RUPEE NEWS: Recording History, Narrating Archives, Strategic Intellibrief Analysis: Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | اخبار روپیہ

Remember the UN inspectors in Iraq? Do we want a repeat of that?

A probe led by the United Nations into Pakistan could cause serious issues for the country. The UN could finagle their way into restricted army areas, and ask questions from people who had nothing to do with the murder. An extreme example would be that the UN probe could say that they wanted to interview A.Q. Khan about his last discussion with Benazir Bhutto or the UN could subpoena the head of the missile program to see if Ms. Benazir had given them some clues about her death. All these would very intrusive into the Pakistani machinery and would be counter-productive for all concerned.Because the probe would be authorized by the UN, once the process begins, Pakistan would lose all control over her sovereign right to restrict the scope of the investigation. The investigation would naturally be handed over to the FBI and Scotland Yard, so theoretically they should repeat what they have said before.

The Government can hire the best detectives from around the planet or invite Scotland yard back to Islamabad. However the probe should not be done under the auspices of the UN.

BB’s murder probe through UN | Mushahid fears foreigners may access nuclear assets: Habib Asgher

ISLAMABAD: PML-Q General Secretary Mushahid Hussain Syed has criticised the National Assembly’s resolution to involve United Nations to probe into the martyrdom of Benazir Bhutto and said the UN involvement into the internal issue of the state would be fatal for the national integrity and would pose a serious hazard to nuclear assets of Pakistan as foreign elements would enter to access Pakistani nuclear setup under the cover of UN investigation.
He was talking to journalists after a PILDAT workshop Tuesday.
Mushahid said the UN probe into Benazir’s case depicted the “no confidence on Pakistani institution by the present government”. He said involving UN into investigation was a deliberate move to welcome foreign interference in national matters.
Mushahid expressing his fear that UN probe were not in the interest of the country as foreign interference would increase under the umbrella of this investigation.
“I fear they will try to access our nuclear assets while increasing investigation circle,” he added.
“Then the UN Security Council will also put its efforts to get access to Pakistani nuclear programme that will result in devastating affects on Pakistan,” he added.
To a question, he denied that intelligence and law-enforcement agencies were still under control of the presidency. “Now the president possess a few staff members and is not influencing the system,” he argued.
Mushahid was of the view that the new government would review its resolution to investigate Benazir Bhutto’s assassination through United Nations and would involve the Pakistani administration to investigate the incident of December 27.
Mushahid expressed his hope that the government would unearth and eliminate the conspiracies as it always blamed the incidents of Dr Sher Afghan and Arbab Ghulam Rahim as “conspiracies against the government”. “We gave them vote of confidence and now they should inform us about their agenda,” he said.
Mushahid hailed the inclusion of Afghanistan to SAARC countries and said it was a natural outcome as South Asian countries had historical relations with Afghanistan. He hoped for the better bilateral relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan and said a peaceful Afghanistan was in interest of Pakistan.

UN probe to seek international indictment of ‘elements’ behind Benazir’s killing

Special Report Tuesday, April 22, 2008 By Qudssia Akhlaque
ISLAMABAD: The PPP-led government’s paramount objective in pursuing a Rafik Hariri Commission-like UN probe into the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is to seek international indictment of the culprits, accomplices and sponsors of the act of terrorism.

This has transpired through a series of background interviews conducted by The News with key and close associates of the ruling party’s Co-Chairperson Asif Ali Zardari over the past few weeks.
“That’s right,” was the categorical response this correspondent got from a leading PPP strategist the other day when asked if “international indictment” was the real purpose of the UN probe after all vital “conclusive evidence” had been virtually washed away within hours of the tragic incident.

Defending the decision of going for an international inquiry instead of first re-investigating the case internally with necessary foreign assistance under PPP’s own government, he argued in a veiled reference to the intelligence agencies that certain security outfits may not fully cooperate with the government. But when asked what was the guarantee that the UN investigators could ensure the level of cooperation that the federal government could not, he asserted: “Well if we say they are not cooperating it may not be taken so seriously and will be projected as a politically motivated allegation but when it comes from an independent UN-mandated body it would certainly carry more weight.”

When questioned about the logic of such a move given that even after three years, 10 reports and costs in millions of dollars the UN-mandated Hariri Commission had failed to come up with anything impressive or conclusive, another PPP insider snapped back: “But even if the Hariri Commission has not achieved anything it has at least started pointing fingers and that’s what we want.”

Another PPP insider disagreed with the perception that the governmentís request for a UN-led probe would amount to “self-indictment” and an admission of the ruling party’s lack of control over the security apparatus and its incompetence.

When asked what was the sense of seeking a probe with scant chance of it reaching a definite and credible conclusion in the absence of any hard, conclusive evidence, he stated: “The purpose is to fix responsibility and identify elements within and outside the state apparatus who are beyond the government control and have thwarted efforts to expose the culpritsÖAt least we will be able to close in on the culprits.”
When pressed further on the question he noted the basic purpose of the UN-mandated probe would be “to establish and send a signal to the international community that there are elements beyond the government control so you come and help us.”

Responding to a question that in the process those elements could destabilise the newly formed PPP-led government and create problems, the PPP strategist emphatically declared: “The party is prepared for that. We have done our calculations.”
In an indication that the demand for an independent UN probe into Benazir’s assassination was an attempt to heal wounds and bring closure to the great national tragedy, the PPP Co-Chairperson Asif Ali Zardari before the February 18 elections underlined: “The PPP has never talked about seeking revenge for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto but for the sake of history, future, people and our children, we want to know the truth behind the killing.”
While the PPP government seems determined to go ahead with a formal request for a UN probe into Benazir Bhutto’s assassination armed with unanimously adopted resolutions moved by all the provincial assemblies and the National Assembly, the institutional view of the Foreign Office is that the move is fraught with risks. Although not articulated publicly, senior bureaucrats within the Foreign Office have discussed this matter amongst them and believe it is an unwise move reflecting a narrow approach. Mindful of the fact that ultimately it will be political decision, they privately caution that it would set a wrong precedent which may come to haunt the government tomorrow. “It has too many pitfalls and will set a precedent which the government of the day may live to regret, particularly if faced with a similar situation in future,” a senior diplomat warned, adding: “The Foreign Officeís position on this issue is very clear and there are no two views on this subject but the question is who will bell the cat.”
However, Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan and Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN mission in New York Ambassador Munir Akram did attempt “belling the cat” after all. Pakistan’s top diplomats candidly conveyed to the prime minister and the ruling party’s Co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari the pitfalls involved and advised them against it in a written communication as is evident from the contents of the two separate notes published in The News on Monday (April 21).
Apparently, Akram during his visit here last month had also verbally sounded Zardari about the grave implications and the foreign secretary briefed the federal cabinet about the considered institutional view of the Foreign Office on this question more recently at a meeting chaired by the prime minister, it is learnt.
One key reason for opposing such a move is the very intrusive nature of such a probe which would require access to highly sensitive and classified intelligence information, sites, facilities and officials in equally sensitive positions. It is feared that such intrusive probe would prove to be divisive and lead to intra-institutional tensions. Hence, it could have destabilising effect on the government as well as the country, causing friction between the government and the state institutions.
President Musharraf had outright rejected the demand for a UN probe when the PPP made it at the outset. Another concern is that it could open up Pandora’s box. Already the Balochistan Assembly has demanded a UN inquiry into killings of two Baloch leaders Nawab Akbar Bugti and Nawabzada Balaj Murri besides a probe into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The MQM Quaid Altaf Hussain has also called for an international investigation into the 1992 incidents and military action in Karachi and Hyderabad by the then PPP government.
While talking to this correspondent before the adoption of the National Assembly resolution demanding UN-led probe into Bhuttoís assassination, a former Pakistani ambassador who has held key posts in the Foreign Ministry had predicted: “In the heat of the moment the PPP demanded a UN probe but once a government is installed they will realise that the intrusive measures it would involve are not even good for the government of the day.” His hunch was: “They would probably table a resolution but may not actively pursue it.”
Despite the reservations voiced by different quarters, the government which will have the last word on the matter seems all set to formally approach the UN secretary general for an independent international investigation on the lines of Rafiq Hariri Commission established in 2005.
Federal Minster for Law and Justice Farooq Naek and his team of legal experts are currently working on a draft letter that would be soon sent to the UN secretary-general. This will be one of the agenda items on this week’s Cabinet meeting to be chaired by the prime minister, sources said, hinting that the Cabinet would give the go-ahead. Subsequently the formal letter of request, to be signed by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, will be delivered to the UN secretary-general by the head of Pakistan’s mission in New York.
The UN Security Council established with consent of the Lebanese government an international independent investigation commission under the unanimously adopted Resolution 1595 to assist investigation into the terrorist bombing that killed former prime minister Rafiq Hariri in Beirut on February 14, 2005.
The resolution gives Hariri Commission the mandate to: “Enjoy the full cooperation of the Lebanese authorities, including full access to all documentary, testimonial and physical information and evidence in their possession that the commission deems relevant to the inquiry; Have the authority to collect any additional information and evidence, both documentary and physical, pertaining to this terrorist act, as well as to interview all officials and other persons in Lebanon, that the commission deems relevant to the inquiry; and Enjoy freedom of movement throughout the Lebanese territory, including access to all sites and facilities that the commission deems relevant to the inquiry.”
Some of the apprehensions in the official circles here regarding the move for a UN investigation into Benazir Bhutto’s assassination are based on the sort of invasive access and rather sweeping mandate the Hariri Commission has under the above-stated UNSC resolution.
“Don’t worry it will be ensured that the UN-mandated inquiry into Benazir Bhuttoís death does not undermine the sovereignty and legal system of the country,” was the assurance held out by a key PPP representative involved in the consultation process. This assertion was echoed by another PPP strategist who saw it more as a “matter of detail” and maintained that the government would frame the request in a way that it remains empowered.
The strategist sounded confident that when the request for a UN-led commission is forwarded to the UN Security Council by the UN secretary-general it would be endorsed by all the Permanent Five (P-5) members (the US, UK, France, Russia & China) of the 15-nation Security Council. He dismissed concerns that it would put countries like China in an awkward position, indirectly conveying that the government may have already secured assurance from the P-5 countries on this count. Earlier some PPP leaders had disclosed that the response of P-5 and EU envoys with whom they had initially raised the question was not too enthusiastic. “They were largely non-committal and had many questions about whether the UN-mandated probe could achieve the desired results,” a PPP leader involved in the discussions told The News.
Independent observers and UN watchers insist that the question of seeking a UN inquiry ought to be reviewed. Analysts say it should not be seen within the narrow confines of a party line and any decision in this regard must be based on dispassionate appraisal of the overall situation with a clear objective. That it needs to be looked at in the wider context of international ramifications for Pakistan which is already in a vulnerable position in the aftermath of 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US and the ongoing war against terrorism. Such a probe is seen by many as a potential “bad precedent of foreign intervention in Pakistan’s internal affairs” and could even cause embarrassment for the ruling party as some of its own cabinet members may also be interrogated by the prospective international inquiry commission. Treading into this domain could also be exploited by anti-Pakistan lobbies that continue with their propaganda about alleged vulnerability of the country’s nuclear assets and spare no opportunity to re-open the A Q Khan chapter, is another view.
Financial Aspect: The question of who would fund the investigations and provide the required resources remains a key issue. Will the UN or the Government of Pakistan foot the bill for facilities necessary to perform its functions, including premises, staff and equipment? Who will bear the cost of insurance for the UN-mandated team is also a question that has been asked in the context. However, PPP leaders and many others in Pakistan consider these questions irrelevant in the context of Pakistan’s quest for truth.

PROCESS: Once the UN secretary-general receives the formal request from the government, he would hand it to the 15-nation Security Council as he cannot authorise an investigation. The UNSC would then discuss and debate the possibility of authorising an independent investigation into Ms Bhutto’s killing and take a decision. If it gives the green light, the terms of reference and composition of the investigation team would essentially be determined by the Council members and would be binding on the government and the state. The process of constituting a commission could easily take a few months, diplomats familiar with the UN system told The News.

UNPRECEDENTED: The request from the Government of Pakistan to the UN would be unprecedented. In case of the Rafik Hariri Commission the blame was on a foreign government and the US and UK had openly pointed fingers at Syria. Also the UN itself had initiated the move for international investigation.

RECAP: The UN Security Council in a meeting on December 27, 2007, the day Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, had condemned the killing and had underscored the need to bring the “perpetrators, organisers, financiers and sponsors of the reprehensible act of terrorism to justice.”

The US Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton had made a similar demand. US lawmakers and Human Rights Watch also demanded a Hariri-like UN inquiry into Benazir’s death. The PPP demanded that UN secretary-general be approached to constitute an independent commission to probe into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto as had been established by the world body to investigate the killing of Lebanon’s former premier Rafik Hariri.

In January the spokesperson of the US embassy in Islamabad rejected as “completely outrageous and unfounded” insinuations in a report of Washingtonís alleged involvement in Bhutto’s assassination. That Ms Bhuttoís killing was a part of US-led international conspiracy to destabilise and denuclearise Pakistan.
On January 11, 2008 the PPP asked the caretaker government to request the UN Security Council and the UN secretary-general to constitute a commission to probe into the assassination of Ms Bhutto.

“We would like the government to request the UN to form a UN commission to be known as Ms Benazir Bhutto Inquiry Commission,” the PPP Co-Chairman Asif Zardari told a press conference at the Bhutto House in Naudero after chairing a meeting of the party’s central executive committee.

“The investigation process in Pakistan suffers from serious flaws and interference from powerful figures in the establishment,” PPP lawyer and Senator Farooq Naek who was also present at the press conference said while reading out contents of a letter to be sent to caretaker prime minister Mohammadmian Soomro.

Naek claimed that the security services of Pakistan neither had the capacity nor the commitment to reach a “satisfactory and credible conclusion”.
He noted: “Thus, it is not possible for the security services to carry out an impartial or credible investigation into her assassination, which will lead to the truth being uncovered and bring the people who are behind this heinous crime to justice.”

Later when the caretaker government declined to forward the PPP request to the UN, the party co-chairperson Asif Zardari formally sent a letter to the UN secretary-general and five permanent members of the UNSC on January 16, urging them to set up an international commission for probe into Benazir Bhutto’s death. However, the response received from the world body was that the request would have to come from the Government of Pakistan for it to be considered.

On February 8 the PPP leadership outright rejected the Scotland Yard report on the cause of Benazir Bhutto’s death that concluded she was killed by a bomb attack and not by an assassinís bullet and reiterated its demand for a UN probe.

After the formation of the PPP-led government when the UN secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon telephoned Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on assuming office the latter raised the possibility of the UN body investigating the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The prime minister was advised that the UN would need a formal request from Pakistan before considering the matter. Gilani indicated that a resolution by Pakistan’s parliament would be the first step.

On April 14 the National Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution recommending that the government approach the UN for constituting a “Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Commission” to identify the culprits, perpetrators, organisers and financiers behind her assassination. Similar resolutions were passed by all the four provincial assemblies earlier on.

While bringing a closure to the Benazir Bhutto assassination is very important, any move towards this end must be guided by sagacity and not driven by mere party line. It must ensure that the larger national interest is as much guarded as the government’s agenda. That any move in this direction should be based on sound objective analysis and not be politically or emotionally motivated