World

Partly Sunny with Showers 12° London Hi 12°C / Lo 6°C

Hundreds of thousands flee Pakistan fighting

Associated Press

Refugees from Swat, Buner and Lower Dir scramble for tea rations in a relief camp in Mardan

Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images

Refugees from Swat, Buner and Lower Dir scramble for tea rations in a relief camp in Mardan

Pakistani jets screamed over a Taliban-controlled town today and bombed suspected militant positions as hundreds of thousands fled in terror and other trapped residents appealed for a pause in the fighting so they could escape.

A half a million people have either already left the Swat Valley and nearby districts or want to leave but can't because of the fighting, Pakistani officials and the UN say, bringing the number of people likely to be displaced due to anti-militant offensives across Pakistan's volatile northwest region to 1 million.

Pakistan has launched at least a dozen operations in the region near the Afghan border in recent years, but most ended inconclusively and after widespread destruction and significant civilian deaths.

The mountainous region remains a haven for al-Qa'ida and Taliban militants, foreign governments say.

To end one of those protracted offensives, the government signed a peace accord in Swat that provided for Islamic law there. But it began unraveling last month when Swat Taliban fighters moved into Buner, a neighboring district just 60 miles from Islamabad.

Following strong U.S. pressure, the Pakistani government launched its latest offensive, and the prime minister appealed for international assistance for the growing refugee crisis and vowed to defeat the militants.

Asking for Pakistanis to support the government and the army, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani pledged Thursday night to "eliminate the elements who have destroyed the peace and calm of the nation and wanted to take Pakistan hostage at gunpoint."

The military hailed signs of the public's mood shifting against the Taliban.

"The public have seen their real face," Army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said. "They realize their agenda goes much beyond Shariah (Islamic) courts. They have a design to expand."

Still, the pro-Western government will face a stiff task to keep a skeptical nation behind its security forces.

The mayor of Mardan, the main district to the south of the fighting, said an estimated 250,000 people had fled in recent days and that more were on the move. Of those, 4,500 were staying in camps, while the rest were with relatives or rented accommodation, he said.

Pakistani officials have said up to 500,000 are expected to leave.

On Friday, the UN refugee agency said that the provincial government estimates that between 150,000 and 200,000 people have arrived in safer areas of North West Frontier Province in the last few days and another 300,000 are on the move or want to leave but can't because of the fighting or curfews.

The exodus from Swat and other nearby districts adds to the more than 500,000 already displaced by fighting elsewhere in Pakistan's volatile border region since August 2008, said Ron Redmond, spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, in Geneva.

Government forces are fighting in three districts, stretching over some 400 square miles, but much of the fighting has been in the Swat Valley's main city of Mingora, a militant hub that was home to around 360,000 people before the insurgency two years ago.

Abbas said Friday that 140 militants had been killed in the last 24 hours, adding to around 150 already reported slain. He did give any figures for civilian deaths, but witness and local media say that noncombatants have been killed.

Tens of thousands of people remain trapped in Mingora. Some have said the Taliban are not allowing them to leave, perhaps because they want to use them as "human shields" and make the army unwilling to use force.

"We want to leave the city, but we cannot go out because of the fighting," said one resident, Hidayat Ullah. "We will be killed, our children will be killed, our women will be killed and these Taliban will escape."

"Kill terrorists, but don't harm us," he pleaded.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Dilemma.
[info]ron_broxted wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 11:14 am (UTC)
This boils down to a "something must be done" moment. In geopolitical terms Pakistan is too important to lose for the west (i.e America). Trying to cobble together agreements with various tribes and factions is essential but how? Corruption and nepotism are not unknown in Pakistan. How far can the U.S go in imposing a situation on a nuclear regional superpower? What will India do?
HRW, where art thou?
[info]schweigen2009 wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 05:19 pm (UTC)
Perhaps Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch executive director, and general expert on Asia, should encourage the international community to stop dithering and apply pressure on Pakistan to stop battling the Taliban. He should also remind Pakistan that there will be a reckoning. Investigations into the conduct of the conflict by both sides will take place. The truth will come out. A commission of inquiry will be established.

After all, this could also be a scene out of Dante's Inferno.
[info]ibnsana wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 08:41 pm (UTC)
The reckoning or investigation would not really be threatening to anyone, after what israel got awway with in Gaza
US always start wars
[info]moha21 wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 08:54 pm (UTC)
US didn't believe that taliban and pak government agreed on to implement sharia law in swat, so USA is against peace which is not serving their interests, always selfish and they are behind this war and disaster.
Expanding conflagration
[info]jaded63 wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 11:01 pm (UTC)
The one thing that is absolutely certain is that we are seeing an expanding conflagration which is already a near civil war in Pakistan, and which will inevitably become totally fused with the Afghan war. We must therefore very soon be faced with the unpalatable choice between a greatly increased commitment of forces - which, given our pitifully small and overstretched standing army must mean we undergo a degree of national military mobilisation, including conscription - or, in practical terms, capitulation and defeat via a withdrawal of our forces.

Given the lack of political will already abundantly evident from this government, the latter outcome seems the more probable. The consequences of such defeat will be of no small significance. Whatever happens, the government's present piecemeal and equivocal approach is unsustainable.
Re: Expanding conflagration
[info]floppsiefrog wrote:
Saturday, 9 May 2009 at 12:00 am (UTC)
Funny you should mention conscription, especially when there have been mumblings in America about reinstating the draft. Quite frankly, I don't like the idea of our boys dying to support American's hegemonic ambition to control the production and distribution of Middle East and Central Asia energy resources. Indeed, the entire conflagration is completely immoral.
Re: Expanding conflagration
[info]jaded63 wrote:
Saturday, 9 May 2009 at 05:31 am (UTC)
I don't think the Taliban are very moral, and if you are female I would be surprised if you found them to be appealing, given their severely misogynistic views. Theirs is a perverted morality. I am more concerned about the spread of hegemonic Islamic fundamentalism than I am about our main ally being the main controller of Middle Eastern and Central Asia energy resources. Come to think of it, we'd be in a right pickle if that control was lost. Maybe you are too young to remember things like the three day week and petrol rationing in the '50s. I am not. The dire straights we were in then would be nothing compared to the effect of Islamic fundamentalists controlling our main energy resources.

However, the main reason we are fighting this war is because of the threat posed to us by Islamic fundamentalists being able to use Afghanistan and Pakistan as a launchpad for attacks on the West. In realpolitik terms, the loss of Afghanistan to Islamic fundamentalism is untenable, and the loss of Pakistan would be catastrophic.

Pakistan should not stop until Taliban obliterated
[info]richardm30 wrote:
Friday, 8 May 2009 at 11:02 pm (UTC)
This is the best solution - Pakistan battling their own Islamic militants. At least that won't cost more Western lives. Pakistan is paying the price for doing a deal with the devil. This is what you get when you give the Taliban a millimetre. You simply cannot reason with mad dogs. Pakistan should not stop until all the male Taliban have been obliterated. Whatever cost. At last then they (Pakistan) will have a good change at being able to build a decent and fair society.
No help and no wisdom from those in power, only corruption
[info]lee_ji_me wrote:
Monday, 11 May 2009 at 07:33 am (UTC)
Here we see hundreds of thousands of ordinary Pakistani people running AWAY from the Taleban - and they are still Muslims. The majority of people in Pakistan do not want war or strife - just a good life. It must be the same in Afghanistan and Iraq and Palastine. Why or why then is there war? How does the minority of evil doers get so much power? There is something fishy about all this at the end of the day and don't tell me that the Pakistani government and a country that has atomic weapons at their disposal cannot protect these people and let them stay in their home lands. Where is the priority? The fat cats of governments, military and UN organisations are all part of this corrupt and filthy network of war and economics and dirty power and religious manipulation. Nothing has changed in the Middle East or in this region even after all the war and bloodshed. The corruption is deep as the core of the earth.
One example -Tony Blair instigated a war and blood bath in Iraq - millions have lost their lives - he now makes millions himself giving talks and living the high life? Where is the good that he did? He misused his power and lives off it. The same with all leaders of the current world.

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date