Pakistan is
Not a Dog, or Is It?
By Dr Ghulam M. Haniff
US
No need to get all bent out of shape over a cartoon,
recently published in Washington Times, depicting
Pakistan as a dog bringing in yet another terrorist.
The caricature drawn accurately portrays the way
Pakistan is seen by policymakers in Washington.
That should not surprise anyone given that Arabs
have been pictured as hooked-nose vultures, for
price gouging, and Arafat as a hooked-nose rat,
for resisting occupation. Muslims all.
“Here, boy, go fetch another terrorist,”
is what Pakistan has been trained to do with CIA
and the Pentagon close on its tail. To this point
the dog has produced scores of alleged terrorists,
many shipped over to the US illegally, in violation
of the due process rights. (Do Pakistani citizens
have any rights? is an interesting question to
ask).
Each time the dog brings in a catch it gets a
little pat on the head, as in the cartoon “Good
boy—now let’s go find” another.
No doubt, the combat ready soldier pictured probably
gave him few crumbs, or even a bone.
Dutifully the dog will bring another, and another,
and another. Reports say Pakistan has handed over
perhaps a couple of hundred to the US authorities.
Maybe more. No body knows the exact count. That
information is top secret. Pakistan, the dog,
is only serving its master.
Eventually, the hapless victims flown over will
be classified as “enemy combatants”
without any rights for a hearing and probably
wind up in Guantanamo, or taken to Bagram for
special treatment, or to Uzbekistan where the
ruler specializes in boiling his prisoners. All
the rhetoric about human rights and spreading
democracy around the world is just that, rhetoric.
A batch of Guantanamo inmates, just released,
has complained bitterly of torture and mistreatment,
including desecration of the Qur’an and
insults to the religion of Islam. One guard is
said to have flushed the Qur’an down the
toilet. A former Army sergeant, Erik Saar, appearing
with a CBS reporter on “60 Minutes”
on May 1, 2005, graphically described how “prisoners
were subjected to sexual tactics” where
a female interrogator with menstrual blood on
her hand touched an inmate and mockingly asked:
“Does that please Allah?”
The degradation and hatred of Islam seems to continue
unabated in the Guantanamos and Abu Ghraibs of
the world, described so vividly by Robert Fisk
in many of his writings.
Insightful observers have noted with alarm that
the multi-pronged “crusade” against
Islam apparently includes the undermining of the
religion completely. The daily vitriol on Islam
is not accidental but is fostered in a permissive
atmosphere. If the White House bully-pulpit were
used to condemn these attacks, they would not
occur. Unfortunately, the Muslim world is constantly
criticized for its presumed intolerance but there
is never a comment on the American mass media
for its drumbeat of Islamophobia. No wonder, the
likes of Franklin Graham and Pat Robertson are
emboldened to denigrate Islam at every possible
turn. When someone openly advocates constitutionally
prohibited discrimination against Muslims, as
Pat Robertson did on ABC’s This Week, on
May 1, 2005, you know he has supporters in high
places.
Unfortunately, no Pakistani organization of which
there are countless, such as MMA, or Jamiat-al-Islam,
or a Muslim leader, or a Maulana has responded
to the blatant denigration of Islam. In the absence
of strong voices of condemnation the deprecation
of Islam has become so routine that it is now
accepted as a “norm” in the mainstream
media. Meanwhile, the dog dutifully keeps on sniffing
around for more terrorists.
Despite the catches brought-in bombastic voices
heard in Washington, especially on the Capital
Hill, claim that Pakistan is not doing enough,
it’s dragging its feet. One congressman
Gary L. Ackerman (D-NY) has drafted a bill to
deny Pakistan any military equipment or technology
(this of course includes the much vaunted F-16
fighter planes) unless A.Q. Khan is handed over
to the US authorities. Quite likely, in addition,
if Pakistan fails to do this, sanctions will no
doubt follow. What Pakistanis fail to understand,
that in this relationship, past is a good guide
to the present and the future.
According to the “realpolitik” premise
of the American foreign policy in the post-World
War II era, great powers do not have permanent
friends, only permanent interests. Why should
the US worry about Pakistan once the last terrorist
has been delivered?
The reward to Pakistan, in the American war against
terrorism, has been a handful of crumbs, and an
occasional bone. But the dog has been more than
willing to do the master’s bidding.
Deservedly, when the last terrorist is handed
over (anytime now) the dog will get a swift kick
on its butt (with those boots yet!) and the master
would have disappeared. Pakistan would be left
holding the bag.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
