Since Salala

Few would have predicted the steep fall that has occurred in relations in the months elapsed since Salala attack.

In a column some weeks ago, I had opined that if US President Barack Obama had compassion, he would have apologised for the killing of our soldiers at Salala, offered compensation and moved on, much as his ambassador in Islamabad had suggested. I had said: “Honourable nations are not ashamed to admit their mistakes and apologise for egregious errors”. Adding that, even if the subsequent report on the incident had showed that Pakistan was at fault, “the American apology could have been withdrawn and the same demanded from us”. Either way, Obama would have emerged an honourable man.

Instead, Obama commissioned a serving brigadier from the very outfit responsible for the bombing to undertake an investigation, who predictably produced a finding that was rejected outright by Pakistan as fictitious. The excuse that had Obama apologise to his Republican opponents would have had him for toast and showed him off in an even poorer light.

It now seems that Obama is having second thoughts. According to a US official, “the State Department is supporting a proposal circulating in the administration… to issue a formal apology for the death of the soldiers (killed on November 26) because we feel that an apology would be helpful in creating some space”. In other words, the US is considering an apology months later, not because it was wrong for not apologising earlier, but because by doing so now it would obtain what is presumably worth more than America’s honour, namely; cheaper petrol, etc; for the American war machine in Afghanistan.

In the same column, I had said “If (Nato) supplies are reopened as a result of pressure on the current weak and vacillating leadership here, routes will likely be blocked by demonstrators or made impassable by local Taliban supporters”. And this is now likely. The Jamat-e-Islami has pledged to block them and there are others who will do worse, making it more difficult for our already harassed police and Rangers to ensure safe passage.

Actually, it was an open secret that the routes would be reopened following a brief show of bravado and, sure enough, that’s what’s happening. Given our economic woes and our spendthrift habits and the military’s incessant need for American weaponry, the compulsion to return cap in hand to the IMF and the Americans for further assistance is irresistible.

However, few would have been able to predict the steep fall that has occurred in relations in the more-than-two months that have elapsed since the Salala attack. Consider the following:

1. The obloquy heaped on Pakistan by US officials and Congress when Husain Haqqani was directed by the Supreme Court not to leave the country. Such was the fury on display that it seemed as if Pakistan had detained the US ambassador rather than one of its own.

2. Congress scheduling hearings on Balochistan and calling for a free Balochistan to be carved out of Pakistan. When has a state openly called for the disintegration of an ally even as they are fighting a war against a common enemy?

3. Granting US citizenship to a foreigner — Shakeel Afridi — for placing American interests above that of his own country so that he would not swing, just as the American murderer Raymond Davis was handed over because he was an American citizen.

Meanwhile, Senator Kerry, of the Nishan/Hilal-e-something-or-other fame, says that America is banking on India for taking on China and looking after Afghanistan. In so many words, he has called upon India to play the role of America’s sentinel in Asia. It’s almost impossible to believe that the Indians will be so stupid. And in case, if they are tempted by his invitation, they need look no further than how we fared when offering ourselves as America’s bastion against all comers in the region.

Soon the CENTCOM supremo, General Jamges Mattis, will be reaching Islamabad, bringing with him a whole lot of new targets for the drones; new demands that he will want General Kayani to fulfil and American suggestions to place before the Taliban presumably in return for the release of the (CSF) money they owe us.

Before getting down to discussions, General Kayani could address Mattis thus: “General, as I understand it, your policy re: ‘safe havens’ is: Marja (in Helmand province) must be controlled in order to eventually control Kandahar. Kandahar must be controlled to control Afghanistan. Afghanistan must be controlled to control Pakistan. Pakistan must be controlled to prevent Saudi terrorists from getting on to an aircraft on a flight to JFK, New York. If that is correct there is nothing more I can say or do. If it is not, what are you doing here?” (I owe the foregoing thought to an American journalist)

Published in The Express Tribune, February 11^th, 2012.