The hawks in Washington, who in their meeting at the White House last week debated the possibility of undertaking covert CIA military operations inside Pakistan, may like to consider the findings of the survey funded by US Institute of Peace.
The survey was conducted in September last year - that is some time before President Musharraf earned public hostility by sacking judges, imposing Emergency rule, shedding the military uniform and helplessly seeing the country's most popular leader, Benazir Bhutto, gunned down in the heart of garrison town of the Rawalpindi.
Findings portrayed the Pakistanis deeply suspicious of American objectives in the region, a situation that was not likely to have improved over the last few months. Clearly, there is a yawning gap between what the Bush Administration expects of Pakistani rulers to deliver in the so-called war on terror and what is realistically possible, given that the people of Pakistan nurture very much different, if not sharply conflicting, perspectives on this anti-terrorism alliance.
The survey findings bring out three characteristic features of the Pakistan nation. Firstly, the overwhelming majority of the people of the Pakistan wants the government to base its policies on "Islamic principles" and would like the "madressa" schooling to be upgraded and modernised, but reject Talibanisation. Distrust of the United States' presence was there, but it did not lead to any meaningful support for the Islamist radicals or Taliban or al Qaeda elements in the FATA.
While the radicals were considered less threatening as compared to Americans, six out of 10 respondents said they considered them as a "critical" and "important" challenges to Pakistan, but not as serious as the US presence in Afghanistan. Only 5 percent of respondents to the survey said the Pakistan government should permit the US or other foreign troops enter Pakistan to pursue the Taliban or al Qaeda militants.
Secondly, a large majority wants Pakistan to be more democratic. Asked how important it is for you to live in a country that is governed by elected representatives, on a 10-point scale, the mean response was 8.4. Asked to rate Pakistan under the present dispensation, the mean score was only 4.8. Thirdly, the survey detected pronounced negative perceptions about the American presence in the region.
Asked to choose from a list of alleged US goals in the region, 78 percent cited Washington's alleged desire "to maintain control over the oil resources of the Middle East", 75 percent "to spread Christianity" and 86 percent "to weaken and divide the Islamic world". Only 63 percent chose the option "to prevent more attacks such as those on the World Trade Centre in September 2001".
Friendships and alliances between states depend on convergence of their national interests in their bilateral/multilateral relationships. But, seen in the backdrop of the Institute of Peace survey findings Pak-US bilateral relationship is fast losing its convergence.
The people of Pakistan find American diplomatic and military objectives contrary to their interests and expectations. There is that crimson thread of suspicion that runs through the spectrum of public perceptions in Pakistan, dangerously eroding the viability of Pak-US cooperation in the war on terror.
There is the feeling among the Pakistanis that Washington has been two-timing the people of Pakistan, in that while it pays lip service to democracy it fully stands behind the totalitarian set-ups.
For Washington to succeed it must create linkages between its policy in this region and the reality on the ground. As for Islamabad, it is already confronted with failure, basically because the policy it has been pursuing is not in harmony with national aspirations.
Given the durability of the perspective that the US Institute of Peace survey brings out, one may suggest its compulsory reading by officials both in Washington and Islamabad.
Comments
Comments are closed.