In Focus

Kerry-Lugar Bill –

The lesser of two evils?

By Salman Latif

There has been a lot of hue and cry over the Kerry-Lugar Bill passed by the US Congress. It's about the 7.5 billion dollar aid package to be given to Pakistan and the terms and conditions associated with this bill. As usual, as soon as the bill was passed and brought into national stream of debate, many people started to cash in on the anti-US sentiments of the masses by speaking against the bill and against the US to win people's sympathies. Sadly, this tactic, as always, works with our masses and they tend to accept the word of such people.

However, after paying some close attention, one realises that those who are putting up the loudest show against the bill are the ones who haven't apparently even read its original text. They have no idea of what the bill contains and are busy debating over assumed notions and clauses picked from other, unauthentic sources.

In this article, I will try to unveil certain myths about KLB that have been floating on text messages through cell phones. And I invite all the readers to actually download a copy of the bill and read it for themselves. This will give them a clearer and more real picture of the situation.

1 – Army will not interfere in politics:

Well…that's true – the bill asks for a mechanism to keep army at bay – at barracks, to be exact. But, is that not exactly what a proper democracy demands and so does our own constitution? I am quite unable to grasp why a sane being would even object to it!

The exact clause reads:

"CERTIFICATION. The certification required by this subsection is a certification to the appropriate congressional committees by the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Director of national Intelligence, that the security forces of Pakistan--

....(3) the security forces of Pakistan are not materially and substantially subverting the political or judicial processes of Pakistan

2 – Army's major postings will be approved by the US:

Rubbish! I wonder what sort of 'creative minds' come up with these rumours – but then again considering the literacy rate in our homeland and the mob psychology of clinging to everything anti-US, it is understandable why people give space to such lameness. Well…as a matter of fact, there's no such clause in the whole bill. Here's the original clause: 

"An assessment of the extent to which the government of Pakistan exercises effective civilian control of the military, including a description of the extent to which civilian executive leaders and parliament exercise oversight and approval of military budgets, the chain of command, the process of promotion for senior military leaders, civilian involvement in strategic guidance and planning, and military involvement in civil administration…"

The bill only asks for the army postings to be done by the civilian government, as is done in all democracies around the globe and as is very desirable in our country, too.

3 – There will be no restrictions on US citizens (read Black Water) in Pakistan.

Again, nonsense. There's absolutely no clause in the bill that asks for such a thing. 

4 – US will be given access to any person related to nuclear energy.

The bill, in its connotations, only implies that the US will keep an eye on any possible occurrence of nuclear proliferation from our end and if it happens, will cut short the aid package, stopping immediately the next instalment. It's obvious that a country which's giving us billions in aid wants to ensure that the same money wouldn't be used towards undesirable ends.

"c) Certification- The certification required by this subsection is a certification by the Secretary of State, under the direction of the President, to the appropriate congressional committees that--

(1) the Government of Pakistan is continuing to cooperate with the United States in efforts to dismantle supplier networks relating to the acquisition of nuclear weapons-related materials, such as providing relevant information from or direct access to Pakistani nationals associated with such networks."

Here, the bill says that the specific lump of the amount being given by the US will be delivered after the Secretary of State affirms that Pakistan or any Pakistani official is not involved in nuclear proliferation. Of course access to 'Pakistani national associated with such networks' is to be granted after the said individuals are proved to be guilty by the government of Pakistan.

5 – Aid will be given to persons, not Pakistani government.

Persons are an intended miscreant's replacement for non-governmental organizations that the actual aid package talks about. To quote the exact statement:

"PREFERENCE FOR BUILDING LOCAL CAPACITY-- The President is encouraged, as appropriate, to utilize Pakistani firms and community and local non-governmental organizations in Pakistan, including through host country contacts, and to work with local leaders to provide assistance under this section…"

That's precisely the original statement. However, the aid is still to be doled out to the government when it'd have been far better off in the hands of standard, well-reputed NGOs working here, considering the non-transparent spending of such aids in the hands of governmental officials. Nevertheless, the myth is a mere rumour, albeit sadly so.

6 - ISI will work under the American Joint Chief of Staff.

Now that's the most hilarious one. I am, literally, quite baffled at the creativity of the creators of these rumours. This one, as are most of the rest, is totally unfounded and baseless.

Having done with that, I'd say that there's nothing wrong with the bill, really, when considering it in its entirety. True, the language of the bill is somewhat commanding and hence rude, but that's not important enough to make it an issue. Those whining over the language actually need to complain against accepting foreign aid and taking yet another temporary opium injection for our crumbling economy, for that's what all the recent aid packages have been; no long-term planning has been done through these aid packages and one half of them simply vanishes with the governmental affairs and accounts (no wonder - we boast of having, after all, the largest cabinet) and the other half never makes it to the actual reforms it is intended for. That's where the actual problem lies. We need better economic policies that can lead us to self-sufficiency and help us get rid of the need to get foreign loans and aids.

The only thing about the bill that's unacceptable to our masses is that it's straight-forward. The US has two ways of saying 'help us in Afghanistan' -- one is by asking Pakistan to be an ally in the Afghan fiasco- and the other one is to ask our army to protect US operations in Afghanistan by taking care of this side of the border. That's what the bill does and that's where our false patriotism is stirred. So much for this pretence!

Therefore, the sentimental gibberish of the so-called patriots with their falsely-inflated patriotism which is actually ignorance over the bill-issue needs to rest! They have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, and unless they do, to engage in a debate with them is totally pointless.

What's more, without accepting this aid package, we are left in an economic crisis where we will have to get, yet again, a hefty loan from IMF which, obviously, we then have to return with a hefty interest -- which means another strain on our economy for decades to come. I guess accepting this aid package, then, wins out to be a far better choice, especially when it doesn't ask of the government to increase electricity charges and petrol charges, as opposed to IMF's conditions.