In US-Pakistan relations stability means obedience: Chomsky

Chomsky <3Recommend

Relationship between two like US & Pakistan practically means unconditional acquiescence of one in the interests of the powerful. A recap of recent events with Raymond Davis Case as the starting point will prove this point. Though finally the weak (Pakistan) surrendered to the will of the powerful (US), but even that tiny bit of resistance from Pakistan was considered the insult to presumptuous, arrogant US.

The Osama Saga provided them an opportunity to open their media guns on Pakistan maligning & censuring for being perpetrator of duplicity. Within a span of a few weeks, military & ISI ( Pakistan’s institutions hitherto most respected & idealized by the public for their supposed capabilities to defend & past contributions in the moments of crises like expulsion of terrorists from Swat Valley, tremendous job done in rehabilitation of flood victims), appear like weak, in-capacitated, unreliable & incapable of defending even their own assets like they failed in PNS Mehran terrorists attack case.

US is increasingly tightening noose around Pakistan & is disseminating the messages of bordering around the conviction that Pak Nukes are vulnerable & unsafe, hence US troops will be deployed around Pakistan’s key installations under protective custody. The moment Pakistan will show some resistance, thin line between stable friend & un-stable ally will vanish. Pakistan is in a proverbial in a wolf & sheep-like relationship, it will be policy of extreme prudence & diplomatic excellence which might allow the sheep to survive from the jaws of the wolf.Recommend

we need to focus on the menace of radical islam that is eating up from the inside like termites eating up wood.Blaming others like america,india or europe won’t help us to solve our problems.living in denial doesn’t help anyone,we might decieve ourselves but the problem remains as it is.

We should take a good,hard look at our society & how radicalised it has become.We seem most interested & focused on performing religious rituals & having exhibitionist displays of just how islamic we are rather than focusing on making our country better.
look at our universities & colleges with the increased number of hijabis & burka women.Look at the alarming increase in the number of beards on our campuses.

Not shaving & hiding behind black tents doesn’t make one a better person but just shows how beholden one is to rigid religious dogma.Recommend

Vienna,26-05-2011
The matter is as simple as that of a single track two way traffic with a collision,without
SOS help mechanism.Both the vehicles involved in the collision remain unbreakable.What
is then but a traffic jam? No destabilization but may be diversionary route for the on going
unending traffic an inevitability.
Kulamarva BalakrishnaRecommend

When will pakistani leaders serve the purpose of nation rather obeying US orders . Many so called intelectuals like Nazir naji ,imtiaz aalam and others are vocal supporters of US agenda.their past role in supporting military regimes and now US AGENDA CLEARLY remind us that theyt are on pay rol .so please let them not allow to talk shows.Recommend

I reckon the last thing we want to do is to arrange a lecture by Chomsky, we can arrange one by Dr. Zakir Nayek as he has memorized more books than Chomsky and seems to have a photographic memory. Also, if stable relation with USA means destable Pakistan, we should make every effort to strengthen the relationship, after all we want to be a good friend of America, one way or the other.Recommend

Very well said Mr. Chomsky.Any body knows till when Mr. Chomsky staying in Pakistan?Recommend

I agree with Chomsky, that as long as Pakistan will show obedience, there is stability, but the moment Pakistan stood against US is going to take on.Recommend

Nice read.Recommend

Um, no, having something less than 1,300 terrorist attacks per year and something less than two dozen domestic militant groups operating means “stable.”Recommend

Pakistan should consider reunion with India to have a better .Recommend

@Omer K. Feroze:
He is intelligent enough not to visit Pakistan :)Recommend

@BruteForce You meant relationship of unequals! right?Recommend

Most people don’t even know Eqbal Ahmad, one of the most precious assets ever produced by this luckless country and wasted by its people and state.

Eqbal Ahmad’s advice was eagerly sought out by Edward Said also. Recent success of unarmed mass mobilization in several Arab countries and well-publicized tactics adopted by Palestinian protesters 2 weeks ago show how prescient he was:

In the 1970s, he formulated the suggestion, an extremely brilliant one, quite in keeping with his general attitude of non-violent aggressiveness, that the PLO should try to organize a march of Palestinians toward the Israeli borders in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Inspired by the great civil rights marches of the 1960s, Eqbal urged Arafat and company to mobilize as many people as possible, walking unarmed to the borders, with banners saying, “We want to go home.” I remember the look on their faces, when I patiently explained Eqbal’s proposal, of disbelief and mild panic, especially when I emphasized the need for peaceful means and disciplined organization. This was at a time when Eqbal was mercilessly critical of the cult of the gun, the misuse of slogans like “armed struggle,” and the creeping, ultimately debilitating militarism of Palestinian thinking and organization. At a seminar convened in Beirut for Eqbal, he painstakingly propounded a strategy for mounting an organized campaign for Palestinian human rights in the United States. He explained that we needed detailed information on every congressional district in the United States, on the workings of important civil institutions such as the churches, colleges, and labor unions, all of which could have been done with one-tenth of the resources that were squandered on first-class air tickets, an expanding bureaucracy, and bottles and bottles of Black Label whiskey. Ten years later, he repeated a similar but more detailed argument to the exiled Palestinian leadership in Tunis with, I’m sorry to say, the same results.

Recommend

Stability doesn’t mean obedience.
Stability means being trustworthy and sincere. Unless, of course, you mean Pakistan is a bunch of liars from birth and the U.S. wanting honesty and sincerity requires an unreasonable and one sided demand.

Look at your own history. Your whole existence is basically one big lie from the view of a self-proclaimed victim of everyone and everything with a contradicting ego.

You lie, talk bad about everyone, make contradicting requests, play two or more sides, blame everyone else for everything and still claim you’re on some moral high ground. Have you no shame?

Face it, you’re a mess. It’s not about countries wanting to harm Pakistan. You’re such a mess and have been one for so long that people are willing to send their own soldier’s lives in to make it stop because it seems like the more you get blown up the dumber you get.

But, no, you freak out at the mere mention of someone else setting foot in your country as long as they’re not there to kill you. You say it’s your pride and dignity at stake and you’ll take care of it yourselves because you have the ability and desire to do so. Guess what? You’ve killed any chance at pride, your dignity can’t be found and the fact it keeps happening with no progress shows you even lie to yourselves.

Your denial is putting the lives of the world at stake. Don’t be surprised when the world gets tired of your empty promises and starts getting things done for you. You may claim ownership over the land called Pakistan, but you sure as hell don’t own the world and if you condone and harbor threats to that world, you’re going to get the world’s unwanted intention regardless of whether or not you say you know about it or agree with it because even if that is the case, it still means you’re incompetent and someone else has to do it anyways. You speak of the innocent parts of the population. Those innocence are simply targets like everyone else. They’ll die either way, be it war or pretending you know what you’re doing and leaving you alone. The innocent may accidentally die here and there, regretfully. At least there are good intentions. If not accidental drone kills, you’ll end up with deliberate mass murder.

In the end, you are the world’s poster boy for victimization in your eyes, right? Come on now, why ignore what’s happening inside your borders? It gives you one more thing to cry about. Do it while there are still shoulders available to cry on.Recommend

@Mark

you must not forget that this is all your mess that we are trying to clean up-your mess that has caused us more lives than any other country in the world. had your leaders not been shaking hands with OBL himself and drawing under-the-table plans to incite jihad ism in the Afghan and Pakistani youth during the cold war to overtake USSR, only to let them lurk with all the training and weaponry afterward, we never would have been in this mess in the first place…

it is the ultimate desire of the US to extend its super power status for the next 100 years, that the world is so destabilize and bloody. of course, Pakistanis are not the only victims, dictatorships around the world and mostly in Muslim countries is backed , funded and supported by the US. remember the assassination of Che Guevara by the CIA in 60′s….does that ring any bells?….

you created jihadis. you funded them to rage war. you gave them training. you radicalized the Pakistani society. and you left when your purpose was done. its unbelievable that you come here and give us a lecture on self respect and harp of what really integrity is when you yourself shamelessly ignore your share in all the mess.Recommend

Chomsky, no doubt, a great statesman of his era, has grown old and lost touch with reality. This is a different world than Chomsky lived in. It is crystal clear that Pak-US relationship cant continue as it continued in the past. Realities have changed. There is no more cold war. America would like to change geo-strategic worldview of Pakistan and that is obvious but it is very surprising that a statesman like Chomsky could not see it. Literally, both the states are on warpath and this statesman is forcasting that same old relationship will continue.Recommend

@saad naseer:
Pakistan government, eversince its independence, has been in the hands of Seculars. Ayub, Yahya, Bhutto, Sikander, Nawaz, Benazir, Musharraf, Zardari, all of them were totally secular. Some of them used the name of islam to lift their popularity in Islam0wanting society. Not even for a single day, Islam has been put into constitution/law of this Islamic republic. Secular rulers have always been playing hypocricy. Zia is sometimes named as an Islamic ruler, but I totally disagree to this. Had this state been blessed with a true islamic leader/ruler, the situation would have been totally different. What I say is either remove the name “Islamic” from the name of the country OR make is islamic in real manifestRecommend

@Mark:
What’s the history of US of A???
Convicts, killing indigenous people. Waging wars against nations of no match for no reason, like Vietnam, while puling out of there decided to destroy Congo along, against Iraq, for the mythical WMDs. Against Afghanistan, entering there in the name of Al Qaeda and OBL and forgetting about their cause as soon as they were in (referring to Bush’s statement who said that he didn’t spend that much time thinking about Bin Laden in 2002, one might think that OBL being the cause of invasion he should have been walking, talking, sleeping, breathing Bin Laden) while pulling out of there will destroy Pakistan along the way. First, nurture the tyrants, dictators, terrorists; like Saddam Hussain. Husni Mubarak, Bin Laden, then stab them in the back…
Yep, what an honoured nation…
It’s role in Mexico drug war is just another story…

Hugo Chavez didn’t smell “sulphur” for no reason…Recommend