PAKPAC Press Releases

PAKPAC releases survey results of the Pakistani American Community views on Kerry Lugar-Berman Bill

PAKPAC conducted an online survey of the Pakistani American Community about the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Bill. A total of 214 individuals participated in the survey

The responses to the questions include asking whether the Pakistani-American community had actually read the bill. The results show that a significant proportion (40%) had actually read the text of the bill while the majority had not read the actual text of the bill.  One interesting finding was that the source of information that the Pakistani-American community were receiving on the bill included from the Pakistani media.  This would include the satellite based channels and also the possibility of Pakistan based web sites. The other source was actual reading of the bill followed by word of mouth.

Most of the people who responded had mentioned that they supported the bill and its development, but however overwhelming majority felt that this bill was not what that they had hoped and worked for and hoped it would be like.

People agreed in the significant majority that they believed that the people of Pakistan needed help at the present time. Majority of the people also felt that this support to the people in Pakistan needs to be provided either through the Pakistani NGOs or the Pakistani-American non-governmental organizations and only a small minority felt that the support should go through the Government of Pakistan.

About 73% of the respondents felt that the main area of concern that they had problem with the bill was with the section 203 on the limitations on certain assistance.

Majority felt that the parts of the bill that talk about strengthening the democracy in Pakistan were reasonable and useful. The people also felt that the aid to Pakistan need to be overseen specifically with focus on that it goes into the areas where it is intended to be.

The questions also discussed whether Pakistan needed support for counter insurgency and a significant proportion felt that the counter insurgency was not up to quality as it was needed at this time. When asked the voices coming out of Pakistan, which are reasonable voices to help strengthen the US/Pakistan relationship, overwhelming majority felt that the civil society was part of Pakistan’s society, which was likely to strengthen Pakistan/US relationship.  Interestingly people also felt that the Pakistani army was another part of the Pakistani society and establishment, which would be able to strengthen US/Pakistan relations.  Within the political parties, Pakistan Peoples Party was selected amongst the people as the likely source or the political party to work towards the strengthening Pakistan/US relations.

The people felt that the Pakistani media was not playing a constructive role in strengthening Pakistan/United States relationship and they felt with even more of the majority that United States media was playing a very negative role in strengthening Pakistan/United States relationship.

People agreed that nuclear proliferation is not good for the world and while they agreed that it was not good for the world, also a slight majority felt that the US should not be concerned about nuclear proliferation from Pakistan.

When asked about the different components of the section 203 of the bill, it appears that the majority of the people had concerns of the part of the bill which requires relevant information from or direct access to Pakistani Nationals Associated with nuclear weapons related work.  This was followed by the concerning area where statement in the bill made about Pakistan even support to elements within the Pakistani military or its intelligence to extremist to terrorist groups was something that has not been worded well and this was a concern to the significant proportion of the people as well.

The people felt that the House Side of the initial bill was poorly written bill and they also felt that that part of the bill was what had led to some of the challenges between Pakistan/US relationship. When asked if there were elements within the minority of the Indian groups that had led to some of these changes through the head of the Foreign Relation Committee of the House, the people felt that that would be a concern and they felt strongly that that actions were contributing to harming US interest in the region.  They also strongly felt that because such actions had led to harming the US interest in the region. When asked about the people who had done this to harm US interests not only at home, but abroad should be held accountable especially if they were identified to be working for entities and groups, which were not working in US interests, overwhelming majority agreed on it.

About 86% of the people had felt that the bill that came from the Senate initially was the right bill.  People also felt that the community needs to be much more politically involved to make sure that US interest are not compromised especially with respect to Pakistan/US relationship by small fringe elements, which working through small group of legislators can harm US interests.

For detail questions and individual responses please visit

For PAKPAC Position on Kerry Lugar Berman bill please visit

Archived Press Releases

News

Pakistani-Americans key to promoting ties: Haqqani

WASHINGTON: Pakistani-Americans can play a key role in promoting understanding and trust between Pakistan and the United States by influencing Washington’s policy-making process, Ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani told a gathering on the Capitol Hill.

Speaking at an advocacy day event organized by the Pakistani-American Public Affairs Committee (PAKPAC), the ambassador urged structured efforts towards strengthening the important relationship.

In this respect, Haqqani particularly cited the need for increased interaction between members of the community and American lawmakers at both grassroots level and in the legislative process in Washington.

‘Pakistani-Americans can help bridge the trust gap between the two countries, who both now desire to foster a long-term partnership,’ he stated at the day-long event, which explored the role of the community in enhancing Pakistan-U.S. partnership.

Haqqani applauded the Pakistani-Americans for their distinguished services in some highly competitive fields in the United States like medicine and information technology.

However, he drew the attention of the Pakistani community to the importance of having a larger presence in thinking professions and in the process becoming part of the mainstream academia, media, research-intensive institutions and think tanks and various sectors of economy. Availing opportunities in these fields will help amplify voice of the community and forge a better understanding of Pakistan and challenges facing the Pakistani nation, he added.

The envoy underscored that Pakistan ‘will never compromise its sovereignty and has some genuine security concerns’ in the region.

He also spoke about diplomatic efforts the embassy made to get toned down language and strict conditions as proposed in the original draft of the House of Representatives version of the Kerry-Lugar Act.

A host of American lawmakers spoke at the invitation of PAKPAC leaders and members. These included Senator Bob Casey (D-PA), Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland), Senator Ron Wyden( D-OR), Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, co-chair of the Pakistani-American caucus, Congressman Andre Carson (D-IN), Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), Congresswoman Donna Edwards (D-MD), Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), Congressman Gary Peters (D-MI), Congressman John Sarbanes (D-MD) and Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).

Besides, US officials from the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, USAID, and staffers of lawmakers attended the event.—APP

Need to counter McCarthyism - Faiz Rehman
American political system by design - in theory as well as practice - offers unparalleled access and openness to its citizens regardless of national origin, race, religion and other factors that may retard people’s participation in the system. This is not to say that competing interests in an open society do not use not-so-ethical means to create roadblocks in each other’s way. Unfortunately, this is still a common occurrence in American society. One such ugly campaign was launched by four members of Congress against the Muslim American community. The group of four, all of them from Dick Cheney’s party (yes, he is still around and offering stealth leadership) last week accused, without evidence, a Muslim group of planting “spies” in the Congress and called on the government to investigate it. The four members, who have reserved a place for themselves in the Hall of Shame, were Representatives Trent Franks (Arizona), Sue Myrick (North Carolina), John Shadegg (Arizona), and Paul Broun (Georgia). All of them Republicans! Two members are from Arizona, former Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain’s state, and two others hail from the southern states, not famous for tolerance and diversity.

Undoubtedly, these four members are a tiny minority even in the Grand Old Party, but the fact that these members had the audacity to hold a press conference on Capitol Hill and make serious allegations against Muslim staffers and interns on the Hill, and not a single member of their party has distanced himself/herself from these statements yet, speaks volumes about the challenges Americans still struggle to overcome. The group accused of planting these “spies,” the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR), is a prominent civil rights group based in Washington with offices nationwide.

These centuries-old tactics to harass and contain a community are not new to America. Almost every community from Catholics to the Jews, and the Irish to Italian and the African American, has experienced way harsher times in the land of the free. Actually, there was a name given to such tactics, McCarthyism, which was coined after a US senator’s name in the not so distant past. Senator Joseph McCarthy used the unfounded and unsubstantiated scare of Communism as a tool to silence his opponents and condemn them to oblivion, destroying thousands of careers and lives through his Machiavellian tactics.

This brings me to underscore the need for relentless participation and activism by the Muslim and Pakistani American communities in the American political process. Recent American history is full of examples from the nations who have benefited handsomely by activism, political participation, and financial success of their respective diasporas in the United States. Chinese Americans have played a well-recognized role in China’s thrilling rise as a financial giant. Chinese Americans are part of the Obama Administration, including a Cabinet position, have representation in the Congress, have elected mayors and governors, and have taken billions of dollars as investment to their motherland. Israel exercises influence in every sphere of American society due to a very proactive pro-Israel lobby. Indian Americans are the most recent addition to this unique American phenomenon. They have helped, to their credit, in the election of an Indian-origin governor, they are in state legislatures, mayors, councilmen, heads of major US corporations, faculty chairs, professors, think-tank scholars, and what have you. To top it all, the Obama Administration has appointed an unprecedented number of Indian Americans in every department, including State, Justice, and the White House at various levels of bureaucracy and sub-cabinet positions. Young Indian Americans passionately serve as interns and full time staffers in the offices of several members of Congress and have access to opportunities for input in legislation. This is not due to an Indian conspiracy against Pakistan and the Muslims. They have arrived at these milestones with a lot of hard work, unity of purpose, and gargantuan resources provided by an array of successful Indian American businessmen, and, of course, stability and a functioning democracy back home has helped greatly.

The good news is that all these opportunities and roadmaps are available to other communities as well, including the Pakistani Americans. There is no reason for the Pakistani Americans to lag behind. Pakistani Americans are already serving, though in a much smaller number and level, in several positions in state legislatures, Congress, and the administration. But it is not enough to give them the clout and a seat on the proverbial table. However, one significant step in this direction was taken here through an event on Capitol Hill. This week the Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee, (PAKPAC) commonly known as PakPac, hosted over 25 members of Congress and senators at its semi-annual event on the Hill. Not surprisingly, the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act featured prominently in the discussions and as expected was vehemently defended by the US legislators. Despite an impressive show put up by the PakPac, the community still lacks seriously in resources, skills, commitment, unity of purpose, and a clear-cut direction.
Leaders in both Pakistani and US governments don’t get tired of ceremonially trumpeting the value of the community in bridging the gap between the two nations. Both, however, stand guilty of ignoring the strategic significance of the Pakistani American community in matters important in bilateral relations. The Kerry-Lugar Bill is again such an example where the community and its institutions - in whatever shape and form - could have been a great source of input and guidance, but were totally ignored. Understandably, the onus for offering advice and input to the legislature is on the community; still the earth-shattering reaction in Pakistan over the bill and equally strong the sense of surprise in the corridors of power in Washington would have shattered a lot less earth in both capitals had the community been given a chance to speak at some congressional hearings and the congressional staffers had taken some time to seek input from a few community advocacy groups!

Kashmir: Not a Movement of Terrorism: Dr. Fai

New Haven, Connecticut.  Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai, Executive Director, Kashmiri American Council/Kashmir Center said, “The persistence of the Kashmir problem has been a source of weakness for both India and Pakistan.  It has diminished both these neighboring countries.  The resolution of this dispute will guarantee peace and prosperity not only to Kashmir but also to the whole region of South Asia.”  Dr. Fai was invited as a guest speaker by the South Asian Society (SAS) at the Yale University.  The lecture was moderated by Mr. Ashish Mitter, Chair, Political Forum of SAS. 

Dr. Fai emphasized that India’s occupation of Kashmir has been left undisturbed by the international community, even though its validity has never been accepted.  At no stage, however, have the people of Kashmir shown themselves to be reconciled to it.

He reiterated that an indication of the misplaced focus by so-called South Asian experts is the wrong-headed talk about the sanctity of the Line of Control in Kashmir.  This line was originally formalized by the international agreements as a temporary Cease-fire Line pending the demilitarization of the State of Jammu & Kashmir and the holding of a plebiscite to determine its future. The people of Kashmir are not resigned to its becoming some kind of an international border.

Dr. Fai said that the Government of India needs to listen to her delegate Mr. N. Gopalaswami, who said at the United Nations on January 15, 1948,” The question of the future status of Kashmir vis-à-vis her neighbours and the world at large, and a further question, namely, whether she should withdraw from her accession to India, and either accede to Pakistan or remain independent, with a right to claim admission as a Member of the United Nations – all this we have recognized to be a matter for unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir, after normal life is restored to them.”

Dr. Fai quoted Mr. Vir Sanghvi who wrote in the Hindustan Times on August 16, 2008, “So, here’s my question: why are we still hanging on to Kashmir if the Kashmiris don’t want to have anything to do with us?...we should hold a referendum in the Valley. Let the Kashmiris determine their own destiny. If they want to stay in India, they are welcome. But if they don’t, then we have no moral right to force them to remain.”

Dr. Fai rejected India’s allegation that there is terrorism in Kashmir.  He said what could be less terrorist – than the phenomenon of virtually the whole population of Srinagar – at times more than one million – coming out on the streets, marching to the local office of the United Nations in order to lodge a non-violent protest against the continuance of Indian occupation.  Certainly, terrorists cannot compose the entire populations of the major towns of Indian-Occupied Kashmir.  One million people reflect the true nature of the peaceful Kashmiri resistance movement and not a movement of terrorism. 

Dr. Fai concluded that the Kashmir dispute cannot be resolved militarily. It is a political issue and needs to be resolved through peaceful political means.  So, the first step is that there has to be a cease-fire from all sides that must be followed by negotiations.  Negotiations cannot and should not be carried out at a time when parties are killing each other.  Kashmir must be demilitarized, on the one hand, and de-terrorized on the other.

Viewpoint

The way forward - Hamid Mir
Many Pakistanis still remember the prediction of a US military advisor, David Kalcullin, in March this year. He claimed that Pakistan may collapse in the next six months and Taliban will take over Islamabad. Six months passed in September 2009. Pakistan is not only intact but Pakistani security forces defeated Taliban in Swat. Now Pakistan Army has started a new operation in South Waziristan but misunderstandings about Pakistan are still visible in Washington. This time US policy makers fear a military coup against Zardari-led government in Pakistan. They think that a successful operation in South Waziristan will give more credibility and popularity to Pakistan Army, which will further undermine the authority of Zardari government in Pakistan. Very few people in Washington realise that tension between Pakistan Army and President Zardari were actually created by Kerry-Lugar Bill.

US Congressman John F Tierney is the one who led the efforts to include several controversial provisions in the Kerry-Lugar Bill. He is the chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs in the US Congress. He tried his level best to defend the Kerry-Lugar Bill in a conference on US-Pakistan relations in Harvard University the other day. Harvard Extension International Relations Club organized the Conference. The US ambassador of Pakistan, Mr Hussain Haqqani, PML-N secretary information Ahsan Iqbal, myself and some other experts were also invited to speak there. This conference provided an excellent opportunity to the students and academia of Harvard to listen the arguments from both sides but unfortunately there was no consensus that how to move forward jointly in the right direction. Ambassador Haqqani rightly said that the only way forward is democracy. US must support democracy in Pakistan. When I raised a question why the US is not listening to the voice of democracy in Pakistan coming through an elected parliament? There was no answer from US side. Read full article

How the west can exit the Afghan quagmire -  Maleeha Lodhi and Anatol Lieven

The political half of America’s strategy in Afghanistan is now in ruins. This is not just due to the debacle of the Afghan presidential elections. Eight years after US troops arrived in the country, as General Stanley McChrystal conceded in his report to President Barack Obama, there is a “crisis of confidence” among the Afghan people in their government.

As a result of the collapse of the political strategy, Washington’s military mission now appears to have no goal beyond the avoidance of defeat. Asked to define victory, the US special envoy, Richard Holbrooke, could only say, “We’ll know it when we see it.” American and allied soldiers should not be asked to sacrifice their lives for such an unclear goal.

But the west should not simply leave. That would repeat the error of the 1990s when the US abandoned the region, contributing to the chaos that he lped nurture the attacks of September 11 2001. The choice is not between scuttling away or deepening an open-ended military engagement. Neither is feasible.

The US and its allies need to recognise two facts and shape their strategy accordingly: successful “nation-building” in Afghanistan can only be undertaken by Afghanistan’s own people; and, above all, it is the western military presence in Afghanistan that is driving support for the Taliban both there and in Pakistan. Put these together and what results is the need for a carefully phased exit strategy combined with a military and diplomatic strategy vis-a-vis the Taliban.

This will involve talking to the Taliban leadership. The Taliban today probably does not enjoy the support of a majority of Pashtuns – but then, neither the IRA in Northern Ireland nor the FLN in Algeria were supported by a majority of their communities. To continue their fight indefinitely, such groups only need to be stronger than any other group in their community, and to appeal to one deeply felt idea. In the case of the Pashtuns of Afghanistan and Pakistan, that is a strong desire for the departure of western forces from Afghanistan. From this point of view, the notion that the western presence is protecting Pakistan from the Taliban misses the point completely.

The west should therefore pursue a political solution, open negotiations with the Taliban and offer a timetable for a phased withdrawal in return for a ceasefire. This should begin with the military pulling out of specific areas in return for Taliban guarantees not to attack western bases and Afghan authorities in those areas.

If the Taliban refuses such terms, then military pressure should continue. The point should not be to eliminate the Taliban – which is impossible – but to persuade it to agree to a deal. Similarly, a new approach to Pakistan should focus not on putting pressure on the Pakistani state to destroy the Afghan Taliban on its territory, but on persuading Islamabad to help bring the Taliban to the negotiating table. Meanwhile, Kabul should be secured as a neutral space by the establishment of a UN peacekeeping force from Muslim countries.

This approach should be combined with political reforms to decentralise the Afghan state and with a move from a presidential to a parliamentary form of government. In the parliamentary elections due next year political parties should be allowed to stand (at present this is banned). The Taliban should be encouraged to form a political party, which could take local power in many Pashtun areas through the political process and share in central government in Kabul. The west’s central condition must be that the Taliban pledge not to permit sanctuaries for terrorism in areas it may dominate. Indications that the Taliban’s alliance with al-Qaeda may be fraying need to be seriously tested .

Why should the Taliban agree to these terms if the west is leaving anyway? Because otherwise, after withdrawing ground forces, the US will give massive long-term military aid and air support to the anti-Taliban forces of non-Pashtun ethnicities, rekindling the civil wars of the 1990s, but on terms vastly disadvantageous to the Taliban and the Pashtuns.

This approach will not bring quick results. But the military-diplomatic strategy we have proposed offers a chance of a settlement and orderly withdrawal – whereas the present strategy offers only endless quagmire.

Are Development Dollars in Pakistan Being Well Spent? -  Ken Stier

To development experts who have long called for a shift in strategy in the Muslim world, it would seem like cause for celebration. After years of devoting the bulk of U.S. aid to Pakistan to military assistance, Washington is about to shift that equation. Under legislation approved by the Senate last week and by the House on Wednesday, Pakistan can expect to receive $1.5 billion of non-military (or civilian) aid for each of the next five years, which triples previous levels and will roughly balance out the amount of military aid the U.S. gives to Pakistan.

But getting the money is only half the battle; how well it works — and whether it helps to change strong anti-American sentiment — depends on getting it to the right people and projects on the ground. That job principally falls to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and many critics say its performance isn't very encouraging. "When you are spending large amounts of money at arm's length, operating in hostile environments, it is very easy for money to get spent corruptly and/or badly, and that is what I have seen in our health programs," says Roger Bates of the American Enterprise Institute, a trenchant USAID critic. Read full article

All is not yet lost Dialogue needed that includes Pushtuns -  Dr. Nasim Ashraf

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's report told us what we were afraid to hear. We are going to lose the war in Afghanistan! President Obama's Afghanistan-Pakistan policy, launched just in March, whose main goal was to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda, doesn't seem to be going well. Growing insurgency and a totally ineffective and discredited government in Afghanistan pose lethal threats that can result in America's total defeat unless something is done immediately.

I agree with Gen. McChrystal that more troops may be needed presently. However, before additional troops are sent to Afghanistan, there must be a clear operational strategy as well as a political surge. Military victory is not possible, and the path of extended military engagement is a recipe for disaster.

But simply abandoning the region is also not an option. This would be the same mistake the United States made in 1989 after helping to expel the Soviet army from Afghanistan.

The sooner Afghanistan is stabilized politically, the earlier the United States can disengage militarily. How does America do that? Read full article

University blasts in Pakistan and the future of Islam - Mark LeVine

Lund, Sweden - When the Taliban attacked the International Islamic University in Pakistan this week, many were shocked that militants were targeting an Islamic school. In fact, the double suicide bombers were going after a university that is at the forefront of changing the way Islamic and Western knowledge are brought together in the Muslim world.

I also had some misconceptions before I had lectured in the very building where the second bombing took place. But the encounters I had there in 2007 utterly changed my understanding of Pakistan, as well as the future of Islam.

I had only landed in Islamabad just a few hours before I was scheduled to give my first talk at the university, and whether it was the 13-hour time difference with Los Angeles, two nights flying in coach, or walking through an arrivals lounge that had recently been attacked by terrorists, I felt more uneasy about being in Pakistan than Baghdad or Gaza during their own periods of intense violence.

Matters weren't helped when I was introduced to a group of male religious studies students by my host as someone who'd lived in Israel and speaks Hebrew. In fact, my stomach sank a bit – especially as their long beards and traditional dress reminded me a lot more of the Taliban than the graduate students I normally spend time with.

But as with most things in Pakistan, appearances were deceiving, and the situation was far more complex, and inspiring, than I'd imagined.

It turned out that the students with whom I was meeting weren't merely studying Islam, they were PhD students in comparative religion. They were situating Islam, its history, and its religious dynamics within the broader study of religious experience worldwide. Read full article

Events & Activities

Pakistani NGO’s highlight their projects at Capital Hill

Pakistan American Public Affairs Committee (PAKPAC)  organized a highly content packed event about the Role of the Pakistani American Community in   United States and Pakistan Enhanced Partnership - on Oct 20th in Rayburn House office Building  Capital Hill Washington DC.  Over 150 Pakistani Americans  travelled from across the nation to attend the eight hour long event.

Objectives of the event were: 

·           Get a clearer understanding of the implications of Kerry Lugar Berman bill for both US & Pakistan

·           Inform US Administration Officials and Legislators about the work of Pakistan focused NGO’s, and to secure funding from USAID for NGO’s operations

·           Highlight to US Administration Officials and Legislators specific needed projects in Pakistan

·           Help USAID and other donor agencies identify NGO’s to partner with for economic assistance to Pakistan

·           Inform US Agencies of the needs and issues faced by the Pakistani American Community

·           Inform the Pakistani American Community as to how the US agencies are protecting the rights of Pakistani American community

·           Develop strategy to educate and inform about the needs of each other 

The event was divided into three sessions, the first session as to highlight the work Pakistani NGO’s are involved with. Following NGO’s presented their projects in the morning session. Mr. Charles North Special Advisor of USAID to Afghanistan and Pakistan addressed the group and asked for closer cooperation between USAID and Pakistan based NGO’s. He indicated that once money from Kerry Lugar Berman Bill is appropriated, USAID will then be actively working with Pakistani NGO”s.

A large number of Congresspersons attended the lunch event and had a very lively discussion about the Kerry Lugar Berman bill with the attendees.  The most common theme from eth Congresspersons was that Kerry Lugar Berman Bill does not undermine Pakistan’s sovereignty, and has been mischaracterized by the Pakistan media and political parties. However, the Congresspersons concluded that it is up to the Pakistan government and people of Pakistan to accept or reject the aid package.

Ambassador Haqqani in his address to the group, urged the Pakistani American Community to get more engaged, he asked them they should be talking to their elected representatives not one day a year but all year around. He requested them to leave Pakistan politics and political parties’ interest back home, and focus on the politics and political parties of USA.

In the third session, officers from various Governmental agencies presented an overview of their services to the community, and highlighted what courses are available to the community to address their grievances.

See complete set of pictures of the event (courtesy- Dr. Rashid Chotani)

SESSION II Speeches & Q &A by Legislators

Speeches by Dignitaries Ambassador Haqqani Ambassador of Pakistan to United States

SESSION III

Immigration

USCIS Reminds Applicants for Travel Documents to Apply Early

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reminds individuals that they must obtain Advance Parole – permission to reenter the United States after traveling abroad – from USCIS before traveling abroad if they have:

                        been granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS);

                        a pending application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident (LPR);

                        a pending application for relief under section 203 of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA 203);

                        a pending asylum application; or

                        a pending application for legalization.

To obtain Advance Parole, individuals must file Form I-131, Application for Travel Document, which is available under “Forms” on USCIS’ Web site.

Advance Parole is permission to reenter the United States after traveling abroad. Advance Parole is an extraordinary measure used sparingly to allow an otherwise inadmissible individual to enter the United States due to compelling circumstances. By law, certain individuals must apply for a travel document and have Advance Parole approved before leaving the United States. Attempts to reenter the United States without prior authorization may have severe consequences since individuals requiring advance parole may be unable to return to the United States and their pending applications may be denied or administratively closed.

Applicants planning to travel abroad should plan ahead since Advance Parole processing times take about 90 days, depending on the USCIS office location. Instructions for filing Form I-131 provide details on where to mail travel document applications and should be followed carefully to avoid delay. For more information on Advance Parole see How Do I Get a Travel Document? and instructions for Form I-131.

Before making any plans to travel abroad, all individuals with pending applications for adjustment of status, relief under NACARA 203, or asylum are urged to consult an immigration attorney or immigration assistance organization accredited by the Board of Immigration Appeals, or call the USCIS Customer Service Center at 1 (800) 375-5283.  For more information on USCIS and its programs, visit www.uscis.gov.

For more information read  fact sheet

USCIS revises FORM I-601, Application for waiver of grounds of inadmissibility  

USCIS has revised Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Revision Date 04/06/09 N, OMB Expiration Date 04/30/11) to make it easier for applicants to complete. Applicants may now select from a list of grounds of inadmissibility on the form itself and mark all which apply to them in order to request a waiver. In addition to the list, the form includes a section where applicants can describe, in their own words, why they believe they are inadmissible. In the previous edition of Form I-601, information about grounds of inadmissibility could only be found of the form's instructions. 

The new Form I-601 and its filing instructions, including instructions on where to file and applicable fees, can be found on our website at www.uscis.gov.  In accordance with 8 CFR 103.7(c)(5), USCIS may waive the filing fee in an individual case based on the individual’s inability to pay, only if the individual filing the a Form I-601 is: 

·                     An alien who in valid T or U nonimmigrant status;

·                     An approved VAWA self-petitioner; or

·                     An alien, seeking adjustment of status, to whom section 212(a)(4) of the Act does not apply, so that the alien is not required to prove that he or she is not likely to become a public charge.

Guidance on how to request a fee waiver can be found on our website at www.uscis.gov/feewaiver.

Religious Freedom

FBI Produces Redacted Surveillance Guidelines

On September 16, 2009, Muslim Advocates filed suit demanding that the FBI release the guidelines used by its agent to monitor the activities of innocent Americans.  In response to the lawsuit -- and considerable media coverage [ see Politico article ] -- the FBI released a heavily redacted version of the surveillance guidelines on September 25, 2009.  As a result, Muslim Advocates yesterday filed an amended complaint to press the FBI to release the surveillance guidelines in their entirety.

While key sections were concealed, the guidelines nevertheless describe a troubling evolution of the FBI from an agency focused on fighting crime to an agency focused on tracking the everyday lives of millions of law-abiding Americans, particularly Muslims.  The guidelines permit identifying and monitoring locations of concentrated racial and ethnic communities, and the businesses, vocations, travel, financial practices, and charitable giving of American Muslims.  They confirm concerns that the FBI has been monitoring millions of law-abiding American Muslims, a practice that was recently described by a former FBI agent.

Furthermore, the FBI redacted the entire chapter on the use of informants in religious and political organizations, which is of particular significance given reports that the FBI is actively recruiting and cultivating agent provocateurs and sometimes coercing community members to become informants to infiltrate mosques and spy on American Muslims.

The amended complaint filed by Muslim Advocates in federal court seeks the full and complete guidelines without redactions.  Full disclosure is required to allow Muslim Advocates and the public to assess the constitutionality of the guidelines and understand the full scope of the FBI's surveillance powers.

Community Action

Call Congress to Support Fair Treatment of Immigrants and Join a Webinar on Health Reform

Congress is working rapidly on health reform legislation. Yet, many immigrants may be left out of changes making the health care system more accessible and affordable. For example, did you know that, in spite of paying taxes to support these programs, most legal immigrants must currently wait 5 years before being eligible for Medicaid, Medicare, and CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program)? Waiting five years for affordable health care is simply too long for anyone who needs vital medical treatment.

"My name is ___________ and I live in ____________. I am calling to let you know that I want to end the five-year waiting period for legal immigrants in Medicaid, Medicare, and CHIP. I believe immigrants should be treated fairly when it comes to health care reform."

Community members are encouraged to contact the following three offices:

• Speaker Nancy Pelosi at (202) 225-0100 or via email

• House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at (202) 225-3130 or via email

• Your local Representative (You can find your Representative by clicking here and then calling the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to be connected)

Want to learn more about health care issues affecting the South Asian community?

• Join a webinar on "Health Reform and the South Asian Community" on  Monday, October 26th at 2 pm EST/1 pm CST/11 am PST to learn the latest from experts and discuss what it means for the South Asian community. Register for the webinar by clicking here. (After registering you will receive a confirmation email with a link and call-in information and access code. Before the webinar, click the link and call in to the number from your confirmation email. When prompted, enter the access code.)

• Check out two health reform factsheets developed by SAALT on "What You Need to Know about Health Insurance Reform" and "Health Care Issues Affecting South Asians in the United States"

• Learn more about health care issues affecting immigrants by visiting the APIA Health Forum's, the Asian American Justice Center's, and the National Immigration Law Center's websites.

For additional information, contact SAALT at saalt@saalt.org.

Community Alert

Foreign Service Diplomatic Courier openings in US State Department

US State Department is seeking applications for Foreign Service Diplomatic Courier positions. Click here  (http://careers.state.gov/specialist/opportunities/dipcour.html) for more information, and to start the application process. Please note that the deadline to submit completed applications is October 29, 2009.
All potential applicants are strongly urged to read the entire vacancy announcement to ensure that they meet all of the requirements for this position, and that they fully understand the special circumstances involving a career in the Foreign Service before applying.
All applicants must be U.S. citizens, at least 20 years old to apply and at least 21 years of age to be appointed. By law, all career candidates must be appointed to the Foreign Service prior to the month which they reach 60 years of age (preference-eligible veterans excepted).

Fundraiser

Fundraiser for Congressman Andre Carson

Assad Akhter
Cordially invites you to a reception honoring

Congressman André Carson (IN-07)
Committee on Financial Services

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009  6:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

 at Jacobs House  413 New Jersey Avenue, SE  Washington, DC

Contribution Levels:
$1,000 Host , $500 Patron , $100 Supporter  $50 Friend

Please make Contributions Payable to:
André Carson for Congress ,499 South Capitol Street, SW, Suite 422  Washington, DC 20003
Please RSVP to James Modie or Randy Broz at (202) 479-2527 or jmodie@politicaldg.com

Future Activities

Panel Discussion on “The Changing Role of Women in Pakistan ”

Wednesday, October 28 3:30-5:00pm, Cannon House Office Building Room 121, Washington DC

Hosted by: Congresswoman Jackson Lee and the Pakistan Caucus

Participants:

·        Mukhtar Mai- Women’s rights organizer and international figure because of her personal story.

·        Asma Jahangir- Lawyer and advocate for women’s rights, was a Special Rapporteur to the United Nations.

·        Somy Ali- American film-maker, advocate for women’s rights, and model.

USCIS National Stakeholder meeting

USCIS National Stakeholder meeting will be held on October 27 at 2:00 p.m. in the Tomich Conference Center, 1^st floor, 111 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington D.C. 20529

Upcoming Seminars at Think Tanks

To get information about future seminars and events relating to US-Pakistan relations, please visit the following websites

Atlantic Council

Brookings Institution

Heritage Foundation

Middle East Institute

SAIS