In Re: President Zardari's Op-Ed
I no doubt feel for Mr. Zardari's personal loss. But that is not the matter in question. His present mandate very clearly derives from the nation's sympathy, just as Rajiv Gandhi's did in 1984 and Lyndon Johnson's did in 1964. His personal experiences may give him an emotional understanding of what Mumbai suffered. That is, however, no qualification to run a state. Further it does not seem to reflect in his actions so far. To put it more precisely, it does not reflect in Pakistan's actions so far. Mr. Zardari has offered us his words, but it is illogical to take them at face value. The promises he and PM Gilani make are constantly rescinded because they DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE THEM.
While there is much to be said in terms of the efforts of Mr. Zardari's government to build good economic relations with India, the fact remains that he is a mask that exercises but a small amount of control. Even his hometown of Karachi (in relatively peaceful South Pakistan) is out of his control, as it turns out to be the launching pad for the Mumbai assault. The question now is whether Mr. Zardari can be anything but the unwilling face of a terrorist state?
Pakistan has seen 3 coups since its independence. It spends 25% of its budget on defence. And it has a military that is still reeling from a defeat over thirty years ago. However, wars can't be scheduled like boxing bouts, . It has therefore been in the Pakistani military establishment’s warped interests to instigate a war with India to satisfy, if nothing else, their egos. India has had no pressing reason to be anything other than civil to Pakistan. It has not encouraged extremists, trained them and unleashed them on a civilian populace. It has dealt with its communal tensions internally. I’m given to understand that as per the Border Security Force’s rules of engagement, it does not even offer retaliatory fire along the borders. Yet, India was forced to repel an assault from “extremists” in 1999, a proxy war, a phony war with no result, nothing to satisfy the Pakistani egos. It was, once again, a war where the civilian government gave India, and indeed the world, words. Can we believe them?
A puppet civilian government is such an appeasing face. Perhaps it’s time the world saw through that. Perhaps it’s time the world realized that it is being lied to. Lies about “banning” organizations, lies about sharing NATO’s agenda, lies about actions Pakistan will take to stem its terror problem. Perhaps NATO should wake up to the fact that while Pakistan’s civilian agenda and overt actions are in their favour, too large a part of its establishment supports the other side. It is time for NATO to realize that Pakistan is now a desperate double agent, one caught with his ankle-holster showing.
Is there a solution? It would be foolishly Gandhian for India to turn the other cheek. Perhaps Pakistan’s civilian government should accept that it has lost control over parts of its territory, if not parts of its establishment. Perhaps it should then permit the international community help it to clinically act against those “non-state actors” without a threat to its sovereignty. But will it? From its actions in the last week or so, it appears that it will give us more words and eyewash. Is one to listen and wait? The hypocrisy is increasingly apparent. For instance: Why are Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon so precious to Pakistan? What does Pakistan’s most recent act of denying India its criminals signify? Take your pick:
a) Pakistan is honouring its lack of an extradition treaty with India. [Would have been nice of them to sign one in the first place…]
b) Pakistan is not willing to give up twenty individuals to avoid an armed conflict between nuclear-armed nations. [That’s an interesting statistic, 20 people or 2 armies with a combined strength of some 3.5 million. Hmmm… Wonder what the Pakistani establishment has in mind. A war perhaps?]
c) Pakistan has further use for these individuals. [Probably to walk Mr. Zardari’s dog… which is actually Gen. Kiyani’s dog… which is actually Lt. Gen. Pasha’s dog…]
d) It just really likes the buggers. [OK, had to give them one nice option].
So, let’s step back and take a look at the bigger picture. The Pakistani extremists are in cahoots with the Taliban. The Taliban and their extremist friends, including the Al Qaeda are in a war with NATO, and, ostensibly, the Pakistani armed forces. But parts of Pakistan’s armed forces have been, for about 20 years now, training such extremists and funding and equipping them [See, I told you they really liked the buggers…]. Unless NATO accepts this fact, the fact that it is the Pakistani establishment, and not just a handful of extremists that are against them, the battle for Afghanistan is going to continue in perpetuity. And unless India takes some decisive action, it will continue to suffer at the hands of a two-faced Pakistan.
