A question regarding May 2
Gilani 's remarks on OBL, in the mind of Chaudhry Nisar, was tantamount to a “charge sheet” against the military.
Leader of the opposition, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan of the PML-N, who has generally take a more pro-military and anti-American stance than his party leader Nawaz Sharif, has now decided it would be a good idea to blast Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani for his remarks wondering how Osama bin Laden was able to hide in Abbottabad for so long. That statement by Gilani, in the mind of Chaudhry Nisar, was tantamount to a “charge sheet” against the military and would provide further grist to the anti-Pakistan international community. It seems Chaudhry Nisar, a politician who is extremely interested in finding out who wrote the memo that landed on the desk of General Jim Jones and in how US Navy SEALS were able to enter Pakistani airspace, is far less curious about how Osama bin Laden led a comfortable life in our country for so long.
Joining him in that lack of interest is the Abbottabad commission that is investigating the May 2 capture of the al Qaeda leader. So far, the commission has focused its investigations on whether the US violated our sovereignty in the raid. The answer, as the commission has deduced and as anyone could have told it without the need for dozens of witnesses, is that yes our sovereignty was violated and that, in fact, the US had always maintained that it had little interest in such niceties if it would prevent them from capturing Osama bin Laden. The Abbottabad commission has also shown its keenness on investigating such ancillary matters as how many Americans did former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani issue visas to. But it has been completely silent on the not insignificant matter of Bin Laden’s presence in the country. The protestations of Chaudhry Nisar and the Abbottabad commission notwithstanding, the fact is that the prime minister has raised a powerful point. If our sovereignty is all that precious, why then is the military not the slightest bit outraged that Osama bin Laden was able to live in Pakistan without our knowledge? And does the military’s lack of interest actually mean something more sinister? No matter what the answer to that question, it means that the military and its intelligence agencies are either guilty of incompetence or tacit collusion. This more than anything else, including questions of sovereignty, is what should be investigated.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 2nd, 2012.
Joining him in that lack of interest is the Abbottabad commission that is investigating the May 2 capture of the al Qaeda leader. So far, the commission has focused its investigations on whether the US violated our sovereignty in the raid. The answer, as the commission has deduced and as anyone could have told it without the need for dozens of witnesses, is that yes our sovereignty was violated and that, in fact, the US had always maintained that it had little interest in such niceties if it would prevent them from capturing Osama bin Laden. The Abbottabad commission has also shown its keenness on investigating such ancillary matters as how many Americans did former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani issue visas to. But it has been completely silent on the not insignificant matter of Bin Laden’s presence in the country. The protestations of Chaudhry Nisar and the Abbottabad commission notwithstanding, the fact is that the prime minister has raised a powerful point. If our sovereignty is all that precious, why then is the military not the slightest bit outraged that Osama bin Laden was able to live in Pakistan without our knowledge? And does the military’s lack of interest actually mean something more sinister? No matter what the answer to that question, it means that the military and its intelligence agencies are either guilty of incompetence or tacit collusion. This more than anything else, including questions of sovereignty, is what should be investigated.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 2nd, 2012.