Towards Polls via Saudi Arabia By Asha’ar Rehman: New Age Islam's Selection, 05 January 2018
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
05 January 2018
• Towards Polls via Saudi Arabia
By Asha’ar Rehman
• Mind’s Input
By Zubeida Mustafa
• In Defence of Democracy
By Saeed Mirza
• The Insatiable Demands of US
By Talat Masood
• Trump’s Threatening Tweet
By Asif Haroon Raja
• Trumping Logic
By Shahzad Chaudhry
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
-----
Towards Polls via Saudi Arabia
By Asha’ar Rehman
January 05, 2018
THEY say that the Sharifs’ visit to Saudi Arabia was in no way linked to the scheduled general election in Pakistan. Mian Nawaz Sharif’s news conference after his surprise return home had everything to do with the 2018 general election.
It was a surprise comeback since many amongst us had strived to import a permanent stamp on Mian Sahib’s flight from Pakistan. According to the script, the Sharif brothers were to eagerly put their thumbprints on a deal that was to free Nawaz from the burden of having to take on the establishment.
The deal was to release him of his democratic bondage and provide him refuge away from the tough schedule in Pakistan that, among other nuisances, required him to frequently appear in court. Younger brother Shahbaz Sharif was, in contrast, to emerge as the one leading the PML-N’s charge towards and beyond the 2018 general election.
Polls weighed heavily on Nawaz Sharif’s mind as he spoke to the press corps.
There was no word — neither was one sought with any urgency — about how Shahbaz Sahib himself was to escape the much feared legal juggernaut and stay relevant to Pakistani politics. It was a given that, if the Saudi monarchy so desired, he could still be the man to beat in the dash for power this year.
So sure were we that journalists and other interested citizens in Lahore started to prepare for the emotional shock of living without Shahbaz Sahib and his dynamic leadership. Few of them were ready to trade him for a Hamza Shahbaz. The sense of anticipation and loss hit hard as the two Sharif brothers went through the familiar screening process in Saudi Arabia.
Various explanations were offered about the visit by the two Sharifs — the former prime minister following the Punjab chief minister to the land from where we Pakistanis derive so much solace and spiritual and worldly strength..
One theory that was rather easy on the mind, perhaps purely because it was based on the chronological order of things, was a remark attributed to Nawaz Sharif which was neither denied nor confirmed. It was a remark in which Mian Sahib was said to have ‘approved of’ Shahbaz Sahib as his candidate for prime minister in the next election. The explanation said that it was this remark which had set Shahbaz Shaib off for Saudi Arabia. Mian Sahib followed him there to reconfirm with the Saudi royalty that Shahbaz Sahib did indeed enjoy his blessings.
There is as yet no word if this is the right explanation for the mysterious Sharif voyage to the land of bounty, or which ones of all these theories paraded in public for the last so many days have some truth to them. This may be an entirely wrong impression of the expedition, its purpose and outcome. But at the risk of sounding repetitive, let us remember that there are people here who believed from the outset that this is what Mian Sahib had been aiming for — forwarding Shahbaz Sahib’s credent
Considering the odds, it would appear a good enough bargain for the PML-N to aim for. The most ardent of Mian Sahib’s fans were giving him few chances to turn the tables on what appeared to be his fate. He was most unlikely to redeem himself, and quickly, to be able to lay claim to the leadership mantle in the context of the 2018 general polls.
Even Shahbaz Sahib initially appeared to have little effect on the kingmakers, summoning his most innocent, most promising expressions on the occasion with the help of his portfolio of all the development work conducted with typical severity. The children of the Sharif family as the next leaders was a proposition fraught with danger. Shahbaz Sahib had to be the best bet for the 2018 election.
Election apparently weighed heavily on Nawaz Sharif’s mind as he spoke to the press corps upon his return from the soul-cleansing journey to Saudi Arabia — election and democracy which in a poll year has more to do with votes than at any other time. He did warn ‘them’ that he would come out with the whole truth about what has been happening in Islamabad in the last four odd years, since he was elected prime minister in 2013. On the day he did speak about a common problem: the difficulties faced by a man who has to frequently show up in court. But if one were to pinpoint one salient point on which he put utmost emphasis it had to be election 2018.
Take a look. A report in Dawn.com said Sharif “described how elections in Pakistan have historically not been taken seriously, preventing successive prime ministers from completing their term”.
“Because 2018 is a year for elections,” he said, “this worn-out rule of the past is being applied again today.”
“They are trying to shift the public’s views ... Block the way for a certain political party, and pave the way for the[ir]) darling.”
He spoke about “the most recent assessment of the numbers” and claimed the PML-N was way ahead of others and its vote bank “still larger than the vote bank of all other political parties combined”. “The ones afraid of this truth are trying hard to change the reality and turn it into something else.”
“I want to say in crystal clear words today that this country’s fate is linked to free and fair elections. Every political party should have equal opportunity to take part in these elections.”
“Secret telephone calls and deals should not be used to tie our hands, and to give the darling a new deal and new dheel (freedom).”
The passionate, focused call for a level playing field for elections could well mean a concentration on polls. The stress would be misplaced unless the big brother has decided who is going to lead this thrust for power.
Source: dawn.com/news/1380839/towards-polls-via-saudi-arabia
-----
Mind’s Input
By Zubeida Mustafa
January 05, 2018
THE problem with the policymaking process in Pakistan is that it receives very little intellectual input. In an authoritarian system, decisions are taken arbitrarily by a dictator or his coterie and that is why these are regarded as flawed.
But in a democracy, as we claim to be, it is unforgivable that the government should ignore the advice of those who “engage in critical thinking, research and reflection about society and propose solutions for its normative problems”. Wikipedia terms such people as intellectuals.
It would be valid to ask how many such intellectuals we have in Pakistan. Not many, it would seem, given the paucity of facilities and opportunities for research in the social sciences in public-sector institutions of higher education and the elitist approach of the private universities many of which also restrict freedom of expression causing students to live in a bubble.
The think tanks that carry out research on many social issues are generally funded by the government or foreign donors. That means that they are generally tuned in to their sponsors’ agenda. They can, therefore, not produce intellectuals as thinking people are born only in an atmosphere where thoughts are not chained.
et it would be wrong not to acknowledge the contributions of the few men and women of learning who think and apply their knowledge to seek solutions to the multifarious problems that beset our society. We, however, need them in far greater numbers to be able to mould public opinion and advise policymakers.
It is in this context that I write today about the Irtiqa Institute of Social Sciences that has recently elected a woman scholar of history — Dr Huma Ghaffar — as its chairperson. This is significant. For the first time, a woman who is much younger than the previous leadership will lead Irtiqa. With a PhD in history, Huma has been a member of the executive committee since 2011. What qualifies her for the post of president? It is her commitment to inculcate among younger people the spirit of inquiry and curiosity that is a prerequisite for conducting research.
The Irtiqa Institute of Social Sciences was formed in 1991 by the merger of the Irtiqa magazine and Sangat. Its aim was to create awareness among people with social, political and economic problems at the local and international levels and to help them understand the exploitative nature of power.
The institution was to be non-official and would have absolutely no links with political parties. For this purpose, it organises talks, seminars and short courses. Two lecture series have been held since 2001 without a break to commemorate the services of Hamza Alavi and Hamza Wahid, two eminent academics. Hundreds of seminars and talks have also been organised, while three short courses on sociological, economic and political issues have been arranged. Study circles and film screenings are also held.
To give its activities an academic orientation, Irtiqa has been placed under the umbrella of the National Council of Academics.
This experiment in the intellectualisation of people has certainly come a long way from where it started in the 1990s with talks and group discussions in a small apartment on University Road that was acquired at a very low cost from one of my colleagues at Dawn, Ghayurul Islam. Another member, Waqar Jafari, donated a huge amount for its renovation.
In those days, Ghayur Sahib would pass a plate around for us to drop in some cash to fund the institute’s modest but serious work. Today, the institute is more structured but has so far managed to barely sustain itself by collecting membership fees and nominal charges from course participants.
With younger members in the executive committee, Irtiqa has been revitalised. The new chairperson is confident it can make an impact. Some contemporary burning issues of the day have been taken up and are discussed freely in an atmosphere that is not intimidating. The aim is to set up a people-oriented think tank In keeping with new methods of disseminating information digitally, videos of lectures are uploaded on its Facebook page and talks are live-streamed. The growing traffic of visitors on these sites testify to a very positive response.
It would, however, be wrong to believe that it will be easy sailing for the institute all the way. Kaleem Durrani, the general secretary who joined the institute in 2013, activated Irtiqa by his dynamism. But he is more pragmatic and can foresee obstacles. He says he has met with resistance from obscurantist elements in society who are pathologically opposed to critical thinking and left-leaning ideas. The institute’s strength lies in some old-time progressives (many of them members of the Democratic Students Federation in their students’ days) and the younger idealists like Huma and Kaleem who form the hard core of the institute.
Source: dawn.com/news/1380838/minds-input
----
In Defence of Democracy
By Saeed Mirza
January 4, 2018
As the political drama heats up and the citizenry watches the civil-military and the politico-judiciary discord, with great dismay, it’s perhaps a good time to say ‘stop’ and remind the Big Boys of our rights and our morale!
In an independent country, the sovereignty of the people is absolute and inviolable and all the rights and privileges that flow from it, including electing a parliament and a government to represent them. Despite being an independent country for 70 years and having in place a Constitution agreed by all parties and functioning pillars of the modern state, we are still debating the need for democracy. There are powerful voices suggesting that we need a government of technocrats, as democracy has failed. Let us review these reactionary arguments:
People are uneducated. They vote for feudals or along ‘biradari’ lines; their votes are bought and sold. Time and again, the common people have demonstrated their astuteness by voting for change, in clear defiance of biradaris and influential. Whether it was the referendums of 1945, or the 70s elections, when two new parties – the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and the Awami League swept the polls. In 2013, the people voted out the PPP due to non-performance, something which the establishment couldn’t achieve despite many years of ‘political engineering’. In Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), the people have changed three political parties since 2002 — the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, then the Awami National Party and currently the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, in their quest for better governance. What further do they have to do to prove themselves? We have deprived the common man of most basics and now we want to even take their right to vote away!
The corruption mantra. Politicians are corrupt, and the stables need to be cleaned. In Pakistan, we have had four military regimes and there is little evidence that corruption decreased. A democracy is more open and politicians and officialdom are constantly challenged, which is much more likely to curb corruption.
Democracy has failed. A broad sweeping statement based on anecdotal evidence and clichés. The recent Gallup and Pulse Surveys found that, 81% and 68%, respectively, of the people want democracy. The 2013 elections had 55% participation, compared to 44% in 2008 and 41% in 2002. Clearly, people want democracy and are turning out in greater numbers! Despite the dismissal of Mr Nawaz Sharif, the federal government is working properly and still commands a majority. The 18th Amendment, a landmark political achievement, has improved inter-provincial harmony and relationship with the centre. Punjab and K-P governments are clearly in competition to demonstrate better performance in delivery of healthcare, education and other public services. Politicians have worked out sensible steps to bring in transparency – the holding of elections under neutral caretaker governments, the appointment of the Election Commission of Pakistan and National Accountability Bureau heads through consultation between the government and the opposition, appointment of the chief justice of Pakistan through a self-regulating seniority rule and so on. This is a show of maturity and good sense by what is, arguably, a rather young and fragile democracy.
The security situation with the military’s active participation has greatly improved, the economy is doing well, inflation is in control, the electricity and gas shortages are almost behind us and so on. So, why the itchy fingers on the trigger?
Our political parties are dynastic. This is a valid criticism. That said, politics in our part of the world has tended to be dynastic. Take the world’s largest democracy next door and witness the succession of three generations after Jawaharlal Nehru. The Bandaranaike family of Sri Lanka and the Begums of Bangladesh all point to a dynastic trend in the subcontinent. While this is not desirable, is it a good reason to uproot democracy?
There are better systems. And the armchair warriors point to countries, rather than political systems. They talk of China, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, etc. China is a single-party Communist regime, which is clearly not an option for us. Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia are all democracies. Frequently cited Singapore, mistakenly perceived as a ‘dictatorship’, is a multi-party Westminster-style democracy since inception.
Clutching at the proverbial straw and with no reasonable alternative, the elite has proposed a ‘government of technocrats’. This was tried in Bangladesh some years back, with the blessings of the judiciary and the military, but, predictably, proved to be a failure. Both Field Marshal Ayub Khan and Gen Pervez Musharraf’s early years had governments run mainly by technocrats — what enduring legacy did that leave us? How long will we keep going on in these debilitating circles? A technocrat government will lack legitimacy in the eyes of the people, no matter how it is anointed.
Defending democracy is fine, but going forward a lot needs to be improved. Politicians need to progress on devolution and empowerment of local governments. They need to be more participative in parliament, rather than taking to streets to assert their positions. The civil services and police need to be strengthened and made more independent. The military needs to cede space and avoid public disagreements.
We need to invest in the human resource which at the same time is our biggest failure and our greatest opportunity. The tax structure needs to be overhauled. Accountability for all — fair, across the board and with no sacred cows is required to clean up the mess. Selective accountability will never be credible.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1599872/6-in-defence-of-democracy/
-----
The Insatiable Demands of US
By Talat Masood
January 3, 2018
It is always a challenge for a middle-ranking power like Pakistan to maintain an amiable and functional relationship with the United States. This has been its dilemma practically ever since its birth. The demands from Washington are unending, and rarely is it willing to accommodate the other country’s viewpoint even if it happens to be an ally.
In the last 70 years, US-Pakistan relations have had several ups and downs but since President Donald Trump has assumed office the pressure on Pakistan has increased manifold. What then are present expectations and demands on Pakistan by the US?
From Washington’s perspective, the Haqqani Network and the Taliban Shura continue to benefit from sanctuaries in Pakistan’s tribal belt. It is not prepared to accept Pakistan’s version that these entities do not exist anymore. Moreover, according to US own official sources, 13% of Afghan districts are under insurgent control and an additional 30% are disputed where largely the writ of the Taliban prevails. In this situation, the Taliban or the Haqqani Network do not need Pakistani territory to operate. In any case whatever advantage these groups would have had in locating in Pakistan, is no more available to them.
The US government holds Pakistan responsible for the activities of all militant groups that are operating within its territories. Whereas it takes no responsibility for the militant groups that are launching attacks from Afghanistan on Pakistan. Furthermore, it turns a blind eye to the support of the TTP by Indian and Afghan intelligence agencies. There has never been any criticism of these hostile activities directed at Pakistan by any power centre of the US, be it Pentagon, the State Department, Congress or the White House.
The Trump administration’s policy of assigning a much bigger role to India in Afghanistan and overlooking its support for anti-Pakistan militant groups cuts against Pakistan’s interests. This remains a constant point of friction and a major reason for the Pakistan military not to take an antagonist position against the Haqqanis.
Washington finds the deepening China-Pakistan ties and especially its manifestation in the strategic project of CPEC cutting against its vital interests. The US is trying to build India as a strategic partner to counter China’s growing influence in the region. Conversely, Pakistan is broadening its options by improving its relations with Russia, which obviously is not being appreciated by the US. It is further deepening its strategic relations with Saudi Arabia, moving closer to Turkey and reinforcing ties with Iran.
President Trump’s contempt and ingrained prejudice towards Muslims in general also find its reflection in the bias shown against Pakistan. This predisposition is now a global phenomenon where the space for Muslims in certain countries, like Hungary and Poland, is shrinking.
It is unfortunate that the Trump administration has based its entire Afghan policy as viewed through the lens of a military conflict. It is not surprising that its implementation is placed exclusively in the hands of the military commanders. Afghanistan’s problems are essentially of a political and economic nature that require engagement and dialogue and less of military muscle. Moreover, the Afghan conflict has to be viewed in the larger context of rivalries between various stakeholders as well. If the US continues to place all blame on Pakistan for its failures in Afghanistan then it would be a wasteful exercise as history reminds us. The current challenges of Afghanistan have to be viewed in a wider context, wherein interests of Pakistan in particular need to be addressed whether these pertain to the role of India in Afghanistan or the type of policies that the US government pursues towards Pakistan.
In the Trump administration there is a wide consensus towards taking a hard position against Pakistan on counterterrorism. This is so obvious with threatening statements emanating from the top leadership at an increasing frequency. The Trump administration refuses to accept that there are different priorities and even conflicts of interests that need to be resolved through mutual accommodation. Being a superpower, the US considers its right to impose policies without any regard to Pakistan’s interests.
The US in the past had largely overlooked the consequences of Afghanistan’s exponential increase in drug production. This has enhanced the power of the local warlords with adverse impact on its economy and political evolution. The infighting and distrust between President Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah further undermines their ability to govern effectively. All these inadequacies find a convenient cover under the hubris of Pakistan’s alleged misdeeds.
It is ironic that Pakistan, which has suffered most due to the civil war in Afghanistan and would benefit enormously if peace was to return, has to be repeatedly admonished by the US. America conveniently ignores the adverse impact of its policies that it pursued in the region stretching over three decades that are largely responsible for aggravating conditions in Afghanistan. Using the Haqqani Network as a whipping boy may be a convenient alibi but not a solution that would bring peace any closer. What is not apparent is that the unceasing hostility of the US makes it increasingly difficult for a weak government in Pakistan to maintain a delicate balance between catering to US demands and avoiding the wrath of the Mullah constituency.
On the one hand, the US Congress is fast taking measures to restrict aid to Pakistan. On the other hand, strong voices are being raised at home especially by Imran Khan and the Jamaat-e-Islami to do away with US assistance. Indeed in the current context accepting any favour of US assistance especially when these are accompanied with harsh conditions requires compromising one’s national pride.
The broad contours of this relationship and their complexity demand greater appreciation of each other’s national interest. This would be the only way that both sides will be able to normalise relations.
Pakistan has to move towards shedding its policy of supporting militant groups as an instrument of foreign policy. This is not a viable option anymore. The US should respect Pakistan’s genuine national interest and avoid pursuing a one-sided India-biased policy. Both countries need each other for their own valid reasons. Success lies in how best to accommodate these interests.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1599053/6-insatiable-demands-us/
-----
Trump’s Threatening Tweet
By Asif Haroon Raja
05 January 2018
PAKISTAN was made an ally by USA in September 2001 to fight its war on terror as a frontline State but was treacherously subjected to biggest ever covert war to destabilise, de-Islamise and denuclearise it. For the success of covert operations launched by RAW-NDS combine backed by CIA, MI-6, Mossad and BND from Afghan and Iran soils in FATA and Baluchistan from 2003 onwards, Pakistan was subjected to a willful propaganda campaign to demonize and discredit it by painting it as the most dangerous country of the world. It was subjected to a barrage of unsubstantiated accusations that it was in collusion with terrorist groups. It was also alleged that Pakistan’s nuclear programme was unsafe and might fall into wrong hands. Allegations and denunciations were made by Bush regime as well as Obama regime and Pakistan was constantly asked to do more. Policy of ‘Do More’ was a clever ploy to bleed Pakistan as well as to tarnish its image and thus weaken it from within.
The latest narrative framed against Pakistan by Donald Trump regime is that it is continuing to provide safe havens to Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network and is chiefly responsible for the instability in Afghanistan. It ignored Pakistan’s colossal sacrifices and brilliant successes achieved against the foreign funded and equipped terrorists. On August 22, 2017, Trump subjected Pakistan to severest denunciation and threats while pronouncing his Afghanistan policy. He reiterated his stance while elucidating his national security policy last month. Trump, Secretary Defence Rex Tillerson and Vice President Mike Pence have rejected Pakistan’s explanations and hurled threats of aid cut, sanctions and losing territory if it fails to abide by the US dictates. The old allegation that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are unsafe has again been repeated and Pakistan put on notice. In other words, a clear cut narrative has been framed to validate punitive action against Pakistan. Threat of unilateral action has been sounded by US to force Pakistan to fight its war and help the US in converting its defeat into victory.
On January 1, Trump gave a New Year gift by tweeting: The US has foolishly given Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies and deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe havens to terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more”. Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif, in response to Donald Trump’s tweet said that Pakistan was not worried as it had already refused to ‘do more’ for the US. “We have already told the US that we will not do more, so Trump’s ‘no more’ does not hold any importance,”.
Pakistan Foreign Office summoned US Ambassador David Hale and lodged its protest against US President Donald Trump’s tweet wherein he accused Pakistan of “lies and deceit” and used undiplomatic threatening language against an ally. Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi has summoned a meeting of the National Security Committee on 3rd January. He will chair the huddle to discuss the future course of action following the US President’s scathing statement against Pakistan. None appreciated Trump’s weird tweet inside and outside USA except for India, which is rejoicing and is terming Trump as the best President the US has had since ages. I was asked for comments by IndiaTimesNow but got thoroughly disappointed by my curt reply that, ‘Pakistan is quite used to ups and downs in its relationship with USA, but mercifully it has got out of the US magic spell, and it no more yearns for US aid, and that it is now India’s turn, which is in the tight embrace of USA, to face the music. I also rubbished the claim of $33 billion and added that Pakistan lost $123 billion in US imposed war besides 70,000 human casualties.
The US is hell-bent to scapegoat Pakistan in order to hide its enormous failures in Afghanistan. While Pakistan has cleared all the safe havens and strongholds of TTP despite its leadership enjoying a complete safe haven in Kunar, Nuristan and Nangarhar, NATO has ceded over 47% Afghan territory to Afghan Taliban. It is time for the US to accept its fault lines and fight its own war, or else accept its defeat gracefully, patch up with the Taliban and find a political solution instead of scapegoating Pakistan, and beat a hasty retreat from the quagmire it has got stuck. The US must remember that it buckled down before Lilliputian North Korea which is an emerging nuclear power, but is now foolishly vying to lock horns with a full-fledged nuclear power, which is height of foolhardiness.
A highly dangerous situation has been created for Pakistan already grappling with multiple internal challenges. Ongoing political turmoil as a result of gang up of opposition political cum religious parties/groups in their bid to put the Federal and Punjab governments in the dock has further vitiated the atmosphere and made Pakistan more vulnerable to exploitation by enemies of Pakistan. The people are suspecting that ongoing political disorder in Pakistan is also the handiwork of such elements. The US-Saudi and the US-India strategic partnerships are impelling both Iran and Pakistan to gravitate towards China and Russia and explore avenues to form a unified block in conjunction with Central Asian States to counter the US imperialist designs.
Source: pakobserver.net/trumps-threatening-tweet/
----
Trumping Logic
By Shahzad Chaudhry
January 5, 2018
On New Year’s Day, Pakistan and its self-styled ‘commentariat’ went crazy with a Trump tweet. Uninitiated into logical scenario-building and fed on only social media, these experts sounded a death-knell.
With least understanding of the American administration and its policy arms and with an even poorer understanding of how Trump conducts business, they raised the sky with forebodings that there was to be no tomorrow, literally. When an attempt was made to envision a practical enactment of the implied threat, there was none. Experts cried, “A tweet is not a policy” and a Trump tweet is never policy, it is an impulse; these self-styled intellectuals went on and on till the evening was out.
There are two kinds of such people: one, imbued with a hate-US sentiment, who earnestly await the next faux pa in the long US-Pakistan relationship and then latch on to how Uncle Tom and its lackeys need to be thumb-nosed and told off. With nations like Germany, England, Turkey, Iran, Russia, North Korea and Iran already in defiance of Trump’s idiosyncratic assertions, their case against the US may seem well merited. Except that international relationships are far more complex. A common past beckons each back to unfinished business. See how India and Russia simply cannot break off, despite India’s stronger fling with the US as the new reality. US-Pakistan ties have other compulsions and we shall get to those soon. But this is about the commentariat and their predilection.
The second kind is more suave. Loudly liberal, this set of the ‘intelligentsia’ is patently anti-military regardless of the military’s disposition at any given time. Second, the state has become a euphemism for the military in popular discourse – touted by these liberals to be the perennially non-democratic, illiberal, conservative, scheming side of the state which employs and uses non-state actors and is given to the badly abused notions of strategic depth in Afghanistan or perpetuation of enmity with India. So when the state gets trashed, be it through a Trump tweet or a domestic event such as the Faizabad dharna – where the state is proclaimed by this set to be complicit – it becomes a moment of sadistic celebration.
So they trashed the state side of Pakistan, the military, invoking its libellous past and its adventurous ways; an endless maligning made possible by the Trump tweet. This group has also used Nawaz Sharif’s removal by the courts to impute a conspiratorial hand of the military to malign it further. In a country among whose intelligentsia and upper crust liberals ‘patriotism’ is a dirty word, there is little surprise on how the Trump tweet was celebrated as ‘See, I told you’ intellectualism.
And now to the tweet. We are weak at conception and possible hypothesisation, only revelling in the fringes and making up for the rest with noise. But imagine, it is the morning of the New Year, (remember, the tweet was timed around 7am Eastern Time in the US) and President Trump – on a holiday to his Florida resort – wakes up to some early homework. And a piece of information turns up in advanced reading while preparing for his coming State of the Union address. He reads reports of the Pakistani ‘state’ and government hierarchy reiterating that it has done enough and will do ‘no more’. Repeated quite often in recent weeks, this ‘no more’ mantra from a lowly Pakistan irks him somewhat and he has an impulse. ‘We’ve done much to help Pakistan in terms of financial support over the course of the on-going Afghan war, and here they are thumbing their nose at us, telling us to go do something else’. His first response, ‘no more money to Pakistan’, and the $255 million which too must have found mention in a cable or a report due to Pakistan under the head of Coalition Support charges suddenly seems his first actionable part of revising the nature of relationship. Possible? It also could have been a more deliberate part of a process to be put in place after the holiday break.
Let’s be clear, for all the love that we may profess for each other, the US and Pakistan are beholden by two material determinants: the need for each other, which is a geostrategic determinant and hence transient, and the transactional follow-up which is almost a given whenever they have needed to cosy up. And as Trump mulls those options, he fires a tweet off. Not that it may not exactly play out as it says in the tweet, still it isn’t yet a slam-dunk deal. He simply seeks a more quiescent Pakistan through such pressure. Like the one which should hand over some militants to the CIA rather than work together on them. Do not forget the embarrassment that the UN vote on Palestine caused Trump and his UN ambassador, and their promise to not forget it. What better than to conflate the perceived omissions in one stroke for the SOTU and put the errant on notice.
And now to the response. First, all of Pakistan went mad. Why? We have that established. The morning after was a lot more rational even as the papers beamed the madness of the evening before. Some gloated with meaningful headlines to show the state in a bad light while others took up the cudgels on the state’s behalf to teach an imperious power another lesson from Vietnam. Between such polarity, the real work began. The action to call the US ambassador and seek some explanations and express disappointment was the right beginning. The security apparatus of the country met at different forums and were far more pragmatic about their response.
Pakistan planned to place before the world a very transparent comparison of what the US had provided in the domain of aid, CSF and other military aid to enable provision of military equipment to Pakistan, and what had Pakistan helped the US to achieve. Just in the last seventeen years the US attained control of Afghanistan after defeating the Taliban, eliminated Al-Qaeda, and has been able to retain its centrality in the region – all based around logistics support enabled by Pakistan. Consider the $33 billion support, not all aid, that Trump counts against the almost $1 trillion expended in and on Afghanistan in the same war and in the same period, and notice the substantial difference in outcomes in each war. Pakistan has practically won its war except for sporadic occurrences while Afghanistan continues to be afflicted by 40 percent of its area outside its remit.
Any good in Afghanistan and the region will come only through a cooperative effort between the three nations of Pakistan, Afghanistan and the US. Of that there should be little doubt. A lot has gone wrong in this war on all sides. It is time to take stock and come clean on the real intentions in Afghanistan. Till then this war may only be fought in the shadows which will only perpetuate turmoil. Unless that is an undeclared and unfortunate end, it is time to stop tweeting and getting around to talking. A 7:20am tweet by someone who just can’t keep his fingers off the keypad should not cloud better judgment.
Source: thenews.com.pk/print/264624-trumping-logic
-----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/pakistan-press/towards-polls-via-saudi-arabia/d/113817