|
Where's the Money?
Christina Lamb is in Islamabad
Writing under the title "Where's the money?" in Sunday Times of August 10, Christina Lamb reveals details of her interview with Pakistan's ruler Asif Zardari. She says that Mr Zardari told her that 250-300 million Dollars of the Billion Dollars Pakistan receives from America every year was given to the military but the rest of the money is unaccounted for. She says that Asif Zardari claims, "the American aid may have gone to fund rogue members of the military intelligence, the ISI, who were last week accused by Washington of assisting the Taliban and jihadi groups rather than rooting them out".
There is no reason to believe that she put words into the mouth of Zardari although it might be claimed that he was quoted 'out of context'; she appears to be right. This explains why Asif Zardari placed the ISI under his trusted accomplice - Rehman Malik - just before Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani left for an official visit to the USA. Asif Zardari's target is not just the ISI, his objective is much more sinister. In simple English, Zardari is saying that Musharraf (meaning the Army) betrayed the country (by accepting the role in the war on terror) and betrayed America by helping the Taliban instead. He also appears to be saying, "the betrayed should get together and sort out this rogue army?" I believe that is what he means. That is clearly his message even though he underlined his theme by dubious logic saying: it was the military action that started the insurrection in Baluchistan and in FATA.
The benign explanations of such delusions is that Asif Zardari - like the 'father' of Pakistan's atom bomb, Dr. Qadeer Khan - just cannot hold back when interviewed by 'foreign correspondents'. Quite often, in an attempt to evade responsibility, they allude towards culpability by others, who they see as unfriendly or hostile. Dr Qadeer Khan was repeatedly reminded of his responsibility under the Official Secrets Act but he just could not resist the temptation of talking to foreign correspondents frankly, meaning irresponsibly. He went to the High Court complaining his fundamental rights had been violated. But the Court passed an order restraining him from talking to the press. If the affliction of Asif Zardari is the same, he will also need to be constrained by a court order to stop him from going overseas and giving interviews to the press particularly to foreign correspondents.
But there is a less benign and more credible explanation of Zardari's conduct. It might actually be his desire (which could become policy in time) to get together with India and America to 'cut the army to size'. That does make a lot of sense from the standpoint of our enemies. It would take a lot of fighting and a lot of cost in men and material to cut down, for example, three divisions of the Pakistan Army. But it will entail no cost, just a 'friendly ruler' in Pakistan to disband three divisions and render ineffective the entire armed forces of Pakistan. The PPP Defence Minister has said on several occasions, "Why do we need such a big Army? If we have friendly relations with India, we can cut down the size of the armed forces". Asif Zardari has said, "we should forget about Kashmir and build trade with India instead".
The people of Pakistan did not know that voting for the PPP is a vote for capitulation to India. They have better wake up. Asif Zardari stands for capitulation to foreign enemies of Pakistan. In his interview with Christina Lamb he goes even further than capitulation; he has invited India and America to join him in his fight against Pakistan's Armed Forces.
Anti-state forces are powerful but not yet in power in Pakistan. The people are alert and are not easily swayed. The campaign to oust Musharraf is a vital FIRST STEP in the defeat of the anti-state forces. LET US TAKE ONE STEP AT A TIME.
|