PDA

View Full Version : The US & Gulf states colonizing Pakistan?



hulaku
08-26-2009, 06:06 AM
Our leaders' voluntary submission to colonisation

Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Shireen M Mazari

First there has been the threat to the ordinary citizen of an effective occupation of Pakistan by the US, especially for those living in what is becoming a threateningly close proximity to the droves of Americans arriving in form or another. Before the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was given orders to the contrary, press reports of August 6 show that its spokesman, Mr Basit, on August 5, at the Karachi Press Club, had already given out the fact of the 1,000 marines coming for the protection of the new, imperial US embassy in Islamabad.

Now we are seeing houses being barricaded for US personnel all across the capital and we know of the 300 plus 'military trainers' already ensconced in Tarbela. In addition we have the notorious Blackwater (now hiding under a new label, Xe Worldwide) and the rather obvious CIA front-company, Creative Associates International Inc (CAII), operating not only in Peshawar but now in Islamabad also it transpires – and a recent reflection of this was the sealing off of the road in Super Market last week right in front of a school! Whatever the US embassy gives out or the terrified Pakistani leadership echoes, the reality is that there is a questionable and increasingly threatening US armed presence in Pakistan and this may be augmented soon with an ISAF/NATO presence. Incidentally, to add to the suspicions of the US presence, reports are coming in of around 3,000 Hummer vehicles, fully loaded, awaiting transportation from Port Qasim.

Will some of these go to the Pentagon's assassination squads, who may take up residence in some off the barricaded Islamabad houses and with whom the present US commander in Afghanistan was directly associated? Ordinary officials at Pakistani airports have also been muttering their concerns over chartered flights flying in Americans whose entry is not recorded – even the flight crews are not checked for visas and so there is now no record-keeping of exactly how many Americans are coning into or going out of Pakistan. Incidentally the CAII's Craig Davis who was deported has now returned to Peshawar! And let us not be fooled by the cry that numbers reflect friendship since we know what numbers meant to Soviet satellites.

Now another threat, in the making for some time, is becoming more overt. Pakistan's precious and fertile agricultural land is up for grabs to the highest foreign bidder. Pakistan is not alone in being targeted thus by rich countries with little or no food resources. The UN has already condemned this purchase of agricultural land as a form of neo-colonialism. Over the past five years in a hardly-noticed wave of investment, rich agricultural land and forests in poor countries are being snapped up by buyers from cash-rich countries. Leading this grab of poor country resources are the rapidly industrialising states and the oil-rich countries who have, between 2006-2009, either directly through governments or through sovereign wealth funds and companies, already grabbed or are in the process of grabbing between 37 to 49 million acres of developing countries' farmland (a July 2009 report by Robert Schubert of Food and Water Watch).

Wealthy countries like Japan and South Korea are acquiring farmlands abroad for food security while oil-rich countries are seeking cheap water and cultivated crops to be shipped home. The land buyers from the oil-rich arid countries are seeking water as much as land because by buying or leasing land with sufficient water, they can divert their own domestic irrigation water to municipal water supplies.

The foreign land purchases destabilise food security since land given to foreign investors cannot be used to produce food for local communities – the foreign investors' intent being to take the food back to their own food-scarce countries. Many of the land purchases comprise tens of thousands of acres which are then turned into single-crop farms – and these dwarf the small-scale farms common in the developing world, where nearly nine out of ten farms (85 per cent) are less than five acres. Such land grabs have now been recognised as harming the local communities by dislodging smallholder farmers, aggravating rural poverty and food insecurity.

With Gulf countries importing 60 per cent of their food on average, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are leading the investments into Asia and Africa to secure supplies of cereals, meat and vegetables. The rise in demand for food imports for the GCC comes at a time when exportable agricultural surplus worldwide has declined.

How does all this impact Pakistan? Pakistan has rich agricultural land and adequate water although the latter's distribution has been subject to political machinations. There has also been a seemingly deliberate effort by successive ruling elites to undermine the country's agricultural potential and nowhere is this more brazenly evident than at present with power outages preventing crucial water supply through tubewells; and many rich lands being converted into housing colonies! Then we have had artificially created sugar and wheat shortages – 'artificial' because for the last few years our wheat and sugarcane crops have been bountiful. As for the wonderful local fruit, that is also being diverted to feed external populations through exports that are not only depriving the locals of their land's bounty but also raising local prices so only the rich elite can consume what is left.

Now it has come out that we are selling land to the Gulf states, thereby undermining our local agriculture further. Abraaj Capital and other UAE entities have acquired 800,000 acres of farmland in Pakistan (we have learnt no lessons from the sale of the KESC and the PTCL). Qatar Livestock is investing $1 billion in corporate farms in Pakistan. But all this produce will be taken out, so the argument that this foreign investment will bring in new technologies into our agricultural sector does not hold. In any case, one does not have to sell one's land to foreign forces to acquire new technology which is available in the open market and the government can help local farmers acquire it.

Not surprisingly, the Gulf countries are pleased with Pakistan's rulers bending over backwards to accommodate their needs at the expense of the ordinary Pakistani – for none of the food produced on these lands will be available cheaply for Pakistanis; it will go to feed the Gulf populations. Gulf countries are happy because their imported food bill will cost 20-25 per cent less, positively impacting on their present high inflation rate. We may import this food from them for a price, just as our government has now decided to import sugar from the UAE. Of course the UAE itself imports sugar so the absurdity should be abundantly clear to all, including our profiteers!

In the visibly servile mindset of our leaders, instead of offering incentives on a similar scale to local farmers, Islamabad is offering legal and tax concessions, with legislative cover, to foreign investors in the form of specialised agricultural and livestock 'free zones' and may also introduce legislation to exempt such investors from government-imposed tax bans. The most worrisome aspect of such wheeling-dealing is the government's decision to develop a new security force of 100,000 men spread across the four provinces to ensure stability of the Arab investments. This will cost the Pakistani state around $2 billion in terms of training and salaries and the real fear is that this force will be used to forcibly eject local small farmers from their lands. Concerns have been further heightened because no labour laws will be applicable to corporate agricultural companies and there will be no sales tax or customs duties on import of agricultural machinery by these investors. Nor will their dividends be taxed and 100 per cent remittances of capital and profits will be permitted. So where is there even an iota of advantage for the ordinary Pakistani as opposed to the rulers?

With the US increasingly occupying Pakistan with their covert and overt armed presence, and the Gulf states taking over our rich agricultural lands our rulers are voluntarily making us a colony again – as we were under the British who used our men to fight their wars and our cheap labour to ship the finished produce back to Britain! Have we come full circle after 62 years of our creation?

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=194868


An article from one of Pakistans well known defence analyst. With analysts like her its no wonder that Pakistan is where it is today.

Take it with a pinch of salt.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=194868

muck
08-26-2009, 07:02 AM
Right. The first settlers are about to arrive within a week.

DaveDash
08-26-2009, 07:32 AM
Paranoia much?

1000 Marines for the U.S. Embassy? lol wtf.

Dragonscript
08-26-2009, 11:16 AM
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usmc/msgbn.htm


The battalion commander reports to the Director of Operations (PO) at Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC). MSG Battalion currently fields over 1000 Marines at 121 Detachments organized into seven regional MSG companies and located in over 105 countries.

I doubt that the embassy in Pakistan is going to have 1,000 Marines to itself.

pg_ord
08-26-2009, 11:38 AM
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usmc/msgbn.htm

I doubt that the embassy in Pakistan is going to have 1,000 Marines to itself.
Marines not coming under cover of embassy expansion (http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-marines-not-coming-under-cover-of-expansion-of-embassy-malik-rs-02)

ISLAMABAD: Federal Interior Minster Rehman Malik has said the arrival of US marines is not part of the expansion of US embassy in Islamabad.
They are coming alright but not for expansion.


On reports of establishment of office of US agency BlackWater in Peshawar and its planning to conduct operations, the minister said that US goods go to Kabul via Pakistan and the government charges on these goods under an agreement and the US authorities can hire agencies to protect their goods, it is the part of that agreement.
Not to mention PMCs already present.

deagle
08-26-2009, 12:07 PM
do we even have military bases within pakistan, let alone settlements that make up the definition of "colony". the reporter/journalist must be an idiot.

tyovan
08-26-2009, 12:24 PM
A threat against the Land of the Pure?!
Somehow those evil Hindus and Juice must be involved!

hulaku
08-26-2009, 12:33 PM
A threat against the Land of the Pure?!
Somehow those evil Hindus and Juice must be involved!

For a change this time the evil Arabs are also involvedp-)

Dragonscript
08-26-2009, 02:09 PM
Marines not coming under cover of embassy expansion (http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-marines-not-coming-under-cover-of-expansion-of-embassy-malik-rs-02)

They are coming alright but not for expansion.




On reports of establishment of office of US agency BlackWater in Peshawar and its planning to conduct operations, the minister said that US goods go to Kabul via Pakistan and the government charges on these goods under an agreement and the US authorities can hire agencies to protect their goods, it is the part of that agreement.

When they say "agency", i assume they mean private company.

pg_ord
08-26-2009, 02:13 PM
When they say "agency", i assume they mean private company.

Or a "front company" for "the agency" p-)

PeterG
08-26-2009, 04:12 PM
Yes, the US can't wait to get their hands on 160 million muslims that are on the brink of civil war, and their third world nation with 0 oil and economy generally down the toilet. The jews are in on it too.

pg_ord
08-26-2009, 05:46 PM
Yes, the US can't wait to get their hands on 160 million muslims that are on the brink of civil war, and their third world nation with 0 oil and economy generally down the toilet. The jews are in on it too.
Dont you know? :bash: The christian army of infidels are fighting the crusades against the purest defenders of true islam.
/sarc off

observer1
08-26-2009, 06:39 PM
You think it's a stupid article yet you post it?

:cantbeli:

pg_ord
08-26-2009, 06:46 PM
You think it's a stupid article yet you post it?

:cantbeli:
The lady is well known for being the mouth piece of military..... not to mention is a senior advisor for well known political party..... she at one time used to head P'stan Institute of Strategic Studies (P.I.S.S) .... now called I.S.S.I (http://www.issi.org.pk/).

OrangeWolf
08-26-2009, 06:58 PM
I said it before and I say it again Pakistan is the worst ally we have. If we could somehow (I know, not very plausible) get rid of their nukes they'd probably be considered much and much less of a friend. The most powerful thing Pakistan can do is destabilizing neighboring places and harboring terrorists, contrary to doing anything about the ****hole economy and government they have.

Pakistanis must be happy to have Hindus (and to a lesser extent Jews and well pretty much any civilized person), they at least have someone to blame and get paranoid about for their own uncountable ****-ups. How typical.

Danielotu
08-27-2009, 02:16 AM
Marines not coming under cover of embassy expansion (http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-marines-not-coming-under-cover-of-expansion-of-embassy-malik-rs-02)

They are coming alright but not for expansion.


Not to mention PMCs already present.

PMCs in Pakistan? That's a new one. But will the government of Pakistan allow that.

pg_ord
08-27-2009, 02:22 AM
PMCs in Pakistan? That's a new one. But will the government of Pakistan allow that.
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/14-patient-capital-and-power-zj-05
P'stanis dont have choice ... army as usual mints money by playing both sides.... who do you think pays for the Army officers bungalows??:roll:
when has in its existence has P'stan have any kind of economy apart from hand outs as a rentier state??

khalsa1699
08-28-2009, 02:35 AM
ISLAMABAD: The United States embassy said on Thursday the Marine House to be constructed on its premises would be a $5 million bomb-proof facility to accommodate less than 20 guards and the $112.5 million figure quoted from the US budget documents was a ‘misinterpretation’.

‘About $5 million would be spent on the construction of the Marine House. It would be bomb proof. The amount being spent is high, but not widely excessive and the maximum number of Marines assigned here would be less than 20,’ said US Ambassador Anne W. Patterson at a media briefing that was beginning of what was described as ‘deeper engagement with media’ to counter the bad press America was getting in Pakistan.

The ambassador tried to lay to rest a controversy about the number of Marines being based in Islamabad. The controversy was sparked by reports about an allocation of $112.5 million by the State Department for residential quarters for the Marines.

Ms Patterson said that from the $112.5 million allocation, $5 million was for Marine quarters, $53.5 for housing infrastructure, $18 million for improvement of general services office area, and $36 million for temporary duty quarters and community support facilities.

The duties of Marines, she said, would be to guard the embassy building and classified material inside and there weren’t any sinister designs about which fears were being expressed by certain quarters.

The ambassador was visibly shocked when someone asked if the embassy expansion was for espionage. She said: ‘I’m speechless. To spy on Pakistan we don’t need a big US embassy. And we don’t need to spy either’.

About projected increase in the embassy staff strength, she said there were at present 250 regular diplomatic staff, 200 visiting American staff on short-term duties and 1,000 local personnel, while there were plans to add another about 500 personnel over the next three years, half of them would be Pakistanis.

The embassy expansion, she said, was a reflection of the long-term commitment that the US intended to have with Pakistan. Moreover, she said, quadrupling of the social, economic and military assistance that would touch $4 billion a year over the next 18 months, necessitated staff increase.

Ms Patterson said the US embassy needed to improve its public outreach and dispel misgivings. She said she was working on plans to bring back families of diplomatic staff based in Pakistan to increase people-to-people contact.

Pakistan has been a ‘non-family’ station for US diplomats since 2002. The return of the families, she stressed, would be a ‘huge element of the outreach’.

‘The security has lately dramatically improved and I think we can build a case for the return of the families,’ she said, adding that she wanted to bring them back as quickly as possible.

The ambassador said she intended to speak and write to the Pakistani politicians on the embassy expansion plans.

http://beta.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/07-no-plans-of-increasing-marine-presence-us-ambassador-ha-05

khalsa1699
08-30-2009, 07:31 AM
Gulf States 'more covert' about farmland deals
(*******)

30 August 2009
DUBAI - Gulf states seeking farmland for food security are going underground as the deals, seen by many as land grabs, risk tarnishing their reputation, an independent consultant advising the region on the deals said on Sunday.
Gulf Arab countries, heavily reliant on food imports, have been buying farmland in developing nations to ensure food security, following spikes in basic commodity prices.
“The media has really managed to put a negative spin on these farmland deals, that’s why we are seeing many Gulf countries being less open about them,” said Huma Fakhar, chairwoman of Market @ccess Promotion, an international consultancy advising Gulf states on agricultural issues.
“Since the deals started getting a bad reputation, the owners of the companies no longer disclose their identity,” she told *******.
Foreign land acquisitions have provoked opposition from some sectors and from many farmers in developing nations.
In Madagascar, an attempt by South Korea’s Daewoo Logistics to lease land larger than Qatar to grow food for export contributed to the unpopularity of former leader Marc Ravalomanana, who was toppled in March.
In April, the United Nations expressed concern that farmers’ rights in developing nations could be compromised as rich countries buy farmland to secure food supplies.
“But the truth is there could be a win-win situation, since many of these developing countries offering the land don’t have the money to increase their produce,” said Fakhar.
Over the past couple of years a number of Gulf investors have been leasing farmland in Pakistan’s Punjab and managed to increase employment and agricultural produce of around 200,000 acres, said Fakhar.
“I find it a true shame in some cases where these deals are stalled due to having this negative image, when at the end, the developing country is a beneficiary,” she said.
Gulf countries are now targeting land in Egypt, Ethiopia, Georgia, Angola, Sudan and Ghana, said Fakhar. “And I am personally aware of serious talks between Saudi Arabia and Ghana about buying farmland,” she said.
So far, foreign investors have acquired some 15-20 million hectares of farmland in poorer countries since 2006, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute.
“The point is these deals will keep happening, but the way they are happening now is just more covert,” said Fakhar.
http://khaleejtimes.com/Displayarticle08.asp?section=biztalk&xfile=/data/biztalk/2009/August/biztalk_August55.xml