VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,413
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
from: Pakistan and America: In a sulk | The Economist
Pakistan and America
In a sulk
Relations grow yet worse between Pakistan and the superpower
Jul 14th 2011 | ISLAMABAD | from the print edition
EVEN at the best of times it would have seemed unusual for America’s embassy in Islamabad to organise its recent gathering for “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender” people. Given the grim state of bilateral relations, the meeting looked downright provocative. Some in Pakistan’s religiously conservative society promptly accused America of conspiring to attack them by spreading outrageously liberal sexual views. One Islamic political party called it “cultural terrorism”.
Though the United States remains, by far, Pakistan’s biggest financial benefactor, it is reviled among Pakistanis, many of whom genuinely believe that Americans are set on their country’s destruction. What little trust existed before the killing in May, by American special forces, of Osama bin Laden, is disappearing fast. The Americans gave Pakistan no warning; Pakistanis, especially the armed forces, felt humiliated. On July 12th Pakistan’s spy chief went to Washington, DC, for the first time since Bin Laden’s death.
There is plenty to discuss. At the weekend America said it would suspend $800m in military aid, around a third of the total it planned to dish out this year, citing a lack of co-operation by Pakistan in fighting extremists. India cheered, but grumbles echoed in Islamabad. The defence minister, Ahmad Mukhtar, said Pakistani soldiers might be pulled from guarding the Afghan border. One hopes he did not speak for the real power in the land, General Ashfaq Kayani, the armed-forces chief. The idea is desperate: removing such troops would be a boost to insurgents who threaten Pakistan and Afghanistan alike.
In any case, the situation in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state of 180m people, looks dire. Its rotten economy, broken legal system, Islamist insurgency, and street warfare among ethnic gangs in its main business centre, Karachi, are topped off by politicians widely derided as clowns. The army, still supreme but with its public image tarnished, is sunk in gloom: bitter over Bin Laden’s death, and over CIA agents who roamed across cities without the oversight of local intelligence officers. A risk now is that Pakistan’s huffy leaders drag their country into isolation.
America, too, seems to be pushing it that way. Officials frequently talk of Pakistan as all but a rogue state. Maleeha Lodhi, a former ambassador to Washington, says America’s new policy of “tough love” is “more tough than love”. Getting firmer with Pakistan may not be a bad idea in itself, but America bungles when it is unclear about its goals or tells Pakistan to act against its own strategic interests. Contradictory demands, telling Pakistan both to hunt down Afghan insurgent leaders on its soil and to bring them to the negotiating table, will not get far.
The muddle is not helped by America’s growing eagerness to find a quick way out of Afghanistan. Pakistanis, who fear they will be left holding the mess, accuse it of neglecting wider goals of promoting regional stability. They like to point out, too, that America has abandoned them before, cutting aid and military support when Soviet forces left Afghanistan at the end of the 1980s.
Still, Pakistan is exasperating. Bin Laden was a greater threat to Pakistan than to America in recent years, yet Pakistanis behave as if they regret his death. A festering source of tension is Pakistan’s backing, or at least tolerance, of violent jihadist groups active in Afghanistan, India and beyond. Pakistan is carrying out operations against some extremist networks on its soil, but says that it cannot make enemies of them all. It could obviously do more.
A hope is that Pakistan and America will realise, after all, that they need each other. America shares Pakistan’s long-held view that only a political settlement is possible in Afghanistan, or at least that outright military defeat of the Taliban is impossible. Any deal requires Pakistani help. The two sides also ought to agree on the dangers posed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates. As for Pakistan, for all its bluster, it desperately needs foreign, ie, American money. The sulks may have to end.
from the print edition | Asia
Pakistan and America
In a sulk
Relations grow yet worse between Pakistan and the superpower
Jul 14th 2011 | ISLAMABAD | from the print edition
EVEN at the best of times it would have seemed unusual for America’s embassy in Islamabad to organise its recent gathering for “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender” people. Given the grim state of bilateral relations, the meeting looked downright provocative. Some in Pakistan’s religiously conservative society promptly accused America of conspiring to attack them by spreading outrageously liberal sexual views. One Islamic political party called it “cultural terrorism”.
Though the United States remains, by far, Pakistan’s biggest financial benefactor, it is reviled among Pakistanis, many of whom genuinely believe that Americans are set on their country’s destruction. What little trust existed before the killing in May, by American special forces, of Osama bin Laden, is disappearing fast. The Americans gave Pakistan no warning; Pakistanis, especially the armed forces, felt humiliated. On July 12th Pakistan’s spy chief went to Washington, DC, for the first time since Bin Laden’s death.
There is plenty to discuss. At the weekend America said it would suspend $800m in military aid, around a third of the total it planned to dish out this year, citing a lack of co-operation by Pakistan in fighting extremists. India cheered, but grumbles echoed in Islamabad. The defence minister, Ahmad Mukhtar, said Pakistani soldiers might be pulled from guarding the Afghan border. One hopes he did not speak for the real power in the land, General Ashfaq Kayani, the armed-forces chief. The idea is desperate: removing such troops would be a boost to insurgents who threaten Pakistan and Afghanistan alike.
In any case, the situation in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state of 180m people, looks dire. Its rotten economy, broken legal system, Islamist insurgency, and street warfare among ethnic gangs in its main business centre, Karachi, are topped off by politicians widely derided as clowns. The army, still supreme but with its public image tarnished, is sunk in gloom: bitter over Bin Laden’s death, and over CIA agents who roamed across cities without the oversight of local intelligence officers. A risk now is that Pakistan’s huffy leaders drag their country into isolation.
America, too, seems to be pushing it that way. Officials frequently talk of Pakistan as all but a rogue state. Maleeha Lodhi, a former ambassador to Washington, says America’s new policy of “tough love” is “more tough than love”. Getting firmer with Pakistan may not be a bad idea in itself, but America bungles when it is unclear about its goals or tells Pakistan to act against its own strategic interests. Contradictory demands, telling Pakistan both to hunt down Afghan insurgent leaders on its soil and to bring them to the negotiating table, will not get far.
The muddle is not helped by America’s growing eagerness to find a quick way out of Afghanistan. Pakistanis, who fear they will be left holding the mess, accuse it of neglecting wider goals of promoting regional stability. They like to point out, too, that America has abandoned them before, cutting aid and military support when Soviet forces left Afghanistan at the end of the 1980s.
Still, Pakistan is exasperating. Bin Laden was a greater threat to Pakistan than to America in recent years, yet Pakistanis behave as if they regret his death. A festering source of tension is Pakistan’s backing, or at least tolerance, of violent jihadist groups active in Afghanistan, India and beyond. Pakistan is carrying out operations against some extremist networks on its soil, but says that it cannot make enemies of them all. It could obviously do more.
A hope is that Pakistan and America will realise, after all, that they need each other. America shares Pakistan’s long-held view that only a political settlement is possible in Afghanistan, or at least that outright military defeat of the Taliban is impossible. Any deal requires Pakistani help. The two sides also ought to agree on the dangers posed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates. As for Pakistan, for all its bluster, it desperately needs foreign, ie, American money. The sulks may have to end.
from the print edition | Asia
