Pakistan US relation – My Bit for Change

Of Regrets and Apologies

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again”, said Hillary Rodham Clinton to Hina Rabbani Khar on a telephone call, and Pakistan reopens its border to NATO supply convoys into Afghanistan after a seven-month blockade since November, when an American aircraft killed 24 Pakistan soldiers.

The nation went into shock and twitter was bombarded with questions like ‘Was this really an apology’, ‘they said sorry which they say even when they sneeze and did not apologize’ and ‘Is Clinton Camera-shy for a formal apology?’

I sat down and thought for a moment, ‘Would we be happy and satisfied if the word regret and sorry is replaced by an apology, a formal one, with a US official appearing on media? The civilian and military leadership was so inclined to open the land routes that even a slightest blink of the eye was enough for them? How was it different from Cameron Munter’s condolences given immediately after the incident and those too in Urdu for which he must have done an extra effort to sound more convincing to the sheeple he was addressing. And, hand over heart, would you be satisfied if your wishes or demands of a ‘formal apology’ are met. Would you believe these statements coming from a super power that has a history of war crimes and blatant lies, very well acknowledged by internationally accredited activists and impartial commentators. Let us go through just a few of these.

-Just a few months ago, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta apologised to the Afghan people for an incident in which copies of the Quran were burned and said that it wasn’t intentional.

‘These actions do not represent the views of the United States military. We honour and respect the religious practices of the Afghan people, without exception.”

NATO commander John Allen also addressed to the ‘noble Afghans’ and that too with an extra effort of learning to say ‘Assalam Alaikum’ and ‘Manan, Tashakkur’ to ‘calamin-ise’ the blistered sentiments with his amazing Pushto and Persian.

-Shortly after that, international media breaks the news, that a course for US military officers has been teaching that America’s enemy is Islam in general and suggesting that the country might ultimately have to obliterate the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina without regard for civilian deaths, following second world war precedents of the nuclear attack on Hiroshima.

“This would leave open the option once again of taking war to a civilian population wherever necessary (the historical precedents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki being applicable to the Mecca and Medina destruction decision point).”

The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martic Dempsey responded to it as “the material in the course was counter to American appreciation for religious freedom and cultural awareness. It was just totally objectionable, against our values, and it wasn’t academically sound,”

-A few weeks after burning of the Holy Quran incident, comes the horrible news of a US sergeant killing 16 innocent civilians, out of whom 9 were children and later all the bodies were set alight. As always, the authorities tried to explain, they do not represent anybody. They were just mad (disagrees Robert Fisk).

Remember, US senator John Kerry was “deeply sorry” over the killing of two Pakistanis by a US official, and promised justice if he was handed over to the US? Similarly, there are numerous incidents which have torn apart United States claims of freedom and equality, belief in humanity and justice for all. Illegitimate drone attacks on Pakistani soil and civilian casualties are very frequent. Detainees in the Guantanamo held without charge, Abu Ghraib’s disturbing pictures where the soldier refuses to apologize for her ‘prisoner on the leash’ and other disturbing treatment, US military officials using Quran as target practice and urinating on corpses, Aafia Siddiqui’s physical and sexual abuses in the world’s most horrifying jail, sentenced for allegedly shooting (missing the target) a US soldier while a Marine gets three months in jail for massacring two dozen civilians in Iraq, are just a few. With a war that began with a lie of ‘Weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq, US remains the first and the only country to have used Nuclear weapons and is the biggest manufacturer and supplier of chemical weapons. Let’s also recall heavy usage of white phosphorus on the city of Fallujah.

A former American soldier who fought at Fallujah says:

“I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it’s known as Willy Pete. Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone, I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for.”

What has the US or the NATO apologised for in the past? And if they have apologised, have the injustices and war crimes stopped? Have they ever apologised for Hiroshima ‘formally’ or for the usage of napalm bombs and chemical weapons on Vietnam civilians? I must mention, they felt ‘sorry’ for deliberate syphilis infections in Guatemala as a part of medical tests without prior consent.

So my dear countrymen, what is it that we really want? With this history of regrets and condolences of the masters, even a formal apology means nothing. I remember from my childhood what my mum used to say every now and then to my little brother, ‘My son, you say sorry and then repeat the same thing? What kind of an apology is this? Saying ‘sorry’, means you admit your mistake and you would never do that again’. Unfortunately this does not mean anything in the real world and our mums had kept us in a world of fantasy and text bookish philosophy which we only come to find out as almost non-existent as we grow up to the ugliness of the mighty in this world.

A dog is no doubt man’s best friend. But, either our spineless leadership should come out of this ‘ideal friendship’ and let us live like a sovereign nation, who is capable enough to deal with its own issues (including terrorism that started after US invasion) or keep wagging the tail and make us all a mere joke . The precious 24 soldiers would never come back and nor would the thousands of other soldiers and civilians who didn’t get a name. The solution is: this war MUST end!

I leave with you the words of an American activist, a daughter of a Jewish mother and an Iraqi father demanding the same as I do today. No justice, No peace!

A million dollars a day, keep all the worries away

Recently, a news item caught my attention that by opening NATO supply routes, Pakistan will earn $365 million annually. By the time you will be reading these lines, re-opening of supply routes might have been finalized. The issue was a bone of contention in Pak-US relationship since the Salala check post incident on 26th November 2011. The present democratic regime may take the credit for bringing the US administration on table talks which was not the case in Musharraf’s regime, but the decision to re-open the supply routes is an unpopular one and will attract criticism from opposition, religious parties and public alike.

Since 2001, Pakistan has been serving as a front line ally of the US in its War on Terror (read error). In terms of cost-benefit analysis, Pakistan has lost more than it has gained. In monetary terms, we have incurred losses amounting Rs. 68 billion whereas if we talk about human losses it translates to roughly 40,000 precious lives. In this case, the math is simple; earning $365 million per annum at the cost of 24 soldiers. Would this be named as “blood money”?

Talking of blood money reminds me of the famous Lockerbie bombing case, a precedent set by the US itself. If we take into account the money paid by Libya for the loss of life of one US citizen on the hijacked plane then the same value should have been assigned to the human loss that we have incurred in the form of drone strikes and bombings. The US claims that drone strikes are inevitable. Not surprisingly, in order to support their ailing economy, Pentagon has ordered General Atomic to increase their production that makes $4 million on every drone produced.

The ‘war on terror‘ and ‘promoting democracy‘ are the 21st century equivalents of the 19th century British gobbledygook. American Neo-colonialism purveys them as moral justification and uses as political cover for intervening and, where necessary, invading resource-rich and strategic countries to overthrow nationalist leaders, install puppet regimes and ravage the countries’ wealth. And of course, the US is by far the most powerful terrorist force. But the American War in Afghanistan has turned out to be an amazing circus of military ineptitude. NATO’s problem in Afghanistan is how to get out without losing too much face. In this scenario, US needed a scapegoat and who else could be a better one than Pakistan.

Oil lies at the center of the War on (T)error. Failure to recognize this and its full implications has distracted and muddled our thinking and debates into “smoke screen” issues. The real objective of the US is to achieve complete military domination over oil resources and routes. The latest estimate of the US spending on “oil wars” is around $2-2.5 trillion. One has to be completely blind to believe that the US is spending this amount just to fight terrorism or bring democracy in Iraq & Afghanistan. In its pursuit of achieving military primacy, the US has devastated Iraq & Afghanistan. Now, Pakistan is in danger of becoming a “collateral damage” of the US pursuit of global energy control and military domination if Pakistan Army continues to fight its so-called “war on (t)error”. This war has brought Pakistan to the greatest crisis since 1971, a crisis that can result in the disintegration or Balkanization of Pakistan.

The people of Pakistan will not tolerate foreign hegemony under any circumstances. On the basis of the self-same logic, they would never agree to an internal hegemony by any institution of the state. The two hegemonies compliment each other. If our people meekly submit to internal hegemony, they will have to submit to external hegemony. This is so because the strength and power of external hegemony is far greater than that of internal one. If the people are too terrified to resist the weaker force, it is not possible for them to resist the stronger force. Thus the acceptance of internal hegemony means surrender to external hegemony. Fear is no policy, surrender is not an option.

William Francis Butler once said,

“The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

The saying above aptly describes the situation in Pakistan post NATO killings. I think that the major cause of instability in Pakistan is the American led War on (T) error. Our government should revisit its foreign policy and rely more on regional strategic partners like China and Iran. I think that the US should leave the treachery of aiding us on the face and stabbing us at our backs. It’s time to let them know that we will not tolerate any foreign interventions, in any form whatsoever at all. If a country like Iran could flout sanctions, why couldn’t we? Boycotting the Chicago Summit could have been our first step in tactfully wiggling out of this alliance by clearly shifting our stance from “Do more” to “No more”.

Kinda Like Chicken!!

We, the Pakistanis! Do we look like chicken?

No really, is that how we look like?

I believe we do look like chicken to you. The reality is that you Americans have always seen the world the same way you view chickens. You don’t have to see the slaughter and suffering of the chicken, do you? You have factories for that kind of stuff. And even in those factories you don’t have to do the killing yourselves, do you? You have machines for that. But could you stand seeing as to what a chicken actually goes through?

I was watching Jim Carrey’s “Yes Man” the other day. I happened to go through a scene where the main character faints in a chicken slaughtering factory when he learns about the techniques adopted. Then it occurred to me that this was not the first time I was seeing an American movie in which Americans have problems seeing chicken, or any other consumed dairy animal for the matter, being slaughtered. The fact is that they are never usually exposed to such a scene. But ironic as it is; they love eating chicken.

But the question neither starts nor ends with the chicken. It’s much more than that. It’s about being concerned of only the end product.

Multi-national corporations exploit people all over the world. Because they are unwilling to hire expensive labour at home, they simply go to places where they know labour is extremely cheap, and take complete advantage. Such corporations make billions of dollars. Labour is exploited by being made to work in extremely inhumane conditions. They are deprived of all basic facilities, including proper food and sanitation. They have zero job security, and have to work on daily wages. When they have an emergency, they have to choose between that emergency and feeding their children. This does not however end here; there are many more facets to this exploitation, which includes environmental damage and market monopoly.

But then again; do the employers have to see all this? They only have the final product in their mind and they’re happy. Little do they know, or care, that in the production of that certain product was there a huge exploitation of human beings.

Then they have their government; a government they voted for, a government which is usually at war, a war to make the world a better, and more peaceful, place. They have their “brave” American men and women who fly overboard to fight for this just cause. Obviously, the lives of Americans are precious you know. All being done to keep the American people safe at home. But then again, who are they exactly at war with?

The United States of America is the Big Show, or the Undertaker, of the Global arena. In fact it’s much more than that. Never has a power accumulated such military and technological might as has the United States, or so it is said. This being the case, one may presume that such a power, if at war, will be at war with an entity that is, at least, possessive of strength worthy of any comparison. But where is it that American bombs fall? Is it, say, China? The European Union? Forget the EU; is it even a European country like France and Germany? The once almighty, United Kingdom? Or, even, India? Hell no! Of course it’s not any of these. It’s always some weak Vietnam or Afghanistan or Iraq. Its always “terrorist” countries. Countries where people need to be liberated, even if they have to be killed for it. (liberated from the circle of life)

My question to Americans; have you ever thought over the chances of your dying in a terrorist attack? Today there is a much larger probability of you being abducted, raped and, then, murdered by a friendly neighbour than to be blown up in a Muslim suicide attack. I’m sorry that you lost three thousand people in one such attack ten years ago. But if you are going to repeatedly justify the same for the implied killing of the hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, then you shouldn’t expect the slightest sympathy. Let me remind you that you voted, and hence you’re no less responsible for the happenings.

What about the case of Pakistan? According to US, we are double-dealers. Today we have betrayed the “Global” (or Western) Community by not handing over Osama Bin Ladin, presumably, the “greatest threat” to the world. We are just a bunch of fanatics who support terror, and cannot reconcile with modern times. Simply put, we are belonging to a terrorist state; a state that exports terror.

You see the big beards of terrorists. You see how uncivilized they are. All on your large TV screens. But have you ever seen a drone? Have you ever seen a little girl die from a drone attack? Have you ever seen the loss of a whole family from one drone attack? Is it in your knowledge that your brave men regularly bomb schools (madrassas)? I think I may have used a politically incorrect word, i.e.madrassas, because you have, unfortunately, dehumanized “mullahs” to such a level that you believe that just eradicating the world from their very existence would make the world a better place. But do you know that in many of the madrassas bombed, the students, or “mullahs” as you may call them, were within the age span of 10 to 18. We here, who live in the real world, see them no different than elementary school students in the U.S. It cannot be denied in any case that the large majority of people who die of your drone attacks are civilians. But wait, what do you see?

The only thing you see is the same thing you see in Palestine. You don’t see the murder of little girls in Israeli bombing raids, do you? You see little lads throwing pebbles on Israeli Tankers bulldozing their homes, as terrorists. However, you don’t see Israeli soldiers throwing bombs at the helpless Palestinians in Gaza, do you?

But yes, you do protest. How silly of me to miss that out. Many of you protest against the war. Many of you are against the war. The reason, however, mostly being that you have to stop the increasing deaths of your soldiers. “Brave” soldiers, aren’t they. They are homesick, and the only thing they fear is death, and other small things, such as the battle field. But then again you are only disturbed when the effects enter your comfort zone. What about us? Us over here! Do you see us? Can you see us? What about our lives? Do our lives carry the slightest of value?

We then come again to the point we started with. What are the workers in sweat shops to Americans? They are merely a transaction in a balance sheet under the heading of “expense”. Not a very expensive expense though. What are we to Americans? We are hurdles to a better world. When we go through the process of humiliation and death; we end up as merely “collateral damage”. What’s collateral damage? Well, it’s kinda like chicken.

Saad Lakhani is a motivated young writer, a student of Social Sciences from Karachi