last tranche of the pipeline on the Pakistani soil is expected to be finished in the next two years.

This project is of high significance to both countries. Construction of a pipeline for the export of Iran’s natural gas to its eastern neighbor is of special importance to Islamabad because Pakistan is facing serious energy crunch. The problem was even worse during this winter when some Pakistani cities experienced power cuts which at times lasted up to 18-20 hours a day. In addition, many Pakistani plants, especially those related to the country’s textile industry, had to shut down their operations as a result of sever energy shortage. When looked at from this viewpoint, it is clear that the gas pipeline from Iran will be able to guarantee long-term and secure energy flow to Pakistan.

On the other hand, in view of special conditions of Iran and the sanctions which have been imposed against the Islamic Republic during the last year, the country has been facing difficulties for selling its energy resources. As a result, this pipeline will help Tehran to go around sanctions and will be of serious help to Iran under the existing economic conditions.

In addition to long-term economic benefits which Iran is bent on achieving through presence in global energy markets, the pipeline is of high importance to Iran from a political viewpoint as well. The West, especially the United States, has been putting pressure on many countries to dissuade them from concluding oil and gas contracts with Iran. They had also put tremendous pressures on the governments of India and Pakistan to make them abandon the energy deal with Iran.

It was due to the high importance of the project that Iran was even ready to give concessions to Pakistan to go on with the construction of the gas pipeline. As a result, the Islamic Republic accepted to grant 500 million US dollars as credit in loan to Islamabad to be spent on the construction of pipeline by Pakistan. Before that, the two countries had differences over this issue, which were resolved through the final agreement.

Due to the above facts, the pipeline project can get the two neighboring countries engaged in a very important project which will not only serve the interests of both countries, but will also have an obviously positive impact on bilateral relations between Tehran and Islamabad.

Despite all the above facts, the pipeline had been originally designated as the “Peace Pipeline” because it was supposed to be built through cooperation among Iran, Pakistan and India. However, despite extensive plans and a whole decade of negotiations, the project was finally aborted. So, why the project is currently being implemented in the absence of India?

In reality, India initially agreed to the project, but it finally abandoned it for two major reasons. The first reason was that the Indian officials did not want the pipeline to cross through Pakistan soil. The Indian officials were concerned that in case of possible future tension in relations between Islamabad and New Delhi, Pakistan may use the pipeline as a means of putting pressure on India by cutting off the gas flow.

Therefore, India proposed that the pipeline should be built under the sea. Indian officials noted that the pipeline may run on the ground up to the Iranian border with Pakistan in Gwadar region of Iran’s Chabahar city. Thenceforth, the pipeline was supposed to go under the sea and continue toward the Indian city of Mumbai. Implementing the project in that way would have been both too costly, and needed cutting-edge technology which was not available even to India and could be only provided by a few European countries and the United States.

The second reason which dissuaded India from taking part in the project was that New Delhi would have to pay a transit fee of about 350 million dollars per year to Pakistan for the transit of gas while India was by no means willing to boost the economic strength of its rival neighbor. Therefore, India was very hesitant about taking part in the project due to the aforesaid reasons.

Of course, the United States’ opposition and Washington’s pressure on New Delhi to abandon the project also influenced India’s decision. Although this does not mean that India’s decision has been totally influenced by the US pressure, in reality, the contract signed between the United States and India according to which Washington is supposed to build 13 nuclear power plants for India had greatly increased India’s doubt about being part of the Peace Pipeline project.

The Indian officials reached the conclusion – on the basis of a loss and benefit estimate – to give priority to their national interests and go on with the agreement they had already signed with the United States at the cost of withdrawing from the Peace Pipeline project. This, however, does not mean that the issue of the Peace Pipeline has been forgotten for good and ever in India. The Indians look at it as an open case which may be followed up in the future in order to forge a deal with Iran over its natural gas resources. At any rate, it should not be forgotten that as a result of very rapid economic development in India, the country’s demand for energy is very high and that demand is sure to skyrocket in the future.

Therefore, I believe that the Indians will first take that concession from the United States and then they will enter into a deal with Iran on the basis of their national interests. In doing so, they will conclude the pipeline contract with Iran in order to extend the Iran – Pakistan pipeline up to India and take advantage of Iran’s natural gas resources.

Of high importance in this regard is the close rivalry between India and China. It is noteworthy that China has made hefty investment in Gwadar region. Therefore, in case of a good opportunity and if a suitable price is offered for gas and the project’s cost seems feasible, China might be willing for the pipeline to further travel to Tibet by crossing Karakoram Mountains.

This will be a problem for India in the long run as its rival will be able to take advantage of the pipeline. This is especially true as China’s need to energy continues to soar in coming years. Therefore, India is sure to strike a deal with Iran in the long run over the latter country’s gas resources. In the short term, however, India will stay away from the project as long as the United States has not built the aforesaid nuclear power plants for India.

US can’t afford to antagonize Pakistan

Over the years Pakistan has been fighting proxy US war in Afghanistan, not because of any love for Afghans or even to please the super power. It has been dragged into it and one could sum up the negotiations in before US assault on Afghanistan in one sentence ‘either you are with us or with our enemies’. At that time Pakistan had no option but to bow down as India was ready to join the US crusade. By that time Pakistan was also facing enduring economic sanctions for undertaking ‘nuclear test in 1998 and the probability was that refusal to join the war may also lead to air strikes on Pakistan’s sensitive installations.

On this Monday, Iranian Presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari jointly inaugurated the work on the of 780-km Pakistani segment of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline in the Iranian port city of Chahbahar. The point to be noted is that in this city India is constructing a sea port which is also being linked with Central Asia via Afghanistan on which the United States has never raised any objection. In fact it may be said that India is doing this under the instructions of United States which wants an alternative route, other than through Pakistan.

As I have said earlier United States is once again following .carrot and stock policy’. Victoria Nuland of the US State Department on one hand warns Islamabad that its cooperation with Tehran falls under the Iran Sanctions Act, which means that Pakistan may face a ban on its transactions through American banks and that U.S. military and other aid to Pakistan may be curtailed. She also plays the mantra that the US administration is willing to offer other alternatives, but little has been done to date.

Pakistan is rightly demanding its treatment at par with India, if it has to quite Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, this could be done on only one condition supply of nuclear technology for civilian use. The US has offered this to India in exchange for deserting the gas pipeline project.

This morning I got another inspiration after reading an article in eurasiareview quoting Russian analyst Maxim Minayev of the Civic Society Development Foundation on the matter. He said “I don’t think that Washington will cut its military aid to Islamabad as long as the Afghan campaign continues. The aid is meant to strengthen Pakistan’s defense capacity, particularly against radical Islamist groups. Speaking about Pakistani-US relations, one should bear in mind the potential of those who oversee them in the White House, namely US Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joseph Biden. I think that such players will manage to create additional opportunities for the White House in terms of minimizing the impact of the Pakistani-Iranian pipeline project”.

In his view impositions of sanctions may have the opposite effect. If Washington curtails political and military cooperation with Islamabad, the latter will move to expand ties with China. That’s not what the White House wants. There will be a general elections in Pakistan in May with the ruling Pakistan People’s Party facing a tough challenge from the Muslim League-Nawaz led by ex-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Both the parties are campaigning on the promises to ease the country’s energy crisis that has reduced its GDP growth rate to around 2.5%. Therefore, any party that wins majority or form coalition government, its first priority will be to resolve looming energy crisis.

In fact President Asif Ali Zardari has won hearts of Pakistanis once again by transferring control of Gwadar port to China and commencing work on Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. Any effort by the United States to create hurdle in smooth working of these two projects could raise two popular demands: 1) Pakistan should immediately pull itself out of US proxy war and 2) stopping movement of Nato supplies through Pakistan with immediate effect. I hope the US government just can’t afford either one.

I also tend to agree with Russian Orientalist Sergei Druzhilovsky. He believes that the project will go ahead, no matter who wins the election. All the more so that Iran has already built its 900-km segment of the pipeline and hopes to extend it into India. For Pakistan, gas transit means handsome profits. The latter circumstance must have outweighed the alternatives proposed by Saudi Arabia and the United States. Last May, Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar made clear Islamabad would not yield to pressure over the pipeline.

Pakistan needs gas to keep its thermal power plants running and industries operating at optimum capacity utilization. Last but not the least Pakistan has a right to demand that the United States should first impose economic sanctions on India for buying oil from Iran, constructing Chahbahar seaport and rail and road network in Iran.