Dear Readers,

The month of June has seen Pakistan rise to an amazing height of unity and then descend helter skelter into a welter of disunity. The bomb united us, the announcement of Kalabagh threatens to disintegrate the country. Karachi's problems seem to have no solution, from the PM downwards everyone seem to be content to let things slide into anarchy. The economy has gone from bad to worse, mainly because of mishandling of policy towards Foreign Currency Account holders, the result has been a total loss of credibility, such lack of confidence is an unmitigated disaster in the financial world. We have some excellent articles in this issue which I am sure the readers are going to appreciate. My own penchant being to be more pragmatic and flexible in foreign policy, I am taking the liberty of quoting below my article in THE NEWS dated June 19, 1998 on 'REVISING FOREIGN POLICY'.

Quote, 'Pakistan's foreign policy has been rooted since 1948 in two major considerations viz (1) the UN Security Council Resolution on Kashmir and (2) blind support for the Palestinian cause and animosity towards Israel. In 1965 we added a third dimension, total reliance on the Peoples Republic of China for support.

As far as the UN Resolution on Kashmir is concerned, the ground realities are that (1) the areas known as Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AK) and the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Skardu) are firmly pro-Pakistani (2) the area comprising Jammu is firmly pro-Indian (3) the area comprising Ladakh is presently under Indian occupation but is ethnically aligned to China which already controls the disputed Aksai Chin region and (4) the Valley of Kashmir occupied by Indians is firmly anti-Indian but whose views whether pro-Pakistani or pro-independence have yet to be tested. While Plebiscite in the Valley is (and must remain) an article of faith, the partition of Kashmir could take place on the basis of existing ethnic and geographical realities so that the Plebiscite itself could be focussed only on the area still under contention. While Plebiscite is supposed to take place under UN supervision and monitoring, under no circumstances can it be allowed to be held under Indian control, they are bound to rig the whole process and face us with a fait accompli as well as a major embarrassment. Since it would be impossible for the UN to send in enough staff to administer the Plebiscite in the whole of Jammu and Kashmir, by confining it to only the area of ambiguity we will be able to avoid manipulation of results by the Indians. There may be a case for a UN Force to take over the administration in the Valley prior to any Plebiscite. Instead of a dogmatic approach to self-determination, we must take a very fresh approach that guards our interest as well as being pragmatic.

As regards blind support for the Palestinian cause, we need to open our eyes. It is a fact that Israel occupies land that is considered holy by us and it is a fact that the Palestinians have been ejected from their homes, very much as Kashmiris from theirs. As much as we in Pakistan have been vociferously supporting the Arab/Palestinians against Israel, have the Palestinians and their near supporters like Egypt and Syria ever supported us over Kashmir? Let us not live in a fool's world anymore. While our students were signing up in the hundreds to fight for Egypt against Israel in 1956, Egypt's Nasser was even then supporting Nehru over Kashmir. While we have reason not to recognize Israel as long as they are in illegal occupation of Palestine and Arab territories including sites holy to Islam, we have no reason to search out enmity towards them. There was a strong rumour that Israel with the connivance of India was going to attack our nuclear sites during the last seven days of May. This must be a fact given the Israeli long-range hit at the Oserik nuclear reactor in Iraq. However, what should Israel do in the circumstances given the late ZA Bhutto's coining of the phrase 'Islamic Bomb?' Our bomb is very much a Pakistani bomb and we should be proud of the fact that for the last 25 years we have not passed on nuclear secrets to anybody and are not likely to in the future. A neutral attitude towards Israel will convince them that their pro-India stance is not justified, we do not seek Israel's friendship, only a separation of their interests from India's. They should realise that it is in Israel's interests to stay away from India otherwise episodes like the alleged attack in end May may force our hands as regards passing on our nuclear secrets to their enemies. We can thus convey to the Israelis that there will be a cost for their support to India and it makes more sense to have a detente. A balanced neutrality (or detente) with Israel will also help us in avoiding the adverse world media attention which India so avidly exploits to its benefit. Of course if Israel makes any adverse moves towards our genuine Arab friends like Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Jordan, etc then we have to react accordingly. Instead of a blanket condemnation approach, let us be selective about the fights we pick, ensuring that our stance is not counter-productive to the causes we espouse. Even without recognition of Israel or any diplomatic connections, we need to open a communication channel that will avoid incidents like the one nearly happened last month.

We nearly lost China as a firm friend, partly because of our own shortcomings and partly because of the changed world situation where China has emerged as a world power. Our religious activists had no business getting involved in the internal affairs of China in the Sinkiang Province. Certainly this annoyed China as did a number of other gaffes in the commercial and military fields including the submarine episode. China has become an economic power in the last decade and as such has its own compulsions and that included a phased rapprochement with India. Over the last 10 years it had become quite apparent that China would not sacrifice its place on the world pedestal blindly for Pakistan and that at most it hoped to use its new found friendship with India to tone down its animosity towards Pakistan. Thanks to George Fernandes the Indian Defence Minister, who railed against China even as the Chief of the Chinese Defence Forces was visiting India on his first visit, then to Vajpayee and company who went berserk in equating China with Pakistan as an equal threat to India as well as condemning China for allegedly passing on nuclear secrets and technology to Pakistan and lastly to Dalai Lama, the so-called advocate of peace, who hailed the Indian bomb and therefore invited a stinging rebuke from China, which is sensitive on the Tibet issue, as a 'hypocrite,' China is back on Pakistan's side. The Indians have been proven to be totally untrustworthy. So let's not be complacent about this anymore, on the contrary let us seek actively to deepen our economic and military inter-action.

The Kashmir dispute must be understood both historically and geographically without getting into the famous 'principled stand' mode that we espouse to high heaven. Only persons having fresh minds and politically inclined with the ruling government can deliver, not fair weather vanes. In this respect, we have the wrong man in Washington. Riaz Khokhar in Dhaka in 1987-9 was a self-proclaimed Zia man, the whole of Dhaka's elite is witness to how he changed overnight to being a Benazir loyalist, singing her praises to high heaven and maneuvering a posting to the PM's Secretariat once she was in power where he remained her close confidant. He then survived the change of government somehow till Benazir sent him to India as High Commissioner. Because of his connections to Farooq Leghari and his boast about ISI connections, he was sent in as replacement by the Caretaker Government when Dr. Maleeha Lodhi's term expired as Pakistan's Ambassador to the US. Despite his professions (or protestations) now of loyalty to the Mian Nawaz Sharif regime, it was his tacit OK that cleared the way for Mrs Hilary Clinton, the US President's wife, to meet Ms Benazir Bhutto. Since Bhutto is now clearly close to indictment by Swiss Court for corruption, the show of acceptability was a shock to the people of Pakistan and an indirect snub to the ruling regime. It is time to stack Riaz Khokhar away from where he can do no more damage to the Nawaz Sharif regime.

Similarly Geneva is important since increasingly this is where the Big-5 will meet occasionally to take up solution of India-Pakistan problems, the root cause being Kashmir. Mr. Munir Akram is an outstanding diplomat but his PPP connections are very well known for this very crucial post to remain occupied by him. There is an effervescent danger here which does not necessarily cast aspersion on his professionalism. Similarly the government has to look at second and third level staffers in vital Embassies and make sure that those who have had political connections that may be exploitable by forces with their own vested interests and/or agenda are re-adjusted in non-sensitive locations that cannot interfere in any manner with this government's sincere purpose for the country.

The Foreign Ministry is vital to the country's well being considering the diplomatic offence in the next few months with Kashmir as the main agenda on the world menu for solution. Having won the psychological nuclear battle we may yet lose the war unless we have our most potent person handling the sensitive negotiations as well as maintaining control over the Mandarins that rule the Foreign Ministry roost and are time-locked into the 1948 UN resolution on Kashmir as well as anti-Israel stance without any dynamics in adjusting to new realities. Let us become more pragmatic in our foreign policy assertions and that is only possible to have a consummate politician/diplomat at the helm of affairs.