Interesting and wroth reading analytical article in NYT.

GOVERNMENTS wade into treacherous waters when they compile lists of people who might cause their countries harm. As fears about Japanese-Americans and Communists have demonstrated in the past, predictions about individual behavior are often inaccurate, the motivations for list-making aren’t always noble and concerns about threats are frequently overblown.

So it might seem that current efforts to identify and track potential terrorists would be approached with caution. Yet the federal government’s main terrorist watch list has grown to at least 700,000 people, with little scrutiny over how the determinations are made or the impact on those marked with the terrorist label.

“If you’ve done the paperwork correctly, then you can effectively enter someone onto the watch list,” said Anya Bernstein, an associate professor at the SUNY Buffalo Law School and author of “The Hidden Costs of Terrorist Watch Lists,” published by the Buffalo Law Review in May. “There’s no indication that agencies undertake any kind of regular retrospective review to assess how good they are at predicting the conduct they’re targeting.”

What’s more, the government refuses to confirm or deny whether someone is on the list, officially called the Terrorist Screening Database, or divulge the criteria used to make the decisions — other than to say the database includes “individuals known or suspected to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism and terrorist activities.” 

Even less is known about the secondary watch lists that are derived from the main one, including the no-fly list (used to prevent people from boarding aircraft), the selectee and expanded selectee lists (used to flag travelers for extra screening at airport checkpoints), the TECS database (used to vet people entering or leaving the United States), the Consular Lookout and Support System (used to screen visa applications) and the known or suspected terrorists list (used by law enforcement in routine police encounters).

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/sunday-review/who-is-watching-the-watch-lists.html?hp

( Shared By Tahir Mahmood)

The United States and five other world powers reached a deal with Iran over its controversial nuclear program Sunday. The agreement sets stringent limits on Iran’s nuclear activities; in exchange, the country will get about $6 billion in unfrozen foreign assets and relief from sanctions. Some people think it’s a good deal, some think it’s bad deal, but everyone agrees it’s a big deal.

For people who have not been following every twist and turn of the Iranian nuclear dispute, which is just about everyone, this story can get overwhelming. There are the decades of history leading up to it, deeply contentious diplomacy by several countries that want very different things and, of course, the nuclear science of what Iran can and cannot actually build. It can be a lot to keep straight, not least because some of the most important details are disputed.

Here, then, are the most basic answers to your most basic questions. First, a disclaimer: This is not an exhaustive or definitive account of this very complicated story, just some background, written so that anyone can understand it.

1. What is Iran’s nuclear program?

This question is the entire conflict. Iran says its nuclear activities are peaceful, but a lot of countries worry that they’re cover for a nuclear weapons program. The dispute, on the most basic level, is over what sort of nuclear program Iran gets to have — if any at all — and what happens if it defies the world’s demands.

Iran has been developing nuclear fuel and technology for years, which it says is just for power plants and scientific research. They’ve got a few big facilities, some of which are out in the open and some of which are hidden away in underground bunkers. The program, and this is where it gets controversial, includes some stuff that would be awfully useful if Iran wanted to go a step beyond a peaceful program and develop a nuclear bomb.

2. So is Iran building a nuclear bomb or not?

It’s not clear. The United States and several other countries believe that Iran is trying to develop the technology and fissile material necessary to build a nuclear weapon. There’s an important distinction here: Western intelligence agencies have not concluded that Iran has decided to definitely build a bomb. Rather, they’ve reported lots of signs — secret facilities, weapons-related research programs — that suggest that Iran is trying to develop the technology and materials necessary to build a nuclear bomb very quickly. This is called “breakout capability,” as in Iran would have the ability to quickly “break out” into a full-fledged nuclear weapons state.

The United Nations’ nuclear watchdog hasn’t definitively concluded that Iran is doing this, but it has reported some very worrying signs and says it can’t state confidently that the program is peaceful. Iran has also dodged inspections and built secret facilities, which is not exactly reassuring anybody.

The world is so worried about Iran’s nuclear intentions that, starting in 2006, even China and Russia joined with the rest of the United Nations Security Council — a small, powerful body of world powers — in ordering Iran to “suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development.” Iran has not complied, insisting that its program is a point of national prestige and independence. It’s been punished severely with economic sanctions, including on its vast oil and gas industry.

The unresolved conflict over Iran’s nuclear program has left the once-wealthy country increasingly impoverished, harming especially its large middle class. It’s also bad for European economies, which are losing out on all the business they’d do with this large, resource-rich country. It’s terrified Iran’s neighbors, particularly Israel and Saudi Arabia, who are worried what Iran would do with a nuclear weapon. And it’s been a major part — but far from the only part — of Iran’s long-standing tension with the West, especially the United States, in which war is a remote but real possibility.

3. Wow, Iran’s nuclear program is causing some major problems, especially for them. Why do they insist on it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/11/25/9-questions-about-irans-nuclear-program-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask/

(The article describes the contradictions in Pakistani national and political attitudes towards their terrorist tormentors.
Nasik)

Four years ago, in the main street of Mingora, the largest town in Pakistan’s Swat Valley, I saw a man trying to make and sell kebabs. The coals weren’t catching fire, he was fanning them with a rolled-up newspaper, and the skewers were all over the place; it was quite obvious that the man was new to this type of work.

Swat had just been handed over to a man called Mullah Fazlullah, who had terrorized the valley in a bid to usher in his one and only version of Sharia law. He was trying to achieve this by running a very lively and illegal FM radio station and commanding a bunch of fighters from tribal areas, along with young sectarian zealots from the Punjab who specialized in blowing up girls’ schools and slitting the throats of Pakistani soldiers. They didn’t like dancers, so they pulled one out of her home and executed her in the bazaar. They also didn’t care much for barbershops, video stores, or women. Under Fazlullah’s regime, the main square in Mingora was known as Khooni Chowk—“Bloody Square”—because his fighters dumped their victims’ bodies there.

One may not agree with views of Ayesha Jalal, but it is worth listening her recent video touching the topics of Kashmir, Sovereignty and her findings on Partition. Below is the description attached to ‘YouTube’ video. The link to video is at the bottom.( F. Sheikh)

Ayesha Jalal, one of the most respected Pakistani historians, speaks on India-Pakistan relations. An interesting video with her interesting take on South Asian notion of ‘sovereignty’. This lecture was conducted by South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA). Those who are regular watchers of Zaid Hamid comedy would immediately recognize that these SAFMA people are the ones who are often branded as traitors and Indian agents by right wing Pakistani media.

By the way, she is the grandniece of the renowned Urdu fiction writer Saadat Hasan Manto. And she is married to Sugata Bose, a Hindu from India and the grandnephew of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and grandson of nationalist leader Sarat Chandra Bose. He is also her research partner. Together, they have written a book called Modern South Asia which is the first South Asian history book that has been written in joint collaboration between a Pakistani and an Indian. link to video;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUkrO9xGn20