It is more than obvious that the American attack on two Pakistani posts that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, including a major and a captain, was intentional not accidental, as some of America's local apologists/collaborators have been trying to argue.
ISPR spokesman Major General Athar Abbas has explained that Nato knew, along with exact reference co-ordinates, about the two posts located on a hilltop 200-300 metres inside Pakistani border in Mohmand Agency. Soon after the incident, Isaf spokesman General Carsten Jacobson told CBS News that Afghan and Nato forces were holding an exercise in Kunar close to the Pakistan border when "air support was called in, and it is highly likely that this close air support killed Pakistani soldiers." Which is utter nonsense considering that the attack continued, according to the ISPR spokesman, for nearly two hours, during which time Pakistani commanders contacted their Nato counterparts to ask them to stop it. Still, it did not stop. Clearly, it was not a mistake, but a deliberate assault.
Why did they do it? Because they wanted to show Pakistan they could go to any lengths - and get away with it, too - to force it to help advance American agenda in the Afghan war endgame. They gave us money and expected full co-operation in return that has been forthcoming until recently when it became untenable. In a mercenary relationship with Washington, our top civil and military leaders have been lying to us all these years. The list of our side's acts of capitulation is long. The one that has repeatedly elicited public outcry is the issue of drone strikes that have been going on with official connivance, in fact, physical support from Shamsi airbase. Before the present crisis hit the relationship, CIA launched its Predator drones from Pakistani soil, killing and maiming Pakistanis on Pakistani soil as Islamabad kept denying that the US was using the airbase for drone attacks. It has now emerged that in a bizarre deal with the UAE, the Musharraf regime had rented out the facility to the UAE government for unspecified purposes, which later sublet it to a third country for military operations. In an equally, if not more, bizarre development, when following the Mohmand attack Pakistan demand that the US vacate the airbase within 15 days - this time seriously - the Emirates' foreign minister arrived in Islamabad to ask President Zardari to let the Americans keep it. He could make such an outrageous demand only in Pakistan, which calls attention to the rentier status of this state.
Some of America's servile friends are arguing that Pakistan can ill-afford to resist the US to the point of a rupture because of the financial assistance it gives us. Indeed, the relationship need not come to a complete break. Nonetheless, the money we get is not as important as it is made out to be. Since 2001, Pakistan has received $20 billion, mostly in military assistance to help the US fight its war, while economic losses suffered on account of the war are over $70 billion. As for the dependency syndrome, we must not forget that when the US enacted the Pressler Amendment to punish Pakistan for its nuclear explosions, slapping stringent sanctions, the country did manage to survive without Washington's economic assistance. It can do that again. Not long ago Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had advised our government to tax its own rich before asking for money from her country. If only we can pay attention to that priceless advice it won't be difficult to overcome most of our financial difficulties. As a matter of fact, the present situation can help extricate this country from a vicious mercenary relationship.
Apparently, it was the same thinking that prompted the US commanders to decide they could launch an unprovoked attack inside Pakistani territory and kill 24 soldiers guarding its borders without worrying about consequences. They have done it twice before, though on a much smaller scale, that were blamed on the fog of war. What has happened now is a deliberate act of war and has come amid tensions over the Afghan war endgame. The nature and timing of the attack make it a decisive moment for the Pak-US relationship.
Pakistan has more convergence of interests with Afghanistan's other neighbours - Iran, China and Russia - than with the US. The latter's new security architecture plan for this region aims to maintain a permanent military presence in Afghanistan in military bases, and assign a big role to India in Afghanistan also providing it access, via a new 'Silk Road', to Central Asia. Pakistan's concerns are obvious. But Iran, China and Russia are equally alarmed at the plan. Which is why all three along with Pakistan had serious differences with the US and its allies at the November 2 Istanbul conference on Afghanistan. Our government's decision, in the wake of the Mohmand attack, not to attend the upcoming conference in Bonn is not only an important show of anger and indignation, it is also indicative of an imminent parting of ways.
In launching the attack with its trademark arrogance, the US seems to have made it that much easier for Pakistan to pursue an independent course. We need an Afghanistan, which is friendly towards us, but free from outside interference. In that we have a common cause with other big regional players, like Iran, China and Russia. We have a lot to gain in terms of economic well-being as well from a closer relationship with them. Iran is making attractive offers to help us tide over our huge energy deficit. China, the rising superpower, has been increasing trade and investments in this country. Pak-China trade that stood at a mere $2 billion in 2002 is being given a boost, and is expected to surge to $18 billion by 2015. Chinese investments are growing fast from the current $2 billion a year to cross the $3 billion mark next year. The country has also been quietly giving us money to deal with the recent natural disasters. The important thing about Chinese assistance is that, unlike the US aid and loans, there are no strings attached. That, of course, is not to say they want to help us just because they are such nice people. We share strategic interests while our partnership with the US has been only of a transactional nature.
It also needs to be recognised that despite our civil and military leaders' obsessive preoccupation with the US, when it comes to what is seen as Pakistan's core interests - eg, nuclear programme and countering Indian hegemonic designs - they dig in their heels. It is that same moment now. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani seemed to be making a rare credible statement, when while commenting on the Mohmand attack, he told CNN it will no longer be business as usual. He went on to add that the alliance could continue only on the basis of "mutual respect and mutual interest." Neither of the two conditions exists nor is likely to exist in the days to come.
[email protected]
Comments
Comments are closed.