THE HILL
 

Diagnosing Pakistan



By Kathy Kemper - 11/10/09 02:34 PM ET

Husain Haqqani offered a candid assessment of where Pakistan stands at my IFE / INFO Global Connections Public Policy Roundtable last Friday. In addition to being Pakistan’s youngest ambassador to the U.S., Haqqani was a strong advocate of the late Benazir Bhutto, who stood as a symbol of democracy in a country where dictatorship has long prevailed. 



Pakistanis, Haqqani noted, believe that the U.S. has long used their country, not engaged it. Hillary Clinton’s trip there was significant to the extent that they saw a different side of our country. In attending town halls and visiting colleges and universities, she tried to demonstrate that the U.S. is genuinely concerned with Pakistan’s welfare. Polls showed that Pakistani approval ratings of the U.S. went up by 7 percent after her visit. Unfortunately, though, one high-profile visit is unlikely to do much, because many of the country’s woes are historically rooted. Pakistanis had no idea what suicide bombers were prior to 9/11. The U.S. supported radical Islamists in their fight against the Soviet Union, but it’s precisely those Islamists who are now waging jihad across the globe, including in Pakistan; many Pakistanis regard the Taliban as an existential threat to their country.

Although Pakistan’s economy is back on track (largely due to IMF lending), insecurity limits its ability to achieve sustained economic growth. It shares a border with a hostile neighbor (India), with a desperately poor country in which the Taliban is reasserting its influence (Afghanistan), and with a nation that’s in the midst of tremendous domestic upheaval (Iran). Being in a near-constant struggle against internal and external threats, real and imagined, has its consequences: Pakistan spends far more on defense than education, with the result that the country has only a 38 percent literacy rate. As both Ambassador Said Jawad of Afghanistan and Ambassador Husain Haqqani say, "We live in a dangerous neighborhood."



Haqqani noted that India is perhaps the biggest elephant in the room. Pakistan is wary of the Indo-U.S. relationship, which is robust and multifaceted. He mentioned that India is Boeing’s largest customer, and also that 26 members of the Obama administration are Indian-American; facts like these naturally make Pakistan nervous.



As much as it’s concerned with India, Pakistan is also anxious to see how its relationship with the U.S. evolves. Haqqani noted that Pakistanis want to receive credit for their counterterrorism efforts; Pakistan has killed or captured more al Qaeda leaders than has any other country. He concluded by saying that the U.S. won’t truly be able to win hearts and minds there until it adopts a more comprehensive engagement strategy — one that has a political element and a socioeconomic element. Haqqani encouraged American companies to invest in Pakistan, offering a Thomas Friedman-like thought that Pakistanis need to be making boxer shorts for Wal-Mart, not boxes of bombs.



Whether or not that hope is realized will depend a lot on how Pakistan’s military fares against the Taliban. Let’s hope that it succeeds.


Kathy Kemper is founder and CEO of the
Institute for Education, a nonprofit foundation that recognizes and promotes leadership and civility locally, nationally and in the world community.

Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/67203-diagnosing-pakistan

Comments (5)

The horror of Mumabi have been unfolded Live on TV for the whole world to see.The State of [***]stan have during this entire year did not take even a token steps to bring the conspirators to justice.Any efforts by India or US have been met with increasing indifference from [***]stan Government.The military wants to keep alive this monster for their own agenda so that they can keep control of the [***]stan and distribute the goodies from US among themselves. The people of [***]stan need to wake up but with 38% literacy rate it is hard to find people with good judgement.BY Bharat Desai on 11/10/2009 at 21:29
I disagree with the characterisatio n of India as [***]stan's "hostile neighbour". On the contrary, it is [***]stan that has been unremittingly hostile towards India. If [***]stan is willing to walk the talk on peace instead of arming and sending terrorists across the border into India, there will be no hostility. You surely know the well-known fact that no two democracies have ever gone to war. If the [***]stani military and secret service cease to control that country's affairs and allow it to be genuine civilian-ruled democracy, there will automatically be peace, and even the Kashmir issue will be sorted out without much fuss.The biggest elephant in the room is not India but the covert support for terrorism by [***]stan's military. Mr. Haqqani's handlers in uniform will never allow him to admit that, of course.GaneshBY Ganesh Prasad on 11/10/2009 at 22:55
I think Mr. Haqqani has offered a fairly accurate assessment of the state of US-[***]stan relations as being heavily negatively influenced by America' increasing tilt toward India. Let there be no illusion that the original Obama policy of focusing on Kashmir as the key to solving Afghanistan was the right policy. Unfortunately, it fell prey to the powerful Indian lobby in Washington. In some ways, it's similar to the Obama retreat on Israeli settlements under pressure from AIPAC. The failure to deal Kashmir is destabilizing the entire region, and India will not be immune to the growing instability in the region. It's time for US to wake up and see reality as it is, not through the jaundiced Indian eyes. I see both Obama and Hillary as having good instincts on Kashmir and Palestine, but they are unable to act on their insticts because of domestic lobbies representing India and Israel. You can read more about it at Haq's Musings blog.BY Riaz Haq on 11/13/2009 at 12:54
It does not matter. India is market which every manufacturing country would love to date with. [***]stan is a banana country which created proliferation of the nuclear weapon and today with nuclear arm in one hand and a big begging bowl on the other hand.It does not give a balance to compare the two. Further inspite of having two digit muslim population the contribution of these to the global terror list is minimal give an idea about the culture of indiaBY satwa gunam on 11/13/2009 at 22:21
Shekhar Gupta of Indian Express argues that India has "a stake in [***]stan’s survival and moderation as a democratic state" and warns against "utterly unconcealed sense of delight" about the daily carnage in [***]stan. Gupta cautions against the prevailing "smugness" in his country and adds, "This is not just the mood of the mobs here. Even the “intelligentsia ”, the TV talking heads, opinion page columnists, government spokespersons, all have the same smug air of “I-told-you-so” and “so-what-else-did-they-expect” satisfaction. And they ask the same patronizing question: hell, can [***]stan be saved?"Gupta concludes his piece by saying, "Time has therefore come to nuance our policy as well as national mood and psychology, to not merely reopen communication with [***]stan but to also make moves, offers, anything that will enhance the power and credibility of its government which, with all its faults, is still the most moderate of all forces in that region. Finally, time has also come to set in place some kind of diplomatic standard operating procedures in case more terror attacks take place because a third round of coercive diplomacy may spin out of control. We have to now demonstrate a stake in [***]stan’s survival and moderation as a democratic state. Just bombing somebody there in anger won’t work, because people who are targeting us are also targeting the rest of the modern world, from Chicago to Copenhagen."BY Riaz Haq on 11/16/2009 at 20:42

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.