The United States and Pakistan reached tacit agreement in September on a don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy that allows unmanned Predator aircraft to attack suspected terrorist targets in rugged western Pakistan, according to senior officials in both countries. In recent months, the U.S. drones have fired missiles at Pakistani soil at an average rate of once every four or five days.

The officials described the deal as one in which the U.S. government refuses to publicly acknowledge the attacks while Pakistan’s government continues to complain noisily about the politically sensitive strikes.

The arrangement coincided with a suspension of ground assaults into Pakistan by helicopter-borne U.S. commandos. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said in an interview last week that he was aware of no ground attacks since one on Sept. 3 that his government vigorously protested.

Officials described the attacks, using new technology and improved intelligence, as a significant improvement in the fight against Pakistan-based al-Qaeda and Taliban forces. Officials confirmed the deaths of at least three senior al-Qaeda figures in strikes last month.

Zardari said that he receives “no prior notice” of the airstrikes and that he disapproves of them. But he said he gives the Americans “the benefit of the doubt” that their intention is to target the Afghan side of the ill-defined, mountainous border of Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), even if that is not where the missiles land.

Civilian deaths remain a problem, Zardari said. “If the damage is women and children, then the sensitivity of its effect increases,” he said. The U.S. “point of view,” he said, is that the attacks are “good for everybody. Our point of view is that it is not good for our position of winning the hearts and minds of people.”

A senior Pakistani official said that although the attacks contribute to widespread public anger in Pakistan, anti-Americanism there is closely associated with President Bush. Citing a potentially more favorable popular view of President-elect Barack Obama, he said that “maybe with a new administration, public opinion will be more pro-American and we can start acknowledging” more cooperation.

The official, one of several who discussed the sensitive military and intelligence relationship only on the condition of anonymity, said the U.S-Pakistani understanding over the airstrikes is “the smart middle way for the moment.” Contrasting Zardari with his predecessor, retired Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the official said Musharraf “gave lip service but not effective support” to the Americans. “This government is delivering but not taking the credit.” Read more »

In the 9/11 terrorist attacks on twin towers in New York in which about 3000 persons died, no Afghan or Pakistani was involved. All the 19 perpetrators of the crime were Arabs, mostly hailing from Saudi Arabia. Yet the wrath of USA fell on Afghanistan for a bizarre reason that the so-called master mind behind the attacks was Osama bin Laden based in Afghanistan. Mullah Omar kept requesting that proof of his complicity should be furnished to enable him to hand over his guest but none was provided.

Terrorism became a buzzword and the fuming sole super power pounced upon militarily extremely weak and economically impoverished Afghanistan with utmost ferocity and decimated it. The whole world including UNSC supported the ghoulish invasion and its occupation under the hope that it would help in eliminating global terrorism.

Iraq too was pulverised on a cooked up story of WMDs and linkage with Al-Qaeda. Both charges turned out to be totally fabricated. Saddam as well as UN inspectors kept saying till the last that there were no WMDs, but Bush and Blair ignored them as well as world protests and went ahead with the second invasion without UNSC blessing. After destroying the two countries, USA is now bent upon destroying one of its close allies Pakistan which had played a key role in ousting Taliban and in getting Karzai elected. Without Pakistan?s all out military support, it may not have been possible for US-NATO forces to stay in Afghanistan for that long.

In case of Afghanistan and Iraq, both Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussein refused to buckle under US repeated threats followed by troop mobilisation. Instead of submitting to US diktat they opted to fight the aggressor well knowing that they were non-nuclear states and their conventional means were no match to the military prowess of sole super power duly aided by all the advanced nations of the world. In our case, we had nuclear weapons and adequate conventional means to defend our homeland. However, our commando General who never tired of bragging about his boldness, turned into a kitten when he received a phone call from Washington. He hastily threw in his towel and provided US spy agencies and its military forces large-scale facilities to make easy USA task of achieving its long term objectives. He justified his cowardly act of ditching the friendly Taliban and befriending USA on the premise that had he not done so Pakistan for sure would have been destroyed. Read more »

Provided by a contributor to Take Back Pakistan

Recent reports in the western media indicate that Pakistan needs as much as $10 billion to avoid an economic meltdown and Pakistan’s foreign currency reserves are:

• falling fast and if forward liabilities are included, the real reserves may go down to $3 billion. This cannot meet the import bill of one whole month*.
• Out of total reserves of $8.467 billion, the reserves held by the commercial banks stood at $3.461 billion on September 23. From September 22, the reserves fell by around $180 million, as there were no receipts while the government made heavy payments for oil and other imports.
• This week, Moody’s Investors Service lowered Pakistan’s credit outlook to negative due to the risk of “missed repayments” on the nation’s debt.

Pakistan’s “gradual economic decline, which started last year”, alarmed the United States and Britain as they feared that financial chaos could allow terrorists to deepen their roots in the country.

To avoid such an eventuality, they decided to launch a new group of donors.

Read more about our dismal state here: ‘Friends’ unveil initiative to avert collapse: Over $15bn needed

It is interesting to note that former President Musharraf inherited a far more fledgling Pakistan in 1999, a Pakistan which was on the verge of being declared a terrorist, bankrupt and a failed state. Musharraf inherited a Pakistan which had less than a billion dollars as foreign reserves, with an economy the mere size of $75 billion, and with 65% of our GDP used for debt servicing. Although currently our economy is fast deteriorating due to the incompetency of the new regime (who looted Pakistan in the past), the situation in 1999 was FAR WORSE than what it is now.

And despite not receiving the above level of support and commitment from the international community, Musharraf and his team were still able to deliver, with Pakistan’s situation improving prior to September 11, 2001. For example, Pakistan’s foreign reserves had risen up to $3.2 billion by September 10 2001.

To quote Dr.Ishrat Husain:

“In 1999, the ratio of foreign reserves held by India was 40 times that of Pakistan. “By June 2002 this ratio has declined to 8 times while the size of Indian economy is about 6 to 7 times that of Pakistan.”

Dr. Ishrat Husain goes on to say:

“It may be relevant to point out that the biggest quantum jump in our reserves had taken place between July 2000 and June 2001 i.e. well before September 2001. During this one year period the reserves increased by 138 percent to $ 3.1 billion. The rate of increase during July 2001 and June 2002 was 105 percent.”

Consider the improvement of a variety of indicators prior to September 11, 2001. We read:

“While acknowledging the salutary impact of the external account improvement, however, it is worth stressing that the trend improvement was visible well before the seminal September 11 events. Interest rates were already on the way down; foreign currency reserves were edging up; the exchange rate was relatively stable; the inflation downtrend was well defined, and the government’s continuing fiscal discipline and commitment to reforms had already set the stage for the IMF PRGF, and the subsequent re-profiling of external debt. Nonetheless, the pre-existing positive trends did gain invaluable momentum in FY02, post-September 11. However, despite these major positives, the economy was not unscathed in FY02.” Read more »

I quite enjoy listening to the members of parliament, both provincial and national, extol the virtues of the “democracy” that they have helped to restore in Pakistan. While its a great claim to make, what democracy have we been given for the votes that we have cast? As a nation, we have long demanded accountability and transparency from our government, but to this day, despite the many promises, our democracy is still hidden behind a shroud that only the privileged can see.

When we look at democracy in Pakistan, we should also look at the things that can be done without budgetary increases, long debates and foolish television appearances. The United States Congress publishes a Congressional Record for each day that the Congress meets. In this Congressional Record, there are all the debates, floor speeches, votes and voting by member, so that the American people can see their government at work. Additionally, these same Congressmen and Senators maintain regular office hours so that their constituents can drop in to discuss problems or concerns they have about government.

These same members are expected to maintain camp offices, that they regularly visit, to keep regular contact with the voters and gauge their feelings about government policy, reporting back to the member’s office. And, for those that just can’t get enough, there is the C-SPAN network that covers the activities within the US Congress, Senate, Committee and Sub-Committee meetings live for anyone to watch. Sure, when there are things of national security being discussed the cameras are off, but otherwise, the people are invited to take part in the government.

For their tireless work and never ending scrutiny for the public, these Congressmen and Senators are paid US$ 100,000 annually. The President of the United States makes US$ 250,000. Consider that for a moment.

If you do some digging, you will find that most functioning democracies work in a similar fashion, with similar good governance practices. These good governance practices allow the citizens of the respective country to understand the issues and problems that their country faces without the spin of the media and soundbites for explanations.

In Pakistan, the government doesn’t allow the people to be involved in the governing practice. Our responsibility in the Pakistani form of democracy is to attend the rallies, make the noise, get beat up and arrested by the police (if in opposition), and cast a vote. Usually, in that specific order. But why do the citizens of Pakistan not have any involvement in government after that? Because the politicians become rock stars after elections and no longer need the people until the awards ceremonies and the next time the box has to be filled.

Now, please don’t consider the nightly television dramas that pretend to pass themselves off as issue based talk shows as anything more than entertainment. Having watched many of these during numerous “crises” in Pakistan, it is blatantly obvious that their sole intent is to confuse the logical, strengthen the illogical and incite the illiterate. Hosts have no control over guests; guests make outlandish accusations that can’t be proven, but go unchecked or unchallenged. And shows that start with interesting topics end with nothing interesting being said. Read more »