Stabilising Pakistan more important for US: CIA expert
Washington, March 15:
Former CIA Middle East expert Bruce Riedel has said that stabilising Pakistan was now more important to the United States.
Related Stories
Death threat to Sharif brothers: Pak intelligence
Sharif defies house arrest, headed towards Islamabad
Zardari not to step down: spokesman
Gilani accepts Sherry Rehman’s resignation
Pak political crisis: Gilani, Kayani meet, discuss minus-one formula
Riedel, who is heading a team of policy makers to chart out new US policy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said that rooting out militancy from safe havens in Pakistan’s lawless northwest border region is very important as it poses a direct threat to the US.
Riedel said that the government in Pakistan has failed to control its own military and intelligence.
He termed Pakistan’s tribal area as a “failed state and a safe haven for terrorists”.
“If that spreads, the whole country will become a terrorist university. The chance of a spectacular in the US, or Britain, is exponentially increased. And Pakistan has nuclear weapons,” The Nation quoted Riedel, as saying.
He also expressed fears that British al Qaeda or Lakshar-e-Toiba militants, trained in Pakistan, might strike in America in the near future.
The US’ Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, agreed with Riedel’s views.
Holbrooke maintained that the efforts of allied forces could not succeed unless Pakistan gets its western tribal areas under control.
Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Miliband also expressed concern over the continuous political brickbatting in Pakistan.
He said that the political turmoil has diverted the attention from the real threat of terrorism.
“I would say it’s very grave. I think Pakistan faces a mortal threat, not from India
, but from domestic terrorism,” Miliband added.
------------
Editorial: Unwise politics of delaying the deal
Reports are that the PMLN has received the “deal” and, according to one report, a two-member committee comprising Senate chairman Mr Farooq Naik and Senator Ishaq Dar is going to finalise it in the days to come. Mr Nawaz Sharif has denied it but balanced it by saying he is ready for reconciliation.
Why has the deal come now? How has it benefited one party or the other as the offer falls in the middle of the Long March and its clear negative fallout for the government? If the delay in the offer was based on the strategy of gaining a position of strength, how has the government fared? What are the chances of this deal being accepted in the present situation? If “foreign friends” are involved in the negotiations, can they be designated as “guarantors” for the deal? Has the Long March and its media effect got out of hand for the politicians on both sides? Is the nation faced with a situation where the way to be taken is clear but fear of being shown as “kowtowing to the enemy” is pushing the politicians to the brink?
The media fallout has certainly been to the disadvantage of the government. There was a time when both sides were unsure about how the Long March — with a planned “dharna” — would pan out. That was the time when lack of certainty would have pushed the two sides to the middle ground, which is another name for that term of “humiliation” in our parts known as “compromise”. Outside Pakistan, it is axiomatic that for a deal to hold it is essential that both sides have to give and take. However in our culture the time to become inflexible is when the opposition appears weak. But the truth is that the time to offer compromise — containing the promise of give and take — is when the enemy is weak. We have the killer instinct but our instinct of survival is weak. That is the story of Pakistan today.
The crackdown on people like human rights worker Tahira Abdullah and the blocking of the broadcast of GEO TV on cable services has not covered the government with glory. After the news of the resignation of the Information Minister Sherry Rehman, the government is looking worse.
The press is now reporting that President Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani are discussing a constitutional amendment based on the Charter of Democracy that will revolutionise the procedure of inducting judges into the higher judiciary.
Meanwhile, the PMLN is riding high in the public estimation. President Zardari is being demonised progressively by the Long March coverage. Even if the “dharna” is unsuccessful, the heady feeling of basking in public adulation might overcome the urge in the PMLN to compromise. The war of words seems to have frightened the dove of peace away from the wall that divides the two parties. The situation might encourage hopes for a mid-term election and Mr Dar may go for the kill in his parleys with Mr Naik instead of showing flexibility.
Even the lawyers may not relent. Their demand may in fact become more single-item. One is compelled to think that the time for the offer of the deal was at the end of last month when the PMLN faltered in its aggressive resolve in the hope of getting some concession from Islamabad. If however peace returns as a result of a deal it will not be because our politicians are mature but because the Pakistan army under General Ashfaq Kayani has made it clear that it will not intervene to facilitate mid-term elections. *
No comments:
Post a Comment