A Post-Musharraf Pakistan Policy

[fatman17]

A Post-Musharraf Pakistan Policy

By Farhana Ali
From the RAND Corporation
Friday, March 7, 2008; 12:00 AM

Now that the parliamentary elections in Pakistan have gone decisively against President Pervez Musharraf, there are two relevant questions for the United States to consider: Will the newly elected Pakistani prime minister agree to work with Musharraf, America's staunch ally on the war on terrorism? If the answer is no, what should the United States do in response?

To allay U.S. fears about the elections, Musharraf and his Pakistani friends in Washington repeatedly assured American policymakers that Monday's elections would be "free, fair and transparent," as well as on time -- a relatively new word attached to the infamous slogan.

Voting did proceed as planned, but many U.S. experts and officials were wary about whether the elections would produce an honest result. From the U.S. State Department to the Washington-based think tank community, there were concerns that manipulation of the results would force the White House to make some tough choices.

Yet contrary to some Western news reports, the choice for the United States in Pakistan is not simply between a moderate democratic leader or the all-powerful military regime. Rather, the choice for America was boldly articulated by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice a year ago during a hearing before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee: "No matter what the [election] result, we need to move in Pakistan from a Musharraf policy to a Pakistan policy."

Her remarks signal that the United States no longer can afford to blindly support Musharraf. Hence, America is moving toward defining a new policy direction for Pakistan, and for good reason.

For a long time the United States has supported Musharraf -- a leader who harbors a "cult of personality." He is not unique among Pakistani leaders in this regard. Previous rulers, from Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to General Zia ul-Haq, have assumed a larger-than-life leadership role. It is no different today with the ex-General Musharraf in power.

When I worked for the U.S. government, in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, security analysts could not have imagined a Pakistan without Musharraf. Each time an assassination attempt was made against him, the U.S. government officers I knew sighed in relief when Musharraf escaped.

In those early years after 9/11, U.S. government analysts understood that without Musharraf, the U.S.-Pakistan counter-terrorism cooperation might have been stale and stagnant. Pakistan boasts of arresting or killing at least 700 al-Qaeda operatives on Pakistani soil, a point U.S. analysts accept. Without Musharraf's consent, damaging al-Qaeda's core infrastructure (i.e., training camps) might not have been possible.

But today, the stakes are too high for the United States to compromise its vision of promoting democracy in Pakistan. The United States must support a democratically elected leader to help Pakistan evolve from a weak state to a strong state.

However, the ballot box alone does not guarantee promotion of democracy in a country like Pakistan. With a large rural population, which is illiterate and easily manipulated, we cannot be sure this week's elections truly represent the sentiment of the masses. The only way for this election to be considered "free, fair and transparent" is if the Pakistani elite accept the outcome, no matter how unfavorable it appears for Musharraf. And America should be willing to support the next civilian ruler even if he refuses to enter a power-sharing agreement with the ex-military ruler.

 

[salman nedian]

Many people are expecting or they are thinking the newly elected parties will go against US policy of War on Terror but I don’t think so. Different parties might have differences amongst them but in following USA they all are “Aik se barh ke aik”.

 

[fatman17]

Many people are expecting or they are thinking the newly elected parties will go against US policy of War on Terror but I don’t think so. Different parties might have differences amongst them but in following USA they all are “Aik se barh ke aik”.

i think the author is alluding to a pakistan policy instead of a musharraf-centric policy. with the latter they (US) could get what they wanted all they had to do was talk to musharraf.
with the new govt. expect the decision making to take up a lot more time and effort to get what they want.

 

[moha199]

It is generally believed that the United States is continuously and persistently supporting President Pervez Musharraf to keep him working as the president of Pakistan. This is false.
America did support Musharraf as long as the U.S. perceived that its interests were actively being served by him and Pakistan.
he situation has changed over the last three years. Since then, the U.S. wanted change in the government in Islamabad but the incumbent government successfully hanged on and sustained the American pressure effectively. Several intrigues were witnessed in the recent years and the most significant conspiracy involved the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Pakistan passed through that subversion. The support from the U.S. recently started dwindling as our services to them became contradictive to the emerging national interest of Pakistan.
In the background of longstanding American domination and control over Pakistan’s internal and external affairs, most Pakistanis presently believe that President Musharraf is still the Americans’ blue-eyed boy in Pakistan. But in the last three years, Pakistan has actually started acting more independently. It has asserted its interest from those of the U.S. This changing stance of Pakistan is not liked by the U.S. Pakistan has also found a new importance for its stronger relations with the regional countries.
The changed behavior of Pakistan towards the U.S. and the region is not spontaneous and reactive. Actually Pakistan has learned from its long history of checkered relations with the U.S. and the region. It has found that Pakistan’s interests are better served through its strong relations with the regional countries. In the context of this learning, Pakistan has tacitly changed its policy towards the United Sates. Accordingly, the U.S. has changed its behavior substantially towards Pakistan during the last couple of years. As a result, the U.S. does not support President Musharaf in the same way it used to.
The changed U.S. stance is evident from the fact that for the last few months, it stopped payments to Pakistan on account of its military services to the U.S. The Americans do not like Pakistan’s preference for stronger relations with the region, which has adverse bearings on American interests.
International relations are greatly influenced by economic relations and the dependent mutual benefits. Pakistan has turned to the region and has leased Gwadar port to Singapore, which is under the greater influence of China. This act of Pakistan was not swallowed well by the U.S. The expensive and highly technical project Neelam-Jehlum Hydropower Project, with a construction tag of multibillion dollars, has been awarded to China recently. Such a project would have normally gone to a U.S. or an allied European company. This independent streak of the Pakistanis is not approved by the Americans and they wish to re-tame Pakistan.
Accordingly, the question arises; is it real that the U.S. would continue supporting President Musharraf. The answer is: definitely not.
Various surveys and observational impressions show that vast majority of the people in Pakistan do not like American interference and whoever sides with the U.S. is not liked by the public. Whenever a statement of support for President Musharraf appears in the media, it intensifies the adverse feelings of Pakistanis for Musharraf. This is a double game of the U.S. and our people must understand this complexity; otherwise this country will keep suffering at the hands of global politics. We must understand this and gain confidence in ourselves and our leaders. Our leaders and governmental managers are capable enough to act in favor of Pakistan. It is certain that Pakistan will be a strong and respectable country in a short span of a decade or little more.

 

[fatman17]

It is generally believed that the United States is continuously and persistently supporting President Pervez Musharraf to keep him working as the president of Pakistan. This is false.
America did support Musharraf as long as the U.S. perceived that its interests were actively being served by him and Pakistan.
he situation has changed over the last three years. Since then, the U.S. wanted change in the government in Islamabad but the incumbent government successfully hanged on and sustained the American pressure effectively. Several intrigues were witnessed in the recent years and the most significant conspiracy involved the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Pakistan passed through that subversion. The support from the U.S. recently started dwindling as our services to them became contradictive to the emerging national interest of Pakistan.
In the background of longstanding American domination and control over Pakistan’s internal and external affairs, most Pakistanis presently believe that President Musharraf is still the Americans’ blue-eyed boy in Pakistan. But in the last three years, Pakistan has actually started acting more independently. It has asserted its interest from those of the U.S. This changing stance of Pakistan is not liked by the U.S. Pakistan has also found a new importance for its stronger relations with the regional countries.
The changed behavior of Pakistan towards the U.S. and the region is not spontaneous and reactive. Actually Pakistan has learned from its long history of checkered relations with the U.S. and the region. It has found that Pakistan’s interests are better served through its strong relations with the regional countries. In the context of this learning, Pakistan has tacitly changed its policy towards the United Sates. Accordingly, the U.S. has changed its behavior substantially towards Pakistan during the last couple of years. As a result, the U.S. does not support President Musharaf in the same way it used to.
The changed U.S. stance is evident from the fact that for the last few months, it stopped payments to Pakistan on account of its military services to the U.S. The Americans do not like Pakistan’s preference for stronger relations with the region, which has adverse bearings on American interests.
International relations are greatly influenced by economic relations and the dependent mutual benefits. Pakistan has turned to the region and has leased Gwadar port to Singapore, which is under the greater influence of China. This act of Pakistan was not swallowed well by the U.S. The expensive and highly technical project Neelam-Jehlum Hydropower Project, with a construction tag of multibillion dollars, has been awarded to China recently. Such a project would have normally gone to a U.S. or an allied European company. This independent streak of the Pakistanis is not approved by the Americans and they wish to re-tame Pakistan.
Accordingly, the question arises; is it real that the U.S. would continue supporting President Musharraf. The answer is: definitely not.
Various surveys and observational impressions show that vast majority of the people in Pakistan do not like American interference and whoever sides with the U.S. is not liked by the public. Whenever a statement of support for President Musharraf appears in the media, it intensifies the adverse feelings of Pakistanis for Musharraf. This is a double game of the U.S. and our people must understand this complexity; otherwise this country will keep suffering at the hands of global politics. We must understand this and gain confidence in ourselves and our leaders. Our leaders and governmental managers are capable enough to act in favor of Pakistan. It is certain that Pakistan will be a strong and respectable country in a short span of a decade or little more.

well put but what remains to be seen is that people like Zardari / Nawaz have the where-with-all to deal with global politics.

 

[moha199]

well put but what remains to be seen is that people like Zardari / Nawaz have the where-with-all to deal with global politics.

I belive if they really want to take Pakistan one step more ( what i strongly doubt because this is their last chance and they will bz makeing the most fortune for themself) They will have to work with USA plus it will help Pakistan bro we need to be strong both military and economic wise and it is only possible if we work with USA and inthe meanwhile we work on the things which will help Pakistan to farmly stand on her feets!!!!!! God Bless Pakistan and USA on this case lol