Hillary’s visit & Pakistan’s dilemma
M Ashraf Mirza
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has returned home seemingly with a
bitter and better understanding of Pakistanis’ perception about
Washington ’s policies pertaining to the South Asian region in general
and Islamabad in particular. She interacted with a cross section of
people including students, journalists, TV anchor persons,
parliamentarians, female members of the civil society, Tribal elders,
politicians and officials to have a real feel of the Pakistani nation’s
sentiments of distrust and mistrust about the United States across
Pakistan . At her interactions, she was questioned about Washington ’s
partisan and discriminatory tendencies towards Pakistan in the regional
context.
Students and media men, however, proved torch bearers of the national
interests. They grilled her on the Kerry-Lugar bill, ‘do more syndrome’,
drone attacks, discrimination in the Indian context and non-recognition
of Pakistan ’s contribution in the anti-terror war in real terms. She
was told that the US presence in Afghanistan is the real cause of
trouble in the region. ‘It’s your war that Pakistan is fighting…you had
one 9/11, we are having 9/11s in Pakistan on daily basis’ she was
bluntly told by Tribal elders. Hillary Clinton, the highest ranking
Obama administration official, visited Pakistan with an agenda to
dissipate the “trust deficit” that persists in the US-Pakistani
relations. By “reaching out” to a broad section of Pakistanis, she tried
to focus the difference between the current US administration and that
of George W. Bush, which to the dismay of ordinary Pakistanis supported
dictator General Pervez Musharraf. As part of her “charm offensive,”
Hillary made a few proforma concessions about “mistakes” and oversights
and repeatedly proclaimed that the US has the interests of the Pakistani
people in focus. She also decried what she called distortions of the
intent and meaning of a recent US law, the Enhanced Partnership with
Pakistan Act of 2009, commonly known as the Kerry-Lugar bill, under
which US will provide $1.5 billion per year in economic assistance to
Pakistan for the next five years, if Pakistan fulfils Washington
objectives in respect of the anti-terror war and nuclear
non-proliferation.
The secretary of state asserted that the legislation doesn’t in any way
interfers in Pakistan ’s internal affairs or erodes its sovereignty. The
reality, however, is that the Pakistani-US partnership has for decades
been a conspiracy against the Pakistani people, in which Washington has
used the Pakistani political and military leadership as linchpin of
America’s strategic designs in the Middle East, Central and South Asia.
In the case of the Pakistani elite, there resentments and concerns that
the US drive to subjugate Afghanistan has destabilized Pakistan state,
increased the already yawning gulf between the people and the ruling
class and is undercutting Pakistan in its rivalry with India. The latter
fear is compounded by the US ’s courting of India , as epitomized by the
Indo-US nuclear accord, as a strategic counterweight to a rising
economic and military power of the Peoples Republic of China . For most
of the first two days of her visit, Clinton stuck to her brief of trying
to charm Pakistanis by making a show of listening to them. She, however,
couldn’t swallow everything and rang out her anger, telling a group of
journalists, ‘I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government
knows where the Al Qaeda leadership is, and couldn’t get to them if they
really wanted to.’ She also publicly called for extension of the current
counter-insurgency offensive beyond South Waziristan . With the initial
campaign in Swat and now in South Waziristan finished, Hillary told a
town hall like meeting of Pakistani professional women: ‘I think the
Pakistani military would have to go on to root out other terrorist
groups or else they could come back to threaten Pakistan.’ She also
responded to unending criticism of the Kerry-Lugar bill as erosion of
Pakistan ’s sovereignty bitterly though smilingly that the US has no
desire to impose this financial assistance on Pakistan . It’s up to
Pakistan to accept it or not.
While she did make several economic assistance announcements, she
rejected two long-standing demands of the Pakistani elite: that the US
remove tariffs on textiles, the country’s most important export, and
that it prod India to enter into meaningful and result oriented dialogue
with Pakistan to resolve the outstanding issues including the long
standing Kashmir dispute. During his campaign for the presidency, Obama
suggested a possible quid pro quo in which the US would assist Pakistan
in arriving at a settlement with India over Kashmir in return for
Pakistan doing the US ’s bidding in the Afghan war. He, however, backed
off in the face of Indian resistance to US effort to mediate between
Islamabad and New Delhi to address the Kashmir issue.
Clinton said of the Indo-Pakistani dispute: ‘it’s clearly not for us to
dictate solutions.’ She conceded that the US support to the dictators in
the past was a ‘mistake’ and held out an assurance to the women
parliamentarians that in future relations will not be established with
individuals but will be done with the state and people of Pakistan. The
statement made by Hillary Clinton that the US has found no proof of
Indian interference in Balochistan and Tribal areas through supply of
funds and weapons to the renegades and militants has, however, exposed
the myth of US ‘strategic partnership’ with Pakistan. It has rather once
again proven that it will not hesitate to once again dump Pakistan once
its tactical designs are realized in the ongoing anti-terror war through
consolidation of its occupation of Afghanistan . To the people of
Pakistan , it’s a brazen display of hypocrisy.
Pakistan has persistently focused the Indian mischief and kept the world
community especially the United States fully on board about the issue.
Former President Pervez Musharraf had presented the documentary evidence
of Indian supply of weapons and funds to the renegades in Balochistan to
the former US President George W. Bush. It’s proven up to the hilt that
the Indian consulates established in the Afghan cities and towns along
the Pak-Afghan border are RAW dens of interference in the internal
affairs of Pakistan .
Most of these ‘consulates’ are, in fact, training centres for the
miscreants from Balochistan. Prime Minister Yusuf Reza Gilani had also
handed over the dossier pertaining to the documentary evidence of Indian
financial and weapons support to the miscreants in Balochistan. And the
latest proof of Indian support to the militants and terrorists has been
captured in the militants’ heartland in South Waziristan by the
Pakistani troops currently engaged in military operations against
terrorists and militants. Yet ironically, the US Secretary of State is
totally ‘unaware’ of the Indian interference. The truth is that US is
pursuing a double standard policy in the region apparently for the sake
of its international agenda. Washington must, however, not ignore the
universal truth that you cannot deceive all the people for all the time.
It’s a matter of record that US has never been sincere to Pakistan .
India has always remained its preference. Its relations with Pakistan
are, in fact, motivated by its vested interests. |
