WASHINGTON - Amid reports that the
administration of US President George W Bush is
considering aggressive covert actions against
armed Islamist forces in western Pakistan, a new
survey released here Monday suggested that such an
effort would be opposed by an overwhelming
majority of Pakistanis themselves.
The
survey, which was funded by the quasi-governmental
US Institute of Peace and designed by the
University of Maryland's Program on International
Policy Attitudes, also found that a strong
majority of Pakistanis consider the US military
presence in Asia and neighboring Afghanistan a
much more critical threat to their
country than al-Qaeda or
Pakistan's own Taliban movement in the tribal
regions along the border with Afghanistan.
Only five 5% of respondents said the
Pakistani government should permit US or other
foreign troops to enter Pakistan to pursue or
capture al-Qaeda fighters, compared to a whopping
80% who said such actions should not be permitted,
according to the poll, which was based on in-depth
interviews of more than 900 Pakistanis in 19
cities in mid-September.
As a result, the
survey did not take account of the tumultuous
events that have taken place in Pakistan since
then, including the six-week state of emergency
declared by President Pervez Musharraf, the
sacking of the Supreme Court, the return from
exile of former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and
Nawaz Sharif, and Bhutto's December 27
assassination which has led to the delay of
scheduled parliamentary elections from January 8
until next month.
To what extent those
events may have influenced public opinion in
Pakistan on the range of issues covered by the
survey - particularly toward the Pakistani Taliban
one of whose leaders, Baitullah Mehsud, has been
accused by the government of carrying out Bhutto's
killing - cannot be known.
But the
underlying attitudes revealed in the poll,
especially toward the US, can offer little very
little comfort to the administration, which has
become increasingly alarmed about recent events in
Pakistan, particularly Bhutto's death, the
Pakistani army's reluctance to take on the
Taliban, and intelligence reports that al Qaeda
and its local allies, including the Taliban, have
intensified their efforts to destabilize the
government.
On Sunday, the New York Times
ran a front-page article regarding a White House
meeting on Friday in which top officials,
including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice, reportedly debated
pressing Musharraf and his new military leadership
to permit the Central Intelligence Agency and US
Special Operations Forces to carry out more
aggressive covert operations against selected
targets in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas
(FATA), the quasi-autonomous tribal areas that
have come become increasingly dominated by the
Pakistani Taliban who have more recently extended
their influence into the North-West Frontier
Province. The US currently has about 50 soldiers
in Pakistan acting primarily in an advisory and
intelligence capacity.
While some
administration officials reportedly believe that
recent events have persuaded Musharraf and the
army that they need such assistance to curb the
growing Taliban-al-Qaeda threat, regional
specialists both in and outside the administration
have argued that such an intervention risked
further destabilizing the country by triggering
what the Times called "a tremendous backlash"
against the US and any government that was seen as
its accomplice.
Despite the nearly
four-month hiatus since the survey was conducted,
its findings would certainly appear to support the
latter prediction.
While the survey found
that a large majority of Pakistanis hold negative
views of radical Islamists, including the Taliban
and al-Qaeda and strongly reject its their use of
violence against civilians, their views of the
United States and its intentions toward Pakistan
appear to be considerably more hostile and
distrustful.
A whopping 84% said the US
military presence in the region was either a
"critical" (72%) or an "important" (12%) threat to
Pakistan's "vital interests".
By
comparison, 53% of respondents said they believed
tensions with India - with which Pakistan has
fought several wars - constituted a "critical
threat"; 41% named al-Qaeda as a "critical
threat"; 34% put "activities of Islamist militants
and local Taliban" in the same category.
Asked to choose from a list of alleged US
goals in the region, 78% cited Washington's
alleged desire "to maintain control over the oil
resources of the Middle East" (59% said it was
"definitely" a goal, 19% said "probably"; 75%
cited "to spread Christianity"; and 86% cited "to
weaken and divide the Islamic world"). Only 63%
chose the option "to prevent more attacks such as
those on the World Trade Center in September
2001".
Moreover, a majority of respondents
said they believed that the US controls either
"most" (32%) or "nearly all" (24%) of the recent
major events that have taken place in Pakistan,
compared to 22% who attributed "some" control to
the US and 4% who said "very little". Eighteen
percent declined to respond.
As to
Pakistan-US security cooperation, less than one in
five respondents said it had either benefited
Pakistan primarily or both equally. Forty-four
percent said it had mostly benefited the US; and
11% said neither party had benefited.
Distrust of the US, however, did not
translate into support for radical Islamists, the
Taliban, or al-Qaeda, according to the survey.
While they were considered much less of a threat
than the US, six out of 10 respondents said they
considered the Taliban and al-Qaeda either a
"critical" or an "important threat" to Pakistan.
And even as huge majorities opposed any US
or foreign military intervention against the two
groups in Pakistan, pluralities approaching 50%
said they would support the Pakistani army
entering the FATA to capture al-Qaeda fighters or
Taliban insurgents who have crossed over from
Afghanistan.
Comparable pluralities said
they favored phasing out FATA's special legal
status and integrating its areas into the
country's overall legal structure but also prefer
taking a gradualist approach that includes
negotiating with the local Taliban over using
military force to impose the central government's
control.
The survey also found
overwhelming support for government based both on
"Islamic principles" and on democratic ideals,
including an independent judiciary and being
governed by elected representatives. While six in
ten respondents said they supported a larger role
for Islamic law, or sharia, in Pakistan's
legal system, only 15% said they wanted to see
more "Talibanization of daily life", a common
phrase used in Pakistani media to refer to extreme
religious conservatism.
Indeed, more than
eight in ten said it was important for Pakistan to
protect its religious minorities; more than three
out of four said attacks on those minorities are
"never justified"; and nearly two out of three
said they support government plans to regulate
religious schools, or madrassas, to require
them to teach secular subjects, such as math and
science. Only 17% said they oppose those reforms.
In general, those respondents who
supported the expansion of sharia and
government based on "Islamic principles" also
tended to favor both democratic ideals and
educational reforms at higher rates than others.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
