The attacks have been said to incite sectarian violence in Afghanistan. Security officials in Afghanistan have blamed Pakistan for the attacks, saying that militant groups from across the border orchestrated these attacks.

While no proofs have yet been found to indicate any links to Pakistan, Afghan officials have been quick to lay the blame on Pakistan.

Is Afghanistan right in blaming Pakistan for the attacks without any proof? With reference to the Bonn conference and Afghan security being the main talking point, shouldn’t Afghanistan and Pakistan be strengthening their relationship instead of playing the blame game?

Dawn.com invites its readers to give their views and suggestions.

According to President Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan is also negotiating similar agreements with Britain, France, Australia and the European Union.

Afghanistan wants the US and Nato to agree to stop carrying out night raids on Afghan homes as a pre-condition to the Kabul signing a strategic partnership with Washington, President Hamid Karzai said.

And if Washington meets demands such as these, Karzai said Afghanistan was prepared to host US troops in the long-term.

Karzai also reassured Afghanistan’s neighbours, many of whom are concerned about a long-term US influence in the region, that any strategic partnership deal would not hamper relations with them.

Despite Karzai’s assurances, will a strategic partnership in fact obstruct Afghanistan’s relations with its neighbours?

In your opinion, will the US agree to stopping night raids, which they claim are one of their most effective weapons in the fight against insurgents?

And in the case where the US does agree to this condition, how much of this will be actually implemented?

Dawn.com invites its readers to give their views and suggestions.

Dozens of cities across the world, including London, Frankfurt, Washington Australia, Tokyo and Hong Kong, are holding demonstrations today in a show of solidarity with “Occupy Wall Street”, which is being coined as the “people powered movement for democracy.”

According to participants, these non-violent demonstrations are being staged to be initiate global change.

As these protests gain momentum globally, comparisons have been made between the Occupy Wall Street protests and the recent demonstrations in several Arab countries, some of which have seen change as a result.

In your opinion, can these protests actually reform global financial systems and how our countries economies are governed?

Is there really such a thing as people’s power?

Dawn.com invites its readers to give their views and suggestions.

The Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, has been calling for talks to discuss the possibility of Taliban militants dropping their arms and instead being offered jobs funded by the US.

India has clearly stated that they still consider the Taliban terrorists but are willing to back peace efforts. So, with the West and Afghanistan’s efforts to reach out to the Taliban, offering talks, jobs and perhaps more, is the stance towards these militants softening? If so, what are the implications of this for Pakistan?

Also, with these rapid offers for peace talks, is Obama trying to keep his promise of bringing his troops back home soon?

‘Talks about talks’ between the Afghan government and the Taliban leadership have already begun, according to a UN official, who revealed on Thursday that the UN representative to Afghanistan, Kai Eide, met “active” members of the Taliban insurgency in Dubai this month. The meeting was not a negotiation, rather, it was an initial discussion on the possibility of beginning peace talks with the Afghan government.

The Afghan government’s desire to engage with the Taliban leadership is bound to cause diplomatic friction between Kabul and Washington. The US also supports talks with militants, but has called for a strategy that involves luring back low- and mid-level Taliban fighters, as opposed to the top leadership, which is accused of sheltering Osama bin Laden and working closely with Al Qaeda.

Do you think the Afghan government should enter peace talks with the Taliban? Should Kabul engage the Taliban leadership, or only win back the loyalty of militant ‘foot soldiers’? Do you think militants will be open to joining the Afghan government and furthering the democratic process? Can Kabul afford to anger Washington?

The following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

Travelers from Pakistan are to undergo extra security screening according to new rules put in place by the Obama administration. With Pakistan bearing the unparalleled brunt of the war on terror and as no passenger with a Pakistani passport has directly caused panic at a US airport, the measure seems harsh. Moreover, owing to a strict and very stringent visa policy, a majority of people who visit the US from Pakistan are either businessmen or other professionals.

Frequent travelers half-jokingly say that they fear arrest on landing in the US, especially if they’ve ever spoken to someone named Osama (very funny, folks). Adding to their ire is the fact that in addition to being screened and subjected to long queues at home, they will have to suffer the humiliating behaviour of US airport security staff. For their part, students fear cavity searches and businessmen are afraid of a night in detention for even having a Muslim name. Pakistani travelers fear that unless screening is applicable across the board, regardless of nationality or religion, the discriminatory measures will add to their woes of being foreign and Muslim in the West.

Human rights groups have long argued that such draconian practices are discriminatory and go against basic human rights. Foreign policy experts are calling the measures over the top. And more investment in airport security is making taxpayers question the billions that are already being spent on intelligence gathering and sharing.

In response, many in Pakistan have started asking for harsh conditions for travelers from the US. One analyst believes that Pakistan must reciprocate with making cavity searches and separate queues for flights originating from the US, but also argues that due to the donor-recipient relationship, Pakistan cannot take any drastic steps.

The fact is, there is a tenacious scepticism being faced by the US in Pakistan, and Washington must refrain from further aggravating the situation. The new security measures are forcing left-wing parties such as the PPP to utter right-wing words to calm public sentiment. The PM, president and Foreign Office have had to join the chorus of public outrage and anger against what is being seen as anti-Pakistan policies despite the country’s best efforts to fight a US proxy war. After the mess of US foreign policy during the Bush era, the Obama administration faces a mammoth task of strengthening ties and helping America’s image abroad.

Ultimately, the US needs to give more thought to the relationship with a key ally. Perhaps policy makers in Washington ought to read Benjamin Franklin, who wrote: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Do you think the new airport security measures are too stringent? If you have recently traveled to the United States, share your experience with airport security staff with Dawn.com.

Osama Bin Javaid is a Senior Duty Editor at DawnNews TV.

The following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

Speaking at the US Military Academy at West Point, Obama will emphasise that the goal of the troop surge is to stabilise Afghanistan and help build and train the country’s military and police forces.

In the US, and especially within the Democratic party, there are many critics of Obama’s decision. They say that the war has become too costly – it costs US$ 1 million, per soldier, per year – that military casualties are increasing, and that Afghan President Hamid Karzai is too marred by accusations of corruption to prove a viable ally against the Taliban.

A recent poll by USA Today/Gallup shows that 57 per cent of Democrats favour beginning a withdrawal from Afghanistan, while 72 per cent of Republicans back the troop increase.

What do you think of Obama’s decision to send more troops to Afghanistan? Do you think a bolstered US presence will help win the war against terrorism? How will this decision impact the political and security situation in Pakistan?

The following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

How will Mehsud’s death change the tactics in the offensive against militants in the tribal areas?

Will the ‘successful’ drone attack affect Pak-US relations in fight against the Taliban?

Will it really make Pakistan a safer place or will a new, more dangerous TTP leader emerge as Mehsud’s successor?

The views expressed in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

The killing has dominated Egyptian media for days but has received comparatively little coverage in German and Western media.   

What do you think of the reportedly low key response in Germany?

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has called for more international aid to combat extremists, claiming that the Taliban could move into India and the Gulf if the financial support to stem their movement is not made available. He has asked for 2.5 billion dollars for emergency relief and reconstruction aid for the north-west of Pakistan, where military operations against the militants are ongoing. Mr Qureshi’s request for aid comes two days before the first summit of European Union and Pakistan leaders in Brussels, at which aid for Islamabad will likely top the agenda.

Do you think increased foreign aid to Pakistan can help prevent the spread of militants across the region? If Pakistan does receive the requested aid from the European Union, how should the government utilise the funds? In terms of reconstruction, what developments are urgently required?