‘You can’t put a gun to my head and make me like Tendulkar’

After coming under fire for several days, former Pakistan speedster Shoaib Akhtar shot back at critics in India and beyond, saying he could not be forced into praising India’s batting legend Sachin Tendulkar.
“I have my personal favourites which include Viv Richard, Brian Lara and Imran Khan and I can take nothing away from the greatness of Sachin Tendulkar. But you can’t put a gun to my head and force me to like him. For me, Viv Richards remains the greatest batsman and he won more matches for West Indies. This is my opinion and I stand by it,” Akhtar said in an interview with an Indian news channel as the storm created by the launch of his autobiography “Controversially Yours” continued.
He also tore into former Pakistan and Indian players saying they were towing the lines of their employers in criticizing him “for a few bucks.”
“I am sick of clarifying my statements about Tendulkar. I never said he was a coward or scared of me. If these people had put in the effort of reading my book, they would realize I was talking about a specific day and a specific test played in Pakistan. He was struggling with a tennis elbow and our strategy was to target him with short balls. He got struck a couple of times and on the head in Karachi and walked away from me. I felt he was uncomfortable and scared at that moment. That is what I felt and I’ll stick to it. Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid when they played against me did not win, so to me they were not match-winners. Don’t buy my book, borrow it from someone and read what I have said, they are facts and incidents,” he said.
Shifting his focus to Pakistan cricket and specifically Wasim Akram and Ijaz Butt he claimed the duo needed to look at their character before making statements.
“Wasim Akram…there can only be one. But he needs to look at his own past. He was fined by a court for his involvement in match-fixing and even had a player’s revolt against him. He was abusive and had a bad attitude. What position is he in to say anything to me? For me even if a person’s name comes up in something slightly related to fixing, I lose respect. Shoaib Malik’s name came up too and I don’t respect him anymore.”

Pakistan Cricket Board Chairman (PCB), Ijaz Butt, who had recently called Akhtar a madcap and termed his statements as “bullshit”, also copped some flak.

“A person who responded to the match-fixing allegations against Pakistan by accusing the English players of match-fixing cannot be taken seriously. He is old and I don’t think a person of his caliber should be acting like the way he does.”

Akhtar also responded to suggestions that he was breaking the “unspoken code” between teammates by saying his book was his frank opinion and that it was meant to be a learning experience for future Pakistan cricketers and even the management.

To a conclusive question about what India needed to do to be a better fast-bowling unit he said, “The attitude is missing. When they run in they must strike fear in the hearts of batsmen.”

“Whether I was unfit, had back niggles or was limping, I ran in gave everything.

“Additionally, India needs to get on the road, get a group of about 50 fast bowlers and put them in the fast bowling academy.”

Pakistan never backed Haqqani network: ISI chief

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s intelligence chief on Thursday denied US accusations that the country supports the Haqqani network, an Afghan militant group blamed for an attack on the American embassy in Kabul.
“There are other intelligence networks supporting groups who operate inside Afghanistan. We have never paid a penny or provided even a single bullet to the Haqqani network,” Lieutenant-General Ahmed Shuja Pasha told Reuters after meeting political leaders over heavily strained US-Pakistani ties.
Pasha, one of the most powerful men in the South Asian nation, told the all-party gathering that US military action against insurgents in Pakistan would be unacceptable and the army would be capable of responding, local media said.
But he later said the reports were “baseless”.
Pakistan has long faced US demands to attack militants on its side of the border with Afghanistan, but pressure has grown since the top US military officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, accused Pasha’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate of supporting a Sept. 13 attack on the US mission in Kabul.
The dozens of political parties that participated in Thursday’s meeting rejected the allegations against state links to violent militants in a joint declaration. “The Pakistani nation affirms its full solidarity and support for the armed forces of Pakistan,” they said.
The Obama administration appears to be trying to smoothe things over with Pakistan even as it struggles with mounting frustration with Islamabad and seeks to curb speculation about divisions in its ranks.
As some US officials appear to distance themselves, Mullen, who steps down this week, said he stood by the tone and content of his comments.
“I phrased it the way I wanted it to be phrased,” he said in an interview aired on Thursday.
He said the ISI was giving the Haqqani group financial and logistical support and “sort of free passage in the (border) safe haven.”
“They can’t turn it off overnight. I’m not asserting that the Pak mil or the ISI has complete control over the Haqqanis. But the Haqqanis run that safe haven. They’re also a home to al Qaeda in that safe haven,” he told National Public Radio.
The attacks threaten to become a major obstacle to US hopes of withdrawing smoothly from Afghanistan.
White House spokesman Jay Carney said that the relationship with Pakistan was “complicated but very important.”
“There’s no question that we have disagreements, complications in our relationship and we speak openly and candidly with our Pakistani counterparts about those,” he said.
Patience Wearing Thin
Support is growing in the US Congress for expanding US military action in Pakistan beyond drone strikes against militants, said Senator Lindsey Graham, an influential Republican voice on foreign policy and military affairs.
Islamabad is reluctant to go after the Haqqanis — even though the United States provides billions of dollars in aid — saying its troops are stretched fighting Taliban insurgents.
Pakistan says it has sacrificed more lives than any of the countries that joined the “war on terror” after the Sept. 11 attacks by Islamist militants on the United States in 2001.
Pakistan’s military faced withering public criticism after a surprise US raid that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a garrison town not far from Islamabad in May.
A similar US operation against militants in North Waziristan on the Afghan border, where American officials say the Haqqanis are based, would be another humiliation for the powerful army.
Graham said in an interview with Reuters that US lawmakers might support military options beyond drone strikes that have been going on for years inside Pakistani territory, including using US bomber planes within Pakistan. He added that he did not advocate sending in US ground troops.
“I would say when it comes to defending American troops, you don’t want to limit yourself,” Graham said.
The US Treasury Department on Thursday announced new sanctions on five individuals it said were linked to “the most dangerous terrorist organizations operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” including the Haqqani network.
But it stopped short — despite growing political pressure at home — of officially designating the Haqqani network a terrorist group.
Pakistan was designated a major non-Nato ally by the United States for its support of coalition military operations in Afghanistan after 9/11.
But their relationship has been dogged by mistrust. Although regarded as critical to US efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, Pakistan is often seen from Washington as an unreliable partner.
Following US accusations that some in the Pakistani government have aided anti-US militants, Congress is reevaluating its 2009 promise to triple non-military aid to Pakistan to a total of $7.5 billion over five years.
That aid came on top of billions in security assistance provided since 2001, which Washington is also rethinking.

Afghan insurgent attacks falling, says US-led coalition

KABUL: International forces in Afghanistan have released new data showing violence trending downward in their favor, only a day after the UN reported considerably more clashes and other attacks per month than last year.
The quick scheduling of the news conference to unveil the statistics underscored Nato’s sensitivity about how the war is perceived back home as the US and other nations start to withdraw some forces with an eye toward pulling all combat troops out by the end of 2014.
Nato’s statistics, released Thursday, show that insurgent attacks in the first eight months of the year were down two per cent compared with the same period last year.
The UN report, by contrast, found that the monthly average number of clashes and other attacks was running nearly 40 per cent higher than last year.
The UN study measured not only Taliban attacks but also assaults by Nato and Afghan forces on insurgents; it did not provide a breakdown between the two.
The coalition cited methodological differences between the two surveys: The UN report counted a wide range of security incidents that the Nato report did not, including arrests and seizures of weapons caches.
Nevertheless, both sets of figures confirm that Taliban fighters continue to display resilience despite US claims of advances against the insurgents in their southern strongholds.
The militants have opened new fronts in the north and west and have stepped up attacks in the east, including high-profile suicide bombings inside the heavily secured capital, Kabul.
That resilience renews questions about whether the Afghan government and its Western allies have a solid grip on security, and whether the Afghan forces can ever secure the nation by themselves.
In a briefing at Nato headquarters in Kabul, the coalition said the Taliban were relying more on roadside bombs to fight the war instead of shooting at better-armed international troops.
Roadside bomb activity, which includes both explosions and attempted bombings, rose 25 per cent in the eight-month period compared with last year.
Direct-fire attacks from insurgents fell by 30 per cent in June through August compared to the same period last year.
”The actual enemy-initiated attacks are down,” said German Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, a spokesman for the coalition. ”That is what we are observing as an indicator that actually violence trends are going down in our favor.”
The coalition defines ”enemy-initiated attacks” as all militant actions, such as direct and indirect fire, shooting at aircraft from the ground, roadside bombings and mine strikes. Potential or attempted attacks by militants are not included in this figure.
Since May of this year, the monthly number of these attacks has been lower than the same month in 2010, something not seen since 2007, the coalition said.
Moreover, the coalition said that in 17 of the past 22 weeks, these attacks were lower than the same week of last year.
”The important thing is that we are looking at a decrease overall in comparison to last year … with a higher number of troops” in the country, Jacobson said.
Coalition officials at the briefing said the international force expected a 17 per cent to 30 per cent increase in insurgent-initiated attacks this year partly because of the 10,000 to 25,000 additional coalition forces and 60,000 more Afghan security forces compared with 2010.
In the first eight months of the year, 405 international troops were killed in Afghanistan —16 per cent fewer than the 483 who died in the same period last year, according to a tally by The Associated Press.
Jacobson said the coalition and the UN need to put their reports side-by-side to find out how the data is being compiled.
”This doesn’t mean there is controversy or there is a conflict,” he said. ”It just means that we are looking at certain incidents from a certain angle and different perspective.”
Staffan de Mistura, the UN envoy to Afghanistan, also insisted there was no conflict between the different assessments.
He told reporters after a UN Security Council meeting Thursday that the situation in Afghanistan had improved ”in a purely military way,” but at the same time there has been an increase in civilian casualties.
In a midyear report, the UN said 1,462 Afghan civilians lost their lives in the crossfire of the battle between Taliban insurgents and Afghan, US and Nato forces.
During the first half of last year, 1,271 Afghan civilians were killed, mostly by roadside bombs.
That UN report said airstrikes conducted by the US-led coalition remained the leading cause of civilian deaths by pro-government forces.
In the first six months of the year, 79 civilian deaths were attributed to air strikes —up 14 per cent from the same period last year, the UN report said.

Pakistan must eliminate militant safe havens, says Clinton

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday renewed calls on Pakistan to eliminate safe havens that militants use to launch attacks into Afghanistan, while calling for better US-Pakistani ties.
“We’re certainly making clear that we want to see an end to safe havens and any kind of support from anywhere for terrorists inside Pakistan,” Clinton told reporters.
“And we also want to continue to work to put our relationship (with Pakistan) on a stronger footing,” the chief US diplomat said as US-Pakistani ties appeared worse than ever.
The Pakistani government and opposition leaders on Thursday closed ranks against increasing US pressure for action against the Haqqani network, refusing to be pressured into doing more in the war on terror.
The group, allegedly based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan tribal region, was founded by former CIA asset Jalaluddin Haqqani and is run by his son Sirajuddin. It is blamed for attacks on US and Nato forces in Afghanistan.
Despite the “serious questions” that Washington has about Pakistan’s support for militants, Clinton said, “we have a lot of interests that are in common, most particularly the fight against terrorism.”