What's new

Can the United States take Hussain Haqqani seriously?

notorious_eagle

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Dec 25, 2008
4,597
32
10,335
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
...The cycles of discrediting leaders as ‘traitors’ or ‘enemy agents’ and occasionally allowing them to return to high office reveal a lot about Pakistan’s political culture. Leaders of all ethnic-based political parties, representing Pashtuns, Baloch, Sindhi and Urdu-speaking Muhajir ethnicities, have been alternately declared enemies of the state and included in government at one time or another. The purpose of the exercise seems to be to create a permanent environment of fear and national insecurity, with the people constantly looking for saviours who would defend the country against external and internal foes.

The person or political party accused of sedition can return to the fold of patriotism by cutting a deal with the Pakistani establishment and ceding their independence. Neither the allegations of treason nor their sudden forgiveness are ever fully explained to the people. In some cases, direct intervention by the Supreme Court provides a fig leaf of legitimacy in the absence of a trial. Unlike other countries, where the apex court is only the court of final appeal in criminal matters, Pakistan’s Supreme Court acts politically to directly make pronouncements in response to media articles or petitions by political rivals. One need not be convicted of disloyalty to the state after due process of law when innuendo, fabricated media reports and public comments by Supreme Court judges can suffice to tarnish reputations and cut public support.


Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 3036-3046). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.​
You're quoting this individual as he is some sort of expert on Pakistan. The man shamelessly sold State Secrets of Pakistan to a foreign power, he has no honour. He is practically a nobody. Only considered an expert among certain individuals who are supremely hostile to Pakistan.
 

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
35,533
413
74,994
Country
United States
Location
United States
You're quoting this individual as he is some sort of expert on Pakistan. The man shamelessly sold State Secrets of Pakistan to a foreign power, he has no honour. He is practically a nobody. Only considered an expert among certain individuals who are supremely hostile to Pakistan.
That is the true crux of the matter. Anyone who considers Haqqani seriously holds massive and vile hatred against Pakistan and its inhabitants.
 

Shahzaz ud din

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 12, 2017
7,796
14
13,124
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
HH has served in several administrations in Pakistan. Dismissing his credibility is dismissing Pakistan government's credibility. You may not agree with him but it looks like several of your top most leaders thought highly of him - Zia, Benazir, Nawas Sherieff...
Could you please update us about the administrative post which he ever held in Pakistan.Also tell us something about his qualification.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
41,740
55
35,295
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Now with a changing of the guard, his relevance will diminish further. I'm sure we shall see another book a year or so from now titled 'Pakistan under Imran, the time bomb is ticking'.
Attacking the person will never work in countering his message. The only way to negate the potency of his message is to counter it with a better narrative.
 

Solomon2

BANNED
Dec 12, 2008
19,476
-37
9,950
Country
United States
Location
United States
You're quoting this individual as he is some sort of expert on Pakistan.
Could you please update us about the administrative post which he ever held in Pakistan.Also tell us something about his qualification.
Wikipedia:

...In 1988, he worked in the political campaign for an alliance led by Nawaz Sharif, who was subsequently elected Prime Minister. In 1990 he became Sharif's special assistant and until 1992 functioned as his spokesman. From 1993 to 1995, he was spokesman to Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto; from 1995–96, he was chairman of the House Building Finance Corporation...In 1992 Husain Haqqani became one of Pakistan's youngest ambassadors, serving in Sri Lanka until 1993. He served as Pakistan's ambassador to the United States from 2008 -
...Anyone who considers Haqqani seriously holds massive and vile hatred against Pakistan and its inhabitants.
The combination of aggressive rejection of reproach and insistence on victimhood insulates the Pakistani public from recognizing that anything in Pakistan needs fundamental revision. Any foreigner offering an unflattering portrayal of the country— from reporting honour killings to citing unfavourable economic statistics— is invariably described by Pakistani officialdom as ‘ignorant’ or ‘beholden to anti-Pakistan lobbies’. Pakistanis voicing reservations about the country’s direction are treated even worse. They are characterized as ‘traitors’ or ‘enemy agents’ acting at others’ behest. It is almost as if no one who is knowledgeable, wise, objective or honourable can find anything about Pakistan worth disapproving.

Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 403-409). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.

...The man shamelessly sold State Secrets of Pakistan to a foreign power, he has no honour...
Oh? Consider:

Memo commission didn't declare Husain Haqqani traitor: SC (2012)

...on Feb 15, the Supreme Court had issued arrest warrants for Mr Haqqani...the warrant of arrest issued by the court did not fulfil Interpol’s requirements - link

Interpol seeks more evidence to justify Haqqani red warrant, confirms FIA

In your opinion, @notorious_eagle, do those who accuse H.H. of serious charges that cannot be justified possess more honour than he does? Do you?

Attacking the person will never work in countering his message. The only way to negate the potency of his message is to counter it with a better narrative.
Outside of Pakistan yes, but -

In Pakistan, a perception has been officially cultivated that anyone who offers facts, statistics or opinions that do not coincide with the national narrative does so at the behest of Pakistan’s many external enemies.
The machinery of state is able to, by and large, control discussion of the country’s achievements and challenges within Pakistan but that does not stop critical debate around the world. In case of Pakistani scholars and commentators, nationalist sentiment also colours their assessment of the country’s balance sheet. The result is the widening gulf between an overly optimistic Pakistani view, supported by a few non-Pakistani sympathizers, and the generally pessimistic mainstream international discourse on Pakistan.

Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 228-233). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.


The ISIS also attack to set nations to the right path according to them.
...In any case, one can always fall back on the contention that whatever is being pointed out is not limited to Pakistan. It is not unusual to hear Pakistanis argue that ‘Fanaticism (or poverty or poor governance or lack of attention to social sectors, depending on the topic under debate) can be found everywhere’...Policy debates in most countries involve acknowledgement of threats and challenges alongside discussion of strengths and opportunities. In Pakistan, however, there seems to be an obsession with the country’s ‘image’ at the expense of ignoring unpleasant realities that might need changing.

Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 412-419). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.
 

Thorough Pro

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 23, 2008
12,766
-19
12,368
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
If they can take their own clown seriously, why not a Pakistani sell out?


Can the United States take Hussain Haqqani Seriously?

View attachment 381316

By Jamal Hussain |


A briefing paper on Pakistan was issued to much media hype in February 2017 by the Hudson Institute, a research setup under the Heritage foundation titled “A New Approach to Pakistan: Enforcing Aid Conditions without Cutting Ties.” It advised the Trump administration on how to deal with Pakistan. It made for interesting reading for all especially those interested in Pakistan. But, before we evaluate its contents, a brief examination is necessary of the backgrounds of the academics who authored the report and some of those that were listed as signatories.

The report authors list among them foremost Hussain Haqqani and Lisa Curtis.

Hussain Haqqani (HH), the Director for South and Central Asia at Hudson Institute and Lisa Curtis, a senior research fellow, at the Asian Studies Centre at the Heritage Foundation have co-authored the study.

Hussain Haqqani: Friend or foe?

Hussain Haqqani is a Pakistani who has settled in the USA. His colorful resume, with continuously changing positions to please latest paymaster, is one of its kind. President of Jamat e Islami (JI) student wing in his youth, HH became a strong supporter of Zia ul Haq when the General was in power during the 1980s. After Zia’s demise in a plane crash, he latched on to the bandwagon of Zia’s protégé, Nawaz Sharif (NS), whose party opposed the resurgent Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP) under the young and popular Benazir Bhutto.

Considered the architect of the smear campaign against Benazir during the 1988 General Elections in Pakistan, he was rewarded for his loyalty to NS with the post of Special Assistance to the Prime Minister when the latter came to power in 1990. By the end of the first tenure of NS, HH was appointed as the youngest ever High Commissioner of Pakistan to Sri Lanka.
After the dismissal of NS government and the return of Benazir, he was recruited by her as her spokesperson with the status of a minister of state. After Benazir’s dismissal in 1996, he became an academic and a decade and a half later when the PPP under Zardari gained power in the Centre, he was appointed the Pakistani ambassador to the USA.

Dismissed for suspected anti-state activities, which he vehemently denies, accusing the Pakistan Army of orchestrating a plot to implicate him in a false case. HH settled in the USA and currently is the Director for South Asia and Central Asia at Hudson Institute. He has authored three books on Pakistan where his animosity towards the Pakistan Army is apparent. He is known to carry a grudge against the Pakistan Army that a clear majority of Pakistanis consider the only state institution which secures the country from foreign domination. With such a credential of HH, should one expect objectivity if he heads a policy paper advising the US administration on how to deal with Pakistan?

Read more: Where does Pakistan fit into Trump’s World?

The co-authors of Hudson Report

Lisa Curtis, the co-author is a retired CIA employee who has also served as a diplomat in Pakistan and India. With her CIA background where the confrontation of the CIA with the Pakistani intelligence agency the ISI is an open secret, can one expect an impartial approach when dealing with Pakistan where the ISI is known to provide key inputs on the conduct of the nation’s foreign policy?

Among the signatories, Christine Fair, Polly Nayak and Aparna Pande ring alarm bells. Christine Fair, who once was considered the darling of the Pakistan Army, is now known for her anti-Pakistan sentiments. Her earlier work on drones and her pro-drone stance and viewpoints has been denounced as “surprisingly weak” by Brooking Institution and journalist Glenn Greenwald dismissed it as “rank propaganda.”

In 2011 and 2012 she received funding from the US embassy in Islamabad to conduct a survey on public opinion concerning militancy. Her journalistic sources have been questioned for their credibility and she has been accused of having a conflict of interest due to her past work with the US government think tanks, as well as the CIA. In the Pakistani media, she has been accused of double standards, partisanship towards India and has been criticized for her contacts with dissident leaders from Baluchistan, a link which raises serious questions “if her interest in Pakistan is merely academic.”

Polly Nayak, a South Asian expert and currently an independent consultant retired from CIA in late 2002 as a senior executive. Her views on Pakistan, like those of Lisa Curtis, would not be free from the bias that colors CIA’s opinion about Pakistan and Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency the ISI, which is viewed as an ally only when its help is desperately sought— otherwise a nemesis. Aparna Pande is a born Indian working for the Hudson Institute and her writings mirror the rabidly anti-Pakistan stance of the Indian government under Narendra Modi.

Is Hudson Report credible to define future US-Pakistan relations?

Can an objective assessment of how the USA should frame its Pakistan policy be based on a paper produced by the remote group of known Pakistani haters? The very composition of the team assembled to produce the Briefing Paper appears mala fide. How much credibility would one attach to a policy paper headed by Netanyahu of Israel about the Israeli/Palestine two-state solution or Steve Bannon evaluating the Obama/Affordable Care Act—not much! The Hudson Institute Briefing Paper is in the same league.

Read more: Is Trump under pressure to adopt tougher approach towards Pakistan?

Part II – The Substance of the Briefing Paper

Avoid viewing and portraying Pakistan as an ally, is the first policy recommendation of the briefing paper. The USA has never considered Pakistan as a true ally and has used this term only when it suited them. It considers Pakistan as a rentier state and hires it for a price to pursue policies to promote their regional and global agenda.

Yes, Pakistan has often willingly accepted the US offer, at a considerable price to its security and well-being. Even though the military aid package of 1954 and the collaboration in the 1980s to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan was on a reciprocal basis where both sides viewed it as a win-win situation, the USA benefited far more from them while Pakistan, in the long run, paid a very heavy price for the liaisons.

The Mutual Defence Assistance Agreement of 1954 turned Pakistan as the bulwark against any spread of communism that was primarily aimed at containment of the USSR. The defense pact ruled the USSR, the rival superpower, and a neighbor of Pakistan to an extent where they established a strategic partnership with India, the country’s principal security threat and enemy, which had unlawfully and illegally occupied two-thirds of Kashmir.

By supplying Pakistan with leftover and redundant military hardware from the Korean War, the USA succeeded in containing the Soviet expansion in South Asia while Pakistan paid a very heavy price in the shape of Soviet military, political and diplomatic support to India when it employed its veto power to steamroll any peaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

Supporting the US in Afghan Jihad: Was it a wise decision for Pakistan?

The 1980s collaboration was a bonanza for the USA. Pakistan’s critical role resulted in the defeat of the Soviet forces in Afghanistan that resulted in its subsequent breakup.

The USA became the sole superpower, a status it enjoyed for over two decades. The mass migration of the Afghan refugees into Pakistan with their culture of gun, violence, and drugs destabilized the country. Much of the terror related incidents today can be traced to the fateful decision by Pakistan to join the US as an ally in the 1980s. Yes, limiting the movement of the Afghan refugees in the manner it was handled in Iran would have saved the country from much of the negative fallouts and to that extent Pakistan must share some of the blame.

With ample Saudi funding, Mujahideen blood and Pakistani cooperation, USA brought down the rival superpower; Pakistan in the process destabilized. If truth be told, instead of portraying Pakistan as an unreliable ally and a villain, USA owes an eternal debt of gratitude to Pakistan and the brave Afghans.


Post 9/11 US-Pakistan alliance

After September 11 incident, Pakistan was coerced to partner USA in its invasion of Afghanistan. After the ouster of the Taliban setup from Afghanistan, despite Pakistan’s repeated appeals to establish a representative government in Kabul, the Pashtuns were virtually excluded from power. While the Taliban were overthrown, their soldiers and top leadership melted away and took sanctuary in the unruly tribal Belt of Pakistan. The shifting of the US focus from Afghanistan to Iraq in 2001 led to the Taliban aggression against both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban inroads inside Afghanistan soured the US-Pakistan alliance considerably.

That Pakistan is racked by terrorism is a fact and it is also true there are homegrown and foreign terror groups existing in the country. Cross-border terrorism between India and Pakistan is a reality where both accuse each other while denying own complicity. Both internal and external factors are responsible for this state of affairs. Pakistan is currently addressing the internal dimensions to the best of its ability.

It would have made much sense if the paper had recommended USA to play its role to address the ample external support the terror groups active inside Pakistan receive from the Afghan National Government in Kabul and from the Indian operatives there. The existence of sanctuaries of the TTP and other anti-Pakistan syndicates in the eastern provinces of Afghanistan has been accepted by ISAF and Afghanistan.

The USA is right to demand Pakistan prohibit the use of its territory for any aggression across the Durand Line—it should similarly ensure Afghanistan does not provide safe havens to subversive elements targeting Pakistan.

Military operations against terrorists by Pakistan Army

Pakistan in 2004 launched a military campaign codenamed Operation Al-Mizan in South Waziristan to destroy the Taliban sanctuaries there. Attempting to engage a sub-conventional adversary using conventional warfighting strategy was a weakness the Taliban exploited and despite the military might of the state, a stalemate was reached and Pakistan signed a peace accord much to the chagrin and protest of the USA.

The South Waziristan incursion by the Pakistan military led to the creation of the Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) that openly declared war against the state and took over control of the Swat Valley. For the Armed forces of Pakistan, Al-Mizan was a steep learning curve and it helped them come up with fresh doctrine, strategy, and training on how to fight a sub-conventional war.

Pakistan Army began a series of systematic military operation against the Taliban in its soil, first ousting them from Swat where they had taken control by launching Operation Rah e Rast. Operation Rah e Nijat threw them out of South Waziristan and finally, Zarb e Azb has cleared the final Taliban sanctuary in the Tribal Belt.

read more: Should General Raheel have regrets?

When Zarb e Azb was being launched, Pakistan literally beseeched ISAF and the Afghan government to seal their eastern province bordering North Waziristan and act as an anvil to crush the retreating Taliban. This was not done. Perhaps HH can explain why. The Taliban along with the TTP thug Mullah Fazlullah now operate with impunity from Afghanistan and carry out terror raids in Pakistan—ISAF in the meanwhile pleads inability to oust them.

Over 15 years of ISAF presence along with the most sophisticated military hardware and air power, the Taliban has not only survived, they believe they are winning. The USA has spent over a trillion dollars in the process and is looking for an exit strategy.

The latest peace overture with the Taliban warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar considered the butcher of Kabul is a sign of desperation. Pakistan, on the other hand despite limited resources and facing severe opposition from India and Afghanistan has achieved major successes in the military fields against the local and foreign terrorists operating from its soil.

read more: Will the butcher of Kabul bring peace to Afghanistan?

Operations Rah e Rast, Rah e Nijat, and Zarb e Azb have finally destroyed the Taliban sanctuaries in the country. While the majority of their foot soldiers and leadership have escaped across the border, others have melted away in the country’s urban centres. The spate of suicide attacks the country is experiencing is a fallout of the military campaigns that many had cautioned and warned.

Read more: Pakistanis must learn the limits of military-led counter-terrorism

Hudson Report: Endorsement of Indian stance?

Pakistan is now engaged in the final phase of terror elimination and it is fighting a war on behalf of the civilized world. The USA and the western powers must provide wholehearted support to the country—a biased and one-sided brief prepared by HH and Lisa Curtis would eventually harm US interests and the world peace.

One of the major fault lines of the briefing paper is its blind acceptance of the Indian version of cross-border terrorism between India and Pakistan. The Mumbai attackers were a part of the terror syndicate within Pakistan but despite all their effort, the Indians failed to associate the Pakistani state with the raid. The Indian version of the Pathankot and Uri incidents raised more questions than it answered.

Attempting to implicate Pakistan did not succeed and the official stance about the raiders having infiltrated from Pakistan has been questioned and dismissed even by many in India. The possibility of the raiders belonging to the Kashmiri resistance groups inside the Indian Held Kashmir has been summarily dismissed by the Indian government. The farcical Indian claims of a strategic strike within Pakistan have few takers even in India, thus exposing the litany of untruths the country generates to defame Pakistan and hide their own failures and shortcomings.

read more: Modi’s ‘Surgical Strikes’ On Whom? & Why?

While the Indian script on cross-border terror is gulped hook line and sinker by the HH brief, the Pakistani charges about the involvement of Indian RAW are ignored. The capture of Kulbhushan Yadav, an Indian spymaster in Baluchistan, his admissions about promoting terrorism in Baluchistan and Karachi as a RAW operative; the Indians admitting his being a retired Indian Navy Commander; the revelation of the British Scotland Yard document about the nexus between RAW and a party supremo ensconced in London; the Doval doctrine that openly threatens to export terror into Pakistan’s Baluchistan province as a tit for tat response and the overt threat Indian serving and retired Generals air on the Indian TV networks about ensuring bloodletting in Lahore to force Pakistan to abandon its Kashmir policy, are all given a short shrift in the brief.

There are parts of the report where the academic credential and patriotism of Hussain Haqqani, a Pakistani, filters through but in the end, his pathological hatred towards the Pakistan Army takes over. He is a classic case of “cutting off the nose to spite the face”.

read more: History teaches that Weakness invites Aggression: So What is Pakistan’s Foreign…

Flogging the support of Lashkar e Taiba and Jaish e Muhammad by Pakistan particularly the Pakistan Army cannot hide the truth that India is as much responsible for Pakistan’s failure to prosecute Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar, blamed by India for masterminding the Mumbai and Pathankot raids respectively. Hafiz Saeed’s defense lawyers were not allowed to interview the Indian witnesses who had testified against him and Hafiz Saeed was acquitted.

Similarly, the Pakistani investigation team that had visited Pathankot on the invitation of India to assess the involvement of Masood Azhar were not allowed access to the crime site and prosecution witnesses. The team exonerated Pakistan. Sharad Kumar, the Indian Director of National Investigation Agency had also announced a similar verdict, absolving Pakistan of any involvement for lack of evidence.

He was subsequently hounded by the Indian authority and his department forced to issue a denial. That India refuses to prosecute the killers responsible for the murder of Pakistanis in the Samjotha Express massacre even after they have been identified by the Indians themselves complicates the situation further.

Read more: RAW & NDS outsource terrorism: set prices to kill Pakistanis?

Pakistan: After a decade of chaos
The 2017 Pakistan is very different from what existed a decade ago. The nuclear factor has minimized the country’s existential threat from military invasion from another state. The current danger is from lack of internal cohesion and insurgency within that is supported by its neighbors in the east (India) and the west (Afghanistan).

American arms aid, which was considered vital for national survival up until the turn of the twentieth century and for which the nation willingly compromised its sovereignty and interest in the past is no more valid. A degree of self-reliance has been achieved in the conventional weapons through indigenisation and cooperation with China.

The case of the eight block-52 F-16s that Pakistan had desired and the US government applied conditions for their release that were unacceptable is a case in point—Pakistan declined the US offer and is none the worse for it.

Economic development is the key to the future and elimination of homegrown or terror outfits operating from across the border from its soil is the number one priority. Operations Zarb e Azb and its follow-up Raddul Fasaad (Elimination of Discord) along with other strands of strategy to crush the internal terrorism threat has been launched.

Browbeating and insulting Pakistan as HH recommends will not do. For HH and for Lisa Curtis, blindly accepting the Indian version when skeptics in India doubt the official version of their government is sad. One would have imagined the USA has learned the lesson after relying on the types of Ahmed Chalabi whose glib lies led to the disastrous Iraqi invasion. HH is the Iraqi Chalabi equivalent. The USA should be careful it does not fall into the trap laid down by the Pakistani Chalabi.

The total commitment to the CPEC project by Pakistan and China that promises to boost the national economy is a harbinger of a better future. America can no longer dictate terms to Pakistan anymore. While maintaining a friendly relationship with the USA is desirable, Pakistan cannot be coerced into becoming an unwilling ally of the 9/11 variety. It would welcome any financial, material, defense assistance from the USA in its fight to crush terrorism if it does not come with a “do more” mantra or a caveat that harms its national interest.

read more: Pakistan into 70th Year: Living dangerously, surviving & moving ahead despite…

The period when the USA was considered the Alpha Male and the Top Dog of the world is over. The scenario is fast changing from a unipolar world into a multipolar one where Pakistan in partnership with China feels confident it can stand up to pressures from any state that is against its national interest. It is a time the USA accept the reality and avoid actions that would hurt its power and image further.

Jamal Hussain, is an Author & Columnist and appears regularly on media as Defense Analyst. His latest book ‘Air Power in South Asia has been read widely in defense circles. He writes extensively on defense related issues in the Defence Journal (Pakistan), Probe Magazine (Bangladesh), major newspapers in Pakistan and is associated with the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, USA. He retired from the Pakistan Airforce as an Air Commodore in 1997.

This analysis was published by Global Village Space
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
41,740
55
35,295
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Outside of Pakistan yes, but -

In Pakistan, a perception has been officially cultivated that anyone who offers facts, statistics or opinions that do not coincide with the national narrative does so at the behest of Pakistan’s many external enemies.
The machinery of state is able to, by and large, control discussion of the country’s achievements and challenges within Pakistan but that does not stop critical debate around the world. In case of Pakistani scholars and commentators, nationalist sentiment also colours their assessment of the country’s balance sheet. The result is the widening gulf between an overly optimistic Pakistani view, supported by a few non-Pakistani sympathizers, and the generally pessimistic mainstream international discourse on Pakistan.


Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 228-233). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.

As long as Pakistanis believe in what they are told, who is the rest of the world to disagree?
 

Solomon2

BANNED
Dec 12, 2008
19,476
-37
9,950
Country
United States
Location
United States
As long as Pakistanis believe in what they are told, who is the rest of the world to disagree?
Pakistan’s economy is stagnant, its population is increasing rapidly and its institutions of state are too tied to a national ideology rooted in Islamist discourse to be able to address its multidimensional challenges. With terrorists trained in Pakistan showing up all over Europe and in places as far from one another as Mali and Indonesia, Pakistan’s change of direction is now a global concern. International assistance, especially from the United States and some from China and Saudi Arabia, has brought Pakistan back from the brink in the past. But rising xenophobia and Islamo-nationalism— exhibited prominently after the discovery of Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town— coupled with Pakistan’s policies in Afghanistan make continued US support for Pakistan difficult.

Although China remains supportive, it is likely to develop reservations about Pakistan’s ideological direction because of concerns over the support for Uyghur jihadists by Pakistani ones. It is no longer easy for Pakistan’s military or civilian elite to create a semblance of stability with covert arrangements with the United States or with China. If the influence of Islamists in Pakistan continues to rise, it would most likely be increasingly adversarial towards the US and the West. Islamist enthusiasm for creating an Islamic East Turkestan would not sit well with China. This would only increase Pakistan’s isolation. In any case, Pakistan’s direction as a nation cannot and should not be determined by the US, China and other outsiders; the principal actors in this process would have to be Pakistanis.


Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 1268-1280). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
41,740
55
35,295
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Pakistan’s economy is stagnant, its population is increasing rapidly and its institutions of state are too tied to a national ideology rooted in Islamist discourse to be able to address its multidimensional challenges. With terrorists trained in Pakistan showing up all over Europe and in places as far from one another as Mali and Indonesia, Pakistan’s change of direction is now a global concern. International assistance, especially from the United States and some from China and Saudi Arabia, has brought Pakistan back from the brink in the past. But rising xenophobia and Islamo-nationalism— exhibited prominently after the discovery of Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town— coupled with Pakistan’s policies in Afghanistan make continued US support for Pakistan difficult.

Although China remains supportive, it is likely to develop reservations about Pakistan’s ideological direction because of concerns over the support for Uyghur jihadists by Pakistani ones. It is no longer easy for Pakistan’s military or civilian elite to create a semblance of stability with covert arrangements with the United States or with China. If the influence of Islamists in Pakistan continues to rise, it would most likely be increasingly adversarial towards the US and the West. Islamist enthusiasm for creating an Islamic East Turkestan would not sit well with China. This would only increase Pakistan’s isolation. In any case, Pakistan’s direction as a nation cannot and should not be determined by the US, China and other outsiders; the principal actors in this process would have to be Pakistanis.


Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 1268-1280). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.
Yes, but that is just his opinion. Others may disagree. In any case, it takes a lot more than just one person or think tank to formulate national policy.

The key is the last phrase in your quote above, and if a majority of Pakistanis are okay with the national discourse and direction, as I said before, who is the rest of the world to disagree?
 
Jan 22, 2018
583
11
1,044
Country
Norway
Location
Pakistan
If Hussain Haqqani were actually taken seriously, the US establishment media outlets would plaster him on TV on an hourly basis...weekly at least...and Fox News in particular would have a field day with him. Rather it's only the Indian media and its establishment controlled "Pakistani obsession" which seems to feature him. He's practically unknown everywhere else.

I think the US is well aware of the fact that Haqqani only says all these things to try and suck up to the Americans for them to actually TAKE HIM seriously...but it appears in his desperate attempts to impress the Americans, he actually exposed himself as being an absolute loon.

It's like a carpenter ringing your doorbell and saying "Hi...do you need any carpenting work done? I can build this, and do that"....wouldn't you find that weird? And then upon digging deeper, you realize that carpenter in reality can't do shit. That's Hussain Haqqani in a nutshell.

Much of his accusations are either false or wildly exaggerated. What do you think? The US blindly believes any tom, dick and harry that walks into Washington as says "XYZ country is doing this and that and I'm here to help you stop them". They have quite a well oiled intelligence gathering community...it wouldn't be hard to confirm or debunk any accusation made.

In my honest opinion, this isn't about Hussain Haqqan. He's no doubt a piece of shit...it's probably why his own daughters have actually disowned him apparently from what I hear...they refuse to speak to him or are not on talking terms.

But the real question is...how in the world did the Civil Service of Pakistan allow a piece of shit like this into its ranks in the first place? CSS needs to be overhauled and a screening system should be inplace where garbage like this are never allowed into its ranks.
 

tarrar

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 29, 2008
7,536
-1
4,332
Country
Pakistan
Location
Bahrain
US just needs some bastard who can keep on barking & Hussain Haqqani is that SOB.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
41,740
55
35,295
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
List your specifics.

In this forum? I don't think so! :D

Back on topic, it would be interesting to see if the new government pursues its legal cases against Mr. Haqqani. IF things are put on the backburner, that alone would mean a lot.
 

Solomon2

BANNED
Dec 12, 2008
19,476
-37
9,950
Country
United States
Location
United States
...if a majority of Pakistanis are okay with the national discourse and direction, as I said before, who is the rest of the world to disagree?
Just finished the book. Its intended audience are Pakistanis, not "the rest of the world":

This book is my effort at compiling historical facts, political realities, and economic veracities that are often denied as part of Pakistan’s ‘positive’ narrative. It is an invitation to change the way Pakistanis imagine their nation and state so that its reality changes, which might work a lot better than living in denial.

Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 163-166). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.

I suppose that when entrenched interests in Pakistan got wind of the fact H.H. was writing this book they moved to discredit him as much as they could, relying on the habit of Pakistanis to pounce as a pack of hounds when faced with a perceived external threat: it's a scholarly work, with one-quarter of the book consisting of endpages of notes, references, and the like. So it's true argument citing facts and analogies to back it up, not just breezy unsupportable platitudes, and may be convincing to Pakistani readers, even those who feel they are "immune" to such things. (@khansaheeb)

H.H. doesn't primarily appeal to "the majority of Pakistanis", either, but to its leaders and opinion-makers. After explaining the perils of groupthink among the educated and examples of catastrophic failures of security-oriented thought control from recent history, he concludes by appealing to Pakistan's military leadership itself:

...Pakistan’s military officers might need to do the greatest rethinking. Their institution has played a significant role in defining Pakistan as it stands. A younger generation of soldiers is having to fight jihadi militants attacking the Pakistani state, after an earlier team of generals nurtured the jihadis. Instead of mainstreaming groups deemed terrorists by the rest of the world, Pakistan would do better by allowing secular advocates of ethnic nationalisms and supporters of normal relations with Afghanistan and India into the national mainstream. Instead of a narrow definition of patriotism that excludes all serious deliberation about alternative paths for the country, Pakistan’s military could begin reflecting on why the alternative paths may actually lead to a better future. There is, however, no sign that such rethinking is under way...

...Pakistan’s excessive focus on survival and resilience— and its direction being set by men trained only to think of security— may have sowed the seeds of its myriad problems. Pakistan could continue to survive as it has done so far and defy further negative predictions. But if it does not grow economically sufficiently, integrate globally and remains mired in ideological debates and
crises, how would its next seven decades be any different from the past seventy years?

Haqqani, Husain. Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State (Kindle Locations 5235-5241 and 5247-5251). HarperCollins Publishers India. Kindle Edition.

So whether the U.S. "takes Husain Haqqani seriously" or not isn't the question; it's whether Pakistanis do.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom