Pakistan lays down the agenda for the
US By Seema Sirohi
WASHINGTON
- Pakistan, the United States' premier ally in the "war
on terrorism", has laid down the agenda for the Bush
administration for the next four years on what it
expects in exchange for continued cooperation to hunt
down al-Qaeda.
On the menu is a slew of demands,
ranging from continued economic aid to a generous flow
of weapons. But above all is the expectation of a
long-term relationship, especially in light of what
Washington is building with India under the title of the
"Next Steps in Strategic Partnership".
Jehangir
Karamat, Pakistan's new ambassador in Washington, wants
no less. He, in fact, chose to dub his first public
speech "Next Steps" too, articulating Pakistan's hopes
and desires for a partnership that will endure beyond
the capture of Osama bin Laden. "We seek sustained and
enhanced engagement so that gains continue to be
consolidated and pushed further," he said at a
well-attended speech in Washington last week.
But what was noted by observers was the language
he used to deliver the message. He sounded more like a
teacher telling a pupil the level of performance he
expected from the Americans, said diplomatic observers.
He seemed to be drawing a clear parallel between payment
and delivery, which led to questions whether the changes
in policy that Pakistan has pursued post-September 11,
2001, have been made because they are good for Pakistan,
or because they bring US arms and aid.
The
administration of President George W Bush is currently
in the process of dispensing US$3 billion in economic
and military aid, apart from having written off nearly
$2 billion in Pakistani debt. An arms package approved
by Congress worth $1.2 billion includes eight P-3C naval
reconnaissance planes, 2,000 TOW missiles, and other
weapons, which has raised serious concerns in New Delhi
because they counter specific Indian capabilities. New
Delhi has told Washington that large-scale delivery of
arms to Pakistan will jeopardize the composite dialogue
between India and Pakistan.
But Karamat, a
former chief of army staff, said that the US largess,
both monetary and material, "must" continue. He turned
India's reasons for opposing the weapons package on its
head, arguing that it is the United States' "tilt"
toward India that makes peace in South Asia elusive.
"The conventional defense capability must
continue to be built up because an unacceptable tilt in
the balance of power makes meaningful India-Pakistan
dialogue difficult," Karamat declared.
Among
other "musts" for Washington to carry out are a
free-trade agreement, or alternative arrangements, and
bilateral investment initiatives in Pakistan to
"influence public opinion". "US support must continue to
give us access to international financial institutions,"
Karamat added.
"The US support for Pakistan's
counter-terrorism effort must continue and capabilities
must continue to be enhanced. We need to work with the
US to change perceptions based on past happenings and
create perceptions based on current policies and future
projections," he said. As for his side of the bargain,
Karamat said that "Pakistan will of course continue to
address US concerns. The present cooperative and
unambiguous relationship will help to do this as
everything is on the table."
Karamat's
categorical tone left some US officials a little
embarrassed, for they are not used to ambassadors laying
down the line in Washington. "Even Tony Blair's
ambassador won't use that tone in public," said one
observer. Some others said that Pakistan prescribing the
agenda was a case of the tail wagging the dog.
Meanwhile, what surprised some was Karamat's
dismissive tone about the A Q Khan affair, which he
labeled a "proliferation episode" while denying any
government complicity in it. "There was no government
sanction, approval, or any kind of government connection
with what went on," he said flatly. But Dr Abdul Qadeer
Khan, in his 11-page confession reported in the US press
in February, named Karamat, former chief of army staff
General (retired) Mirza Aslam Beg and President General
Pervez Musharraf as the men on top who were aware of
what was going on. As the chief of army staff from
1996-98, Karamat was directly responsible for the safety
and security of the nuclear program.
But Karamat
declined to elaborate how something so big could happen
on his watch, saying that too much had already been
written about the Khan affair.
Karamat's main
objective in the speech appeared to be to move the
debate in Washington from Pakistan's past to Pakistan's
future and Washington's commitment. He said Pakistanis
are worried that they will never be let off the hook,
because the past is always being dredged up to color
policy.
Even though the Bush administration has
embraced Pakistan as a key and indispensable ally in its
"war on terrorism" and publicly defended Musharraf on
every issue - from the Khan affair to the re-emergence
of the Taliban to his refusal to relinquish his post as
army chief as promised - the US media and many
congressmen and senators have repeatedly raised
questions about Pakistan's commitment to the United
States. Editorials in respected newspapers have
questioned the reliability of Pakistan as an ally, and
whether the US is giving Musharraf a pass despite the
many problems.
It is Karamat's job to change
this perception, and he took a big leap forward with his
first speech. Crafted well and delivered with ease, he
presented Pakistan, its role and its indispensability to
Washington with flair, said many in the audience.
He said Pakistan had changed "strategic
directions" and is now suffering the consequences. "From
a policy of active interference and destabilization of
Afghanistan, Pakistan is working with the US for a
stable and friendly Afghanistan. From a policy of
hostility and confrontation with India, Pakistan now has
a policy of dialogue and conflict resolution. From a
policy of appeasement and political expediency with
extremist religious elements, Pakistan has moved to
confronting them to end their negative influence and
activities. From a clandestine nuclear program with
proliferation consequences, Pakistan has moved to a
regime of command, control and international
cooperation," he said, giving an overview of the "new"
Pakistan in progress.
"This is a major strategic
reorientation of the country. And, as in all such
strategic turnarounds, there is a price to be paid. This
price is paid in terms of the blowback, the resistance
and the retaliation to the changes."
Reaction to
Karamat's presentation was mixed. His host, senior South
Asia analyst Stephen Cohen, was full of praise for his
candor. "I had never heard a Pakistani official so
systematically and bluntly go over the errors of past
governments, including one in which they served. Of
course his government, and the army, did things that
were wrong at the time, and have come to regret, but
Pakistan officials have promulgated a new benchmark that
the world can hold them to. This is not trivial," said
Cohen.
But others, speaking on background, were
more critical of Karamat's rosy picture. One US official
who is familiar with South Asian issues said the
ambassador's storyline was overly
optimistic.
Regardless, there is little doubt
that the US-Pakistan partnership is fraught with
potholes that will take more than a smart presentation
to fill up.
Seema Sirohi is a
Washington-based correspondent.
(Copyright
2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.)
