Pictures: Anti-Pakistan TTP Terrorists Equipped With U.S., Indian, Israeli and German Weapons

In one case, Germany sent 10,000 small weapons to Afghanistan.  Half of them have disappeared.  This is a classic way of supporting insurgencies without being caught.  German investigators can never accuse German intelligence of crossing the NATO mandate and helping CIA in extracurricular activities.  The Americans are good at dismissing their double actions in Afghanistan as conspiracy theories.  Here is a brief, detailed and sourced account of what types of foreign-origin sophisticated weapons are in use against the Pakistani military.  A ragtag army of criminals, throat-slitters and mercenaries could never have faced one of the world’s largest organized armies if not for outside sophisticated support.

By Akhtar Jamal

Wednesday, 21 October 2009.

ISLAMABAD – Reports reaching here confirm that hundreds of militants from Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), or the so and other associated groups are equipped with most sophisticated American, Indian and German weapons.

According to a survey the weapons in the possession of these militants included U.S. made M249 automatic machine guns, U.S.-made Glock pistols, Indian hand guns, FN Browning GP35 9mmx19mm, Indian automatic machine pistols GLOCK 17 9mmx19mm, Indian machine guns Heckler & Koch MP5A3 9mmx19mm, Indian made Sterling L2A1 sub machine guns, Israeli licenced Indian made UZI 9mmx19mm sub machine guns and German Walther-P1 pistols.

During Swat operation, a number of the Indian army used Vickers-Berthier (VB) light machine guns were also recovered.  The recovery of Indian designed weapons were not astonishing for Pakistan But what was more surprising for Pakistani officials is that the U.S. and German weapons were recently introduced in the Waziristan area.

German sources today confirmed that thousand of German guns are being sold illegally on Afghan, Pakistan black markets.  The German guns were sent to Afghanistan for police and army via a U.S. agency.

The weapons were sent in 2006 and were intended for local police and army personnel.

According to the latest reports in 2006, the German Defense Ministry shipped 10,000 old Walther-P1 pistols to the Afghan Interior Ministry to equip Afghan police and army.

However, both the German government and the responsible US-led security team in Afghanistan failed to properly monitor the guns’ distribution and use.  The U.S. unit was quoted by a German source as saying that “it only had detailed records of German Walther-P1 pistols, numbering 4,563 pistols out of a total 10,000.”  It is believed that German officials failed to pursue the investigation in Afghanistan due to non-cooperation from the Afghan Government.

In February this year, CNN has reported that more than one-third of all weapons the United States has procured for Afghanistan’s government are “missing.”

On February 12, 2009, CNN had quoted a U.S. Government Accountability Office report as saying that the U.S. military failed to “maintain complete inventory records for an estimated 87,000 weapons — or about 36 percent — of the 242,000 weapons that the United States procured and shipped to Afghanistan from December 2004 through June 2008.”

The report elaborated that the U.S. military “is unable to provide serial numbers for 46,000 of the missing 87,000 weapons” and that “no records have been maintained for the location or disposition for the other 41,000 weapons.”

Mr. Akhtar Jamal is a senior journalist and founder editor of the independent PPA News Agency.  He can be reached at pakpress@yahoo.com

Special Report: How Pakistani Foreign Minister’s Son Was Appointed In Kerry’s Office

Let’s just hope that he lost Pakistan’s case on the Kerry-Lugar bill because of personal lack of conviction than a soft corner for Mr. Kerry who gave his son a job in a powerful place.

Special Report

Wednesday, 21 October 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Normally, it would be great to have a Pakistani citizen join the staff of a powerful US legislator like John Kerry, the former presidential candidate, chairman of the US senate foreign relations committee and the man who was being considered for Obama’s secretary of state before Hillary got the job.

It is another thing, however, if this Pakistani turns out to be the son of a serving Foreign Pakistani Minister working in the office of Mr. Kerry, the sponsor of the Kerry-Lugar bill with which most Pakistanis have a problem.

There is a strong hint here of impropriety and conflict of interest.

The problem can be summed up in this question: Mr. Qureshi is supposed to be protecting Pakistani interest at a time when the US-Pakistani ties are going through a rough patch.  Does having his son work for Mr. Kerry create a conflict of interest for Foreign Minister Qureshi?

If you are a father, you develop a soft corner for the powerful man who has given your son an entry job in a powerful place.

Did this natural gratitude affect Foreign Minister’s judgment as he tried to manage the controversy over Kerry-Lugar bill?

Most observers agree that Foreign Minister Qureshi’s performance in the Kerry-Lugar bill fiasco was weak, to put it mildly.  He refused to acknowledge Pakistani concerns and showered grandiose praise on the bill.  When he returned to Pakistan and was told of the reservations, he chose to go back to the United States supposedly to press for Pakistan’s rights.  Only that he was sidelined in no time and forced to accept an ‘explanatory’ note instead.  And again he showered exaggerated praise on the note, calling it ‘historic’.

Some in Pakistan rightly suspect he did not even press Mr. Kerry on Pakistan’s reservations mainly because his government in Islamabad couldn’t care less.  It was the Pakistani military, opposition parties and the public opinion’s demand and Mr. Qureshi’s government was alone in accepting the anti-military US conditions.

Did Mr. Qureshi not fight Pakistan’s case as strongly as he could because he was not convinced or because Mr. Kerry gave his son a big break?

Others have also noticed this.

Longtime journalist Anjum Niaz, in her column The Boston Brahmin published in today’s The News, wrote the following:

After a number of phone calls to Senator Kerry’s office, I finally found out from one of Kerry’s male staffers that ZHQ did indeed work for Kerry but had now left. Why has ZHQ gone into hiding? Did he do something wrong? Yes. And the Foreign Office finds itself between a rock and a hard place. How can it condone its boss’s act of getting his son a job with Kerry when the KLB talks were at a critical stage? Even if fate smiles upon ZHQ because he’s the favoured son of our foreign minister and the doors of the high and mighty in Washington open up for him, we have the right to know whenever the son’s job compromises his dad’s position. More importantly if it is in direct conflict with Pakistan’s interests.  Would you not call this a conflict of interest? Should the foreign minister resign? And if Zardari cannot afford to let him go, then the FM must seek a public apology […] Would he have given ZHQ the time of the day had the young man not been the son of Pakistan’s foreign minister?”

The impression that something is not right in Mr. Qureshi being Pakistan’s foreign minister while his son works for Sen. Kerry is also underlined by how Mr. Qureshi’s brother has reacted to the story.  An Urdu-language daily newspaper, the Express, quoted the brother as saying that members of his feudal land-owning family ‘does not seek employment’ anywhere.  He said this while denying his nephew was ‘employed’ by Sen. Kerry.

There is also an interesting background to how Qureshi Jr. got the job on Capitol Hill.

This version of the story is not verified but comes from a knowledgeable source at the Pakistani Foreign Office:

“Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s relations with Haqqani had become very tense in the early part of this year. During Zardari’s for AFPAK consultations, Qureshi and Haqqani had a shouting match because the ambassador had sent something to the president without going through the foreign minister. Haqqani had direct line to Zardari, and he had some of Qureshi’s decisions reversed. After the Long March when Zardari became a little weaker and Yousaf Raza Gilani a bit stronger, Haqqani decided to patch up with Qureshi. What did Haqqani do: He used his contacts with Kerry and had Qureshi’s son appointed as his intern. With that favour, Qureshi has no more complaints against Haqqani.  So powerful is Haqqani that he has never allowed Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir to set foot in Washington.

Whatever the truth, two points are clear:

One, Foreign Minister Qureshi should have had the courage to refuse to fly back to Washington to renegotiate the controversial anti-Pakistan clauses if he was not personally convinced.  That he did so merely to placate the powerful Pakistani military reflects poorly on his record.

Second, his son’s internship in Sen. Kerry’s office raises a legitimate question of a conflict of interest. Mr. Qureshi should have seen this one coming since he is known to be an upright politician by the standards of politicians in this country.

Let’s just hope that he lost Pakistan’s case on the Kerry-Lugar bill because of personal lack of conviction than a soft corner for Mr. Kerry.