Nawaz Sharif has challenged 10 or 20 percent of status quo element for which he has to pay the price. Nawaz Sharif offered to hold accountability for a purpose and a promise. In the beginning, there was an immature reaction given by PTI – as in election tribunals where they were the most 'concerned' party but their input was comparatively abysmal, immaterial and negligible. It was nothing less than a Kharijite-like response. The opportunity to strengthen the pillars of state on their part was lost this time due to misguided priorities and ill-informed decision making. Sheikh Rasheed and IK saw an opportunity to woo the opposition towards resignation of PM Nawaz Sharif and take revenge. PPP and PMLN have witnessed the infamous politics of 90s and are now concerned with more potent factors of progress and development and, aware of the unjust or unfair role of undemocratic forces. Election tribunals and parliamentary commission are part of a scheme of a plan to strengthen institutional framework that will enhance the deliverance of Democracy. Otherwise, Pakistani optimism has mostly translated into Pakistani bigotry in the past. Russian School of Constitutional Economics has the answer to this inapt political mentality and moral crisis. It directly deals with accountability of military expenditures not only in terms of locating corruption circles but addressing the ‘why, what, where, how and when’ factors of the case- that we terms as a journalistic approach.

How did Air Marshal (Retd.) Shahid Latif manage to earn a whopping 170,000 dirham as a government employee to invest in Dubai property? Such generals who speak about the politicians being the only species worthy of cruel discrimination and rough treatment; why then do these godfathers i.e. untouchable generals, use façade of ‘chaste’ and get away with their wrong? COAS Raheel Sharif is considered effective in the contours of his job task. However, his role with ‘bloody civilians’ is no different from the record of most previous generals. The name of Seth Abid revolves and Agha Hussain Abedi appears in the documents regarding the acquisition of nuclear device materials. Were they not part of oligarch that considers rule of law and system as a game of monopoly or chess, where there is a price for everyone and everything – to make a way out of wrong doings and corruption. Malik Riaz and Aleem Khan do represent that specific cadre. Their history is a full spectrum of lies and deceit.

The Angoor Adda base has been given into Afghan custody. This decision was taken after the development of an event where Pakistan Army and Afghanistan Army rolled tanks against each other on Torkham border which led to meeting between Afghan ambassador and Pakistani COAS, resulting in transfer of the base without the knowledge of Pakistani government. On basis of what authority has the COAS decided to take this step without informing the Pakistani civil government? If there had been accountability of events like East Pakistani 1971 debacle where criminals would be prosecuted and charged, then such unconstitutional actions that do not involve the consent of civil government would not be a possibility. Civil representatives are accountable, so they have to address public outrage with satisfactory answers. Last Friday, the US drone strike breached the territorial integrity and sovereignty when the Taliban commander, Mullah Akhtar Mansour, was killed. The Pakistani government was not informed, beforehand.

Secretary General of NATO has confirmed the target hit (drone attack on Mullah Akhtar Mansour) to be successful. Furthermore, after the surfacing of Panama Papers issue, US-NATO have decided to intensify their activities in the regions where the disgruntled allies of US-NATO are the countries located i.e. in South East Asia, Far East Asia and Latin America, which have decided to initiate a policy shift in order to diversify their foreign policy and enhance relations with Russia and China as a means to strengthen their geo-strategic position. Obama's visit to Vietnam (South East Asia) is considered a significant development due to the reason that military embargo imposed on Vietnam imposed during Cold War has been lifted by America. Obama, during his stay in Vietnam, has stated that America will 'continue to pursue targets anywhere in the world and in any way it deems necessary' – where Pakistan seems to the emerging prime target. Regarding the latest US/NATO developments – Pepe Escobar stated in his Op-Ed, Beware what you wish for – Russia is ready for war:

'Predictably all Cold War 2.0 hell broke loose, all over again. Russia does not want – and does not need – war. Yet the “Russian aggression” narrative never stops.'

Considering the Panama leaks effect and the matter of adopting mature political stance to stay in the course of internationalisation of the global society; it has to be decided that who is the person or party that is adamant on truly reforming the Institutional framework to serve the purpose of paving path to a Sovereign and prosperous Pakistan? It is most democratic parties except the likes of few i.e. PTI or Sheikh Rasheed, that seem to understand the sensitivity of being a part of a global order. Firstly, General Raheel Sharif used the Azadi March dharna to put pressure on civil government to release his former boss – Musharraf. Azadi March dharna was the brainchild of General (retd) Ahmad Shuja Pasha and General (retd.) Zaheer Ul Islam. These were the top two Pakistan army officers who had been involved in the release of Raymond Davis and had played a dirty game by blaming Punjab civil government for the act. No wonder General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani was not liked by many officers within army circles. Was it due to the fact that he never indulged in conspiracies against democratic forces? Secondly, as approval for new GHQ has been made final this month – it was the Panama papers issue which was utilised in order to put pressure on Civil Government to accept the demand. That new GHQ idea was shelved by Kayani which had been proposed in Musharraf era considering the security situation due to the high terror threats during his rule. Anti-Terror operations or the nuclear program, do prove to be achievements of civil governments of PMLN/PPPP, while the Army tends to take credit by falsely staging a 'glorified' role but ends up creating more problems – instead.

In Panama Papers case, names of many Pakistanis have come forth. The proposals of the Parliamentary committee will include the requirement to interrogate matters that qualify as major criminal cases. This proposal will have to be passed as a resolution by majority – as an instruction to Chief Justice to form a judicial commission to probe the findings. The findings of the commission will have to include basic points of reference i.e. F16 US-Pakistan deal or Pakistan/Afghanistan hostility at Torkham border or the idea of allying with China and gaining declaration of support from Russia, nuclear developments in diplomatic and military arena, etc. The findings should deal with the importance of developing an Institution through the auspices of programs like Russian School of Constitutional Economics. This will prove to be a platform that'll serve to re-enforce the strategic interests of a sovereign Pakistan. A civil government is accountable and has to work for representation. Nawaz Sharif is the most senior politician who understands the intricacies of dynamics and reality of frameworks- and is capable of leading the nation out of the abyss. The situation existing at global level seems to be a favourable opportunity to address Pakistan’s strategic interests in the best way possible.

What were the effects of Panama Papers? What was its impact on governments or institutions?  To establish answers, we have to take into account the latest developments and options available to deal with the situation. Pakistan moved a resolution in the United Nations to create a platform where a program will be initiated to list the databases of firms operating in Israel’s occupied territories i.e. areas of Jewish settlements. This resolution in UN was approved at a time when US had worked out an Iran Nuclear deal and EU had taken strict stance against Israel’s illegal settlements and discriminatory policy – with a long term goal in mind, on their part. A similar inquiry must be made regarding the case of Panama Papers. Who hacked into Mossack-Fonseca database for sensitive information and provided it to ICIJ? This came at a time when a Media war has been intensified against Russia with similar provocations on military front. 

These developments come from an oligarchic and monolithic form of governance who seem to find it in their interest to pinpoint factors like terrorism and good governance but themselves are averse or hypocritical. For instance; the international forums held on nuclear disarmament have received most accolades in Obama’s era but the most amount of American nuclear stockpile gathered or up-gradation was during his own presidency. Now, is this approach of duplicity limited to a military scenario? No. USA was involved in Afghanistan (a war NATO ignominiously lost) and Iraq (a war Pentagon ignominiously  lost) when Bush left the White House. During Obama’s presidency, USA has done more damage by sidelining from the inevitabilities of military interventions and pursuing an inactive approach to achieve a mischievous purpose that ends with encirclement of Russia. Libya (a nation turned into a failed state devastated by militia hell) and Syria (a nation NATO, via Turkey, would love to invade and is already a militia hell) are not the prime targets. Right from Saudi-Iranian sectarian war in Iraq, Syria and Yemen to Turkish-Egyptian militarism, their arrogance and transgression will prove to be death knell to Middle Eastern people. The whole game plan aims at complete defeat of Russia. What is most striking about this matter is the defiance of Putin’s Russia. She is on a mission to become a beacon of hope and humanity. Why do we have to consider the case of Russia to deal with constitutionalism and the prevailing social, religious, economic and political conditions across the globe? What is the status of Russia in such matters? What is Russian response to the massive, intensive and increasingly rapid military build-up and an offensive diplomatic (socio-economic and political) encirclement in Eastern Europe, Latin America, Pacific Ocean? Does this response match Russia’s capability or ability to deal with such circumstances on intermittent or coherent basis?

Considering the case of Panama Papers and UN law requiring a record database of Israeli firms in Jewish settlements, together, in the context of recent event around the world and specifically in the Middle East , it seems that a divine intervention has taken place, depicted in the case of the situation prevailing in pre and post Russian intervention scenario in Syria. Let’s consider a case study for a better understanding to the approach of natural forces at work – starting from a religious and secular debate i.e. homosexuality. It is a part of a religious debate except that our religious scholars or leaders are averse to knowledge of any kind in order to deal with the issue i.e. if you’re living in the West, you have to accept it as an element of rule of law. In the east, one resists it by using popular, emotional and moral response. It is a secular debate. However, why is the religious debate valid? It is because the Eastern Orthodox Christians want to expose the dubious role of Western Christianity (Catholics and Protestants). For simplicity, call it Russia v NATO. Russia has and Russia will oppose any attempts by Godless forces to initiate atheistic materialism and territorial expansionism – where, Zionism and homosexuality, on their own, do not qualify as extreme cases except when they start to use their denial to challenge forces of nature. The point is that a whole religious paradigm is being built while Muslims have been killing, looting and plundering for last 600 years instead of realizing that Sufism, itself, is based on secular and spiritual practices that reinforce the concept of religion as a tangible and intangible element of our lives. Instead of debating about the rights and wrongs, let’s deal with it as a subject of study through lens of Russia v NATO (Eastern Europe v Western Europe). We, Muslims, have a lot to learn. Can a secular and religious debate reach on a similar conclusion on this issue? Yes. The onus is more on religious debaters in order to adapt in the uncertain, multi-polar world. Russia has opposed the idea of homosexuality on moral (read: religious) grounds. Speaking about morals, should the Pakistani PM resign?

Taking into account the effects of Panama Papers as an intended tool for maliciously subverting circumstances into favour through unjust and unfair means, what about the rapes that occur to a country’s economic and socio-political infrastructure? Have a look at what’s happening in Latin America? Look what’s happening in Eastern Europe? In the Asian side of Pacific Ocean? It is a pro-Israeli NATO plan in work that aims at subjugation of rivals. Russian reaction in Crimea and Syria has stopped NATO in its track from destabilizing the region in order to inflict a situation of conflict. These developments reveal a lot when we take into account the role of militarism regarding the developments in South Asia (Afghanistan and Indian Ocean) as compared to elsewhere in the context of NATO-Russia military confrontation (Eastern Europe, Pacific and Latin America ). Following the leads, the US lawmakers are looking to use a defense policy to increase restrictions on military aid for Pakistan. The $602m National Defese Authourisation passed by House of Representatives would block $450m in aid to Islamabad unless it does more to fight the Haqqani network, which lawmakers see as a major threat to US forces in Afghanistan.  The case of Shakil Afridi is considered a matter of importance within White House and American circles. Indian papers say that US lawmakers’ approval of a defense bill will put India at par with NATO allies i.e. US lawmakers seek a partnership status for India similar to that of American allies in NATO. The passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) could strengthen New Delhi's military muscle in the Asia-Pacific region. In contrast, Pakistan has received discriminatory treatment.

India initiated the Nuclear Arms Race through the 1974 Test after Independence of Bangladesh. Sartaj Aziz and the Foreign office spokesperson have been active and adamant about Pakistan Defence policy due to the latest rapid escalation of Indian military projects consisting of missiles, submarines and nuclear devices. Supersonic interceptor as a Missile Defense system, Ashwin, is a major development. Pakistan has initiated UN resolutions to support a nuclear free zone after India has managed to carve a second strike capability through option of building a nuclear submarine. As Pakistan has earned failed attempts to de-nuclearise the Indian Ocean, the result has been the induction of tactical nuclear weapons and development of Pakistan’s indigenous nuclear submarine by 2018-19. In a program on AAJ TV, the panel of Major (retd) Abdul Qayyum and Khursheed Kasuri called on team of Sartaj Aziz to project Pakistan’s cause as one that supports economic revival in the region. The nuclear ages of  world war and cold war have reached their culmination points and it has inevitably led to the Third Nuclear Age. These nuclear developments have been massive enough to provide ‘decisive’ military strategies with immediate effect to be utilised in case of war. What response, like case similar to encirclement of Russia, should Pakistan consider among the options available? Pakistan can build a narrative of prioritizing ‘social sector’ and reach out to states that will support our stand, but then the current level of militarization by an opponent (neighbour) has a tremendous negative effect on composite dialogue.

Pakistan has an efficient and effective defense production capability as part of nuclear technology program. India had built a major base in the Bay of Bengal to serve purpose of second strike option. Pakistan neutralized the potency by developing Shaheen Missile that can target any such installations, afar. Pakistan has no offensive designs to propagate an aggressive stance against any country. Despite commendable ‘check and balance’ measures in place for the security programs of the nuclear arsenal and installations by Pakistan, while turning a blind eye to Indian military escalation, the US lawmakers like Senator Bob Corker have decided to make Pakistan an easy target as a step towards humiliating Russia. South Asia has become a flashpoint like Pacific. The intended effect of Panama Leaks was to pave way for imposition of pro-Israeli NATO global military dictatorship. One of the latest targets of Panama Papers issue was Dilma Rouseff, the ex-President of Brazil who was impeached and replaced by representatives of an oligarch. Putin’s unlikely rise saw the disappearance of Oligarch. Ayaz Sadiq and Vladimir Putin are identical cases – I have further clarified this point in my article: Convergence, resurgence, deterrence and the rule of law. Aegis system installed in Romania – and in Poland by 2018, is termed as a measure that changes the game in the sense that it qualifies as a launch area for US missile defenses – with a close reach to Moscow than any other installations. In response to it, Russian President Vladimir Putin had to make it clear that Russia would respond 'adequately' to any threats to its security at hands of Global Robocop i.e. NATO.

British General Richard Shireff of Britian – a former NATO deputy military chief has written in his book, 2017: War with Russia that:

'...a nuclear war with Russia is ‘’entirely plausible’’ over the dispute of Baltic nations. All recent deployments of missile defence systems and troops on a huge scale indicate massive intensification aimed at instigating a response from Russia that would then be termed as 'Russian aggression.' 

The latest developments in Eastern Europe has witnessed NATO lining troops and defense systems throughout Eastern Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Bulgaria, Latvia, Moldova, Serbia and other East European Nations as a provocative step to intentionally destabilize the Caucasus region. These developments strike an amazing similarity with nuclear race and military force intensification in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean during the month of May to which Russia won’t stay quiet. A rare occurrence, Russia and China have intercepted US military planes and warships very close to their borders and airspace in the past. Aside from support to police state of ‘India’, the West has been eyeing the ASEAN as a support base in Pacific region.

Philippines had elections recently. The country has been noted as an American ally but the support has reduced to a large extent. Japan is striding towards an alliance or good terms with Russia. Russia-ASEAN summit held in Sochi, Russia on May 19-20 represents a phase shift of enormous dimensions underway in Asia. It is rendered as the biggest international event in Russia in 2016.  Putin has met leader of each ASEAN country on individual basis and has successfully secured cooperation on matters of ‘social reconstruction’ i.e. investment agreements, closer trade ties and in many cases, defense cooperation. The event was signified by adopting a summit declaration- ‘Towards Strategic Partnership for the sake of common good,’ in order to pursue a partnership action plan. Shinzo Abe, Japanese PM, has reacted sternly to a murder of Japanese woman in Okinawa by US Soldier and has approached Putin during the ASEAN event.   What will likely occur due to the oppressive actions of US/NATO (EU) will be Eastern Europe, Asian-Pacific countries and Muslims forming an alliance with Russia. Witnessing the false game of sidelining Israel in the US-Iran Nuclear deal as well as EU’s strict opposition to Jewish settlements but the undeterred and unwavering support to Israel through actions like supporting Anti-BDS movements will be enough to cause a policy  shift among countries that are traditionally neutral or slightly favourable to Israel in a world where information revolution through industrial, electrical and technological revolutions has led to increase in the awareness of human consciousness in order to ‘distinguish’ or set ‘criteria of distinction’ as part of an ongoing spiritual intervention i.e., ASEAN had been opposing China but the case of Russia has made it clear to ASEAN countries that who is the oppressor that wants to divide and rule? 

According to Salman Rafi, columnist at Russia Insider:

‘Moscow is providing a number of erstwhile US allies the much needed alternative to diversify their foreign policies. This diversification is visible across the globe. Russia, in contrast to fragile commitment of US, seems to hold huge potential for ASEAN as future prospects include dealing with SCO AND EEU'.

Philippines ambassador to Russia, Carlos Soretta, said:

‘’The attributes of this cooperation reflect us to work hard to bring together people and institutions.’’

ASEAN is one of the most successful international organisations in the world which unites 604 million people who produce over $2 trillion in GDP. Thai PM Prayut Chan-o-cha has proposed to visit Moscow later in May – a step that is seen as an attempt to lessen Thailand’s dependence on the US. A couple of weeks ago, China and ASEAN countries held naval military drills in Brunei Darussalam. US policies of intervention in internal political matters of ASEAN countries has led to the emergence of trade and military deals with Russia due to US-EU sanctions that have forced Russia to look forward to agricultural imports from Thailand; and as per Sergey Shoigu, Russian Defence Minister, the Russian MI-17 have started to replace US Blackhawks in Thailand’s Airforce.

The most important of the discussions is the very purpose to relate the similarities of US/NATO led intervention programs in Latin America, South Asia, East Europe and Asia-Pacific scenario whether the case of yielding results through diplomatic manner can withhold or limit to an extent, the possibility of US, to find itself capable to operate through its traditional methods of domination and diplomatic coercion. RT News report depicts the situation In Latin America as where:

‘A Russian diplomatic call to outlaw the US-sponsored policy of “regime change” is timelier than ever following recent events in Latin America. The developments there are now routinely described as ‘‘institutional’’ coups d’état, with popular presidents removed from power and replaced by neoliberal functionaries, enjoying almost unhidden support of the US government and American financial capital.’

This is represented through the Brazilian political crisis in the Latin America. Dmitry Babich writes in his op-ed article, Regime change in Latin America: Why Russia is concerned?:

'Last week, Brazil’s leftist President Dilma Rousseff was removed from power by a very unpopular group of senators, despite having the votes of 54 million citizens, who expressed their will a year and a half ago. Rousseff was removed because of accusations of corruption. However, even the mainstream media in the United States did not consider these accusations to be well founded… In 2014-2015, a similar campaign of personal attacks and ‘character assassination’ took place in Argentina against that country’s leftist president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner… In Brazil, the former vice-president Michel Temer took the reins of power without elections. Mr. Temer, whose popularity in Brazil is in single digits, has already started what RT’s expert on Latin America Juan Manuel Karg called a “realignment” of Brazil’s foreign policy. That “realignment” is supposed “to move Brazil closer to the United States and to the EU with or without Mercosur” (a bloc integrating the markets and economies of Latin American countries)… New Argentinian President Mauricio Macri also did not seem to be keen on following Fernandez de Kirchner’s policy of discovering new horizons for Argentina in China and Russia- who had met several times the Russian Presidents Putin and Medvedev… In Venezuela, the situation is even clearer: the US makes no secret of its support for the “anti-chavista” opposition to President Nicolas Maduro, the successor to leftist leader Hugo Chavez, who gave his name to “chavizmo,” an ideology combining oil sales to the US with spending the proceeds from these sales on social development. The American media gives full support to anti-chavista opposition, despite its role in violent street protests, which have claimed the lives of several dozen people.’ 

There is a reason why Russia is concerned with US pressure on Latin American regimes despite the fact that the foreign trade between the two sides remains relatively small. It has become clear to Russian diplomats that the policy of regime change that was witnessed in Latin America, Syria, Ukraine and in future, Russia itself, is conducted by the same people in Washington and Brussels and the purpose for which the same technology or methods are being utlilised; where, as per Dmitry Babich:

‘Therefore, the events in faraway Brazil may have a direct impact on the developments in Russia.’

Joshua Tartakovsky, a US-based foreign policy analyst, who recently visited both Venezuela and Ukraine, says:

“Attempts to ‘seat out; US-led color revolutions in other countries are simply not wise. Sooner or later, the American enthusiasts of regime change plan to go after all the regimes which even potentially can challenge American domination. First, they will do it in the Western hemisphere, but it won’t take long before they come to Russia, China and India too. The only way to survive for BRICS is to come together and act together – before it is too late. These Western leaders openly said that sanctions should be applied in a way that would cripple Russia’s economy and lead to popular protests. So, the West is sending us a message: we don’t even want to change the policy of the Russian Federation; we want to change the Russian Federation’s regime. In fact they are not even denying that desire of theirs.”

These Latin American countries proved to be most vocal and active in opposition to Israeli siege and attack on Gaza in 2014. The US and Pro-Israeli response has been in shape of regime changes, instigating flash points and direct actions like imposing broad-based sanctions or military deployments. In case of military flashpoints; Abe’s wording after the conclusion of his meeting with Putin was interesting. The two leaders had agreed on a new approach to resolving the dispute over the Kurill islands. He noted that the peace treaty issue would be resolved “by ourselves” and that Japan would pursue a “future-oriented” relationship with Russia “free of any past ideas”. Abe is also believed to have presented Putin with an eight-point plan to strengthen their countries’ ties. Abe is not stupid. Even if he gets nowhere on the Kurils issue, he knows that balancing the Russia-China relationship is beneficial regardless. Signs so far indicate he is willing to risk displeasing the US in Japan’s better interests.

Now, link all these developments to make a case for Pakistani foreign policy. What does the absence of a Pakistani foreign minister depict?

India is a part of BRICs and the US-EU intend to make India their ‘police-state’ in Asia. This is the best time to initiate a diplomatic endeavour to gain strategic advantages for Pakistan on decisive terms. The recent diplomatic developments with US, India’s military escalation on borders and in Kashmir, ignorance regarding Pakistan’s long and hard struggle to join nuclear suppliers group does clarify that the West is clearly discriminatory to a point of ‘rhetorics’ in their relations to Pakistan. It is up to Pakistan to safeguard her interests by incorporating the details of current global scenario that is fast moving towards an imposition of a global military dictatorship- and hold their own accountability through constitutionalism. Pakistan should draft proposals to BRICS, OIC, EU, EEU, ECO, SAARC, ASEAN, UN SCO and such organisations that will cooperate and coordinate with Pakistan due to her sovereign nation-state status. Instead of delving into petty debates to the likes of showing opposition to PM Nawaz Sharif due to the inappropriate depiction of Pakistani border in Turkmenistan visit,  we need a coherent strategy that re-instate 'values' that prefer coherence and to not indulge into 'hunger for power' in terms of atheistic materialism and territorial expansionism. Panama Papers has started a constitutional battle that will end with a moral battle against global military dictatorship. These representatives are accountable. There is a need and an established way to question them on their preparation to deal with the way of using authority to set parameters for effective and efficient outcomes. On these lines, PM Nawaz Sharif has declared that the US drone attacks are violation of Pakistani sovereignty. Strengthening the pillars of state and safeguarding interests would require not only PM Nawaz Sharif but also leaders across socio-political, religious and military paradigm to become a true statesman. Pakistan has earned the Chinese declaration of support and needs a Russian declaration of support in order to widen her scope throughout the globe in order to indulge and struggle to carve a way out before regional skirmishes ignite a World war.

Dmitry Babich questions:

‘How far will Russia go in its support for independence of Latin American countries? Who and how can shield them from the policy of “regime change” conducted by their powerful northern neighbor? Obviously, Lavrov is not under the illusion Russian can guarantee such independence alone. At the 69th General Assembly of the United Nations in autumn 2014, the Russian foreign minister suggested making a special UN declaration on the inadmissibility of the policy of “regime change” and on “non-recognition of coups as methods of changing state power.” Rousseff might regret not seizing the opportunity to act against “regime change” then.  it appears to be too late – for her and, most likely, for Brazil.’

In conclusion, the situation we’ve dealt with does signify enough to be qualified as a case study in order to settle for a coherent strategy to respond to the regional military dictatorship of Israel in Gaza, that will soon impose a global military dictatorship i.e. Pax Judaica. Highest law is the moral law. This is what we should cultivate as a goal within our infrastructure, our minds and during policy-making. Divine will and popular will now seem to be intertwined to lead to an inevitable solution: Moral law is the highest law.