From: "Faraz Mir"
To: <defjrnl@pathfinder.com.pk>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002, 2:30 PM
Subject: Pak UN Somalia debacle

Dear Ikram Sehgal,

Firstly, please DO NOT publish my letter as I would like to keep my identity and the contents of the email hidden. If you feel you cannot do this, please delete my email. Thank you.
I came across a website by a former US Army Ranger Pat McGowan (http://www.outsidethewire.net/the%20author.htm) and read with interest his observations of Pakistani soldiers deployed in Somalia.
Frankly his views were quite shocking and sad to read. Without knowing anything about the inner workings of the Pakistani Army, I would like to know if his information is true or simply embelishment to sell a book. You can read his views here: http://www.outsidethewire.net/pakistanis.htm
It was particularly sad in reading how the Pakistani soldiers died. Was any inquiry, report or article published on the role of the Pakistani soldiers, so as to never repeat such mistakes? While the Army has done extremely well in Sierra Leone, I hope your journal can put to rest the souls of 39 Pakistanis who lost their lives in one of the worst debacles in peacekeeping history.
If you have already covered this topic, I apologize and would request you if you can provide more information on what the truth was.

Sincerely,
Faraz Mir

August 31, 2002

Dear Editor;

Brigadier (r) Muhammad Mahboob Qadir's article in August issue about Pakistan army's decision to break ties with militants gave a detailed account in its historic perspective. There are few points which need clarification and more frank and detailed discussion. As both decisions of raising and supporting militias and now of disbanding them were made by military high command and not any civilian leader, more soul searching is needed. The most important question is that is there any frank discussion and debate among the senior policy makers of military high command about various decisions of national security? So far the evidence points to the fact that it is the army chief with a very small inner circle who decides about a given policy and then the whole organization is re-aligned in that particular course. There is a lack of more long-term view and detailed analysis of various options including calculation about benefits and risks. As we are well aware that no policy issue will have a unanimous approval. There will always be difference of opinion. Regardless of what decision is made about national security, it is the process of reaching at that decision and full analysis which needs urgent and careful attention. The military leadership has been unable to foresee the logical outcome of some of their decisions, which means that it is then forced by external pressure to change a course and then try to convince public that this is best for Pakistan. It should be other way around. When the religious element is added, it can become a very volatile issue. Even a correct decision if perceived by public as done under duress from much hated 'West' and 'America' will be difficult to sell. On international level, military rule is actually handicap. Foreign powers will pressurize the military leadership about any policy issue as it is assumed that military ruler is in full control. He can't give the excuse of constitutional hurdles or negative public opinion which is the main defensive methodology of a civilian leader against intense external pressure. In the last section, he has pleaded for external economic and infrastructure support. Here also, a more realistic approach is needed so that few years later there is no lament about 'letting down' or 'betrayal'. If it is in the national interest of Europe and US, they will provide the assistance, if not there should be no illusion about that. Also, no amount of aid will come without the attached 'strings'. Pakistan will be asked to deliver more and more in the 'anti-terrorism' fight with each instalment. Will Pakistan be ready to play the ball even if such efforts create more complications for it? Getting the house in order with long-term strategic planning based on realistic assessment and not on rhetoric and hyperbole is the need of the day. Open public discussions and debates about these vital issues to reach a certain degree of consensus is must for any long-term benefits.

Kind Regards,

Hamid Hussain
Port Jefferson, New York
humza@dnamail.com