Pakistan army denies abducting British activist

The army is not behind the abduction of Gul Bukhari, Major General Asif Ghafoor, chief military spokesman, told reporters late Friday. (AP)
Updated 09 June 2018
Follow

Pakistan army denies abducting British activist

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s army has denied abducting a British-Pakistani activist known for criticizing the military, in an incident that prompted a wave of condemnation and increased fears of a crackdown on free speech.
Gul Bukhari, 52, was detained for several hours by unknown men in the eastern city of Lahore late Tuesday, one day after the military held a press conference warning that it is monitoring citizens who criticize Pakistan.
She was released early Wednesday.
Pakistan has a history of enforced disappearances, often of people who criticize the security establishment — largely seen as a red line few dare cross. The kidnappings have become increasingly brazen in recent years.
Bukhari is known for advocating human rights online and is also a prominent columnist whose articles are often highly critical of the military and its policies.
When news of her abduction broke it caused a furor, with widespread calls for her release and fingers broadly pointed at the military.
The British High Commission expressed “concern” at the incident as activists called on the army, which is the most powerful institution in Pakistan and has ruled the country for nearly half its 70-year history, to tolerate dissent.




Gul Bukhari. (Photo courtesy: Gul Bukhari/Twitter)

“(The) army is not behind the abduction of Gul Bukhari,” Major General Asif Ghafoor, chief military spokesman, told reporters late Friday.
“We actually want a thorough investigation in this case,” he said.
The military routinely says it is not involved in enforced disappearances, but the statement was a rare on-the-record denial.
It came as the powerful army is facing growing criticism of its policies within Pakistan, from disappearances to the use of militant proxies in Afghanistan and India.
A burgeoning civil rights movement by the country’s ethnic Pashtuns and recent comments from former prime minister Nawaz Sharif have increasingly criticized the generals and caused uproar in the country.
Journalists have spoken of “pressure” not to cover the criticisms, adding to an atmosphere of repression.
During a wide-ranging press conference Monday that appeared to address the mounting criticism, the military issued a veiled warning to online critics, saying it has the capacity to monitor social media accounts.
Ghafoor briefly flashed an image on screen showing what appeared to be Twitter handles and names, including of at least one prominent journalist, but refused to elaborate further, fueling the outcry over free speech.
Late Friday he said they “did not intend to implicate journalists.”
Activists remained skeptical of the military’s role in disappearances and curtailing of free speech.
“If they did not do it, then they need to come up with an action, a plan of enquiry (to investigate) who did,” said Shahzad Ahmed, head of Bytes for All, a think-tank working for digital security and free speech.
“So far the fingers are being pointed toward them.”


Congress taking first votes on Iran war as debate rages about US goals

Updated 6 sec ago
Follow

Congress taking first votes on Iran war as debate rages about US goals

  • The US Senate is headed toward a vote on President Donald Trump’s decision to embark on a war against Iran
  • It’s an extraordinary test in Congress for a conflict that has rapidly spread across the Middle East with no clear US exit strategy
WASHINGTON: The US Senate is headed toward a vote Wednesday on President Donald Trump’s decision to embark on a war against Iran, an extraordinary test in Congress for a conflict that has rapidly spread across the Middle East with no clear US exit strategy.
The legislation, known as a war powers resolution, gives lawmakers an opportunity to demand congressional approval before any further attacks are carried out. The Senate resolution and a similar bill being voted on in the House later this week face unlikely paths through the Republican-controlled Congress and would almost certainly be vetoed by Trump even if they were to pass.
Nonetheless, the votes marked a weighty moment for lawmakers. Their decisions on the five-day-old war — which Trump entered without congressional approval — could determine the fates of US military members, countless other lives and the future of the region.
“Wars without clear objectives do not remain small. They get bigger, bloodier, longer and more expensive,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer at a news conference Tuesday. “This is not a necessary war. It’s a war of choice.”
Trump administration scrambles for congressional support
After launching a surprise attack against Iran on Saturday, Trump has scrambled to win support for a conflict that Americans of all political persuasions were already wary of entering. Trump administration officials have been a frequent presence on Capitol Hill this week as they try to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control.
“We are not going to put American troops in harm’s way,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters in a raucous news conference at the Capitol Tuesday.
But six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait.
Trump has also not ruled out deploying US ground troops. He has said he is hoping to end the bombing campaign within a few weeks, but his goals for the war have shifted from regime change to stopping Iran from developing nuclear capabilities to crippling its navy and missile programs.
“I think they are achieving great success with what they’ve done so far,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday, adding that what happens next in the country will be “largely up to the Iranian people.”
Almost all Republican senators were readying to vote Wednesday against the war powers resolution to halt military action, but a number still expressed hesitation at the idea of deploying troops on the ground in Iran.
“I don’t think the American people want to see troops on the ground,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, as he exited a classified briefing Tuesday. He added that Trump administration officials “left open that possibility,” but it wasn’t an option they were emphasizing.
Lawmakers to go on record
The votes in Congress this week represented potentially consequential markers of just where lawmakers stand on the war as they look ahead to midterm elections and the consequences of the conflict.
“Nobody gets to hide and give the president an easy pass or an end-run around the Constitution,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, the Virginia Democrat leading the war powers resolution. “Everybody’s got to declare whether they’re for this war or against it.”
Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts that Trump has entered or threatened to enter. This one, however, is different.
Unlike Trump’s military campaigns against alleged drug boats or even Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, the attack on Iran represents an open-ended conflict that is already ricocheting across the region. For Republicans who are used to operating in a political party dominated by Trump and his promises of keeping the US out of foreign entanglements, the moment represented a bit of whiplash.
“War is ugly, it always has been ugly, but we’re taking out a regime that has been trying to attack us for quite some time,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican.
Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has long pushed Trump to engage overseas, argued that the widening conflict represented an opportunity for Arab and European countries to join in the fight against Iran and the militant groups it supports.
“I don’t mind people being on record as to whether or not they think this is a good idea,” he told reporters, but also argued that too much power over the military was ceded to Congress in the War Powers Act, which mandates that presidents must withdraw troops from a conflict within 90 days if there is no congressional authorization.
House vote looms
On the other side of the Capitol, House leaders were also readying for an intense debate over the war followed by a vote Thursday.
“I do believe we have the votes to defeat it, I certainly hope we do,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said after an all-member briefing on Tuesday night.
Meanwhile, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said he expected a strong showing from Democrats in favor of the war powers resolution.
As lawmakers emerged from a closed-door briefing Tuesday night, Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, implored the Trump administration to “come to Congress” and speak directly to the American people about the rationale for the war.
His voice filled with emotion as he said, “Our young men and women’s lives are on the line.”