Where have Pakistan’s America experts gone?

[VCheng]

from: Where have Pakistan

Where have Pakistan’s America experts gone?
Michael Kugelman


In recent weeks, numerous Pakistanis — and several Americans, including myself — have decried Washington’s lack of Pakistan expertise. This is indeed a troubling deficiency. Little is said, however, about Pakistan’s lack of US expertise.

I’m not referring here to expertise on US policies. I would actually argue that the level of knowledge in Pakistan about US foreign policies — and particularly those in South Asia — is deeper than in America. Rather, I’m referring to expertise on the United States itself, and particularly its political system.

Take the bizarre obsession with Dana Rohrabacher, the California Congressman who has called for an independent Balochistan. Many Pakistanis, and particularly media outlets, have pounced on this proclamation — seemingly not understanding that as just one of 535 elected officials on Capitol Hill, he has little power to shape policy on his own. True, Congress did hold a hearing on Balochistan earlier this year. Yet Congress holds plenty of hearings, most of which — like the Balochistan one — are quickly forgotten. Rohrabacher’s rantings are largely inconsequential.

Remarkably, Pakistan’s Foreign Office formally expressed its concerns about the Balochistan hearing to the US State Department. The National Assembly even sponsored a resolution against the hearing, warning that it could undermine US-Pakistan ties. Both responses seemed to suggest that the US State Department supported, or was involved with, the hearing. In fact, just because Congress convenes a hearing doesn’t mean it involves, or is endorsed by, the State Department (or any other government agency). The US Constitution’s system of checks and balances certainly restrains the powers of each government branch, but doesn’t keep the legislature from independently planning and holding hearings.

For sure, there are Pakistanis — many of them diplomats, journalists, academics, or others who have lived in the US — who understand the country’s internal intricacies quite well. Many Pakistani students are genuinely curious to learn about America; after all, few countries — if any — have more people studying in the United States on Fulbright grants.

Nonetheless, I’m confident that just as very few Americans understand Pakistan beyond the realm of militancy and nuclear weapons, very few Pakistanis understand the United States beyond the realm of drone strikes and Raymond Davis (notwithstanding the distorted portrayals of America gleaned from Hollywood and other vehicles of US popular culture). I know of a few academic institutions or research centers in Pakistan dedicated to study of the United States, and am aware of no Pakistani equivalent to the American Institute of Pakistan Studies (that the AIPS has an office in Islamabad, however, is encouraging).

Let me be clear here: It’s not the lack of knowledge about America that bothers me (after all, very few people truly understand countries that are not their own, and they certainly are under no obligation to gain this knowledge). Rather, it’s the double standard at play. Pakistanis complain that Americans don’t understand their country — even while they themselves don’t understand America.

This dynamic extends across various dimensions of the US-Pakistan relationship. Consider, for example, Pakistani criticism of US anti-Pakistan rhetoric. Citing the notorious “most dangerous nation in the world” label (among other comments), many Pakistanis (along with several Americans, including, once again, yours truly) have denounced the demeaning language Americans use against Pakistan. This narrative, however, conveniently ignores the daily condemnations of America from various corners of Pakistan — from talks show hosts and lawyers (recall how the head of the Lahore Bar Association branded Barack Obama as a terrorist?) to Imran Khan’s denunciations and the jeremiads of militants.

This double standard spills into the security realm as well. Pakistani officials demand that US forces in Afghanistan do more to stop cross-border attacks into Pakistan, yet these same officials refuse to go after those on Pakistani soil who stage the majority of the cross-border raids into Afghanistan. And then there’s the curious tendency of many Pakistanis (and politicians in particular) to condemn drone strikes (which target militants) more vociferously than Taliban attacks (which target innocent civilians).

Fortunately, there’s a potential silver lining here. By acknowledging this double standard, an important reality can be crystallised: For all their differences, the two nations (as I’ve written previously) actually share much in common. Let’s admit that the United States and Pakistan understand little about each other, and spew hostile rhetoric about each other — just as both nations are former colonial subjects of the British (and enjoy cordial relations with their former coloniser); suffer from natural resource crises; display high levels of religiosity; and boast powerful and polarising mass media. And that’s just a start.

I’m not suggesting the US and Pakistan are soul mates. I’m simply saying that in this troubled relationship, double standards can telegraph convergences. It’s a conclusion worth remembering, because it is the divergences — of policy, interest, and expectation — that so often bedevil US-Pakistan ties.

The author is the program associate for South Asia at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC. You can reach him at michael.kugelman@wilsoncenter.org

 

[A.Rafay]

You Mean Experts like Najam Sethi, i dont consider him ameri-Pakistani Expert But rather a Raw funded Cartoon!

 

[VCheng]

You Mean Experts like Najam Sethi, i dont consider him ameri-Pakistani Expert But rather a Raw funded Cartoon!

No, where are the REAL experts in Pakistan on USA, given the importance of the bilateral relationship?

 

[Don Jaguar]

Pakistanis know America very well but Americans don't know about Pakistan that's a fact.

 

[F.O.X]

There is no Relationship , it is an Agreement signed by force (stone age threat) , and one side (USA) forcing other(Pakistan) to follow without its will. and the other side(Pakistan) resisting.

The longer it goes , the More Disastrous consequences will be , for both sides.

 

[SamranAli]

You Mean Experts like Najam Sethi, i dont consider him ameri-Pakistani Expert But rather a Raw funded Cartoon!

He is good at entertaining... And his Chiriya ( sorry Chirra) Malik Riaz Don.

 

[474474]

Pakistanis know America very well but Americans don't know about Pakistan that's a fact.

They think it's some dessert where everyone lives in caves and eats hummus
-True story, i dare anyone to deny it

 

[A.Rafay]

Americans are dump when it comes to Countries in middleeast and South asia, They dont know any general knowledge of outside America!

 

[airmarshal]

If the author is talking about America sans the govt, then America is a great country. Absolute no doubt about that. Been to America several times. Met common Americans and befriended them too. Its a great country of great people.

The problem is its foreign policy and specially its policies towards muslim world. Its constant interference, micromanagement of other country's internal affairs, buying agents in intelligentsia (Najam Sethi, Rumi, Behoodabhoy,A K Chisti etc etc) to promote its interest, spying, being trigger happy when it comes to muslims and the element of hubris and arrogance that is a problem which Americans will never understand.

 

[Solomon2]

The problem is its foreign policy and specially its policies towards muslim world. Its constant interference, micromanagement of other country's internal affairs, buying agents in intelligentsia (Najam Sethi, Rumi, Behoodabhoy,A K Chisti etc etc) to promote its interest, spying, being trigger happy when it comes to muslims and the element of hubris and arrogance that is a problem which Americans will never understand.

Maybe Americans have trouble understanding because you don't do a good job of explaining yourself.

 

[turbo charged]

author michael kogalman is a zionist jew.....have read his work before too........never makes any sense.....

working on david ben gurion's wet dream...trying to damage Pakistan and its ideology....

 

[blain2]

This is an important point. When dealing with any country such as the US, China or India, we need people in the FO who have an indepth knowledge of domestic ongoings and considerations in these countries. We cannot just put out a response or a feeler or policy that does not take into consideration what the response of the target country would be without really understanding their internal dynamics well. Most of the time, the miscalculations are based on lack of awareness of the domestic politics and compulsions. We end up on an entirely different frequency than the other countries (the same goes for them as well obviously.)

 

[airmarshal]

This is an important point. When dealing with any country such as the US, China or India, we need people in the FO who have an indepth knowledge of domestic ongoings and considerations in these countries. We cannot just put out a response or a feeler or policy that does not take into consideration what the response of the target country would be without really understanding their internal dynamics well. Most of the time, the miscalculations are based on lack of awareness of the domestic politics and compulsions. We end up on an entirely different frequency than the other countries (the same goes for them as well obviously.)

We do have people who are experts and if they are allowed to do their job they will become better. Take the example of foreign office. We have career diplomats but they are sidelined for political appointees for the most important capitals of the world.

The problem with Pakistan is that our people are personality-centric. We dont believe in institution but we depend on individuals. The biggest difference in culture between America and Pakistan is this one. And its a huge difference.

In America, everything is institutionalized. Policy making in US is not the job of one man. Neither American state runs on the whims of one man. Its run by the rule of law. This is the biggest strength of America and lack of this institutionalization is our biggest weakness.

The first thing our leaders do is sideline bureaucracy, from they can get most input, and take control of everything. Every leader we had, was a saviour on the horseback, who came from nowhere and wanted to take the country somewhere, in the end left it in limbo.

This problem though is solidly institutionalized, be it democracy or military rule, all leaders want total control and dont let go off anything.

Take the example of this government and one before it where Musharraf was giving 'out of the box' proposals on Kashmir without consulting foreign office.

 

[VCheng]

.............
The problem with Pakistan is that our people are personality-centric. We dont believe in institution but we depend on individuals. The biggest difference in culture between America and Pakistan is this one. And its a huge difference.

In America, everything is institutionalized. Policy making in US is not the job of one man. Neither American state runs on the whims of one man. Its run by the rule of law. This is the biggest strength of America and lack of this institutionalization is our biggest weakness. ................

That is a very good observation. The important thing is to work on rectifying this deficiency, so that the gap can be bridged easier, not just with USA, but with most of the rest of the world (except the personality-led Middle Eastern monarchies of course).

 

[joekrish]

I think south Asians are a confused and emotional lot, we think and work in a different way compared to them. I dint think we see things in a straight forward manner and these are my observations and I could be wrong.