January 21, 2017

Bruce Riedel: Covert or Coward?


Bruce Riedel, a CIA veteran and advisor to US Presidents on Middle East and South Asia, spites copious but vain toxin over Pakistan once again in his piece in Brookings.

Still living in the age of Nineties, Riedel is overwhelmingly obsessed by Pakistan, its military chiefs and premier spy agency, ISI. He is hitherto rejoicing the suspected killing of bin-Laden in Abbotabad, in a US marine operation that occurred nearly half a decade ago.

Pakistan, army heads, ISI, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Hafiz Saeed are his “dearly-loved” areas of “intelligence” “and intellect” for 20-years or so; clearly envisages a truly bigotry Indian narrative. At the same time, Riedel never forgets to portray the Pakistan political elite as military “victims”; which should be self-exposing.

In his book “What We Won: America’s Secret War in Afghanistan 1979-1989”, he notes that this war “was entirely fought by other people and secretly supported by the CIA”. CIA suffered no casualties in Afghan-Soviet war because it never operated on the ground in Afghanistan. “We had no casualties because we took no risks.”

He goes on to admit that all the “principal risks and sacrifices were taken by the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan” and it was ISI that trained mujahedeen, strategized, and lead the war from front. “I know you all think that this was ‘Charlie Wilson’s War’, but “it was Zia-ul-Haq’s”.

Now if it was a war fought and sacrificed by the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Pakistan Army, ISI, and mujahedeen…why the United States has been commemorating the win over Soviet Union since long? Did you mean, the United States has been fooling its people on winning a war which they never fought, not a single American troop even stepped into the war zone?

In a column for The Indian Express, Riedel opined General Hamid Gul, ex-ISI superior, the “Terror’s godfather” who replaced General Akhtar Abdul Rehman, the mastermind of Afghan-Soviet war. Besides training to Afghan mujahedeen, he also accused Gul for tutoring “Muslim and Sikh terrorists”, “godfather for creation of Lashker-e-Toiba and a close associate of Hafiz Saeed” and meeting bin Laden, after leaving the army in 1991-92.

It is visibly a piece of an Indian expert in an Indian newspaper to secure Indian interests; doesn’t humanly compliment an advisor to various US presidents serving US interests. Indo-Pakistan conflict survived four wars primarily on Indian-occupied Kashmir since 1947 and USA-USSR cold war surfaced much latter 1979. So it sounds as just a wacky, goaded intent of him to muddle two entirely different discords; after impulsive US tilt toward India, aimed at his doorway to again befit in US administration that he lost before Obama’s second term of presidency.

Riedel also charged General Pervaiz Musharraf and General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayyani for playing on both sides, the United States and Afghan Taliban. But Robert Grenier, another CIA operator, conceded that General Musharraf never duped or double-crossed the United States in the aftermath of 9/11, in an interview with Daily Times.

“I can say with good authority that General Musharraf never double-crossed us”, instead evoked that he committed to help Americans well beyond the expectations, said Grenier. He goes on to corroborate that it was General Musharraf who passed on clear-cut instructions to ISI to give full-extent cooperation to CIA whether to convincing Mullah Omer expelling bin Laden or capturing Al-Qaida operatives.

Blaming Pakistan for duplicity, Riedel himself is playing double-game as he remains yet to assert himself either a US or Indian strategic and intelligence custodian. In an article in The Daily Beast, Riedel referred to anonymous “well-informed press and other acknowledgeable sources” to prove Pakistan’s ISI is behind the attack on Indian air force base at Pathankot through Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) “to prevent any détente between Pakistan and India”.

Again, a US resident stationed in Middle East, Riedel takes a shot on Pakistan army & ISI, deliberately avoiding politicians whereas a number of analysts, diplomats, and politicians have pronounced this attack as an “inside job”. Uri attack, like Pathankot is suspected to be an Indian false-flag operation and duly exposed by Veterans Today’s article “Kashmir: Why India Orchestrated the Drama of Uri Base Attack?”

“The Pakistani investigators were allowed to enter the military base from the narrow adjacent routes instead of main entrance and their duration of the visit was just 55 minutes, enough to take a mere walk through the airbase.”

But Riedel’s imaginary “sources” have conveyed him thousands miles away that Pakistani spy service is involved in Pathankot attack. Neither the people of Pakistan nor the people of the world are so gullible to fall in this faux and bogus argument.

Like many others, he reminds Pakistan of the “aids” of the United States. Don’t count the US aid on us which has only been politically manipulated, never reached to people and has only prevented Pakistan to grow independently. The money US paid in coalition support fund is merely a fraction of what Pakistan suffered on account of economic loss, over 100-billion dollar.

It is immaterial, how many the likes of Bruce Riedel, Carlotta Gall, Hussain Haqqani, Farid Zakaria or Kelvin Hulbert try to knock Pakistan off balance; Pakistan armed forces and ISI have demonstrated their resilience, capabilities, and valor to curb terrorism and maintaining peace not only in Pakistan but also across regions.

Wars are fought in the battlefield, not up there in the safe-houses by paying a few pennies and Pakistan soldiers, ALHAMDULILLAH, have won war on terror for their country, for your country and for every country in the world. All your malign contents will trash and Pakistan will continue to show up INSHALLAH.

Happy Crying!!!

January 19, 2017

Apple, Google and Coca-Cola Crowned the Top-3 Brands Worldwide: Technology, FMCG, Financial, Luxury and Automotive Companies Dominate 100-Best Brands of 2016 by Interbrand

By: Azhar Azam

Apple maintains the top rank in the list of 100-best brands for 2016 around the world, says Interbrand; a global brand agency with a network of 24-offices in 17-countries and a part of Omnicom Group Inc.

The company provides consultancy services in core business areas such as brand intelligence, brand valuation, brand strength, experience strategy, management, consumer branding and packaging, service design etc.

The criteria to be part of Interbrand’s Best Global Brands includes a minimum of 30% revenue outside of brand’s home region, brand must have significant presence in across regions, publication of sufficient financial data, delivering a return above the brand’s cost of capital, and public profile and awareness of the brand in the world’s major economies.


The rankings for Google, Coca Cola, Microsoft and Samsung also remained unchanged although Coca Cola revenue fell by 7% in 2016. Toyota overtook IBM to stand 5th whereas Amazon and Mercedes-Benz jumped up in the ranking, pushing GE behind.

McDonald’s (12th), Disney (13th), Intel (14th), Facebook (15th), Cisco (16th), Honda (21st), Pepsi (23rd), Philips (41st), Siemens (52nd), Nestle (56th), Adidas (60th), Panasonic (68th), and Lenovo (99th) are some of the other brands enlisted in the report.

Top Growing Brands – 2016

Facebook topped the Interbrand’s Top Growing Brands showing a revenue growth of 48% in 2016. Amazon (33%) and LEGO (25%) occupied the 2nd and 3rd place in the list.

The other brands that showed stellar growth included Nissan (22%), Adobe (21%), Starbucks (21%), Zara (19%), MINI (18%), Porsche (18%), Mercedes-Benz (18%), Huawei (18%), Hermes (17%), and Adidas (16%).

Samsung (14%), Ford (12%), BMW (12%), Kia (12%), Google (11%), and Siemens (10%) also joined the top growing global brands worldwide.

Best Global Brands – Technology – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)

1. Apple; $178.1bn; +5% (1st)

2. Google; $133.3bn; +11% (2nd)

3. Microsoft; $72.8; +8% (4th)

4. Samsung; 51.8% (7th)

5. Intel $36.9bn; +4% (14th)

6. Facebook; $32.6bn; +48% (15th)

7. Cisco; $30.9bn; +4% (16th)

8. Oracle; $26.6bn; -3% (17th)

9. SAP; $21.3bn; +13% (22nd)

10. Hewlett-Packard Enterprise; 11.0bn; New

11. Hewlett-Packard; $10.4bn; New

12. Adobe; $7.6bn; +21%; (63rd)

13. Huawei; $5.8bn; +18% (72nd)

14. Lenovo; $4.0bn; -2% (99th)

Best Global Brands – Business Services – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. IBM; $52.5bn; -19% (6th)

2. Accenture; $12.0bn; +11% (37th)

3. Xerox; $5.3bn; -12% (84th)

Best Global Brands – FMCG – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Gillette; $19.9bn; -10% (24th)

2. Pampers; $16.1bn; 6% (28th)

3. Kellogg’s; $11.7bn; -7% (39th)

4. L’Oreal; $10.3bn; +1% (45th)

5. DANONE; $9.2bn; +7% (55th)

6. Nestle; $8.7bn; +1% (56th)

7. Colgate; $8.4bn; -1% (57th)

8. LEGO; $6.7bn; +25% (67th)

9. Johnsons & Johnsons; $5.8bn; +5% (73rd)

Best Global Brands – Media – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Disney; $38.8bn; +6% (13th)

2. Thompson Reuters; $6.8bn; +4% (66th)

3. Discovery; $5.9bn; -9% (71st)

4. MTV; $4.3bn; -9% (94th)

Best Global Brands – Apparel – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. H&M; $22.7bn; +2% (20th)

2. ZARA; $16.8bn; +19% (27th)

3. Ralph Lauren; $4.1bn; -12% (98th)

Best Global Brands – Diversified – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. GE; $43.1bn; +2% (10th)

2. Siemens; $9.4bn; +10% (52nd)

3. 3M; $8.2bn; +13%; (59th)

4. Caterpillar; $5.4bn; -9% (82nd)

5. John Deere; $4.8bn; -8% (91st)

Best Global Brands – Financial Services – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Citi; $10.3; +5% (49th)

2. Allianz; $9.5bn; +12% (51st)

3. Goldman Sachs; $9.4bn; -2% (54th)

4. Visa; $7.7bn; +13% (61st)

5. Morgan Stanley; $7.2bn; +2% (65th)

6. Santander; $6.2bn; +2% (70th)

7. Master Card; $5.7bn; +3% (76th)

8. PayPal; $4.8bn; +14% (90th)

Best Global Brands – Restaurants – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. McDonald’s; $39.4bn; -1% (12th)

2. Starbucks; $7.5bn; +20% (64th)

3. KFC; $5.7bn; +2% (75th)

Best Global Brands – Automotive – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Toyota; $53.6bn; +9% (5th)

2. Mercedes-Benz; $43.5bn; +18% (9th)

3. BMW; $41.5bn; +12% (11th)

4. Honda; $22.1bn; -4% (21st)

5. Ford; $13.0bn; +12% (33rd)

6. Hyundai; $12.5bn; +11% (35th)

7. Audi; $11.8bn; +14% (38th)

8. Volkswagen; $11.4bn;-9% (40th)

9. Nissan; $11.1bn; +22% (43rd)

10. Porsche; $9.5bn; +18% (50th)

11. Kia; $6.3bn; +12% (69th)

12. Land Rover; $5.7bn; +11% (78th)

13. Harley-Davidson; $5.5bn; +1% (80th)

14. MINI; $5.0bn; +18% (88th)

15. Tesla; $4.0 bn; New (100th)

Best Global Brands – Electronics – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Philips; $11.3bn; +4% (41st)

2. Canon; $11.1bn; -2% (42nd)

3. Sony; $8.3bn; +8% (58th)

4. Panasonic; $6.4bn; -1% (68th)

Best Global Brands – Logistics – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. UPS; $15.3bn; +4% (29th)

2. DHL; $5.7bn; +6% (77th)

3. FedEx; $5.6bn; +9% (79th)

Best Global Brands – Retail – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Amazon; $50.3bn; +33% (8th)

2. IKEA; $17.8bn; +8% (26th)

3. eBay; $13.1bn; -6% (32nd)

Best Global Brands – Beverages – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Coca-Cola; $73.1bn; -7% (3rd)

2. Pepsi; $20.3bn; +3% (23rd)

3. Nescafe; $12.5bn; +2% (36th)

4. Sprite; $5.1bn; -4%; (86th)

Best Global Brands – Energy – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Shell; $4.6bn; -17% (92nd)

Best Global Brands – Luxury – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Louis Vuitton; $24.0bn; +8% (19th)

2. Hermes; $12.8bn; +17% (34th)

3. Gucci; $9.4bn; +6% (53rd)

4. Cartier; $7.7bn; -2% (62nd)

5. Tiffany & Co; $5.8bn; -9% (74th)

6. Prada; $5.5bn; -12% (81st)

7. Burberry; $5.4bn; -9% (83rd)

8. Dior; $4.9bn; New (89th)

Best Global Brands – Sporting Goods – 2016
Ranking; Brand; Revenue; Growth; (Global Ranking)


1. Nike; $25.0bn; +9% (18th)

2. Adidas; $7.9bn; +16% (60th)

January 16, 2017

Paris Peace Conference: Over 70-Countries Endorse Kerry, United Nations Security Council Resolution on Israeli Violence in Occupied-Palestine


Paris Peace Conference hosted by France on 15-January-2016 unanimously released a declaration underlining the importance of two-nation solution for Israel and Palestine. Over 70-countries and international organizations participated in the peace conference from the Quartet (United States, European Union, Russia, United Nations), the five permanent members of UN Security Council, Arab and European partners, G20 countries and other actors committed to peace, says France Diplomatie.

The declaration demands Israel to fully end the occupation that began in 1967 and reiterated a two-nation solution, including the Palestinians’ right to statehood and sovereignty. The conference also “noted to the importance of addressing the dire humanitarian and security situation in Gaza Strip and called for swift steps to improve the situation”.

Israeli prime minister Netanyahu slammed the Sunday peace conference uttering the conference “futile”. “The conference is among the twitches of yesterday’s world”, was signaling towards change of presidencies in the White House. He added “it was coordinated between the French and the Palestinians with the aim of imposing upon Israel conditions that are incompatible with our national need.”

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas however welcomed the conference declaration stating “the Paris conference has reaffirmed and reiterated all international legitimacy resolutions, including pillars of international law, rejecting any dictations, settlements, and imposing realities on the ground”. He further hailed French president and government for holding and exerting all efforts for the success of this peace conference on Israel-Palestine conflict

The Paris Peace Conference comes after United Nations Security Council (UNSC) finally realization of Israeli stern violations of international humanitarian laws in occupied-Palestine by passing an anti-settlement activities resolution.

Drafted by Egypt, the resolution was presented by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela, and Senegal before 15-member UN Security Council and slated a stalwart shock to Israel by supporting the momentous resolution, 14-0.

The United States abstained to vote, defying calls from Israel and the President-elect Donald Trump. A resolution is adopted through 9-votes in favor and no veto from either of the countries such as Britain, China, France, Russia, or the United States.

Nearly 430,000 Israelis have been settled in West Bank whereas another 200,000 lives in Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem, which Palestinians pronounces to be their future capital.

UNSC Resolution Highlights

The resolution stressed Israel to abide meticulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention; which bars occupant to move population into and establishing of settlements in the occupied territory.

UNSC also condemned the altering of demographic composition, character, and status of the Palestine territory, including East Jerusalem as well as “all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror”.

It also declared that the establishment of settlements by Israel in the Palestine territory, including the East Jerusalem, “has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law”.

Unanimously passed resolution demanded Israel to “immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem”.

Israeli Response

Livid by the resolution, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has lashed hard at Obama and the United States for failing to protect Israel against the gang-up at the council. “Israel rejects this shameful anti-Israel resolution at the UN and will not abide by the terms.”

Beleaguered by the international community, Israel summoned all ambassadors of UNSC member countries who are operating embassies in Israel and voted in favor of the resolution on Christmas day including the United States, China, Russia, and Britain.

Israel further annulled the Ukrainian prime minister scheduled visit to Israel in context of its vote in UN Security Council. Ukrainian foreign ministry considered it “an emotional reaction of some Israeli ministers and politicians”.

Netanyahu also accused Obama for plotting, initiating, backing, and demanding to pass the resolution. “By refusing to veto, the Obama administration broke a long tradition.” “Friends don’t take friends to the Security Council.” He also slammed Obama of a “shameful anti-Israel ambush” stating it a “spiteful act”.

Trump and Republicans Reaction

Israeli prime minister now looks forward to Donald Trump to seek support who pushed Israel “stay strong, January 20 is fast approaching”. Netanyahu too praised Trump for his support “thank you for your warm friendship and clear-cut support for Israel”.

Republicans also condemned UN resolution and threatened UN for dire consequences for it. Ted Cruz said to cut US funding to the UN until the resolution is reversed whereas Lindsey Graham vowed that he would “form bipartisan coalition to suspend and significantly reduce” funding. He added to penalize the countries by blockading US aid for supporting this resolution.

Trump’s pick for new ambassador to UN, Nikki Haley, is a stalwartly pro-Israel and as governor of South California, she legislated against movement dubbed BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanctions), aimed to punishing Israel economically over its actions toward Palestinians. She also supported Netanyahu on his objections over Iran nuclear deal.

However in order to revoke the resolution, Trump would need at least eight countries to vote for reversal as well as it is not vetoed by any of the permanent UN Security Council member, which is highly unlikely. (VOX)

John Kerry Fires Back at Israel

Israeli criticism is predominantly focused to rip Obama and his administration and very much inclined to Donald Trump; outgoing Secretary of State John Kerry delivered blistering speech to carp Israel in defense of Obama administration and not to veto the resolution.

Accentuating pursuit of peace in Middle East, he said that Obama emphasized his deep commitment to Israel and its security. He highlighted that the two-state solution is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israel and Palestine.

Pointing at Israel, he argued “Regrettable some seem to believe that the US friendship means that US must accept any policy, regardless of its own interests, our own positions, our own words, our own principles – even after urging again and again that the policy must change.”

Kerry believes that the Israeli prime minister publically maintains a two nation solution but his current coalition is the most right wing in history, with an agenda driven by most of the extremist elements. He criticized Israeli government policies which are going in the opposite direction – towards one state, in defiance to Netanyahu self described “more committed to settlements than any in Israel’s history”.

Resolution Repercussions

This resolution is not a legal binding for Israel immediately and only a symbolic gesture to condemning Israel illicit settlements in occupied-Palestine on international political and diplomatic forum. However at the same time, it could discharge certain legal and economic repercussion for Israel in future.

Such as the resolution coincides on the violence against civilians, alleging Israel of war crimes which could give an impetus to International Court of Justice (ICC) at The Hague to stage a full-blown investigation against the Israel on illegal settlements.

Moreover, since this resolution is passed by all the Security Council members unanimously, it could used as a baseline to impose economic sanctions against Israel and Israeli companies in future including boycott, divestment etc.

US Betrayed Israel or Israel Betrayed US

By and large, Obama has supported Israel than any other American president in history but Israeli efforts to over-influence the State policies and elections enraged Obama administration and the lame duck Obama reprimands Israel before departure.

The expulsion of 35-Russian diplomats is another extension to the Democrats’ outrage over foreign intervention in US elections.

So it is not US who betrayed Israel, it is Israel who betrayed the US!

January 14, 2017

PC Market Decline Widens to 25% in Five Years despite Consolidation

By: Azhar Azam

Gone are the days of Compaq and IBM, these days belong to Lenovo, HP, and Dell who dominate the declining worldwide PC market.

Lenovo emerged in top-5 PC market shareholders in 2004 with a share of 6.8% and gradually paced itself into the global market leader with a market share of 21.3%, shipping 55.5 million units in 2016.

Although between 2006 to 2010, Lenovo was stalled at 4th place despite continuously increasing market share but in 2011 and 2012, it jumped to 2nd spot powering Acer and Dell behind. Since 2013, top position is now retained by Lenovo for the 4th consecutive year in worldwide PC shipments besides accumulating its market share.

According to Gartner, a total of 269.7 million units were shipped in 2016 against 287.6 millions in 2015, showing a year-on-year decline of 6.2% while IDC data posted a drop of 5.7%,down from 275.7 million units in 2015 to 260.1 million in 2016. In the last five years, grim PC market has cumulatively suffered a sharp decline of a terrible 25% approximately.

Gartner data includes desk-based PCs, notebook PCs, and ultra mobile premium (excluding Chromebooks or iPads) whereas IDC traditional PCs include desktops, notebooks, and workstations (excluding Tablets and x86 Servers).

Where mobile phone and tablets are outperforming the growth of PC market, long-PC lifecycle is also challenging its market expansion. Economic issues such as falling currency value, turbulent Middle East scenario, China stock turmoil, fierce competition and high inventory levels in the channels are all-together rebuking the PC market across the world.

According to the data by Gartner, PC market has shrunk by 14.2% in the last two years whereas IDC figures present that the market has condensed by 16.2% for the same period. At one time, from 2003 to 2008, the PC shipments levitated by 89.4% just in six years at an average of 14.9 percent but its all history now!

The worldwide PC market is now yet to grow for five straight years, since 2011 when the market expanded by a meager 0.5% after an affluent growth of 14.7% in 2010. In terms of units, PC market witnessed its boom in 2011 with highest ever units shipments recorded at 352.8 million whereas in terms of growth, 2003 was the year when the market grew by 27.6%, largest growth ever.

 
Both Gartner and IDC data shows a fierce competition between Lenovo and HP for the leadership crown although so far Lenovo has managed to occupy the throne. Nonetheless HP also managed to substantially lower its decline to challenge Lenovo in 2016.

Dell is the only manufacturer that outperformed the PC market in 2016 and turned the tables showing a belligerent growth in 2016 in the shades of pessimism. Asus also improved on its market share under the negative growth of 2.6 percent/0.8 percent (Gartner/IDC).

Apple, on the other hand, sliced its strong 6.2% growth into 9.8% decline percent though survived to loosing much of its market share. Also, new MacBook Pro slightly reinstalled Apple back in the market during the last quarter of 2016.

Notebook/Laptop Market

Global Notebook shipments have also dropped viciously; from 175.5 million units in 2014 to 164.4 million in 2015, TrendForce reported last year. It further forecasted the Notebook shipments to slump to 159.2 million units in 2016, actual data to be released in February.


 Again in the worldwide Notebook market, there is an intense rivalry between HP and Lenovo; HP maintains the top slot, trailed by Lenovo while Dell is placed at No. 3 in this market too. TrendForce notebook analyst Anita Wang says “HP has a good chance of holding the most market share this year and maintaining its leadership position because of relatively stronger position in the US market”.

“Competing brands are waiting to take over Toshiba’s international market share as the Japanese brand may soon give up selling its notebooks abroad.”

Toshiba’s Notebooks share in global shipments is expected to contract to scanty 1.6% in 2016; down from 4.2% in 2015 and 6.6% in 2014. Scandal-hit Toshiba has already auctioned it medical unit to Canon and there have been rumors to merge its Notebook Division with Fujitsu and Vaio (Sony) last year.