November
02, 2007
Is Pakistan the Most Dangerous Nation?
The latest issue (Oct. 29) of
Newsweek says so in its lead story spread over nine
pages. Pakistan, it says, is now the homeland of
Jihad, and no other country on earth is arguably
more dangerous than Pakistan. For, Al Qaeda may
be able to find its nuclear bomb right in its own
backyard. Almost the entire Pakistani society is
under the delusion that the war on terror is chiefly
between Al Qaeda and Taliban on the one side and
the United States and its Western allies on the
other. It is not Pakistan’s war, nor its responsibility.
While the Newsweek has presented Pakistan as more
dangerous than Iraq and the rest of the world, an
eminent US senator, Joe Biden (D) from Delaware,
Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
said in an interview with the Washington Post’s
editorial board on October 25: “I’m
a hell of a lot more worried about Pakistan, which
already has nuclear weapons as opposed to Iran,
which is still working on nuclear enrichment....
I wish we’d pay as much attention to Pakistan
as the saber rattling we’re doing with Iran”.
Pakistan, that had been declared not long ago a
“major Non-NATO” ally by President Bush
and Gen. Musharraf was accepted by the US government
and the media as a crucial ally in the war on terror,
is now being viewed through a somewhat different
set of glasses.
Pakistan is fighting the war from conviction and
not under pressure from the US as insinuated by
the Newsweek.
The country has throughout its existence been friendly,
if not obsequious, towards the US. It has been the
recipient of substantial military assistance and
sports a war machine disproportionate to its intrinsic
economic strength. Whenever needed, Pakistan’s
military has willingly served the US interests –
the war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan,
for instance. The country’s structure and
interests are so intertwined with those of the US,
that it can hardly march away on a tangent, no matter
how the civil society might feel.
Taking this situation into account, and the unrelenting
pressure on the Bush Administration to pull out
of Iraq as early as possible, it would be quite
convenient for the US to pick Pakistan as the whipping
boy to divert attention from the unflattering and
inevitable withdrawal. It would also diminish the
possibility of Pakistan’s adverse reaction
towards any move against Iran that may follow the
sanctions already imposed on that country for defying
the demand to give up its nuclear program.
The allegation that Pakistan has become more dangerous
than Iraq is therefore tendentious, motivated and
totally false. While in Iraq, the US embassy personnel
cannot move about freely outside the Green Zone
and while the US mission in that country cannot
find local recruits despite high salaries, in Pakistan
even the US Ambassador goes around the country –
her recent visit to Karachi for instance- without
special security arrangements.
Both the Newsweek story and the statement of Senator
Biden point out the possibility of Pakistan’s
nuclear arsenal becoming accessible to Al Qaeda
and Taliban. This despite the fact that US authorities
at the highest level have been provided convincing
evidence of the fool-proof arrangements made for
the security of the nuclear devices. The crucial
fact in this context is that Pakistan is the only
nuclear state among over 55 Islamic states, and
it has yet to recognize Israel.
One hopes that the media campaign is not a prelude
to any action contemplated to remove Pakistan’s
nuclear teeth. That would explain Benazir’s
offer to allow access to PAEC to question A. Q.
Khan. That would also explain her offer to allow
American troops on the soil of Pakistan (ostensibly)
to pursue Osama and his cohorts.
On the other hand, developments on the ground in
Pakistan since last March, when President Musharraf’s
attempt to sack his turbulent Chief Justice got
botched, have loosened his grip on the reins of
power. His strategy to thwart Al Qaeda and Taliban
from making inroads into the tribal areas of Waziristan
by entering into peace deals with the elders of
the area also did not work out as envisioned by
him and his advisors. While he remained in a state
of denial over the success of the militants in using
the agreements for creating sanctuaries in the rugged
terrain, evidence started mounting that the Islamic
extremists had started consolidating their hold
on the area. The traditional system of governance
in the tribal areas had collapsed making room for
the reactionary Baitullah Mahsood and others to
introduce an antediluvian, Taliban-style rule in
the name of Islam.
In Swat, a picturesque, peaceful valley in the same
vicinity, another obscurantist religious figure
by the name of Fazlullah could set up a parallel
administration on the pattern of the Taliban of
Afghanistan. He has been holding court and passing
judgments in the name of Islamic jurisprudence (Shariat).
To him women must be suppressed, confined to the
house and allowed to move out only in a head to
toe cover, ‘burqua’, girls should not
be sent to schools, music should be banned, CD and
video shops be destroyed and barbers ordered to
refuse shaving beards – to mention just a
few of his silly beliefs.
He operates a clandestine FM radio station that
gives guidance and instructions to his followers.
His suicide bombers have just killed 30 soldiers
who were traveling in a military vehicle in the
Swat Valley. Pakistan’s authorities have moved
thousands of armed personnel into the area to reestablish
government writ.
The tentacles of this cancerous growth could take
into its grip even the Red Mosque in the heart of
Islamabad, and had to be eradicated with force at
a cost of over one hundred lives.
Musharraf is a modern man. He has a deep distaste
for the obscurantist mullah. No wonder, two attempts
were made on his life by Al Qaeda operatives in
which he narrowly escaped death. Yet, the fact remains
that under his watch, the semi-autonomous tribal
territories have been used by the Taliban of Afghanistan
to establish havens for their militants.
Pakistan army has the wherewithal to eradicate this
evil. Let it handle the situation and be judged
by the results after the operations are over. Media
campaigns, such as the one mentioned above, pressures
on the country’s administrations and indirect
maneuvering of political developments, might turn
out to be counterproductive. It would be wise to
exercise caution than to yield to the temerity of
tumultuous solutions. Tarnishing the image of a
perennial friend would be like cutting your nose
to spite your face, unless of course the move has
ulterior motives. arifhussaini@hotmail.com
