A good friend, over the last three weeks, had shared some interesting Op-Eds.written in International Media and in Pakistan. I provide links to them below.
I commend the piece by Ayaz Amir. Some extracts from it:
What Pakistan has become today, a fortress not so much of Islam as of bigotry and intolerance, is a fruit of these sustained endeavours…. The prevailing mood now is one of unrelieved pessimism……But we are losing faith in the future. Of all our afflictions this is the most terrifying….The idea of Pakistan we inherited has proved a failure. We must be brave and honest enough to admit this. That idea has to be redefined. The Pakistani nation awaits the Galahad who can do this. [Full article here]
Mansoor Ijaz wrote in the FT that it was time to take on Pakistan’s jihadist spies. Which right-thinking person (Pakistani and otherwise) can disagree with him?
Mohammad Malik wrote thus on October 26th, 2011:
The potent mix to justify the hitherto unjustifiable appears to be in place. There is no governance per se anymore, anywhere. Law and order is conspicuous by its very absence. The economy is bankrupt. Corruption has touched unimaginable heights. Incompetence is the sole requirement for landing important government posts. The executive mocks judges. Court verdicts are not worth the paper they are typed on. Thousands of people are being pushed below the poverty line every day, while the ruling elite churns out new millionaires and billionaires by the week. Desperate circumstances have transformed ordinary masses into raving, raging mobs. The disconnect between the rulers and the ruled is absolute, and naked. We are hurtling towards being a failed State. So what is holding the natural ‘unnatural’ consequence from occurring? Concerns about international reactions, or the obligatory weight of a three-year extension? Should it not happen, no matter what? Is this criminalised democracy still the only or the better option available? I do not know, but we may get the answers sooner than we expect. [Full article here]
Praveen Swami wrote in THE HINDU on October 7th, 2011
Less than six months before Admiral Mullen’s dramatic testimony, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certified that Pakistan had demonstrated a “sustained commitment to and is making significant efforts towards combating terrorist groups.” Pakistan, she wrote, had ceased support to “extremist and terrorist groups, particularly to any group that has conducted attacks against the United States or coalition forces in Afghanistan.”
Islamabad had also helped, Ms Clinton wrote, in “preventing al-Qaeda, the Taliban and associated terrorist groups, such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, from operating in the territory of Pakistan, including carrying out cross-border attacks into neighbouring countries.”
Her empirically ill-founded declaration enabled the U.S. administration to continue funnelling aid to Pakistan, even as its army paid proxies to kill American troops. [Full article here]
Why and what makes Americans do this repeatedly? There mus be other goals that they have whose putative benefits outweigh the ever-present and ever-rising cost of supporting Pakistan. What is it (or) what are they?