Daily Times

Trilateral talks between the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan due later this month have been postponed, according to the US State Department, which is reflective of strained US ties with Islamabad. Last week, the US threatened Pakistan with severing diplomatic relations and cutting US aid if Raymond Davis, who was arrested on January 27 after shooting dead two Pakistani motorcyclists, was not released immediately. Though the US administration itself did not say so in so many words, yet it conveyed the message through its media and lawmakers’ statements. Representative John Kline made his intent known when he said that many lawmakers would support cutting aid if the American, who the US insists has diplomatic immunity, is not freed. There seems to be more to all this than meets the eye, as the entire episode is shrouded in mystery. Investigations by the police have revealed that there was no provocation from the motorcyclists. But who is Raymond Davis? Is he so important that the US is willing to snap diplomatic ties with Pakistan and also put everything at stake, especially its own and NATO troops’ interests in Afghanistan?

Pakistan’s ambassador in the US, Husain Haqqani, has denied having received such threats as reported by ABC News, yet other reports in the American media suggested that President Obama’s National Security Adviser, Thomas Donilon, had summoned Ambassador Husain Haqqani to the White House last Monday, and warned him about the consequences of not releasing the detained US official. Earlier, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made her anger known when she said that she would not meet Pakistan’s then foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, in Munich. Nevertheless, there are some reasonable and sane voices in the US suggesting that Washington should not insist on the immediate release of Raymond Davis, and the process of law should be allowed to take its own course. However, the American administration has no patience for due process and prove in a court of law that he had diplomatic immunity. They are neither troubled in heart or conscience over the sad demise of the widow of one of the slain who took her own life in grief and dejection nor over another Pakistani’s death under the wheels of the recklessly-driven vehicle by the ‘rescue party’.

The situation, by and large, is of our own making, as the rulers of even a banana republic do not sell their soul so cheaply, as we do. Our ruling elite, over the years, neither pursued economic policies to make Pakistan self-reliant nor did they learn to live within their means. They found it convenient to depend on the US for aid and also bail outs from the IMF and other multilateral agencies with the US’s blessings. They bartered away their sovereignty to seek American aid and support to remain in power. By acquiescing to the US and buckling under pressure, they brought disgrace and colossal loss to our national solidarity and cohesion. It is true that the US has a great past. It has remained an engine of growth for the rest of the world for the last 100 years. From 1948 to 1951, the US-sponsored Marshall Plan was drawn up to provide economic aid to European countries after World War II. It provided almost $ 13 billion in grants and loans to 17 countries and was a key factor in reviving their economies and stabilising their political structures. Of course, the US made immense gains in the process and emerged as a superpower.

Some Pakistani analysts and ‘brilliant’ panellists are trying to create fear in the minds of the people that if Raymond Davis is not released, the US will stop economic and military aid to Pakistan. Instead of suggesting the ways and means to meet the challenges and make Pakistan a self-reliant economy, our economic managers want to see Pakistan as nothing more than a camp follower of the US to remain in the limelight. They should look at the meaninglessness of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, as the US has committed $ 1.5 billion annually, out of which more than 60 percent is spent through NGOs. With the US’s economy already in dire straits, and with the Republicans’ majority in Congress, there is a possibility of an overall major cut in foreign aid to other countries. And the axe is surely to fall on Pakistan and not Israel or other American allies. As regards the reimbursement of the Coalition Support Funds, the US has been delaying payments for the last one year and, after a lot of persuasion, has paid only a few hundred million dollars against the bill for $ 1.5 billion.

It is unfortunate that strategically located and resource-rich Pakistan has been brought to the present impasse due to an incompetent ruling elite and their inept policies. Looking back with hindsight, one can conclude that Pakistan has lost a lot more than it has gained, first by joining defence pacts with the US and the west, then by cooperating with the US during the Afghan jihad and, finally, in the war on terror. Members of the US administration, the CIA and media blame Pakistan for their flawed decisions and failures. In fact, the CIA is responsible for the mess in Afghanistan, as it was entrusted with the job of ‘stabilisation’ in Afghanistan after the Americans left the region when Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan. Former CIA director George Tenet had bragged in his book about the CIA’s ‘prodigious’ role. Bruce Riedel, a former CIA director, in his recent book Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America and Global Jihad, sets out to explain, “why successive US administrations have undermined the civil government in Pakistan, aided military dictators and encouraged the rise of extremist Islamic movements that now threaten the US at home and abroad”.

This question has not been phrased properly by the author. First of all, the word ‘encouraged’ should have been replaced by the word ‘sponsored’, as it was the US that tried to settle scores with the former Soviet Union to avenge its defeat in Vietnam. Secondly, it has always been the well thought out plan of every US administration to support autocrats and military dictators, as it is too cumbersome to deal with cabinets and members of parliament and to bring them on board. When dictators became unpopular by following American policies, and also due to the US’s unqualified support for Israel, the US issues only one-liner statements: “He has become unpopular with his people.” It happened with the Shah of Iran, Suharto of Indonesia, Ayub Khan of Pakistan and lately Ben Ali of Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. Only an incorrigible optimist can hope for any change in the US’s policy. Our hierarchs should remember Henry Kissinger’s words: “The US is dangerous for its friends and foes alike.” They should therefore understand that power comes from their own people, not from aliens.

The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at mjamil1938@hotmail.com