US Congressman raises Sindh human rights concerns with Pakistan delegation
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
In a significant diplomatic development, critical issues affecting the people of Sindh were raised during recent discussions between US Congressman Brad Sherman and a visiting Pakistani delegation.The Congressman, a senior member of the US House of Representatives, voiced strong concerns over water scarcity, enforced disappearances, and systemic repression of the Sindhi people.Congressman Sherman took to social media to share that he had highlighted the urgent need to protect the Indus River -- the lifeline for tens of millions of Sindhis -- during his meeting with the delegation. "Protecting this vital water resource is essential," he stated, underscoring the environmental and humanitarian crisis unfolding in Sindh.He also expressed alarm over recent unrest in Moro, a city in Sindh, where two protesters, Irfan and Zahid Laghari, were reportedly killed while demanding water rights. "For years, Sindhis have faced political repression through enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings," Sherman said, citing Pakistan's Human Rights Commission's documentation of over 8,000 enforced disappearances since 2011 -- many of which have never been properly investigated.Sherman assured that he had raised the issue of enforced disappearances directly with Pakistani officials and pledged to continue pressing for accountability and justice.The Washington-based Sindhi Foundation welcomed Sherman's intervention and praised his advocacy for the people of Sindh.The organization in a press statement confirmed that it had also written to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, drawing attention to multiple threats to the very survival of Sindh and its people.According to the Foundation, these threats include the illegal construction of canals over the Indus River to enable corporate farming, systematic enforced disappearances of political activists, and alleged manipulation of the 2023 census aimed at altering Karachi's demography -- all part of an effort, they claim, to divide Sindh along linguistic lines. The marginalization of the Sindhi language was also cited as a serious cultural concern."The Sindhi Foundation will continue to raise these pressing issues in political corridors across the U.S. and the world until the freedom and rights of the Sindhi people are fully realized," the organization stated.This development marks a rare instance of Sindh-related human rights concerns being raised at the highest levels of US policymaking, drawing international attention to the long-standing grievances of the Sindhi population.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Strategic mistake': Former diplomat Vikas Swarup warns US against ties with Pakistan; links Trump's tariffs on India to Brics, Operation Sindoor
Former diplomat Vikas Swarup NEW DELHI: Former diplomat Vikas Swarup on Wednesday cautioned that the United States is making a "strategic mistake" by deepening ties with Pakistan, a country closely aligned with China, which he called a strategic competitor of the US. He also spoke on rising trade tensions, saying Washington's recent tariffs on Indian goods are part of a broader pressure tactic. "I think it's a strategic mistake on the part of the US that you are getting into bed with Pakistan, which is in bed with China. China is the US' strategic competitor," said the former high commissioner to Canada during an interview with ANI. His remarks come after Pakistan Army Chief Gen Asim Munir made provocative statements in Florida, suggesting Pakistan could use nuclear weapons to "take down India and half the world" in an existential crisis. Addressing ongoing trade tensions between New Delhi and Washington, Swarup noted that India had resisted pressure from the US to open its agriculture and dairy markets, describing recent 50% tariffs by US President Donald Trump as part of a broader pressure tactic. Swarup highlighted that President Trump imposed 50% tariffs on Indian goods due to India's BRICS membership and Operation Sindoor . "We have to understand why these tariffs have been imposed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like How Ken Koh revived ailing family business in S'pore to produce the 'Rolls-Royce' of soya sauce CNA Read More Undo I personally feel that there are three reasons. One, Trump is not happy with India because we are a member of BRICS and somehow, in his head, he has got this notion that BRICS is an anti-America alliance which is hell-bent on creating an alternative currency to the dollar. So, because of that, he feels that India should not be a member of the BRICS. Two, Operation Sindoor and his so-called role in bringing about the ceasefire," Swarup said. Swarup added, "We have been saying right from the beginning that Trump had no role because we do not accept external mediation. This ceasefire was mediated directly between the DGMOs of Pakistan and India at the request of the DGMO of Pakistan. Trump has now said almost 30 times that it was he who got the two countries to stop back from the brink, who stopped a nuclear conflagration in the subcontinent. So, obviously he is miffed that India has not acknowledged his role, whereas Pakistan has not only acknowledged his role but has even nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize. " India had carried out Operation Sindoor in early May in response to the Pahalgam terror attack and carried out precision strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and PoJK. India had repelled subsequent Pakistani aggression and targeted its airbases. The former diplomat also underscored that the US is pushing India to sign the Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) with favourable terms for the US, particularly in dairy, agriculture, and GM crops. He further added that India has not caved in to US pressure, and the tariffs are part of Trump's pressure tactics. "...This is part of his pressure tactics to get India to sign on the dotted line on the maximalist demands that the US is making with regard to access to our dairy and agriculture and GM Crops. We have not caved in and it is also in a way a signal to Russia because he is also frustrated that he has not been able to get President Putin to agree to the ceasefire that Zelenskyy has agreed to," Swarup said, as quoted by ANI. Swarup referred to the summit meeting between President Trump and President Putin in Alaska on August 15 over the Ukraine conflict. He predicted that if the talks yield positive results, Russia's sanctions will likely be lifted, as Putin won't accept a ceasefire while facing economic sanctions. "Now they are meeting in Alaska on 15th August. If there is a positive outcome of the Alaska talks then I am 100% sure that the Russia sanctions will be off the table because Putin is not going to accept a ceasefire and yet be saddled with economic sanctions," he said.
Indian Express
42 minutes ago
- Indian Express
When US bought Alaska for $7.2 million and why Trump and Putin's meeting revives the story
When Donald Trump said on Monday that he would meet his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin 'in Russia' this Friday, it sounded like another of the US President's verbal slips. But 158 years ago, he would have been right. Alaska, with its onion-domed churches, fur trade legacy and once Russian-named capital Novo-Arkhangelsk, was part of the Tsar's empire until 1867, when it was sold to the United States for just $7.2 million. The deal was mocked by Washington and mourned in St Petersburg, only to become one of history's most spectacular bargains. As Putin prepares to land in Alaska this week, traces of Russia's past are still visible. From the wild, rugged shores of Baranof Island to Anchorage's Orthodox churches, the legacy endures. In Sitka, the green dome of St Michael's Cathedral rises against a backdrop of glaciers, still standing on the same spot where it was built more than 150 years ago. Russia's presence in Alaska began with fur traders, not armies. In the mid-18th century, merchants and adventurers pushed east across Siberia in search of lucrative sea otter pelts. By the 1780s, Catherine the Great had authorised the creation of the Russian-American Company, granting it a monopoly over trade and governance in the territory. Alexander Baranov, a merchant, tightened Russia's grip in the late 18th century, expanding settlements and crushing native resistance, most famously from the Tlingit, who called him 'No Heart.' Russian Orthodox priests soon followed, building missions and churches. By the mid-19th century, the Russian empire saw Alaska as more liability than prize. The Crimean war had weakened the empire financially, and the growing reach of Britain's navy in the Pacific heightened fears that Alaska could be seized in a future conflict. As per a report by The Guardian, in July 1867, Eduard de Stoeckl, Russia's envoy in Washington and chief negotiator of the sale, confided to a friend: 'My treaty has met with strong opposition … but this stems from the fact that no one at home has any idea of the true condition of our colonies. It was simply a matter of selling them, or watching them being taken from.' The sale was intended as a diplomatic win for both sides. Russia gained much-needed cash and a potential ally across the Atlantic while avoiding a clash with Britain. The US acquired new territory that would push back European influence and extend its reach into the Pacific. At the time, neither country celebrated the deal as a triumph. In St Petersburg, many believed the price was insultingly low. As per a report by The Guardian, the liberal newspaper Golos condemned it as 'deeply angering all true Russians' and asked, 'Is the nation's sense of pride truly so unworthy of attention that it can be sacrificed for a mere six or seven million dollar[s]?' In the US, Secretary of State William H Seward, who negotiated the treaty, was ridiculed for spending what critics considered a fortune on an icy wilderness. The New-York Daily Tribune as per The Guardian, dismissed Alaska as 'the nominal possession of impassable deserts of snow' and wrote, 'We may make a treaty with Russia … but we cannot make a treaty with the North Wind or the Snow King.' Some suspected Russia had sold land of little value. 'Russia has sold us a sucked orange. Whatever may be the value of that territory and its outlying islands to us, it has ceased to be of any to Russia,' the New York World wrote on 1 April 1867. Within decades, those doubts vanished. Gold rushes in the late 19th century and the discovery of vast oilfields in the 20th century turned Alaska into one of America's most resource-rich territories. What critics once called Seward's folly became a symbol of strategic foresight. Yet the sale price remained a sore point in Russian memory. In 1974, during American protests over the low price the USSR paid for wheat, Soviet trade official Vladimir Alkimov drily noted that Alaska had been sold for only $7 million. In 1867, the deal briefly opened a period of warmth between Russia and the United States. The New York Herald wrote that 'the cession of Russian Alaska becomes a matter of great importance. It indicates the extent to which Russia is ready to carry out her entente cordiale with the United States.' That goodwill reached its peak in 1871 when Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich visited New York with a naval squadron, receiving parades, receptions and civic honours. When Trump and Putin meet in Alaska this week, the historical parallels will be hard to ignore. For Ukraine, the hope is that any renewed warmth between Washington and Moscow will not come at the expense of another nation's territory, and that the days of trading land like currency in great power deals remain firmly in the past. (With inputs from The Guardian)
India.com
42 minutes ago
- India.com
Balochistan people are not terrorists...: Baloch leader slams US over BLA terror designation, warns not to trust Pak Army chief Munir because...
Baloch leader Mir Yar Baloch (L) slammed the US for designating the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) as a terrorist organization. (File) Baloch leader Mir Yar Baloch lashed out at the United States for designating the Balochistan Liberation Army as a terrorist organization, asserting that the people of Balochistan are not terrorists, but victims of Pakistan-sponsored terror outfits that have brutalized the region at Islamabad's behest. What did Mir Yar Baloch say? In a post on X, Mir Yar Baloch warned the US against trusting Pakistan, stating the Balochistan rebel movement has had good faith towards the US, while Islamabad has historically been a backstabber who sheltered America's enemies, including Osama bin Laden. 'The people of Balochistan are not terrorists. They are a nation that has suffered 78 years of state terrorism, economic plunder, radioactive poisoning caused by Pakistan's nuclear tests, foreign invasion and occupation by Pakistan's extremist and artificial state,' he wrote. Mir Yar said that Baloch people have been victimized by the IS-Khorasan, an offshoot of the notorious Islamic State terror group allegedly sponsored by Pakistan's ISI and deep state. 'IS-K is a branch of the terrorist organization ISIS, which is being allowed to flourish by Pakistan's intelligence agency ISI,' he alleged, adding that the group recently issued a fatwa (decree) calling for violence against Baloch political activists. 'Baloch are friends of US' The Baloch leader accused Islamabad of supporting radical armed groups to 'crush legitimate political voices, stifle democratic aspirations, and destabilize the region'. 'Throughout history, the Baloch people have shown unwavering goodwill towards the US, and never took up arms against any side, even during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,' he said. Showcasing Baloch people as US-friendly, Mir Yar noted there wasn't a single attack on US personnel or convoys by Baloch fighters or civilians, when NATO supply lines passed through Balochistan after 9/11. 'In contrast, the Pakistan Army and the ISI orchestrated anti-US rallies during the time,' he alleged. Why Mir Yar cautioned US against trusting Pakistan? Meanwhile, the Baloch leader also cautioned the US against trusting Pakistan Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, reminding Washington about Islamabad's betrayal when it sheltered Osama bin Laden, who lived in Pakistan's Abbottabad for nearly a decade under the protection of the Pakistani army. 'Pakistani leaders have admitted to waging a fake jihad against US interests, betraying allies and promoting extremism. Yet, these same extremists are being described as 'strategic partners', while the real owners of the land in resource-rich Balochistan are being defamed as terrorists,' he said. Mir urged the US to recognize Balochistan as an independent, sovereign nation, asserting that it would give the US a liberal and stable ally in the region, who is rooted in democratic values. The Baloch leader's comments came after the US on Monday designated the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) as a foreign terrorist organization for carrying terror attacks, including the recent train hijacking, in Pakistan. The US on Monday designated the BLA in the list of foreign terrorist organizations. It has been put on the list of terrorist attacks for carrying out train hijacking and many other attacks in Pakistan recently.
