Entertainment

Pakistani officials say three security personnel have been killed in an ambush on a convoy carrying paramilitary troops in the restive southwestern province of Balochistan.The attack on the Frontier Corps convoy took place on September 4 in Panjgur dis...

In Karachi, three persons were killed while three others injured in two different incidents.According to report, two security guards were killed when unidentified assailants opened fire on them in Gulistan-e-Johar area of Karachi on Monday.In another i...

ISLAMABAD Pakistan postponed a visit by a U.S. acting assistant secretary of state, officials said, as small protests broke out against President Donald Trump's accusations that Islamabad was prolonging the war in Afghanistan.The visit of Alice Wells...

Pakistan's population has increased to over 207 million, according to partial results of the country's first census in nearly 20 years.If the new population figure is confirmed, Pakistan would overtake Brazil as the world's fifth-most-populous country,...

ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI � India scored a major diplomatic victory over Pakistan earlier this month when the United States designated the largest militant group fighting against Indian rule in the divided Kashmir region as a foreign terrorist organization.

For India, the terror label on the banned Hizbul Mujahideen, or HM, is a strong affirmation of its argument that the violence in its only Muslim majority region is fueled by Islamic militant groups that operate from Pakistan, what India has long called cross-border terrorism. Islamabad denies the charges.

HM was established in 1989 when the insurgency erupted in India-administered Kashmir. The United States declared its founder and supreme commander, Syed Salahuddin, a global terrorist in June.

India says the designations reflect the joint commitment of New Delhi and Washington to fight terrorism.

New Delhi accuses the Hizbul Mujahideen, along with other Islamic militant groups, of killing thousands of people since the armed separatist rebellion erupted in Kashmir.

They are repeatedly attacking civilian targets, killing civilians through acts of indiscriminate violence and sometimes targeted acts of violence, said Ajai Sahni, who heads the Institute of Conflict Management in New Delhi. He says there is a large database of such attacks and the reason the United States has designated HM a terror group.

Pakistan rejects designation

Pakistan's Foreign Ministry and Salahuddin, who operates out of the Pakistani-administered part of Kashmir, have rejected the terror designation as unjustified.

Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Nafees Zakaria said Pakistan and India have disputed claims over Kashmir for the past 70 years, and there have been U.N. Security Council resolutions pending implementation for decades.

Pakistani authorities and Kashmiri leaders maintain the armed insurgency is an indigenous, political and legitimate struggle of Kashmiris strictly confined to the Himalayan region with a mission to free Kashmir from Indian occupation.

Dismissing Islamabad's argument, Indian foreign ministry spokesman Raveesh Kumar said, all of us are aware of what kind of terrorist activities they have conducted in Jammu and Kashmir and frankly the statement made by Pakistan is very strange to say the least.

US step toward India

Analysts say the terrorism designation of HM is another significant step President Donald Trump's administration has taken to politically and diplomatically align itself with India. They also see it as a major blow to diplomatic efforts by Pakistan in the past year to internationally project alleged atrocities Indian security forces have unleashed against innocent Kashmiris.

My sense is that America's decision to designate this group as a terrorist organization is a very strong indication of Washington's desire to take the relationship with India forward in a big way, said Michael Kugelman of the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center.

Hizbul Mujahideen's Salahuddin, a 71-year-old former school teacher in Indian Kashmir, also heads the United Jihad Council, or UJC, an alliance of more than a dozen Pakistan-based Kashmiri militant groups.

They (U.S.) cannot quote a single incident to prove that we are terrorists, he said, responding to the U.S. move declaring him a global terrorist. This idiocy can neither weaken our courage, nor stop the freedom struggle and the target-oriented actions of freedom fighters, he vowed.

Pakistani militant organizations, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jamaatud Dawa and Jaisha-e-Mohammad have also allegedly been supporting insurgent activities of HM and UJC, and participating in cross-border attacks, in addition to raising funds in Pakistan for the jihad in Kashmir.

New Delhi has long accused the Pakistani spy agency of funding and backing the militants and demanded Islamabad help stop the violent campaign against India.

Islamabad denies allegations it is providing any material support to insurgents, insisting it only offers diplomatic, political and moral support to the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris for their right of self-determination under a U.N.-promised plebiscite.

Renewed Kashmiri violence

The terror designation for Hizbul Mujahideen comes at a time of renewed violence after a decade of relative peace in Kashmir that followed a 2003 cease-fire between India and Pakistan.

During that time, the group's presence in Kashmir had shrunk, but the last year has seen a resurgence of militancy, with the Hizbul emerging as the largest group in the Himalayan region.

The response to the terror designation for Hizbul is more mixed in Kashmir, where people say they do not support violence but offer no clear-cut answer as to whether the group should be viewed as freedom fighters or terrorists.

The current wave of unrest erupted after Indian security forces killed the group's charismatic local commander, Burhan Wani. Since then, thousands of ordinary Kashmiris have taken part in anti-India street protests.

Label not justified

A prominent separatist leader in Indian Kashmir, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, sees no justification for the terror label.

Pointing out that there are now an estimated 100 local recruits in the ranks of the Hizbul, he said there is an indigenous aspect to the Kashmiri militancy, and the young boys who have joined militancy today are those who feel pushed to the wall. Most of them have been subjected to repression, families have been harassed by the police.

He added, they don't have any global agenda like the al-Qaida or the Taliban, or the Islamic State. Their focus has been mainly vis-a-vis the Kashmir issue.

Indeed, for many in Kashmir, the main grievance is New Delhi's failure to explore a political solution to the Kashmir dispute and alleged human rights violations by Indian security forces amid what many regard as heavy-handed efforts to stamp out militancy and control protests.

Recent border skirmishes between Pakistani and Indian militaries along the Line of Control dividing Kashmir also stem from the agitation in the disputed territory amid allegations Islamabad is fueling the street protests. The cross-border clashes have left many soldiers and civilians dead on both sides over the past months.

Given that the Hizbul Mujahideen is focused on fighting India's rule in Kashmir and enjoys support among Kashmiris, activists and militants do not foresee any disruptive effect on the organization in the wake of U.S. terror label, raising fears a spike in insurgent violence could trigger a wider conflict between India and Pakistan.

Source: Voice of America

While American white supremacists and ultra-nationalists have been appearing in public and the news more often recently, the heads of the U.S. military have made clear such individuals have no place in the ranks.

The commanders of the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps last week issued strong statements condemning intolerance and racism after protests in the city of Charlottesville, Virginia turned deadly. Organizers and participants in the original demonstration espoused racist, white nationalist positions.

That's a crucial message for those in uniform, say some military experts and veterans.

It was important, I think, for the service chiefs to get on record with what had happened and to show that what was being represented in Charlottesville as people standing up for their culture really had no place in our armed forces. It wasn't our [military] culture, said Peter Mansoor, a retired U.S. Army colonel and professor of military history at Ohio State University.

The message was clear, said Steven Leonard, a retired U.S. Army colonel now teaching at the University of Kansas School of Business. If you can't live by the values of our institutions, then you don't have a place in the ranks. Leonard also runs the popular Doctrine Man micro-blog and social media platform, which discusses military and veterans' issues.

The Department of Defense bans actively advocating supremacist, extremist or criminal gang causes. Doing so can result in dismissal from military service.

While the military is one of the most socially integrated communities in the United States, it has had a problem with extremists in the ranks. Some current leaders of racist organizations have served, and veterans have committed several hate and terror crimes in recent years.

The military has acknowledged it has a problem, most notably after Army veteran Timothy McVeigh blew up a federal office building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995, killing 168 people. The Department of Defense went on a campaign to oust militants.

And it made progress, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks U.S. hate groups; but, in less than a decade, that ground was lost because the military relaxed recruiting standards to meet demand as the U.S. fought wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the center said in reports issued in 2006 and 2012.

The military is a reflection of American society, Mansoor said � which means it has members of all backgrounds and beliefs. You get this sliver that comes in; they may have grown up in a gang culture, or white nationalist culture.

Some criminal gangs and white nationalist groups in the U.S. encourage adherents to join the military, particularly Army and Marine Corps combat, according to Southern Poverty Law Center studies. Some nationalist groups advocate a race war against African Americans, Jews and other minorities, and they want members with weapons and tactical experience.

They've been doing that for years, Leonard said, as have criminal gangs. Where else can you get the skills?

But that creates a challenge. A service member who holds allegiance to a hate group or gang is likely to stay quiet, and remain in place.

If they don't pop up, what can you do? Leonard said.

While DOD training emphasizes tolerance, Mansoor notes that it's not possible to train away unwanted beliefs. You sort of have to live it day to day and model the values and drive it home at every opportunity.

And, it's essential to do so, said Mansoor, who served as a brigade commander in Iraq in 2003. If you have division in the ranks based on the color of one's skin or their religious creed or their gender, it's like a cancer that grows and causes division and eventually will cause a reduction in the combat effectiveness of the unit.

That is why commanders train troops from the very start that they are all one force � to do otherwise weakens it, former commanders said.

While there might be white supremacists in the ranks, overall, the military has become one of the most ethnically mixed segments of the country since it was integrated nearly 70 years ago. Service members of all backgrounds live and work in tight quarters on ships and in barracks, while housing and schools for their families reflect the full range of the nation's population.

We're supposed to be a better example of what it is to be a good citizen, said Margaret Witt, a retired Air Force major who was dismissed because of her sexual orientation. Now a physical therapist for the Veterans Administration in Portland, Oregon, Witt's successful lawsuit over her dismissal paved the way for the DOD decision to allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military.

The military really has made a tremendous effort to lead the way on tolerance, including on the acceptance of gays and lesbians, she said, although it takes time to change attitudes in such a large organization.

The military does adapt to social change, Leonard said, because the measure that matters is how well a service member performs.

Can you do your job and will you do your job when the bullets start to fly? he said. Because if you can't, you start to put people's lives at risk.

Source: Voice of America

WHITE HOUSE Following an announcement by President Donald Trump declaring the United States' commitment to Afghanistan, Secretary of Defense James Mattis said Tuesday he has not yet made a decision on how many troops to send to the South Asian country.

Speaking from Baghdad, Mattis said he is consulting with Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and will make the decision based on his plan.

In an evening address from a military base outside Washington Monday, Trump said that he would not talk about numbers of troops or plans for further military activities, unveiling a "condition-based approach" to defeating terrorism in Afghanistan, without going into detail.

Troop levels

The president has approved up to 4,000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan, according to sources, speaking on condition they not be named.

Currently, there are about 8,400 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Most are advising Afghan forces, though some are tasked with carrying out counterterrorism operations against groups such as the Taliban or the Islamic State's Afghan affiliate.

That number is down significantly from the height of former President Barack Obama's troop surge, which saw nearly 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan in August 2010.

After years of deriding the U.S. war in Afghanistan as a "complete waste," President Donald Trump on Monday explained why he now believes it is in the United States' interest to remain committed to the South Asian country.

His goal, he said, is to stop the re-emergence of safe havens for terrorists to threaten America and make sure they do not get their hands on nuclear weapons.

"Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our strategy from now on. America's enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out. I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will," Trump told about 2,000 service members at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall.

Immediately following the president's speech, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson released a statement saying: "We stand ready to support peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban without preconditions. We look to the international community, particularly Afghanistan's neighbors, to join us in supporting an Afghan peace process."

Trump, in his address, however, very publicly and directly put Pakistan on notice.

"We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars at the same time they are housing the very terrorists they are fighting. But that will have to change and that will change immediately," Trump vowed.

The president's address received mixed initial reviews.

"The president failed to define the goals or objectives that would direct the actions of the whole of government approach. The only thing he demonstrated was that his original belief that you can rip troops out of a combat zone without considering the fallout of that action was, in fact, wrong," said Moira Whelan, a partner of BlueDot Strategies and former senior State Department official.

"Trump repealed his original Afghanistan position, but he failed to replace it with something that will make America safer," Whelan told VOA.

Longest US war

The conflict in Afghanistan � with a factionalized unity government riddled with systemic corruption -- has dragged on for 16 years, becoming the longest U.S. war ever, since the Sept. 11, 2001 al-Qaida attacks on the United States.

Expressing frustration, Trump informed Afghanistan that the commitment by the United States is not unlimited and America's support not a blank check.

The American people, he warned, expect "to see real reforms and real results."

U.S. Vice President Mike Pence, at Trump's request, spoke to Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani on Monday ahead of the address.

Tillerson had spoken over the phone with Pakistani Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj and Afghan Foreign Minister Salahuddin Rabbani, according to the State Department, about how the United States would like to work with each country to stabilize South Asia through a new, integrated regional strategy.

U.S. generals advised Trump to send several thousand more troops to break the stalemate and retake territory from the Taliban, which controls nearly half the country. But Trump, who campaigned on an "America First" foreign policy, has been reluctant to commit more resources to the country.

Reaction

Afghanistan president Ashraf Ghani expressed appreciation for Trump's decision Tuesday.

"Today is a special day because a few hours ago the United States' president delivered his speech," Ghani said. "His message was that after this, there is no limited time or conditions on their support for Afghanistan. America will stand with Afghanistan until the end."

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg expressed support for Trump's strategy, saying the alliance aims to ensure Afghanistan cannot be a terrorist sanctuary.

Ahmad Shah Katawazai, a defense liaison at the Afghan embassy in Washington, told VOA he welcomes the renewed U.S. commitment to Afghanistan.

"We think this will ultimately take us to what we want in the end -- allowing no safe haven for terrorists, helping the Afghan government stand on its own feet and putting more pressure on Pakistan," he said.

A spokesperson for India's Ministry for External Affairs also welcomed Trump's pledge to confront "issues of safe havens and other forms of cross-border support enjoyed by terrorists."

There was no immediate public reaction from Pakistan's government, but Pakistan's Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal told VOA that the government would be issuing a statement, without specifying when.

"There is neither any tolerance nor any safe haven for any terrorist in Pakistan. Pakistan has paid the highest price for (fighting) terrorism. So, we are fighting terrorism not for any country's stake but for our own future and for our country's sake," Iqbal said.

Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis said he was deployed to Afghanistan in 2010, "when there were 140,000 U.S. and NATO troops." He said he saw "firsthand that the insurgent and terrorist fighters cannot be militarily defeated."

"Short of a return of major deployments of tens of thousands of U.S. combat troops, this is not a winnable war," Davis told VOA. "No matter what the president said, this war flatly cannot be won militarily. To set a strategy dependent on militarily defeating the enemy is going to fail, just as surely as all other attempts have over the past 16 years."

Source: Voice of America