April 2000     Vol 3      No 9     Reg No.SS-346

Publisher & Managing Editor:
Ikram-ul-Majeed Sehgal

Chief Patron
Air Marshal (Retd)
Mohammad Asghar Khan

Patrons
Lt Gen (Retd) SF Lodi
Brig (Retd)TH Siddiqi
Lt Gen (Retd) Imtiaz Waraich

Board of Editorial Advisors
Ardeshir Cowasjee
Arif Nizami
Ms Maleeha Lodhi
Ms Nasim Zehra
Hameed Haroon
Humayun Gauhar
Ambassador (Retd) Afzal Mahmood
Brig (Retd) Saeed Ismat, SJ

Panel of Contributing Editors
Air Marshal (Retd) Ayaz A. Khan
Vice Adm (Retd) IF Quadir
Dr Shireen Mazari
Farhan Bokhari

Panel of Columnists
Col (Retd) EAS Bokhari
Col (Retd) Abdul Qayyum
Dr. Matiur Rahman
Ms Amina Jilani
Capt (Retd) A.A. Jilani

Executive Editor
Ms Ambreen Jahangir

Vice President Marketing
Syed Tauseef  Muhammad Ali

Advertising Manager
Naushad Alam

Internet Coordinator/Graphic Designer
Rizwan Alam Khan

Cover Design
Shujaat Ali

Vice President (Circulation & Accounts)
Ms Parveen Akhter

Printing Manager
Tariq Jamal

PR/Advertising (Rawalpindi/Islamabad)
Brig (Retd) Asmat Beg Humayun

AVP Coordination (Lahore)
Azizullah Goheer

Printed at Pathfinder Printing Press. Under the steps Hocley Stadium, Phase 5, Defence Housing Authority Karachi.

Creative Publicity is handled by
DYNAVIS (Pvt) Ltd
Tel 5861637, 5830582, 5863920 Fax:(021) 5863924
Lahore (042) 6360236
Islamabad (051) 277683, 815168

Dear Readers,

The visit of the US President to South Asia was extremely important. In the new millennium, the US has indicated a sea-shift of policy and very much like the King-Emperor who journeyed from London to hold court in Delhi in 1905, he was personally present to announce PAX CLINTONIA in Indian Parliament in New Delhi. Some Indian parliamentarians fell over themselves to touch his hand. No more will Pakistani sensitivities be kept in mind when dealing with India. More important, the US tacitly seemed to urge Pakistan to accept the status quo on Kashmir. This should come as no surprise to Pakistan as pragmatism dictates sovereign interests more than principles. India happens to be a large populous country, economically it cannot be ignored. At the same time geo-political changes are taking place, from engaging China the west may soon be engaged in 'containing' China. Pakistan need not be despondent, this is not the first time the US has turned away from us, only to return when it suited their geo-political interests in the region. Pakistan occupies a geographical position of some consequence, being a part of South Asia, Middle East and Central Asia, as well as proximity to China. And as far as India is concerned, the leopard never changes its spots. They have supported the anti-American coalition for years and will do so again whenever opportunity returns. For the moment the Russians and company are in disarray, what will happen under Putin? Nature will make an 180 to bring us back to the same situation, hopefully our leaders will drive a harder bargain next time around. I wrote an article for THE NATION entitled 'STOPOVER PAKISTAN' on April 8, 2000 which I am re-producing with thanks.

'Once the US President announced his visit to South Asia without including Pakistan as a firm destination our situation became rather untenable,  given the geo-political scenario  we could not afford that Pakistan be deleted from his stopovers.  With India in full cry on the  diplomatic and media front to keep Pakistan excluded from Clinton’s itinerary,  the possibility of life in a diplomatic black-hole would have had far-reaching consequences and complications. We may not be better off  than we were before 'the visit' but such a diplomatic snub would have put us in a far worse situation than we are presently in.  To top it all, the contrast of governance by a military regime with that of the 'world’s largest democracy' made it that much more important. Our bargaining position with the Americans thus weak, it was to be expected one would pay a price for the privilege. The exercise in essence became Catch-22, to the credit of the military regime they  succeeded in keeping damage control  within acceptable limits, even though we did lose a quantum of self-respect in  having to listen to hometruths publicly. 

The intelligentsia was braced for public humiliation in being read 'the riot act' apropos a 'made in India' (to quote Ms Nasim Zehra) US foreign policy.  The message was far milder, in relative sum a plus for Pakistan.  The US President not only acknowledged Pakistan as being the bridge to China but praised our role in the proxy war in Afghanistan that downed the Soviet Union.  In almost the same breath, he disabused us  about one of our favourite fantasies, that come what may the US would never abandon the  'just cause'  over Kashmir!   The US has been sensitive to India’s reactions as far back as 50 years, even before US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles convinced  President Eisenhower to sign off on Sept 30, 1953  for US military aid to strengthen Pakistan as a cornerstone against the southward spread of Soviet-brand  communism.  During the US imposed embargo on military arms and equipment to both India and Pakistan in the wake of the 1965 war,  India had the luxury of continuing  weapon supplies from the Soviets, our supply lines choked because  we were totally dependant on the US. China bailed us out  as it has on many occasions since. It was not till 1982 that aid started pouring into Pakistan after the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.  Even then,  we were only kept off the US nuclear sanctions list in the 80s by President Reagan’s certification that we were not a 'nuclear nation'.  For some reason it is believed that Republicans are more favourably inclined to Pakistan, President Nixon’s tenure was sandwiched between two Democrat Presidents John Kennedy and Jimmy Carter, both romantically inclined to India’s 'democratic' credentials despite the fact that Socialist India remained a Soviet ally in all but name all these years. As soon as the Afghan war wound down in 1990, President Bush withheld  the required certification and the Pressler Amendment sanctions kicked in. At the same time the leopard started changing its spots, India re-discovered the US and vice-versa. US has been fairly consistent in  the pursuing of its own sovereign interests, it is as it should be. We in Pakistan have lived in the misconception of 'our principled stand' all those years, burying our head in the sand rather than facing cold reality and going the pragmatic route.

In the post-Cold War period, ideological concerns have given way to economic imperatives.  US primary concerns now are nuclear non-proliferation and terrorism,  the new US policy initiatives also require China to be 'contained' as an emerging economic and military powerhouse. The US turns a blind eye to the atrocities being perpetrated on a massive scale by the Indians against Kashmiris, on a people the Indians  call their own citizens, yet it is China that is singled out on the 'human rights' buzzword. Can anyone equate the situation in Kashmir (and a dozen other places in India) to any region of China?  Bill Clinton’s admonishments to respect the LoC and not attack civilian targets in Kashmir apply equally to India and Pakistan even though militant attacks against civilians inside Held Kashmir are rare,  to do so would be counter-productive to the indigenous uprising  which depends greatly upon a supportive local population.  That is why the Sikh massacre is clearly a RAW operation, why should Kashmiri militants burn their own sanctuaries? However artillery targeting by the Indians of innocent villagers on our side of the LoC is a daily affair yet we have dismally failed in getting the western media to faithfully report such atrocities. Given graphic representation of true facts, the American people will  certainly react,  after all despite Britain being a traditional ally they decried the British heavy handedness in Northern Ireland. Did not  the images of the 'Intefada' in Palestine sway American public opinion despite the US love-fest with Israel? Economic compulsions may be paramount to US government considerations but public opinion will be shaped by the electronic and print media in western drawing rooms, all these perceptions taken together shapes US  government policy. Despite President Clinton and the Pakistani CE seeming to have developed instant rapport, there was disagreement about a time schedule for a return to democracy.  We have to be governed by our own imperatives, prime among them being accountability so that we do not repeat the bitter experience of bad governance.  The mandate and the mode of the Local Bodies elections is a step in that direction, a road map to the return of genuine democracy.  If Pervez Musharraf were to give a timetable, the politicians and bureaucrats would create conditions that would wait out that timetable and we would be back to square one.   How many of America’s allies have true democracy and how many allow a free media (such as in Pakistan even under a military regime) to operate?  Could President Clinton  give the same live address to the population of some of its closest allies? This suggests the self-confidence and credibility of the military regime, despite disclaimers by Madeleine Albright and sundry it did give them 'legitimacy'. It is all very well to lecture Pakistanis about what is good for them, more than a 100 other countries (including India) need to be given the same advice. US President Clinton has the best means in the world to know much more about what is happening in Kashmir than what the US publicly professes to know, one leaves it to the US conscience to be fair and equitable in revealing all that they know.  Would the US have us believe  for a moment that what is happening  in Kashmir, Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram etc has any relevance to democracy? India’s 'democracy' is best on display in the largest Indian State Assemblies of  Bihar and UP where elected representatives are open to sale very publicly,  is  such a  democracy where Rabri Devis and Jayalalithas exist to be  taken  seriously?  We almost became a failed nation because we tolerated  flaws in our democracy,  the manifest aberrations in India’s democracy e.g. nepotism, corruption, manipulations etc will eventually bring the whole edifice down, as it almost brought us down.  The bigger they are, the harder they fall!

In Field Marshal Slim’s  'Unofficial History',  each chapter had a moral, detailing his life from a subaltern to a Field Marshal.  The chapter one likes best is 'Never take counsel of your fears'.  Despite our doomsday-sayers there is no need to panic or to go off the deep end.  Putting  it bluntly,  if the American people were really aware of what is happening in Kashmir, would they countenance continuing the present US policy? Clinton’s stance in South Asia was alien to the individual American character that supports the underdog in standing up to a bully, that gives weight to truth over lies, that recognizes the legitimate right of every people to freedom,  that never accepts tyranny in any form.   Americans individually or collectively as I have been privileged to know them over the years will never forget a friend who has stood by you in time of trouble,  above all Americans  accept merit as the ultimate qualifier. In the face of such  hometruths  the latest US policy will not stand.  We have to our homework with respect to countering Indian propaganda,  within Pakistan and without we have to use the best talent to do that effectively.  The White House and US Congress are important, the will of the American masses is far more important and we have to take our case on Kashmir directly to the American people.  It is the American people who have made the US what it is today, will such people turn their faces away from the horror being perpetrated in Held Kashmir? Six hours in Pakistan and/or six days in India notwithstanding, the facts are on our side, very much like Lady Macbeth India cannot hide the blood being spilt in Kashmir forever.'