muhammad ali ehsan
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
I sympathise with Dr Shakil Afridi. I do that because despite acting as CIA agent and working for them for making some personal fortune for himself and his family he is now stuck in a Peshawar jail just because his client (CIA) had a poor exit plan. Having achieved what he did, he should have been an honoured guest of state department/CIA/Pentagon in USA and delivering lectures in state universities on how human dignity, justice and impartiality forced him to cooperate with USA to hunt down OBL. In fact, CIA would have helped him explain to the world how betraying your country is a lesser crime when the beneficiary of such a betrayal is a peace seeking world. There they would have further utilized him by projecting him as a participator, a facilitator and an extremely important source that made getting OBL possible for USA. Without the poor man knowing it, he would have become an instant hero and a darling of millions of all those aggrieved hearts who longed for and sought justice after 9/11 tragedy and ultimately found their William Tell who lead them to it.
Without his help confirming the presence of family of OBL in the compound in Abbottabad, the May 2 operation may not have been undertaken ; at least not in a manner it was that caused huge embarrassment to the armed forces and this country. Considering this, is the stance of the state of Pakistan correct in case of arrest and punishment of Dr Afridi? Frankly, we actually dont have a clear stance that our state has taken so far. What we have is what our state has done in the past itself to receive American assistance and rewards for its cooperation with it. Doesnt this set an agenda for individual greed and gluttony? When State follows no morals how can it expect its subject to do so?
We had an Afghan policy that took a u turn after 9/11. The state benefited from US rewards such as; President Musharaffs visit to Washington in Feb 2002 and again in 2003 to Camp David where $3 billion economic and military aid package was announced by President Bush for Pakistan.
We were declared as major non NATO ally in 2004. In 2005 resale of F-16s was promised. By 2007 Pakistan had received $10 billion aid from US since its Afghan Policy U Turn which was more than all aid provided by USA to Pakistan between 1948 and 2001. These were rewards to the state for pulling the plug on the critical life line leading to Taliban through Pakistan.
USA believed in our actions that resulted in the capture of many Al-Qaida operators. We were being rewarded until we 'were doubted'. Blamed that we knew more then we told Americans', gradually US started taking matters in its own hands. The influx of CIA operators in Pakistan and the unilateral drone attacks were the demonstration of US distrust on Pakistan.
It is in this context that we should view the choice that both USA and Mr Shakil Afridi made. The doctor did not trust his own state as much as the American's didn't. He towed American line of thinking of 'not sharing vital and credible information with Pakistan for the fear of loss and compromise'. Why did the management of our Afghan Policy force the USA and the world to distrust us so much?
Was Dr Shakil Afridi also not prepared to trust the State more than the USA, if so why? To find the answers to these questions and to give a fair opportunity to the individual to seek justice the State must arrange for his trial in the regular courts. Though, we may never know the actual truth but seeking it is the right of every Pakistani.
MUHAMMAD ALI EHSAN
Without his help confirming the presence of family of OBL in the compound in Abbottabad, the May 2 operation may not have been undertaken ; at least not in a manner it was that caused huge embarrassment to the armed forces and this country. Considering this, is the stance of the state of Pakistan correct in case of arrest and punishment of Dr Afridi? Frankly, we actually dont have a clear stance that our state has taken so far. What we have is what our state has done in the past itself to receive American assistance and rewards for its cooperation with it. Doesnt this set an agenda for individual greed and gluttony? When State follows no morals how can it expect its subject to do so?
We had an Afghan policy that took a u turn after 9/11. The state benefited from US rewards such as; President Musharaffs visit to Washington in Feb 2002 and again in 2003 to Camp David where $3 billion economic and military aid package was announced by President Bush for Pakistan.
We were declared as major non NATO ally in 2004. In 2005 resale of F-16s was promised. By 2007 Pakistan had received $10 billion aid from US since its Afghan Policy U Turn which was more than all aid provided by USA to Pakistan between 1948 and 2001. These were rewards to the state for pulling the plug on the critical life line leading to Taliban through Pakistan.
USA believed in our actions that resulted in the capture of many Al-Qaida operators. We were being rewarded until we 'were doubted'. Blamed that we knew more then we told Americans', gradually US started taking matters in its own hands. The influx of CIA operators in Pakistan and the unilateral drone attacks were the demonstration of US distrust on Pakistan.
It is in this context that we should view the choice that both USA and Mr Shakil Afridi made. The doctor did not trust his own state as much as the American's didn't. He towed American line of thinking of 'not sharing vital and credible information with Pakistan for the fear of loss and compromise'. Why did the management of our Afghan Policy force the USA and the world to distrust us so much?
Was Dr Shakil Afridi also not prepared to trust the State more than the USA, if so why? To find the answers to these questions and to give a fair opportunity to the individual to seek justice the State must arrange for his trial in the regular courts. Though, we may never know the actual truth but seeking it is the right of every Pakistani.
MUHAMMAD ALI EHSAN
