Ferguson accuses Mancini after Manchester City beat United

Manchester: Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson accused Roberto Mancini of attempting to influence officials after a furious touchline bust-up with the Manchester City boss on Monday.

Ferguson and Mancini had to be separated during an explosive finger-jabbing confrontation in the 76th minute of a highly charged encounter at Eastlands which saw City take control of the title race with a 1-0 victory.

Ferguson had leapt from his dugout to protest after an ugly challenge from Nigel De Jong on United substitute Danny Welbeck.

The 70-year-old United boss later accused Mancini of harassing officials throughout the title duel.

"Mancini was badgering the ref and the fourth official all game," Ferguson said. "He was complaining about refs all week, but he can't complain about this one."

However Ferguson had few complaints about a defeat which he admitted had left the destiny of the title in City's hands.

"We didn't test their keeper enough really, we started brightly and for the first 15 minutes we dominated, but the longer the half went on we were looking for half-time and the goal came at a bad time for us," Ferguson said.

"I can't complain about the result, they were more of a threat from counter-attacks.

"It was a damaging result, they are in the driving seat and we are up against it. They only need to win to two more games and they win the league, simple as that," said Ferguson, whose side have now taken only four points from a possible 12 in their last four games.

Ferguson was also unhappy with United's defending for City's winning goal, which came when Vincent Kompany headed in a David Silva corner on the stroke of half-time.

"If you lose a goal at a setpiece at this level of football then you only have yourself to blame for that," Ferguson said.

"It was a bad time to concede a goal because there was nothing really happening at the end of the first half."

Mancini meanwhile brushed off the confrontation with Ferguson.

"I was talking with the fourth official, he told me some kind words, I answered him and it finished," said Mancini, who shook hands with Ferguson after the final whistle.

He also laughed off Ferguson's suggestions that he had been attempting to influence the match officials.

"And him? No? He never talks with the referee, no, never," Mancini said sarcastically.

Although City now top the table on goal difference, meaning wins over Newcastle and QPR will virtually assure them of the title, Mancini meanwhile insisted that United were still in a strong position to retain their crown.

"They have easy games -- they play against Swansea and Sunderland. We have Newcastle and QPR. These two teams are strong teams," Mancini said.

"For United it will be easy. But we have two strong teams, Newcastle and QPR -- one plays for the Champions League, one plays for relegation."

"But now it's not finished. If we think its finished we make a big mistake," Mancini added.

Asked what he thought the key to the game had been, Mancini replied: "They wanted to draw. We wanted to win. I think that was the difference."

BJP won’t back Congress name, fancies Kalam

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday clearly indicated that it would not support a presidential candidate of the Congress. BJP stalwart and leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj said the party was in favour of former president APJ Abdul Kalam being brought back to Rashtrapati Bhavan again though there were problems with his candidature too.

This means that despite holding Pranab Mukherjee in high regard, the BJP will not support the finance minister whose name has also cropped up as a contender for the post of president.

Congress leader AK Antony suggested the name of vice-president Hamid Ansari for the coveted post during a meeting with DMK chief M Karunanidhi in Chennai on Monday. The DMK is against the idea of Kalam succeeding Pratibha Patil.

In 2002, Kalam wanted to be a consensus candidate but it will be difficult to avert a contest this time, Swaraj told journalists at her chamber in Parliament on Monday. She said she was not sure whether Kalam would understand the compulsions of the situation and step into the fray.

Swaraj said it would not be possible to assure Kalam a victory. Any contest would end in victory or defeat and it will be necessary to fight it keeping that in mind. She could not say whether Kalam was prepared for a contest.

The BJP, however, has not deliberated on the issue as yet and would want to wait till the Congress announces its candidate before revealing its strategy, Swaraj said.

She also ruled out an arrangement whereby the Congress would have its presidential nominee and the BJP nominates the vice-presidential candidate.

She said there was no question of a deal with the Congress and that the presidential election cannot be seen in isolation. The party will have to look forward to 2014, Swaraj said.

The BJP leader has clearly implied that her party would not want to field a candidate of its own because that would hinder possible opposition unity. She has, however, not ruled out a consensus candidate if the name of the person suggested was so above political fray that it would not be possible to refuse to support him/her.

She admitted that the BJP would not want to throw up a name because some parties - she had the Communist parties in mind - would not support the BJP's suggestion. Swaraj said it would be better if the nominee's name came from a party like the Samajwadi Party as it would help in forging broader unity among all non-Congress parties. She said there would then be a possibility of attracting Mamata Banerjee's Trinamool Congress, the Telugu Desam Party and the Biju Janata Dal into the fold.

Swaraj indicated that the BJP would prefer a contest and would not remain a passive player though it may not muster the numbers in the electoral college comprising the state legislatures and two houses of Parliament to defeat the Congress-led UPA candidate.

Pakistan sends mixed signals on US drone attack

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistani officials on Monday condemned the U.S. for carrying out its first drone strike in the country since parliament demanded they end two weeks ago, but qualified that it should be seen in light of the presence of Islamist militants on Pakistani soil.

The mixed signals indicate the delicate tightrope the government is trying to walk with the American attacks. They are very unpopular in Pakistan, so opposing them makes sense for political reasons. But the government does not seem to want the strikes to torpedo attempts to patch up ties with the U.S., which could free up over $1 billion in American military aid.

Pakistan's Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying the strikes which killed three suspected militants in the North Waziristan tribal area Sunday "are in total contravention of international law and established norms of interstate relations."

"The government of Pakistan has consistently maintained that drone attacks are violative of its territorial integrity and sovereignty," it said.

Pakistan's parliament demanded an end to the strikes in mid-April when it approved new guidelines for the country's relationship with the U.S.

Washington had hoped that parliament's decision would pave the way for Pakistan to reopen supply lines for NATO troops in Afghanistan that were closed in November in retaliation for American airstrikes that accidentally killed 24 Pakistani troops.

The drone attacks have been a stumbling block. But Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani struck a moderate tone Monday when he seemed to link the strikes to the continued ability of Islamist militants fighting the government and international forces in Afghanistan to operate on Pakistan's territory.

He pointed out that the resolution passed by parliament also stipulated that foreign fighters must be expelled from the country and Pakistani soil should not be used to attack other countries.

"So, when we plan a strategy (with the U.S.), all these aspects would be discussed," said Gilani.

The U.S. has repeatedly demanded that Pakistan target Taliban and al-Qaida militants who use its territory to launch cross-border attacks.

The Pakistani military has refused, claiming its forces are stretched too thin by operations against homegrown militants battling the government. However, many analysts believe Pakistan is reluctant to target militants with whom it has historical ties because they could be useful allies in Afghanistan after foreign forces withdraw.

The drone issue is complicated by the fact that some elements of the Pakistani government, including the military, have helped the U.S. carry out strikes in the past. That cooperation has come under strain as the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated, but many analysts believe some in the government still support the program at some level.

Even those Pakistani officials believed to support the attacks often protest them in public because they are so unpopular in the country. Many Pakistanis believe they most kill civilians, an allegation disputed by the U.S. and independent research.

A Pakistani intelligence official said the most recent strike seemed to be a message from the U.S.

"It's a message that things are going to continue as usual irrespective of what we say," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

It's not the first time the U.S. has ignored Pakistan's parliament, which has called for the drone strikes to end since 2008.

President Barack Obama significantly ramped up strikes in Pakistan when he took office in 2009, and while the U.S. has said little publicly about the attacks, American officials have argued in private that they are critical to targeting Taliban and al-Qaida fighters who threaten the West.

Drones are not the only issue complicating Pakistan's decision to reopen the NATO supply lines.

The country's parliament has also demanded that the U.S. provide an "unconditional apology" for the deaths of the Pakistani troops in November. The U.S. has expressed regret, but has declined to apologize — a decision that appears to be driven by domestic political considerations. The U.S. has said its troops fired in self-defense — a claim disputed by Pakistan — and the White House could be concerned about Republican criticism if it apologizes.

Associated Press writer Chris Brummitt contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

F1 a job, 'not my life' - Raikkonen

Kimi Raikkonen insists he is "not interested" in formula one -- except the cars, and winning.

 

Asked by the reporter for Bild am Sonntag newspaper if the famous Finnish character might remove his sunglasses for an interview, 2007 world champion Raikkonen replied simply: "No."

At the end of his fourth race since returning to F1 from rallying, the 32-year-old was back on the podium in Bahrain.

"It's not going too bad," he said. "I like what I'm doing, that's enough. I don't care if someone says whether I'm doing it well or not.

"Still, it's disappointing when you're only second. Who knows what's going to happen at the next race," the Lotus driver added.

Just after leaving F1 at the end of 2009, Raikkonen said he disliked everything about the sport -- except the cars.

Nothing has changed.

"No. I'm only here for racing," said Raikkonen.

"All the other bulls**t I can do without. If you took away the cars from formula one, I would not be there.

"Formula one plays no role in my personal life. I have a real life! I think for many people, their life is formula one. For me it's not."

Source: GMM

Shaky truce: Suicide bombs kill 9 in Syria’s Idlib

Beirut: Two suicide bombers blew up cars rigged with explosives near a military compound and a hotel in a city in northwestern Syria on Monday, killing at least nine people and wounding nearly 100, state media said. 

The blasts, which also tore two large craters in the ground, were the latest setback for troubled United Nations efforts to end Syria's 13-month-old crisis. A team of UN observers is already on the ground to salvage a cease-fire that went into effect April 12 but has been widely ignored by both sides. UN officials have singled out the regime as the main aggressor in violations of the truce. 

Monday's powerful bombs went off in the city of Idlib, an opposition stronghold that government troops recaptured in a military offensive earlier this year. 

The state-run news agency SANA said security forces and civilians were among those killed, while state TV said that many of the nearly 100 wounded were civilians. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an activist network, put the death toll at more than 20 people.

Syria's pro-government al-Ekhbariya TV aired footage of the aftermath from the blasts, showing torn flesh, smashed cars, twisted debris and blood stains on the pavement. The force of the explosions tore the facade off one multistory building, shattered windows in the area and sent debris flying for hundreds of meters (yards). Pro-government websites said five buildings damaged. 

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attacks. State media blamed "armed terrorists," a term it uses for rebels trying to topple the government. Activists claimed the regime was behind the bombings to discredit the opposition. 

The bombers detonated their explosives near a military compound and near the city's Carlton Hotel, SANA said. 

A local activist, who only gave his first name, Ibrahim, for fear of repercussions, said the two sites are several hundred meters apart and that the explosions went off within five minutes of each other after daybreak Monday. 

Two members of the UN observer team toured the site of the bombings, SANA said. Ibrahim said the observers have been staying at the Carlton, and a pro-government website reported that the hotel sustained some damage. 

Earlier Monday, gunmen fired rocket-propelled grenades at the central bank and a police patrol in the capital of Damascus, wounding four officers and causing light damage to the bank, SANA said.

Monday's bombings were the latest in a series of suicide bombings to hit Syria. 

An al Qaeda-inspired Islamist group called the Al-Nusra Front to Protect the Levant claimed responsibility Monday for a suicide bombing in downtown Damascus that killed at least 10 people on Friday. The Associated Press could not verify the authenticity of Al-Nusra's statement which was posted on a militant website. 

On Sunday, the head of the UN observer team, Maj. Gen. Robert Mood, appealed to both sides to halt the fighting. "We want to have combined efforts focusing on the welfare of the Syrian people, true cessation of violence in all its forms," he said after his arrival in the Syrian capital. Sixteen monitors are on the ground, but the team is to expand to 300. 

Attack on Christians in Nigeria kills 15: witnessAttack on Christians in Nigeria kills 15: witness

Gunmen killed at least 15 people and wounded many more on Sunday in an attack on a university theatre being used by Christian worshippers in Kano, a northern Nigerian city where hundreds have died in Islamist attacks this year. Security sources said gunmen arrived on motorbikes and threw 

small homemade bombs into the theatre before shooting fleeing worshippers. There was sporadic gunfire in other parts of the city later on from attackers driven from the university by the army, the sources said.

"I counted at least 15 dead bodies. I think they were being taken to the Amino Kano teaching hospital," said a witness who did not wish to be identified. He said he saw many more people being treated for injuries.

A security source said at least 15 people were dead and a source at the hospital said by telephone he had seen 10-15 dead bodies brought in with gunshot wounds and dozens more wounded were being treated.

Bayero University spokesman, Mustapha Zahradeen, said two university professors had been killed in the attacks.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

Radical Islamist sect Boko Haram, which wants to carve out an Islamic state in northern Nigeria, has killed hundreds in bomb and gun attacks this year. It mainly targets police and authority figures but has also attacked churches.

The army said it had secured the area.

"The attack took place in one of the lecture theatres used as a place of worship by Christians. For sure there are casualties but I can't say how many," said Ikedichi Iweha, an army spokesman.

"The elements came, used explosives and guns to attack them. We have repelled them and cordoned off the area," Iweha said.

Red Cross officials said they were trying to get access and had no details on casualties.

Bomb explosions
"For over 30 minutes a series of bomb explosions and gun shots took over the old campus, around the academic blocks," said Mohammed Suleiman, a history lecturer at the Bayero University.

"It started at about 9.30 (0830 GMT) this morning ... our school security men had to run for their dear lives. You can see smoke all over," Suleiman said.

Clashes between Boko Haram gunmen and security forces have flared up several times in Kano since the sect killed 186 people in January, its deadliest attack so far.

On Easter Sunday, 36 people were killed when a suspected member of Boko Haram attempted to force a car packed with explosives into a church compound during a service in the northern town of Kaduna.

After being stopped by security he turned back and the bomb exploded near a large group of motorbike taxi riders.

Boko Haram set off a series of bombs across Nigeria on Christmas Day last year, including one at a church outside the capital Abuja that killed at least 37 people.

Africa's most populous nation of more than 160 million is split roughly equally between a largely Christian south and a mostly Muslim north.

Suicide car bombers targeted the offices of Nigerian newspaper This Day in the capital Abuja and in Kaduna last week, killing at least four people in coordinated strikes.

This Day is based in southern Nigeria and is broadly supportive of President Goodluck Jonathan's government - the main target of Boko Haram's insurgency.

Jonathan has been criticised for failing to get a grip on the sect's wave of violence, which has gained momentum since his presidential election victory a year ago.

The president has relied mostly on a heavy-handed military approach to dealing with the violence and an attempt at mediated dialogue with the sect broke off last month after details of negotiations were leaked to the media.

On a visit to the This Day bomb site in Abuja on Saturday Jonathan refused to be drawn on whether talks with Boko Haram were ongoing but he did not count them out.

"Just like a war situation, you may dialogue, you may not dialogue, depending on the circumstances. But we will exploit every means possible to bring this to an end," Jonathan told reporters.

US pastor burns Qurans to urge Iran clergyman release

Miami:  A controversial Florida pastor has burned copies of the Quran and a depiction of the prophet Mohammed to protest the imprisonment in Iran of a Christian clergyman Youcef Nadarkhani.

The burning, attended by 20 people and streamed live over the Internet, was carried out by pastor Terry Jones' church in Gainesville, Florida on Saturday, The Gainesville Sun said, and video of the burning was uploaded to YouTube by the pastor's supporting group "Stand Up America Now."

The Pentagon had urged Jones to reconsider, expressing concern that American soldiers in Afghanistan and elsewhere could be put at greater risk because of the act, according to the newspaper, but Jones insisted to go ahead with the protest in the name of the release of the Christian pastor in Iran.


Mr Nadarkhani was arrested in October 2009 and condemned to death under Islamic sharia law for converting to Christianity when he was 19.

Now 34, he is a pastor of a small evangelical community called the Church of Iran. Iran's supreme court in July 2011 overturned the death sentence and sent the case back to the court in Mr Nadarkhani's hometown of Rasht, in Gilan province.

His retrial took place at the end of September 2011 with no verdict made public.

Several Western countries, including the United States, Britain, Germany and France, condemned the death sentence and said they feared it could be carried out soon.

In March 2011, the US pastor's assistant burned a copy of the Quran and broadcast the ceremony on the Internet, with the images inciting violence in northern Afghanistan, in which at least 12 people were killed.

Moments after the burning on Saturday, the Gainesville fire department issued the church a citation for violating the city's fire ordinances, the report said.

Maoists to release new audio tape on resignation: Odisha MLA

Bhubaneswar:  Three days after being freed, Odisha's Biju Janata Dal (BJD) MLA from Laxmipur, Jhina Hikaka today said the Maoists are likely to release a fresh audio message which could clear the air over his possible resignation as a legislator.

The 37-year-old ruling BJD MLA from Laxmipur said "a new audio tape is likely to be released by the Maoists shortly. It will remove all confusion relating to my resignation. Everything will be clear."

Earlier, after accusing the Odisha government of not doing enough to secure his release from the Maoists, Mr Hikaka had, in a U-turn of sorts, said he had no idea about the efforts undertaken by the authorities. He is also undecided about quitting his post and the party, a promise he made to the Maoists in exchange of his release.
 

• 3:22
• 1:12

Before his release on April 26 Mr Hikaka wrote a letter of undertaking he drafted, wherein he had accused the Odisha government of sheer apathy towards his plight and failure in protecting the rights of the tribals. It also promised that he would quit as the MLA of Laxmipur constituency, as well as snap all ties with his party. But now he says, "I was inside...I had no way of knowing what the government was doing for my release."

Soon after his release, there were strong rumours that a chopper was kept ready to fly the 37-year old tribal MLA to the state capital, Bhubaneswar, for a one-to-one interaction with the Chief Minister and the BJD President Naveen Patnaik over his written undertaking to Praja Court in exchange for his freedom. But instead, he went back to his village, Dumuripadar in Koraput's Laxmipur block to meet his ailing mother, two sons and other relatives. 

Since his release, a number of his party colleagues have called on Mr Hikaka and apparently done their best to dissuade him from resigning as MLA. There are reports that he also had a telephonic chat with the Chief Minister. But even now, there is no word from him on whether he is willing to stick his neck out and defy the Praja Court or stick to his promise to the Maoists and resign.
 
Moments after he was freed, the MLA had parried all questions in regard to his possible resignation and merely said, "whatever you have heard is correct."

Sources have told NDTV that the Chasi Mulia Adivasi Sangh (CMAS) members, who had escorted him from the jungle camp to Balipeta, were enraged to find the MLA going back on his words and not announcing his resignation before the media. Sources say, some of them have decided to recapture him and send him back to the Maoist camp. But the presence of media on the spot held them back.
 
It appears that it was the CMAS leadership and not the Maoists who were pressing for the MLA's resignation. Some believe the CMAS leader Nachika Linga, who has gone underground since 2009, is harbouring the dream of becoming the MLA of Laxmipur to gain legitimacy and ensure the 30-odd 'false cases' against him are dropped.
 
However, sources close to the Maoists strongly deny such 'rumours' and insist Nachika Linga is completely against the so-called 'democratic elections' and will never participate in it unless he chooses to severe his ties with the CMAS. Earlier, during the 2009 general elections, the CMAS had responded to the Maoists'call for poll boycott and refused to take part in the process. However, interestingly, the CMAS went out of its way to take part in the 3-tier Panchayat polls held in February this year and won a number of seats without any contest, and even entered into a written agreement with the ruling BJD before offering to support the party candidate for the Zilla Parishad Chairman's post.
 
People close to Mr Hikaka's family say he is very upset with the 'indifferent' manner in which the BJD government dealt with his abduction and does not want to invite further trouble for himself and his family by openly defying the Praja Court.
 
"The Maoists may have released him physically unhurt, but he is deeply hurt from within and he is yet to recover from the mental shock," said one of his close associates.
 
Mr Hikaka's dilemma has hit both the state government and the ruling party very hard. And for the Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, nothing could have been worse-timed. For the last several weeks he is struggling to cope with a strong challenge from within his party and he would surely avoid making any move that can erode his position in the party or affect the image of his 12-year old government. The state government and the ruling BJD are now working overtime to make sure the MLA does not resign- because that would be sending a wrong signal to the tribal people who account for over 23 per cent of the state's population while showing the government in very poor light both within Odisha and outside.
 
Some BJD leaders believe the Speaker of the state assembly will not accept Hikaka's resignation because his decision to resign was taken when he was held hostage by the Maoists. In fact, the Speaker had refused to accept the resignation of a former MLA after he felt that his decision was 'forced' and not 'voluntary'.
 
Several possibilities and options are being discussed at the highest levels of the administration and the ruling party. Some are in favour of offering Mr Hikaka a ministerial berth in the imminent reshuffle of the cabinet, which can then ensure a strong security cover and grant him the authority to take a number of welfare measures and programmes in the Laxmipur constituency. Some are suggesting that in case Mr Hikaka resigns he should be immediately placed as the chairman of an important state-run corporation and provided security cover.

For NDTV Updates, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and Pinterest

Take complaint to court: Sarkozy to Strauss-Kahn

Paris: French President Nicolas Sarkozy challenged former IMF boss Dominique Strauss-Kahn on Saturday to take legal action over his allegation that "political enemies" scuppered his presidential bid last year by ensuring his sexual encounter with a New York maid was made public. 

Strauss-Kahn, who was the runaway favourite for the Socialist party's presidential nomination before his arrest last May on sexual abuse charges, told London's Guardian newspaper he was convinced his political downfall was choreographed by his political enemies. 

The Guardian's website said that while Strauss-Kahn does not believe his opponents set up the encounter with hotel maid Nafissatou Diallo, he believes operatives linked to Sarkozy played a role in making sure that she went to the police, sparking a major international scandal. 

"I say to Mr Strauss-Kahn, explain yourself with judicial authorities and spare the French people your comments," Sarkozy told a rally in the central French town of Clermont-Ferrand ahead of next weekend's presidential second round. 

"In the midst of an electoral campaign, Mr Strauss-Kahn starts to give morality lessons and indicate that I am the one responsible for what happened to him, it's too much!" 

Amid frustration at economic stagnation and with unemployment running at a 12-year high, Sarkozy trails his Socialist rival Francois Hollande by around 10 percentage points in opinion polls. 

Strauss-Kahn's dramatic arrest last May as he boarded a plane bound for Europe shattered his hopes of winning the presidency and forced his resignation from the IMF days later.

Aditya Sinha: Fear and Loathing in AfPak

Next week marks the anniversary of the assassination of Osama bin Laden, the man who sat in a cave and on September 11, 2001, attacked America. In the decade between the attack and the assassination, the Americans produced a long list of books dealing with AfPak - Obama’s shorthand for Afghanistan-Pakistan, though his advisors believe it ought to be PakAf - but almost all see matters through the prism of the US strategic establishment.

Bob Woodward probably covers wider ground than most, but only because he is, as the late essayist Christopher Hitchens put it, “stenographer to the stars”; and still, his books have not been the best on the subject. (Tuesday will see the release of Peter Bergen’s Manhunt: The Ten-Year Search for Bin Laden from 9/11 to Abbottabad, which promises to be fairly juicy.) Surpassing them all, arguably, is Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid, whose Taliban: Militant Islam, Fundamentalism, and Oil in Central Asia fortuitously published just before 9/11 suddenly became a handbook for not just those of us covering the War on Terror but the entire planet. Since then, Rashid has put his expertise to good use, producing newspaper and magazine articles that rival The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh for both inside information and deep perspective. In 2008, he published Descent into Chaos: The US and the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia which though demandingly dull reading, was uncannily prescient of how things would unfold in the region. And now comes his Pakistan on the Brink: The future of Pakistan, Afghanistan and the West which makes for an absorbing, if sobering, read.

It begins with an account of the secret US operation to kill Bin Laden; it is a defining incident not just because 9/11 began a chain of events which changed the world (the destruction of Iraq, the democratisation of West Asia, the global trend of encroachment on civil liberties in the name of security, etc), and not just because the hunt for Osama changed warfare in that the unmanned aerial vehicle has become the weapon of choice for the world’s militaries, but also because the unilateral operation defined bilateral relations in such a way that Rashid says: “The United States and Pakistan are just short of going to war.” What a sea-change from their relationship until 9/11.

Ahmed Rashid’s riveting account of the Osama operation beat Bergen’s upcoming book and a probably Woodward book on the subject (I’d bet on the Woodward book to come out shortly before the November US presidential elections). In this, and with the various political analyses in the book, Rashid was helped by wide access: regular meetings with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, a briefing to US President Barack Obama, briefings from the UN hierarchy and of course, sources all over the Pakistani establishment. His big source in the US government was apparently the late Richard Holbrooke, the special envoy for AfPak, who suddenly died at the end of 2010, perhaps due to turf wars in the US administration which Obama could not mediate and which contributed to the failure to find a way forward in AfPak.

The Osama operation made the Pakistanis livid. Faced with angry junior officers, Army Chief General Parvez Kayani “took the easy way out by blaming the entire episode on the Americans for breaching Pakistan’s sovereignty - but he failed to answer the obvious questions: What had bin Laden been doing in Abbottabad for six years, and why had the ISI not found him?” Rashid asks. He says something you rarely hear his countrymen publicly ask, that the violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty was actually by Osama, and not by Obama.

For the duration that Osama was a fugitive many Indians smirked at how Pakistan appeared to be pulling the wool over the US’s eyes. It turns out that the US wasn’t fooled, and that it was making plans. As CIA director, Leon Panetta gave his government a list of clandestine operations he wanted, including “even setting up a parallel intelligence organisation that would be hidden from the ISI”. In 2009, Obama “had secretly authorised the CIA to conduct large-scale recruitment of Pakistanis to establish a clandestine intelligence operation, with the help of fifty CIA officers… In other words, the Americans had set up a specific, secret, second intelligence agency to find Osama bin Laden.” Obviously, despite the sheer audacity of the idea of a secret spy outfit right under the ISI’s nose, it was something that had to be done. Obviously, it would seriously injure bilateral relations.

The biggest factor in souring relations was the US approach to Afghanistan, for Obama never made it clear what he wanted. We know that he wants to start leaving Afghanistan by 2014; it’s a political decision given the domestic unpopularity of the war. We know that he has overcome the American revulsion to negotiating with the Taliban (as even India has); “the Taliban had matured considerably since the 1990s”, having tired of war and also having tired of being ruthlessly under the ISI thumb. We know he wants to leave a permanent base in Afghanistan.

But beyond that, the Americans have never clearly defined a political approach to sorting out Afghanistan; as Bob Woodward’s Obama’s Wars points out, Obama’s first year was spent fighting a battle with the Pentagon on another troop “surge” with which he was able to sell his pull-out plan. Holbrooke’s brief was never taken seriously. The Americans, as Rashid tells us, started negotiating with the Taliban without telling Pakistan, but once the ISI found out, it threw the negotiator in jail. The ISI then planted a phony negotiator who tripped the process up. The Americans never had a strategy for Karzai, around whom nepotism and corruption intensified. The US was unable to help the Afghans build an economy, and Rashid predicts that when troops begin leaving, Afghanistan will collapse in an economic depression.

The US has to now deal with the Pakistan Taliban, whose fingers are itching for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. It’s not a far-fetched dream. One of the book’s implications is that as the Pakistan state weakens so does the Pakistan Army. Though the Army dominates the state, it is still part of it. If you watch Gen Kayani’s pattern of behavior, as Rashid does, you begin to see that Gen Kayani is a singularly weak Army Chief, made weaker by President Asif Ali Zardari granting him an extension. There truly is a Mexican standoff between the extremists, the corrupt civilians and the Army. How Pakistan pulls itself out of this is difficult to see, though you can’t blame Rashid for trying to figure a way out.

Since we keep hearing about how Pakistan wants India out of Afghanistan (and how the ISI uses the Haqqani Taliban against Indian interests), Rashid views are refreshing: “Pakistan accepts only… no role for India - yet India is the region’s economic powerhouse and is the most likely investor in Afghanistan’s economy,” he writes. “A peaceful solution to the Afghan war must include the participation of India.”

While reading this fascinating and lively collection of essays, I wondered whether Ahmed Rashid would have written this book had Al Gore become president instead of George W Bush. Would Gore have invaded Iraq, diverting resources that could have helped Afghanistan to its feet, as Rashid argues? After all, Iraq was an American neo-conservative project. Who knows? The Americans suffered a huge blow to their pride and prestige with 9/11, and as it involved Arabs they could not let the Arab World go unpunished. They had to show the world that they could destroy a country that was brazenly against it. In that sense, with Pakistan’s Taliban far from defeated, and the nuclear-armed military losing its grip with each passing day, you would have to say that Pakistan is really and truly on the brink.

The writer is the Editor-in-Chief, DNA, based in Mumbai