Sacrificial lamb, to eat, or not to eat?
Someone sent me a link to a letter published in 'The News' a few days ago. It seemed like the chain emails one sees floating around Christmas time about the spirit of Christmas and the tradition of giving and sharing. This one seemed like the same sort about the early Christmas gift from the two uncles of the people of Pakistan, namely Uncle Kerry and Uncle Lugar. You can read the article here.
I went through the well meaning article with some amusement. The writer has tried to reason with the seemingly unreasonable people of Pakistan and pleaded with them passionately to not look a gift horse in the mouth. However, like the proverbial road to hell, paved with good intentions, this write-up seems like a half baked attempt at putting lipstick on the ugliest pig of the farm. With due respect to Shakir Husain, it seems like he doesn't even understand the difference between the concept and spirit of exchanging meat of sacrifice with his neighbor or a friend around Eid-Ul-Adha, and the cold reality of a business deal like the Kerry-Lugar bill. This bill is not some form of charity that is being handed out to Pakistan. It is payment for a service that Pakistan is expected to perform to further the interests of the US in the region. Kerry and/or Lugar, even though representing uncle Sam in this endeavor, are not the mamay (uncles) of the Pakistani people, and hence do not have the best interest of Pakistanis in their caring hearts. They have devised a deal which is a payment for the blood and tears, the people of Pakistan are spilling for America's strategic interests. Nothing less and nothing more.
Given what it is, and not going into the nitty gritty details of the deal, overall this stance by both sides is completely understandable and considering this business as usual, both sides are, and should, haggle over the price and the services that are to be delivered in return. That is exactly what is going on right now. The only difference is that this is the first time Pakistan has haggled over the price of the goods being asked for and I think this is good for business overall. Zia made the mistake of not negotiating a good enough price for standing in front of the Soviet bear frothing at the mouth at our western border. The result was a devastated economy, introduction of Kalashnikov and drug culture and the biggest played-with-and-discarded gifts for Pakistan were the trained guerrillas (whom Dan Rather, at the time, while wearing the famous Pashtun Pakol so fondly called the Mujahiddin) with their weapons --and training mind you, who suddenly found themselves out of a job. These chickens had nowhere to go except came back home to roost. Almost two decades or so later, Musharraf made the same mistake and buckled under Bush's threat to side with the US in this never ending Global War On Terror without negotiating a better deal. Wise people had said it even then, that Mushy had sold Pakistan for a paltry sum. Pakistan army's stance now is that a country that spends $1 Billion a day on it's two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and can spend $20 Billion to replace a couple of helicopters (to be used exclusively by the president) to fly between the white house and Andrews AFB --a distance of less than 10 miles, should not and cannot expect to buy a country of such strategic importance like Pakistan for a paltry sum of $7 Billion over several years. Pakistan is the front line ally in America's GWOT and yet compared to other recipients of US aid, like for example, Israel ($2.8 Billion per year) and Egypt ($1.8 Billion per year), Jordan, Colombia etc etc, which don't do much, other than to create headaches for the US, Pakistan is expected to bring home the proverbial bacon for pennies.
This time around the Pakistan army has wizened up a little and is asking for a better deal before they sign off on it. That's all. If the US was really so concerned for the future of people of Pakistan, they would do something about the rampant inflation, the rising cost of living, and the lack of electricity that is needed to run the industry. Bring a power plant on a ship to the shore of Karachi and supply electricity to the industries that are shut down in the industrial sector. Rebuild the silk weaving factories in the tribal belt which had replaced the gun factories of past. That will be a visible gesture which will create more goodwill for the US than billions upon billions in 'aid' that will invariably go towards maintaining the luxurious lifestyles of our leaders.
If my neighbor sends me some sacrificial meat on Eid-ul-Adha along with a note with stipulations that I can only cook this meat a certain way and at a certain time and how and who can eat it, then I would not even debate the issue, I would send it back with a note saying "Thanks, but no thanks".
7 comments:
i like ur article man.. wel said
I'm at a disadvantage, because I have not yet read the bill. But what if I conclude that Kerry - Lugar doesn't really require Pakistan do anything more for the USA than what it should be doing for itself?
That said, I have always argued - for some time at least - that there should be a Marshall Plan for Pakistan, and that it should be partially funded by diverting all U.S. aid from Israel into jump-startng the Pakistani economy.
Vigilante, I could not agree with you more on the first point. If Pakistani people know what is good for them, they would accept the conditions in the bill not just as stipulations but because they make sense.
However my contention with the bill is two-fold:
One. This is no charity, nor a goodwill gesture. This is a pure business deal. Greenback in exchange for the red blood of Pakistani soldiers and civilians. If I were running the US administration, I would rather see someone else's blood spilled than my own. Every country is entitled to look after it's own interests, and USA and Pakistan are no different. The really sad fact of the matter is that Pakistani blood is worth less than American one. It's not America's fault, neither is it ours.
Two. I was just trying to dispel the hubris that the US people seem to exhibit when their country gives aid and expects eternal gratitude in return. First rule of capitalism is that you don't get something for nothing.
As for a Marshall plan. When it was explained to me as a child I was so impressed at the genius and the goodwill of the United States. But it also required the common man to be on board too. I don't know how this can be achieved now with the trust deficit that exists between the two countries.
Good point, Musaafir. Exactly. The trust deficit has to be addressed. But you are acting like you think Kerry-Lugar assigns the role of hamburger to Pakistanis as far as the "war against terror". That's not fair.
Vigilante, I know it's not fair, but such is life that this is the perception of the common man in Pakistan and is part of the same deficit.
This conflict has become as much Pakistan's war as it is part of America's GWOT. However, that is not the entire truth either. Pakistan has been hurt before, of it's own irresponsible volition or naivety in understanding the American mentality. Pakistanis only have to look at the recent past to be wary of the ramifications of any American 'help'. Which, in my opinion wasn't very fair either.
I think you are telling me that I have to revise my euphoria at winning Charlie Wilson's War. I'm willing to work on that.
My USA has done more recent damage in Afghanistan, that I am more aware of.
OTOH, I feel the world has a great stake in Pakistan and India attaining something greater than their current peaceful detente. Kashmir, IMO, is a rare knot in history for which my country cannot be blamed. (Am I right?) I feel Kerry-Lugar is a Marshall plan type initiative in behalf of closer American -Pakistani relationship. But I would like to know what else could be done in terms of American policy to help patch up & heal past Indo-Pakistan wounds.
I may be over-reaching my self, here. Probably so.
Charlie Wilson's War? Come on Vigilante, you believe everything you see in them Hollywood movies? :) I kid with you sir. Although Charlie Wilson had a big part to play in providing finances for the 'Mujahideen' or 'Freedom Fighters' of the time, but even he has admitted in the book that the war was left unfinished and he was no allowed to bring it to a logical conclusion. America missed a great opportunity to implement a Marshall plan there, and hence the current blow-back is a direct result of the mess left unsorted at the end of the biggest CIA-ISI operation in history.
If the world had seen the grand victory parade that Charlie Wilson and Gen Zia had planned after Gen Boris Gromov's hasty retreat from Afghanistan. And had it been made clear to the world at the time that it was not just the 'Mujahideen' or the 'Soldiers of Islam' that defeated the evil, red communist, non-believer empire of Soviet Union. The US supplied Stinger missiles, satellite guided mortars, night vision goggles and other high tech communications equipment and arms and ammunition were equally responsible for bleeding the Soviet bear to death.
And I admit, yes, America has nothing to do with the Kashmiri problem, your cousins, the British are to be blamed for that one. I believe that the India-Pakistan peaceful detente is highly destructive in its own way. Instead of facing each other in the conventional battleground, both are resorting to proxy wars now. This stems from India's deep rooted insistence on not accepting the existence of Pakistan and hence Pakistan's phobia of Indian intentions. Not that you can blame just Pakistan for this situation as we have reason to be paranoid, especially after the 1971 war.
I think going forward, we need trust building exercises to take place. America should engage the local population in a dialogue, not just the privileged (read feudal) few at the helm of power at the top or even a dictator. Madam secretary has made a good start and met with groups of mainstream people recently and this is the first good sign I have seen in decades. this will go a long way in building bridges. A lot more needs to be done in order to bring the good people of both the countries together as it is in both their strategic interests. All this is easier said than done though.
I may be over-reaching myself but hopefully we can achieve this goal in our lifetime.
Post a Comment
All we ask of you is that you be civil in your discourse and respect others and address them in the same manner as you would like to be addressed yourself.