Selig Harrison’s article titled, "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan," published in the Boston Globe of June 29th. Harrison had focused on the China-Pakistan nuclear deal and had highlighted several crucial and alarming scenarios for Pakistan, the U.S, India, and the global community.
His grim conclusion:
“Pakistan poses many dangers to the United States, notably its aid to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and the use of its territory for the training of would-be suicide bombers. But the greatest of all is that fissile material will be smuggled out of its nuclear facilities by undetected Islamist sympathizers and that a future leadership infiltrated by Islamists will risk a nuclear Armageddon in Mumbai or Washington.”
I had raised the question: What can – and MUST – be done urgently to mitigate, and avoid the frightful consequences of the conclusion of Harrison.
Since he wrote his piece four weeks ago, the US has come out strongly against the China-Pakistan nuclear deal and has declared that it will vote against an exemption for China to sell two civil nuclear reactors to Pakistan at the Nuclear Suppliers Group meeting, in a new move to step up pressure to get the controversial deal annulled (
http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jul/ ... at-nsg.htm).
At a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi of Pakistan on July 19, 2010, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the world community has reservations about a Pakistan-China deal for the supply of nuclear reactors and wanted the deal to be approved by the Nuclear Supplier’s Group. She said the NSG which recently examined the proposed deal, had “posed a series of questions that should be answered”.
A more recent report (
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-ste ... 77435.aspx) says, India is not leaving anything to chance and has intensified lobbying with key members of the 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) ahead of the nuclear cartel’s next meeting in Vienna. India has not only zeroed in on the ’Big 4’ in the NSG - the US, France, Russia and Britain - but is also reaching out to other middling NSG members to project the deal’s negative impact on the global non-proliferation regime and the fragile security situation in South Asia.
India’s counter-attack strategy will revolve around three key points. First, the Chinese deal to supply two additional reactors, Chashma-3 and Chashma 4, was not "grandfathered," under an earlier arrangement as China claims. China did not disclose two additional reactors at the time of joining the NSG in 2004. Second, Indian interlocutors will argue that there is no comparison between India’s deal with the US to that of China’s with Pakistan as New Delhi was granted the clean waiver on account of its widely acknowledged impeccable non-proliferation record. Thirdly, India will contend that it’s not an energy deal, but a ploy to contain New Delhi by bolstering Pakistan’s capacity to produce more nuclear weapons and will highlight the alleged abuse of foreign aid by Islamabad to modernize its military machine.
India is surprised that some NSG members like New Zealand, Austria and Ireland, who were so critical of the India-US nuclear deal, have not voiced objections to the Sino-Pakistan deal despite Islamabad’s dubious proliferation record as epitomized by its illegal A.Q. Khan network.
India’s apprehension is that given China’s growing global clout and its strong economic ties with virtually all influential NSG countries, the NSG may look the other way and let China go ahead with the deal which is clearly in violation of its existing guidelines.
Selig Harrison’s full article is at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/edito ... p-ed+pages
I received a wide range of interesting views by way of feedback. The first instalment of the responses (32) is reproduced below. In some cases they had to be edited/summarized because of space constraints. In view of the US decision, some of the views are now dated.
Sincerely,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/
FEEDBACK on Selig Harrison’s article on "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan"
1) In an article dated July 16, 2010 titled, "The China-Pakistan Nuclear “Deal”: Separating Fact from Fiction" (
http://carnegieendowment.org/files/china_pak_nuke1.pdf), Ashley Tellis, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, says:
Summary
China’s commitment to provide Pakistan with two additional civilian nuclear reactors has created great unease in the international nonproliferation community. While some compare this assurance to the U.S.-India nuclear cooperation agreement, the differences between the two are significant.
• Unlike the U.S.-India civilian nuclear initiative, whose terms were publicly debated, the Sino-Pakistani agreement is a secret covenant, secretly concluded.
• China appears willing to dismiss its obligations to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)—which it joined in 2004—by privately claiming that the prospective sale is grandfathered under a Sino-Pakistani contract dating back to the 1980s.
• Whereas the United States respected the international nonproliferation regime by requesting a special NSG waiver to permit nuclear trade with India, China seeks to short-circuit the NSG rather than appeal to its judgment.
The United States must convey to China its strong concern about the planned reactor sale to Pakistan. The integrity of the global nonproliferation system requires an orderly and coordinated process for managing change—which the NSG provides—and China, as a member of that group, should be permitted to consummate its prospective deal with Pakistan only if it first secures an NSG exemption from the current guidelines.
By leading international opposition to the Sino-Pakistani deal in its current form—both bilaterally and multilaterally—Washington can prompt Beijing to reconsider its plans. It would also encourage other countries to insist that Beijing respect the integrity of the global nonproliferation system overseen by the NSG. China has shown its willingness in the past to listen. It is time for the United States to raise its voice again.
Conclusion
The last act of the Sino-Pakistani reactor sale has thus not yet played out. The United States, acting in partnership with other NSG members, can still thwart the current version of this initiative, but it will require concerted pressure on Beijing in both bilateral and multilateral fora. Both avenues are important—and are mutually reinforcing. The Obama administration has begun to challenge Chinese actions in the latter, but it has been far more tepid in the former.
The record of the last decade suggests that the United States has been successful in impeding problematic Chinese nuclear sales to Pakistan whenever it has remonstrated with Beijing at very high levels of government in both capitals, and through clear and tough messages conveyed also by its partners and allies bilaterally as well as multilaterally—while always holding in reserve the implicit threat to withhold those forms of cooperation desired by China.
There is no reason why President Obama cannot sustain this record of American achievement if he invests time and attention in this issue, given the emphasis he has placed on managing nuclear proliferation. As Henry Sokolski has put it succinctly, “it would be a shame if this administration, which prides itself on reducing nuclear threats, should itself wink at China trading in sensitive nuclear technology to Pakistan outside of the nuclear rules” that bind the international community.
2) Kanwal Sibal, formerly India’s foreign secretary, says in an op-ed in The Telegraph of July 20, 2010 (
http://telegraphindia.com/1100720/jsp/o ... 694947.jsp): The US reaction to China’s new nuclear plans for Pakistan is most disturbing. For weeks, US reports prepared international opinion for a tepid American response to this frontal Chinese challenge to the non-proliferation regime and the NSG. It was speculated that the US and China had struck a deal under which China would support US-led sanctions against Iran in the security council against the US’s condoning of the Sino-Pakistan nuclear deal. It was also conveniently argued that the NSG guidelines were not legally binding, and that if China was bent on going ahead the US could do precious little, especially at this juncture of financial dependence on China. Not surprisingly, in a travesty of facts, the blame for creating such a situation was placed on the failure of the Bush administration to secure any non-proliferation concessions from India. The anti-India US non-proliferationists found a way to blame India for the Sino-Pakistan deal.
From India’s point of view, the US has to be most answerable if China and Pakistan get away with their deal without a condign response from the international community. The Indo-US nuclear deal was accompanied by stringent non-proliferation conditions, some at the cost of our sovereignty and dignity. India had to subject itself to a prolonged US legislative process with all the political sensitivities of having to fend off the extra-territorial application of US laws, besides having to undergo a supplicatory diplomatic exercise with NSG members to obtain their consent. If, as the Chinese argue, they and Pakistan are respecting their international obligations and the new power plants will be under IAEA safeguards, where was the need for India to be put in the wringer of a tortuous, conditions-laden process by the US? Why did the US pressure others not to cooperate with India until the US cleared the way? We too could have obtained nuclear cooperation by simply agreeing to put internationally assisted reactors under IAEA safeguards. The US cannot have different standards for China/Pakistan and for us. Like China, the US, too, has supported over the years ‘strategic stability’ in South Asia. It has overlooked in the past Sino-Pakistan nuclear transfers as it needed Pakistan’s support for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan and was reluctant to impose sanctions on China. History is in danger of repeating itself at India’s expense again. India must convey suitably to the US that the newly established strategic relationship with it will develop a huge fissure if it sacrifices India’s interests to protect its Sino-Pakistan relationship.
3) Ajit Pant, a Chicago based financial planner with the Premier Wealth Group: It is ironic that US Aid is being used to fund Pakistan’s illicit Nuclear Program and that too in full world view. This is sure to result in serious consequences not only for India but all anti terrorist nations...including the US. The US State Department, the UN, IAEA should all be approached to stop China and Pakistan from going ahead with the deal.
4) Anne Dos Santos, an adjunct professor at California State University Fullerton: The U.S. has to start treating Pakistan as a rogue state just like it does treat Iran. Not only has the U.S. to stop all aid to Pakistan but it has to enact sanctions against it just like it does for Iran. Action must be taken now.
5) Arvind K Mathur, Indian American military history and geopolitics buff: I think the Government of India has been crying hoarse about what Mr. Harrison is trying to say here. The issue is that it would take a really naïve group to assume that a military state formed out of a colonial system can let any one man like Abdul Quadeer Khan sell nuclear material around the world without doing it on behalf of the Pakistani government of the day. The Pakistanis have been creating bogeys like Khan to absolve its state policy of proliferation. They are doing the same with the numerous terror groups that they support, aid, arm and train.
To my mind it would be impossible for the United States not to know the level of two faced complicity the Pakistani military and its departments including the ISI openly, brazenly perpetrate before the world and most of this is aimed to fool America in terms of nuclear proliferation and terrorism. The real mystery is why does the United States close one eye in a deliberate attempt to let Pakistanis do what is clearly against US interests. What does it expect as quid pro quo? What great policy objective does the United States see to let the Pakistanis play an extremely dangerous game of nuclear proliferation on the one hand and terrorism on the other hand and not to mention the dire aspect of nuclear terrorism. Is it a wrong geopolitical calculation of the importance of the Pakistani State or the consequential dissolution of the Pakistani state? Is it the entrenched cold war establishment that still sees Pakistan as frontline state in its calculations against Russia and China? Or is it that the existing establishment has simply run out of ideas and its war gamed scenarios all lead to some conclusion that the US just does not find useful?
I think the US establishment still believes that it is insulated against whatever happens in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is clearly obsessed with Al Queda which is an amorphous mass of ideas that can be executed by any Islamic group anywhere in the world. Clearly the Pakistanis see leverage in the ideology of the Al Queda, they have to, they are all Islamic and the US just does not get how these ideologies work. The westernized way of logical thinking does not understand the tribal nature of the Islamic insurgencies around the world. Perhaps the illogical actions of these groups are just incomprehensible to the western way of thinking. The idea of the Jihadist bomber just does not make sense to the Western way of thinking. Westerners just do not get the religious fanatic who would kill himself to kill others and bring mayhem around the world.
I doubt the US leadership comprehends the extent of diabolical tyranny that the Pakistani state is capable of. It continues to believe in the assurances of the Pakistanis. Its only action seems to be to throw money at the problem, money that it does not have and its citizens do not wish to be spent in this manner. I think despite its overwhelming military power the United States has many times in history suffered simply because of, for want of a better word, its dumbness.
6) Ashok Kapur, distinguished professor emeritus, University of Waterloo, Ontario; author of forthcoming book ’India and the South Asian Strategic Triangle’: I am quite pessimistic about the Pakistan-China nuclear file. What can be done? Americans like David Albright, folks at the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Federation of American Scientists and State Dept non-proliferators need to weigh in. Unfortunately Ramanna of Princton University is running a hugh distraction by talking ceaselessly about the Indo-Pak. nuclear race as a result of the Canada-India nuclear deal. Pity he is muddying the waters. At the NSG meeting in New Zealand the members were reluctant to confront China - too many commercial and political interests are at stake. And the NPT review conference was a dud. So it looks like a free game for shadowy groups. I talk to people who know the ISI and they are fully in command vis-a-vis Taliban, US generals and the likes of Holbrooke. Poor Obama does not have a prayer to control the direction of China’s and Pakistan’s policies and the fallout in the region.
7) Ashok Karnik, a retired deputy director of Intelligence Bureau, Govt of India and now a free lance journalist focusing on security and allied matters: The concerns over nuclear material falling in the hands of Islamists are genuine and not just a scare-mongering cry.
The US has to get China to realise the danger.China’s friendship with Pakistan is one thing and nuclear proliferation quite another. Pakistan’s Government is not the issue but its lack of control over its territory and large chunks of population is the problem. US has to tackle China on this issue.
Secondly, the US owes it to itself and the world not to be an indirect instrument of destruction. How does the US use its leverage with Pakistan is the real question. The US must warn Pak that it does not accept Pakistan’s promises of retaining control over nuclear facilities.US should tie up its aid with physical control over or right of inspection of all civiilan and military facilities. A soft approach now would be too late as by the time the US unearths another Dr Khan, the nuclear trigger will be with the Islamists/Al Queda and their ilk. There is no time to experiment with diplomatic niceties.
Chandresh Saraiya, a community leader and practicing physician in Tampa Bay area in Florida: a. Terror has been used as an opportunity by many. The military in Pakistan has used this to extract money from the international community, mainly US.
b. By design, money given by US is used by authorities in Pakistan at will. This gives opportunity to manipulate and pursue other agenda. Significant portion of the money goes to US consultants and handlers. This amount is significant. Also significant portion of money goes to "handlers" in Pakistan. Thus Terror has been a booming business to many. All of these beneficiaries are also potential barriers for fixing the terror and stopping the influx of money.
c. Meanwhile terrorist elements in Pakistan will continue to flourish and will pose danger to everyone especially India and US.
What can we do ?
a. I think we must focus on building public opinion about this dangerous practice. One thing I thought was to get Selig Harrison on TV interview with Farid Zakaria and discuss the issue at length. Adding Thomas Friedman will be a plus. I think we should talk to Farid first and see how strongly he feels about this issue. If Farid is unwilling or does not support the concept, we can try another TV station. ? Fox. We could also have a panel of people interested in security issues in our region meet along with Selig Harrison. We can videotape this and put it on you tube and mass e mail to create public opinion.
b. We will also need support of US Congress to act on this by stopping/limiting funding. We will need help of political lobbyist in this. Is their any Indian American organization which can do this ?
c. We need help from Washington insiders to see how this fueling of fire can be stopped. Perhaps there are lobbyist firms who are best suited for this. Involvement of stakeholders of other countries such as U.K. Canada, Israel may be beneficial.
9) Dipankar Banerjee, a retired major general in the Indian Army, has been involved in a senior and directorial position in think tanks in India and the region for the last 23 years: Selig Harrison raises a very important issue, perhaps one with the most important potential consequence for global turmoil. Yet, I predict the world will be unable to respond to counter the threat.
The issue is far too complex and reflects the global power transtion the way it is at the moment. US is over a barrel on Afghanistan, with Obama’s second term at risk, hostage to Pakistan and economically dependent on China. One can confidently predict he will do anything to try rectify the situation, but his chances of success are slim. He will wait and watch and hope China will desist, and send some mild and not so mild protests.
India cannot officially take up this latest Chinese violation. A mix of "we too benefited" syndrome, plain desire not to upset both China and Pakistan and plain lethargy - inability to mount a diplomatic offensive by a foreign policy establishment that is totally under manned to even attempt such a task.
The rest of the NSG in spite of their "noble" intentions, will not dare stand up to China.
It is a near certainty that the terror and wmd mix will take place perhaps not so much in the future in a disintegrating Pakistan.
I am hosting a high level trilateral nuclear strategic conference in Singapore end this month, with senior Chinese-Indian and Pakistani specialists. Will raise this issue but I am sure will not get any satisfactory answers.
Frankly, am really at a loss.
10) Durga Sharma, a retired professor at Delhi University now lives partly in the US: Selig Harrison is correct about the danger posed by Pakistan as a terrorist state but remains short on the solutions to the problem. Here some solutions: Take out Pak nukes. Can be done by Israel and USA. Break the monster state into 3-4 smaller independent states.
Emasculate Pak army and ISI which are hand in glove in the Jihadi agenda.
Stop feeding the monster (Pak army and state ). Stop all aid.
Engage China the only patron. Involve India in this.
The caveat--India lacks guts and also means.USA has the means but lacks guts and foresight. China has its own agenda.
It was Great Britain who carried out such exercises in the 19th and early 20th centuries but it had guts and foresight. Modern Iraq and Turkey are creations of such exercises.
11) Farhatullah Sharif, who describes himself as a Hyderabadi Indian settled in the US -- not a professional journalist or political analyst but just a common-sense observer of what is going on in our world: In a nutshell, there is no prospect whatsoever of putting a leash on Pakistan as long as the US is mired in the war in afghanistan. All of us know this very well that we need Pakistan to be successful in Afghanistan and to our bad luck Pakistan is playing its cards very well indeed. No matter what Selig says, it is very hard for the administration to ignore this vital point and you might have recently read news about Pakistan negotiating some sort of deal between Karzai and the Talibans on the back of the US. It is so complicated, that anybody sitting in DC can plan, visualise and decide in theory but in practical terms and the ground realities are vastly different and that’s how we find ourselves in a limbo. We can only pray for the successful end to this war which has cost us billions and it really needs lot of courage and bold decisions from our leaders in DC.
12) Padmanabhan G Gopal, a retired Fortune 500 financial executive turned restaurateur: The US must realize the Byzantine game that Pakistanis are playing: Running with the hare and hunting with the hounds (that is playing both sides for the maximum benefit they can get: working with predatory and terrorist organizations and countries such as China, the Taliban, Lashkar e Toiba et al) at the same time claiming to be a US ally and talking peace with India.The sooner India, the US and the free world (I mean that in a factual sense) realize that they need to band together against the inevitable reckoning with fundamentalist Islamist forces headed by a nuclear armed Pakistan allied with a predatory China, the better. This axis of terrorists and predatory countries need to be faced squarely by the democracies of the world. Playing with China and Pakistan etc., knowing the outcome seems Neroesque on the US administration’s part.
13) Hosi Mehta, a business owner in the US: Is it possible to flood different newspapers all over US with solid facts that show the average American where all the aid is going and what it is being used for? When a policy needs to be changed and if there is enough pressure from the constituents on their respective senators and or representatives it does make a difference. What I am suggesting is a grass roots movement of education and awareness, it has to be consistent and over a period of time. Efforts could be targeted more to focus on decision makers and their constituents. There could be other more aggressive options also.
14) M. Varn Chandola, an attorney who runs an online legal referral service: At this time, the only unimaginative idea that comes to mind is writing to our state representatives to notify them of our concerns. Although I have never managed to successfully communicate with him,
Prof. Sumit Ganguly may have some useful suggestions. I look forward
to hearing from you and the other members on your listserv concerning
what action will be most appropriate.
15) Ted Raman, a Silicon Valley technologist: My question is why sell plutonium reactors? Can’t they sell non plutonium reactors? I agree100% with the author. China should be made to realize that this is not business as usual. I suggest:
a. all interested persons should sign an urgent petition to Congress and Senators
b. India probably should get EU/ Russia involved.
c. India can move closer to US in defense.
16) Jaya Kamlani, a retired IT and management consultant in the US, she is presently writing a book on rural development of India: During this November election, we need to vote the Congress Reps and Senators out who want to still provide unconditional aid to Pakistan. Just send out a list of all these Congressmen/women. It’s no secret that the Pakistan-Taliban has taken over the govt. there -- the Taliban are in charge. The article mentions the following: "Several confidantes of Khan have told me that he is ready to name names. In their study of the Khan scandal, Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark concluded that Khan was “the fall guy. This covert trade in doomsday technology was not the work of one man, but the foreign policy of a nation and supervised by Pakistan’s ruling military clique.’’ I believe Pakistan would kill A.Q. Khan before anyone gets to question him, because he would expose the Pakistani officials involved.
17) Kirit Desai, a research scientist in polymer science & solid state physics, is now a technical & financial consultant working in business & individual project planning: Pakistan-China nexus is a sad story of modern day politics where most nations including US & China have shown poor vision on mortgaging the future of our next generations just for immediate profits which may not last even the time of one generation. It is also ironic that obedient India is a direct hit of such not-so-thoughtful behavior of the major powers. Well, China may be a direct partner in such criminal behavior where lives of billions of people on the Indian subcontinent could be in jeopardy, but the US can’t be absolved from its role of major accessory where its billions of dollars are going directly to Pakistani army’s coffers to subsidize such monstrous projects on nuclear energy. Selig Harrison has spelled it out with clarity, but the US media has completely ignored it just as the US government - it is all mind boggling, especially as one sees the roles of both entities in event like BP’s oil spill in the Gulf. If they take on this issue with even half of the energy spent over BP - our world would be much safer tomorrow.
Selig Harrison has every reason to worry about tomorrow.
A few things the Obama administration can do right away.....
(a) Any aid to Pakistan should be direct aid for public works projects & accelerating the process of democratic rule which has been stifled by the Army junta under many names. Any mischievous overtures by China must be dealt with a carrot-n-stick approach.
(b) India should be a priority to strengthen both countries’ (US-India) status on world stage. India’s entry to UNSC should be expedited even at China’s expense. A strong India is needed for the US in a global theater more now than at any time in the past.
(c) The US must influence Pakistan to remain a friendly neighbor with India. A prosperous India & a stable Pakistan are in the best interests of both the US & China.
(d) China’s rise is good for many but its hegemonic ambitions must be reined in at any cost. US has no reason to abdicate that responsibility even in the debt situation.
(e) First & foremost: Declare that Pakistan’s elevation to the nuclear club is not in the best interests of all - just like a few other nations at the moment. Pakistan needs to prove on stability, sanity & sincerity before it comes to the table. China can’t circumvent the process for its own self indulgence.
This is a broad line policy & it needs a lot more microscopic details for fine tuning.
18) Kishan Bhatia is an Indian American social and political activist interested in US-India friendship and catalyzing rural education for Indian development: I agree with Selig Harrison’s observations and suggestions. I believe President Obama is about to realize the gravity of America’s engagement in AfPak region. He knows or should know that Pakistan is dominated by Reactionary Fundamentalist Muslims, who are driven to aggressively promoting regional hegemony using its potent military power.
19) Kumar G. Bhatia. a long time resident of the Seattle area and a Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: The US is too dependent on the Chinese due to the US fiscal deficits and trade imbalances. The US administration and even US business do not know how to deal with China. Both have a poor record in this area. Of course, the goal should be to bring China into a responsible international fold and not pursue policies which are inimical to each other. If the US can take the risk of getting tough with China, then the US can threaten China with expulsion from the Nuclear Suppliers Group. I don’t expect that to happen. Therefore, it would be unwise for India to rely too much on the US whose policies seem to have a short term focus.
India and other countries worried about Pakistani nuclear proliferation need to figure out how to cope with the situation. The suggestion from Ambassador Blackwell about Pashtunistan is a good idea and will separate the Taliban from the ex-Northern Alliance groups/territories. India should pursue its interests in this regards and hopefully is doing so. As pointed out in the same article, US should support such an arrangement since this is the only way for the US to extricate itself from its doomed Af-Pak policy. If these events take place, then the breakup of Pakistan and its nuclear weapons need to be managed by India, US and China. Would India welcome the erstwhile Pakistani states in its folds under some arrangement? The Sindhis, the Baluchis and others went with Pakistan based on the Lahore declaration where they would have had much more local governance in a federal arrangement. Instead they have faced a Punjab dominate military rule for the most part, and feel powerless in their own country.
I think India should aspire to create an EU like entity in South Asia including Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. There are many risks and the cost may be too high but perhaps this is the only hope for a lasting peace. In order to be successful, India needs to become the growth engine of South Asia with model governance. Hopefully we will see it in the next 10 years if the current political class is replaced with a more honest and wiser political class.
20) A professor of computer science in the US: Pakistan itself is not a problem but it has been assisted (not entirely unintentionally) to make itself a problem. The blame lies on the two countries who are constantly supporting Pakistan to satisfy their selfish motives. One country treats Pakistan as its puppy and feeds it high energy/high protein food that makes the country highly irresponsible. This implies that Pakistan will not dare to harm that country even though the country (China) is geographically quite close. The other country is geographically far away so it feels that it is quite safe from direct harmful activities of Pakistan. Consequently India directly suffers.
History indicates that a country that creates problems through proxy eventually suffers. The supporters of Pakistan must be reminded repeatedly about this fact. If the supporting countries reform their activities, Pakistan will come to its senses in no time. It has no muscles, no bones of its own, its blood is borrowed. If lenders are reminded and continuously reminded then only the situation will become safe. I think and to some extent sure that one of the countries funneling large amount of money as aid knows that monetary and political returns are zero. Unfortunately, they continue to keep the support flowing. India will continue to suffer and live in unsafe surroundings. So in summary, supporter countries need to be brought to their senses.
21) M. Lal Goel, professor emeritus of policial science and director of international studies at the University of West Florida: My response:
a)The nuclear danger originating from Pakistan should be publicized widely to raise public consciousness. Send Harrison’s excellent short essay to all members of the Congress. Release it to the press. Request Selig to go on TV to broadcast his incisive analysis. Seek funding for his efforts from the GOI. But moving GOI is more difficult than moving a mountain.
b)Organize the Indian American community behind an effort to censure Pakistan. The Indian communty was active during the Civilian Nuclear deal between India and the US. The Indian community has felt betrayed by GOI’s shortsighted steps about visa renewals and passport surrendering ill-thought policies.
c)The GOI should sensitize American administration to the dangers from Pakistan and the possibility of radical infiltration in the military command. GOI reps are not hard bargainers. They are usually charmed by fancy words. Hire accomplished academics to do the job of negotiations rather than bureaucrats.
d)Work to defeat those in the American executive and legislative branches who do not perceive the threat from Pakistan.
22) Manohar Awati, a retired vice admiral in the Indian Navy having once commanded its largest operational command, during 1980-83:
Ever since its separation from the parent state India, Pakistan has been coddled by successive American administrations. The reason for this mollycoddling is that this new nation gouged out of India was the creation of a very deep and dangerous ( to world peace ) plot of the Anglo Americans. They needed a pliable state on the NW frontier of india. When Indian independence came up on the horizon towards the end of WWII, Roosevelt supported it in public, to the chagrin of Churchill. Churchill convinced Roosevelt that yes, by all means let us have an independent India outside the British Commonwealth, if you like, but please remember that a Congress Government in Delhi led by that dangerous socialist Nehru is NOT going to support, let alone promote, our post war Central Asian interests and strategy to contain that terrible scourge called the USSR led by the tyrant Stalin. We need a pliable state to border Afghanistan. They used the Hindu Muslim divide to get around Roosevelt’s initial uneasiness. As a true liberal he did not like this Machiavellian plot to sunder India into two, nay three, parts. Real politics won in the end. Both Dean Acheson and later George Marshall went along with the British conspiracy, with Jinnah’s complicity, to partition India.
It was to be the biggest strategic mistake ever committed by the Anglo Saxon nations. That mistake is now coming home to roost. There never was, and there is none today, a basic civilisational divide between the common Hindu and the common Muslim of the subcontinent. The divide is totally artificial, created by the rich, feudal classes on both sides for their own very narrow, anti civilisational interests. Over the centuries, Indian Islam had come to wear a totally Indian garb, quite different from the desert garb of classical Islam, as to be almost unrecofnisable in the land of its birth. Of course, over the past sixty years the zealots have attempted a turn around to the more extremist Middle East variety preached by Abdul Wahab. I do not wish to bore you with that. Suffice it to say that the divide between India and Pakistan is an artificial, even a superficial one. The need for this prologue is to push my point of view on Selig Harrison’s article before you, to try to make you understan the genesis of all the current uproar over Pak’s dangerous Army-ISI-feudal politics sponsored policies Very unfortunately the Pentagon for some very good reasons known only to those within its five walls, will not step back, nor will it allow the administration to step back from the totally unjustified ( in my eyes ) policy of almost unfettered military aid to Pakistan which eventually is deployed against India. It will be no different this time round. That is my first premise.
Now to turn to Chinese interest in keeping the Indo-Pak pot on the boil.
China considers India as Enemy Number One. That has been repeatedly publicised in its controlled media. China thinks India has become too big for its boots and must be cut to size. The size is still uncomfortably big for China to handle. She wants to see India in the dumps. To that end she aids insurgencies in India, communist or otherwise makes no difference. She has inserted her big finger in Kashmir, in the North East, propped up Pakistan as an All Weather, All Purpose Ally, given Pakistan its nuclear know how, actually given it a bomb, induced North Korea to give Pakistan the wherewithall to carry its nuclear weapons across the border to threaten India with its First Use policy. China has now graduated to wishing to see India balkanised with the help of a Maoist insurgency, supposedly based on tribal unhappiness with their fate in India, with the help of Pakistan and other assorted allies if she can find them. Well and good. None too early, we are waking up from our stupor. So it may not be a walkover as it would have been even a couple of years ago.
Meanwhile Pakistan makes strides in her nuclear weapons programme, in ensuring its strategic interests in Afghanistan, despite the near chaos which rages within its boundaries. The Army-ISI combine is well focussed. It continues to woo the Pentagon with hopes and promises of a strategic base to continue the Great Game, whatever that may be these days, while it plays cat and mouse with the US administration. Military aid, including the much appreciated F 16s continue to be delivered. Pakistan is still the great ally of the US outside of NATO. So be it. Now as Selig has feared the stockpile of bombs and of bomb material may fall into wrong hands as such things have a habit of doing, especially if those who are supposed to guard the compound are busy eating it. There is Shia Iran next door, about to go nuclear. You can imagine the tremors in extreme Sunni Riyadh. It is on the cards that the Wahabi element in the Pakistan establishment may consider duty bound to help their Saudi brothers with a couple of bombs to hold the hated Shia neighbour in check. Better a Jew, even a Hindu than the hated apostate, Shia. There has been a spate of bombings of Shia and Sufi places of worship in Pakistan, without doubt aided and abetted by the Wahabi Sunni establishment. Further there is now increasing evidence of support in Pakistan to the Uighur insurgency in China. That is also likely to be Saudi backed. Saudis are inclined to do that kind of thing, evidence their past conduct to propagate their desert creed around the world. All this has China worried about its great, all weather ally. Call it theft, if you will, but the threat of pilferage or plain disappearance of fissile material from Pakistan’s inventory is no longer a possibiulity. It is a near range certainty. Indeed I am convinced that the rogue elements in that country, of which there is now an ever increasing number, under the guise of propagating Wahabi Sunni Islam, hand in glove with what I will term as A.Q. Khan elements, make that a certainty. Selig Harrison has done an important duty in warning us of the doomsday ahead. Let China put her mind to that possibility rather than worry about the non existent threat to her march to Great Power status from India. The threat is in Pakistan, NOT in India. Let Obama too rein in his Pentagon and its curious love for Wahabi Sunni Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The much vaunted Punjabi/Pathan military too has been repeatedly put in its place by a ’ Bania ` military. The Pentagon needs to mull over this reality. Unfortunately they continue in their misguided admiration of a tyrrannical army, witness the cheque for five hundred million dollars presented to Qureshi by Secretary Clinton the other day.
23) Manu Sharma, who has an active interest in politics and foreign policy of South Asia: Pakistan conundrum for USA symbolizes the make or break moment for US-’the hyperpower’ at the world stage in the 21st century. Pakistan as a state and society stands in shambles today, the massive population growth, lack of new economic engines, increasing wahabist radicalization of general population and a troubled neighbourhood have all left the state of Pakistan essentially bankrupt and in a failed state.
To prevent a catastrophic failure or implosion of Pakistan it is imperative for the international community to aid and support the society and people of Pakistan. However the aid and support for people has been mistaken for aid and support to state! The state in turn is controlled by the Pakistan army, therefore most of the aid or moneys intended for the Pakistani people ends up in the coffers of the Pak-army.
The Pakistan army has tried to be too clever by half and kept the pot boiling by using a large chunk of aid money for sustaining a military that is not commensurate to their strategic and economic size. As a result of this diversion we observe that the condition of the general populace has not improved one bit while the Pakistani army has been able to build up a flotilla/armada in its quixotic quest for strategic parity with India. As a side-effect of this buildup the Pakistani security scenario has undergone deep deterioration on account of growing inequalities and desperation in the general populace, this increasing threat of terrorism is being used by Pakistani army to further extort money from USA and European donors.
The real danger of a massive buildup or arms and a concurrent radicalization of the general populace is that the Pakistani army may be ripe for a coup by Islamists/Wahabists with the intent of establishing an orthodox state in the near future. Even if an internal coup or "shift of loyalties" may be far fetched right now there is an increasing danger of "sympathetic elements" facilitating the usage of the very same weapons supplied by the donors upon the donors themselves!
This is a danger that is not India’s or USA’s alone, I would suggest that the Pakistan of today is akin to a loaded pistol falling off the stairs while all the nations stand and watch-petrified and silently wishing for it to not go off in their direction, none is making an effort to stop the fall!
My policy prescriptions based on Mr Harrison’s research are as follows:
a) Most important of all the nuclear installations and weapons of Pakistan must be brought under some kind of auditing and accounting framework. The danger of not doing that is, there is no reliable estimate of vulnerable fissile material and hence by default there will be no advance intelligence should such matter (god forbid) come in the hands of extremists. The objections of Pakistani army notwithstanding US, being the sole prop of Pakistani economy at least deserves to know that much! Granted that the US may know to some degree about the vulnerable material, other nations on the threat radar also need to know lest they are caught unawares.
b) The aid to Pakistan should be dedicated to society and people in more than equal measure vis a vis the military aid. Kerry-Lugar bill is a step in the right direction and needs to be strengthened and made much more stringent.
c) There should be greater public debate in the donor countries about their aid money funding the arms buildup in Pakistan. Especially given the turbulent and fragile state of global economic recovery is it prudent to buildup an army that faces the existential threat of going rogue anytime? The legislators and policy makers in all the donor countries should take the matter up for debate and ask penetrating questions to the executive in charge.
d) The current Obama administration should adopt a statesman like line and stop pursuing short term goals in the region that are heavily predicated on the Pakistani army’s cooperation (Hint: AF-Pak policy has been lacklustre). Instead they should use regional consensus building to achieve anything of note. That way their dependence on the Pak-army will decline.
24) Martin Sherman, 2009/10 visiting Israeli Schuterman Scholar at USC, lectures in security studies at Tel Aviv University. Ministerial advisor to Yitzhak Shamir’s government. Served for 7 years in operational capacities in the Israeli security establishment:
I believe that neither India not Israel has a friend in the White House.
25) Mihir Das, who has spent his entire life in higher education in India:
It amazes me to see our leaders never seem to learn from history..... Would the Washington think-tank listen before it is too late?
26) Narendra Singh Sarila, retired Indian ambassador and author of the definitive work on the partition of India, titled, "The Shadow of the Great Game : The Untold Story of India’s Partition":
My rapid reaction:
a) Independently, I hold the same view as does Selig Harrison. He is too serious and mature an observer-- perhaps the best informed on Asian affairs in Washington—to indulge in speculation or sensationalism.
b) Pleading with China or pussy footing with Pakistan will not help. In fact, Krishna should not raise the issue in Islamabad; ignore it while talking to them. Only the U.S. is in a position to do something. And there is where our efforts should concentrate-- but without loud talk.
c) First our Ambassador in Washington should make a list of U.S. legislators, if necessary by consulting Harrison, with whom she should discuss the issue, listening rather than pleading. Secondly, do the same with the administration, the White House staff, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen (at a convenient opportunity), and of course Hillary Clinton. Thirdly, when Gen James Jones is here we should ask for information on this deal and enquire if any steps are being planned to meet this reported development. The Americans can emasculate the deal through the IAEA. I doubt they will threaten to withdraw aid if Pak. goes ahead.
d) Pak is not going to modify its anti Indian policy as a result of the gestures we make. Rather it fortifies their belief that their policy of a thousand cuts is working. Of course, we want peace with Pakistan. But as they say you cannot extract butter from a bottle with a straight finger. Nor unless you can create a certain awe in the heart of the other country can you have friendship with it. We are growing, Pakistan much less. The time will come for peace with Pak, it is not yet. Our pussy footing merely postpones that day of peace. Rather, our diplomacy should concentrate on the border settlement with China. It will be stronger in 10 years and then even more intransigent.
27) Naresh Mansukhani, style consultant to top CEOs of fortune five hundred companies with a very distinctive interest in USA and India relationship: The real problem has been China all along. Pakistan has become a master of the leverage game. Choke China and Pakistani terrorism will cease to exist for India, USA and the rest of the World. It doesn’t take a genius to figure this out.
China with one stroke has the USA, India in principal and rest of the world boggled down in a very expensive game in which the Chinese are getting richer and the rest of world poorer. The amount of resources India has to apply in North and the East would have been well spent on eradicating hunger and poverty. Keep India poor and drain the resources of USA is the game plan of China.
Like any master chess player, one has to keep all the possible scenarios and its benefits or repercussions on the table and plan the game accordingly. I think I understand the Chinese game pretty well and all the players who are playing defense (rest of the world) unfortunately. The time actually is ripe to call the Chinese bluff and send them back to drawing board to rethink their foreign policy vis a vis India and rest of the world.
28) Nirmal Choubey, an NJ based retired professional very active in community affairs: Please do not expect US to do any thing that is not in their immediate interest. Like corporations who think as far as the next stock owners meetings, the politicians look at the next election. India should make themselves strong in every way possible to meet any threat that they foresee. China and Pakistan pose the most immediate threat as far as I am concerned. Any alliance that is necessary to reduce this threat should be undertaken. India should be internally strong as well by ensuring better governance, education etc.
29) Pal Luthra, a software engineering manager in the US, retired from IT after 41 years and currently starting up his own company: I think the US needs to deal with Pakistan and China squarely and straight! We are playing into their strategy. Putting up stiff trade barriers against China might even revive US economy.
30) Prabir K. Bagchi, chair, department of decision sciences, School of Business, The George Washington University: Selig has put it very well--nothing much to add. U.S. will not take a tough stand.
31) Preet Malik, former ambassador of India and retired secretary of GOI: Harrison has himself included the main action that the US Administration should be taking. Its largesse is largely responsible for the continuation of the irrational streak and perverted policy that the Pakistan military and civilian regime follows and gets away with because the US Administration is unable to take action to control and help dismantle the hub of terrorism that Pakistan has acknowledgedly become. What needs also to be taken into account is the Saudi connection which continues to fund both directly and indirectly the jihadist terrorist organisations and supports Pakistan via budgetary support. Again this is not a new element it has been there for a long time and is linked directly to the belief within the Saudi monarchy that this is the best means of keeping itself safe.
What the US and the international community in particular have to undertake is an active action oriented policy of sanctions against Pakistan including the denial of all military oriented assistance to its defence institutions unless it (the Pakistan military establishment) acts to effectively destroy the Jihadist elements and organisations most of whom have been developed and continue to obtain institutional support from within the Pakistan governmental institutions which are directly controlled by the Army. Half measures shall not get any results whether these are Afghanistan related or Pakistan-centric ostensibly to contain terrorist and or militant organisations that are rooted within Pakistan and have both a regional and an international agenda which is a direct threat to peace and stability.
Pressure has to be brought by the USA and the NATO countries as well as Russia and Japan on the PRC to prevent it from continuing its policy of extending nuclear support which has a clear weapons related programme direction to a country which is a known proliferator. China has done this with all countries that pose a global strategic threat. Pakistan, North Korea are obviously among them. It has to be confronted by an international community that would be unanimous in adopting a policy of containment if the PRC persists in proliferating nuclear weapons capabilities.
32) Pushpendra Singh, retired major general in the Indian Army: Pakistan has been bleeding and blackmailing USA for most of its 60-odd years of existence. It has succeeded only because the USA has turned a Nelson eye to its myriad subterfuges and adopted expediency as a policy, particularly in Pakistan’s case. It failed to rein in AQ Khan when he was developing the N-bomb – with Chinese help (another convenient ally at that time). US also helped Zia in creating the Taliban to take on the Soviets – never mind that a majority of the weapons went to equipping J&K terrorists. Now all three bogeymen are haunting Washington.
The obvious answer is to take on the three issues head-on, but diplomacy is also the art of the possible. Here’s my take on what USA should do:
a. ** Congress must enact a law seeking special and intrusive audits of all aid to Pakistan focussing on its end-use. This would ensure US taxpayers’ money actually contributes to enhancing its security, as intended.
b. ** Compel the military, Pakistan’s real rulers, to rein-in the ISI. This is easier said than done. Hence ISI should be infiltrated and its clandestine activities exposed and presented to its bosses to help in convincing them to fall in line. Finally, Mossad-style operations could be planned.
c. **Recognise that there are no good-Taliban, the fount of all terror groups is the Rawalpindi GHQ. Taliban fighters based within Pakistan are also combating US forces in Afghanistan. Similarly, J&K-centred terrorists are equally capable of reinforcing Afghanistan. All such groups are an impediment to the emergence of a stable, moderate and responsible Pakistani nation. Hence Pakistan must dismantle its terror network completely.
d. **As regards the nuclear reactors, I would add to Selig Harrison’s idea that US should condition new aid to Pakistan on its termination of nuclear material purchases from China. The special audit must also make Pakistan come clean on its funding for the additional reactors.
e. **It may well emerge that the source of funds would be attributed to Saudi Arabia, for whom the Paks maybe surrogating their Sunni-bomb to counter the Ayatollahs in Tehran.
f. ** A dangerous world is emerging with a multitude of N-weapon states. The source of all this proliferation is China, which facilitated and tested the Pak bomb – under USA’s proverbial Nelson eye. China probably helped N-Korea (or allowed the Paks to do so) and acquiesced in Islamabad-sponsored AQK proliferation to Libya and Iran.
g. **Though China holds most of the aces vis-a-vis USA, it is deeply protective of its image as a responsible gobal player. Thus it can be tackled in the NSG as Harrison has suggested. Its huge investment in US sovereign funds also makes it vulnerable to any significant devaluation of this asset. Hence US has a reasonable clout. It only needs to summon political will.
h. ** Finally, US must reduce its dependence on the Pakistan-jugular in routing logistics to the Afghan war-effort. It can source as much of the materiel as possible from Russia or other former Soviet states and route this through the North. Besides, it can pay Pakistan a fee for all the supplies that successfully reach Afghanistan; thereby the Paks would have a stake in ensuring its safe passage.
No wonder US find herself in this mess. I always belived in stupidness of this funny guy. He has no idea about what he is talking about. Because of such wise guy US ended up paying Bakistanis to kill US soliders. What a brilliant plan.
