|
Congressmen’s fury
[DAWN] LIKE most legislatures in the democratic world, committee hearings are mostly turgid, wonkish affairs that attract virtually no public interest.But when known Pakistain-bashers gathered in the US Congress for a joint subcommittee hearing provocatively titled ’Pakistain: Friend or Foe in the Fight against Terrorism?’ there was certainly going to be a spectacle. Yet, what transpired during the hour-long hearing was extraordinary even by the already low standards that could be expected from a cast of characters that usually chides, berates and threatens Pakistain. Not only were there epithets casually uttered and incendiary allegations tossed around like irrefutable fact, the range of punitive measures discussed bordered on the pathological. One of the so-called expert witnesses called to testify on Pakistain suggested a travel ban to the US for Pak citizens, including students. Earlier in the session, a congressman made a number of wild accusations about militancy in Sindh. By the time a notorious Pakistain-bashing congressman spewed hate about Balochistan  ...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it... and the Pak state, the reasonable observer could have been forgiven for wondering if a collective madness had overcome the room. To be sure, there are continuing and important questions to be asked of the Pak state’s anti-militancy policy. The army leadership has in the last week explicitly indicated that it will act against those using Pak soil for attacks inside Afghanistan, but that extraordinary commitment remains to be tested. Yet, no sober, realistic or honest appraisal of what has transpired in Afghanistan over the past decade and a half can possibly lay the bulk of the blame for that country’s continuing instability and insecurity at Pakistain’s doorstep. Indeed, when asked about his and the US government’s support for Hamid Maybe I'll join the TalibanKarzai ... A former Baltimore restaurateur, now 12th and current President of Afghanistan, displacing the legitimate president Rabbani in December 2004. He was installed as the dominant political figure after the removal of the Taliban regime in late 2001 in a vain attempt to put a Pashtunface on the successor state to the Taliban. After the 2004 presidential election, he was declared president regardless of what the actual vote count was. He won a second, even more dubious, five-year-term after the 2009 presidential election. His grip on reality has been slipping steadily since around 2007, probably from heavy drug use... as the post-Taliban leader of Afghanistan, former ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad offered a weak defence, citing the need for a Pakhtun leader in Afghanistan. But few American officials would deny that the Karzai era proved to be hugely damaging for Afghanistan itself -- the opportunity to build institutions and a somewhat viable state was lost to the preferences and choices of Mr Karzai who put self-interest first. Moreover, no rational outside observer would suggest that the US has ever had a viable or realistic strategy in Afghanistan. No one should forget Gen Stanley McChrystal’s infamous "We’ve got a government in a box, ready to roll in" boast. The arguments over Afghanistan, what went wrong and who is to blame can be endless because they are mostly rooted in political and strategic preferences of those arguing. What is undeniable, however, is that wild and vicious comments from the US Congress have the potential to stoke anti-Americanism here in Pakistain and make it significantly more difficult for reasonable voices on both sides to engage in healthy debate. Democratic norms prevent calling for a ban on political speech, but perhaps sensible voices in the US can speak out with clarity on Pakistain right now. Posted by: Fred 2016-07-15 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=461707 |