|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Following article appeared in The
Daily Telegraph on
30 March 2010. The West should be a better friend to Pakistan
In Karachi too
power is in short supply, while throughout the country water shortages are
affecting crops. As the 28 million people who live in Pakistan’s two
largest cities sweat it out, they could be forgiven for being ambivalent about
their country’s support for our war on al-Qaeda and the Taliban-led insurgency
in its tribal areas and over the border in Afghanistan. Both cities have
suffered terrible losses in terrorist attacks which were carried out in
retaliation against Islamabad’s military, logistical and intelligence support
for our war – many are worse off today than when the war began. Today, the
G8 countries have announced a new economic initiative to help those living in
Pakistan’s tribal areas because their support is “critical for global
security”. Friends of
Democratic Pakistan, in which Britain, the EU and the United States play key
roles, have targeted these same areas to make sure those which suffer most in
the war are quickly rebuilt and given the social and physical infrastructure
they need to thrive. But what about the rest of the country where the suspicion
that America, Britain and the EU are fair weather friends is deeply engrained? When I visited
Karachi last week, I was asked what I see as the main differences between India
and Pakistan. I said the most obvious is that India is confident and
outward-looking, a global economic player focused on taking its place at the
top table rather than its local squabble with Pakistan. Pakistan on the
other hand is febrile, parochial, and obsessed with its larger neighbour, and
this is reflected in India’s ambitious scientific and engineering achievements.
In the last few years it has developed the world’s cheapest car, mounted a
highly successful lunar mission and its companies have bought iconic firms like
Jaguar and Land Rover. Pakistani entrepreneurs and scientists on the other hand
have achieved very little. But I felt
guilty as I said it. Pakistan has been the West’s plaything since General Zia Islamicised the country to suit our cold war needs in
Afghanistan. Instead of encouraging the country to develop its economy and
invest in science and education, we nodded in approval as mosques were built on
every street corner and madrassas became the
main institution for educating the nation’s children. As long as the country
was sending a steady stream of Mujahideen across the
border to fight the Soviet occupation, we didn’t much care about the broader
and long-term impact on the country. Today we blame
the country for what we helped it become and instead of helping it emerge as an
outward looking economy, we encourage dependence (and obedience) by our careful
distribution of aid. When Pakistan’s army chief and foreign minister
visited Washington earlier this month, they came away with $1 billion in
military aid, a paltry $125 million to support its collapsing energy sector and
a flat rejection of its request for the U.S to open up its textile markets to
Pakistani exports. It also dashed
its hopes of a civil nuclear energy partnership like the one being fine-tuned
with India right now. In this Pakistan is being punished for the
proliferation activities of Dr A.Q Khan in a different era. It has been
suggested that even if President Obama backed such a deal, he would not get it past Congress. But the President is persuasive, and the
Congress might also see long-term benefits for American nuclear energy
companies as it did in India. Similarly, the
European Union has failed to back Pakistan’s requests for duty-free access to
its markets which would allow the country to trade its way to greater
stability. We are “Friends of Democratic Pakistan”, but only just. Better
friends might offer a helping hand up rather than manipulative hand-outs. Courtesy: The Daily Telegraph Last updated: 31 March 2010
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||