Redesigning Pak-US relations
November 7, 2009 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, on her arrival in Pakistan, had said that she had come to “turn the page” in the US-Pakistan relations. Undoubtedly, the page has yet to be turned.
The Kerry-Lugar Bill was meant to win “hearts and minds.” Therefore, she sought to clarify, dispel doubts and convince. Hillary Clinton used logic and exuded charm. She met every point raised. Certainly, it was an impressive display of public diplomacy - something Pakistan has, yet, to acquire, learn and practice. While speaking to the National Public Radio later, this is how Mrs Clinton summed up the purpose of her visit: “…to try to clear the air with the Pakistani people and government, to reassert our support, particularly in this very difficult conflict they’re engaged in with the Taliban, and to listen and absorb all the criticism they have. They had this sort of pent-up frustration against the US. And as you know and as you saw, I listened...I wanted to stress that we’re looking for a partnership, and they have to listen to our concerns as well as we listen to their concerns.” Considering the “depth of distrust”, according to a New York Times editorial: “Washington will have to do a much better job of explaining itself….Mrs Clinton’s trip was an important start - but only a start.” Also relevant is an observation made by Shuja Nawaz, a Pakistani scholar working in an American think tank: “Good intentions are not enough in fixing a relationship that historically has been flawed.”
The controversy generated by the Kerry-Lugar Bill has done a considerable good to the people of Pakistan. For one, they are no longer willing to take things lying down. Yes, the US is a superpower and we need aid and arms, but the people of Pakistan do have a sense of self-respect. If the vulnerable and compromising rulers are seen tinkering with national interests, a public reaction can come into play and stop the slide into subservience.
The civil society is, indeed, waking up. The media is also pro-active. The two-year long struggle of the lawyers and the politicians turned the tide bringing the judges back to the benches. Moreover, a military dictator was forced to quit and flee the country. A page was, indeed, turned. The way the nation rejected the pliant government’s slavish acceptance of the Kerry-Lugar Bill has much to do with the resurgence of the people’s will demonstrated during the Long March to win the battle for the judiciary. This very spirit has given a body blow to the NRO.
What is NRO? What does it stand for? The answer is, it epitomises a ‘satanic’ mindset. A wily dictator, an imperial power and venal politicians forged a stinking bargain to share power. An unprecedented deal was struck. One can understand the evil which crept into the minds of a threatened despot and a cabal of greedy politicians conspiring to have their black deeds washed away with the promulgation of an arbitrary piece of legislation. How to explain the conduct of a great democracy which prided itself on the principles of justice, probity and high moral ground? What lesson was it imparting to a developing country? What may one make of the eloquent exhortations of the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she sermonises on the values and norms of a democratic order, knowing as we do her country’s role in the evil deal designed to blow to smithereens, rule of law and demands of justice. If her government thus became an active partner in corrupting another country’s rulers for ulterior and unholy motives, what credibility is there in the claim that doling out dollars and cents will ensure good governance and people’s welfare?
Madam Clinton while in Pakistan teased us for not knowing where Al-Qaeda was hiding in our country (as if the highly sophisticated satellite aid intelligence apparatus had found their location). However, back in Washington, she admitted to the Fox News: “Clearly Al-Qaeda left Afghanistan, and we let them out. We should have taken them out when we had the chance back in 2001 and 2002 and they escaped into Pakistan...if we had done a better job in Afghanistan and captured the people who attacked us and killed them, we would be in a different position.” Rightly we can say, now, that much of our troubles with Taliban and Afghanistan are due to the poor work done by Washington.”
As I wrote in my last column, there is a pressing and urgent need for an unfettered debate on future US-Pakistan relations inside the National Assembly and the Senate as well as outside by the think tanks and also in civil society forums. This crucial matter cannot be left to ill-informed and myopic holders of high government offices. A high level group of knowledgeable foreign affairs experts, former ambassadors, university professors, senior economists, businessmen, media luminaries, eminent citizens including ex-civil servants and ex-military officers as well as well informed politicians should be set up. Political parties, especially PML-N, PPP and Tehrik-i-lnsaf (PTI) should commission position papers on various issues relating to foreign affairs for the education of party leaders. Besides US-Pakistan relations, our relationship with India, Russia, China, Europe, Japan and other important foreign countries too should be examined in-depth and policy lines developed, widely discussed and debated. We cannot afford half-baked statements and speeches by ministers and opposition leaders based on inadequate information and patchy analysis.
Tailpiece: the PPP government in Islamabad is in trouble because of substandard leadership. PML-N as the alternative prospective government has a special responsibility to assert itself and help steer the ship of the state out of the choppy writers. The option of an election next year should not be ruled out.
The writer is a political and international relations analyst.
Email: pacade@brain.net.pk