|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
Editorial overview Party
line Vox pops The new
face of jihad In black or
white terms Partners or
patrons? In the case of anti-Americanism in Pakistan, perception and reality merge. Reality, or history shall we say, engendered perception to a degree where it has become difficult to distinguish one from the other. Today, there is a contrary reality which is being drowned under the weight of a strong anti-American perception. It all began around 1951 when we decided to side with the capitalist America against the godless communists, at our own peril. We failed to make institutions, promote democracy, plan for our people -- all because the US stood with us against India, supported us on Kashmir and gave us military support. Our alliance against the godless communists, which was briefly pushed to the backburner during the early 1970s, swung back into action with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The Soviets were defeated with the might of jihad and the Americans left the region. No matter how hard we tried, the events of 9/11 and the post 9/11 world could not be disconnected with America”s unfinished agenda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Today, the ordinary citizen of Pakistan, who has had to bear the brunt of these historical blunders, mistrusts the state as well as the US. After what has unfolded in the last 10 years, much of which were spent with the United States” love affair with yet another dictator, the Pakistani state mistrusts the US state and vice versa. In the last five years or so, there has been quite visible US engagement with Pakistan -- in terms of humanitarian aid in the 2005 earthquake and recent floods, democracy, development work, education, parliamentarians” trainings, security forces” training, scholarships, roads, hotels in Swat and what not. Somehow the perception hasn”t changed. Some part of it is understandable; the other part isn”t. The focus of people”s energies and ire has been perhaps unnecessarily diverted towards the US as part of an agenda -- by the media, the religious right and some political parties. Instead, the people should have been made to look inwards -- towards a state that did not do anything for its citizens in the name of ideology. A state that did not choose the right path and has perhaps still not found one. In today”s Special Report, academic analyses apart, the words of ordinary people contain a lot of wisdom. Together, their quotes sum up the state of anti-Americanism in this country, its causes as well as the cure.
overview The main
problem is By I. A. Rehman The US-Pakistan relations
are now at the lowest ever ebb. The two states are close allies in the
campaign against terror but the The first issue the policy-makers on both sides need to address is the long history of Pakistani people”s grievances against the United States. The Muslims of the subcontinent always sympathised with the Palestinian people. The All-India Muslim League, at its annual sessions, including those presided over by the Quaid-i-Azam, repeatedly called for Palestine”s freedom, sometimes giving this matter precedence to India”s freedom or the Muslim demand for a homeland. The establishment of the state of Israel severely hurt the Pakistani people and they have tended to attribute all Arab defeats at the hands of Israel less to the weaknesses of the Arabs or the strength of Israel than to the American backing to the latter. The anti-Israel sentiment may not be as strong as it used to be, thanks to the Arab state”s indifference to Pakistani version of pan-Islamic solidarity but the forces of militant faith could revive hostility to Israel to the original level. Until the World War II the United States was not the target of the colonised people”s anger. However, it began to lose this distinction when it replaced Britain as the chief promoter of Western states” neo-colonial ambitions throughout Asia, and particularly in the Middle East. Its role in the Korean and Vietnamese wars and its plans to contain, fight and eventually demolish the Soviets at the cost of political and economic interests of its allies in military pacts alienated a sizeable portion of Pakistan”s population. The US and Pakistan governments joined hands and succeeded in suppressing these elements by branding them as followers of a Godless ideology while they themselves claimed to be defending the people”s Islamic faith. Several factors helped the US in retaining the goodwill of a large section of Pakistan”s population, perhaps a majority. In the 1950s, the US earned considerable goodwill by opposing the Franco-British invasion of Egypt. For many years after independence, perhaps up till the 1965 conflict with India, the United States was seen as a friend that was supporting Pakistan”s case on Kashmir and providing the Pakistan army modern weapons over and above India”s objections. Besides, the US was able to win over the religious right by offering it moral as well as material support. Thus, only a minority in Pakistan took exception to Ayub Khan”s boast about Pakistan being the most allied ally of the United States. The situation has been changing since 1965. First, Pakistanis were shocked to learn that the arms supplied by the US could not be used for their country”s defence, although the US could not be blamed for concealing anything. They also considered the US decision to suspend supply of arms during the conflict an unfriendly act and did not understand the logic in America”s asking Moscow to host Tashkent talks. Pakistan also lost US support on Kashmir and the people realised that the arms supplied by the US were being used more to impose dictatorial regimes on them than for national defence. A large part of the religious right was provoked by the first US invasion of Iraq. Not only that, a rift between the Prime Minister and the army chief came into the open. The Shia population of Pakistan was antagonised by the US policy of supporting the Shah of Iran against Khomeini and the subsequent misadventures against Iran. They have been hardened in their hostility towards the US by its ongoing measures against Iran and its support to Israeli attacks on Hamas in Labanon and Gaza. Finally, the entire religious right has become anti-American because it has chosen, partly out of conviction and partly due to sheer opportunism, to support the extremists operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan”s tribal belt. The United States”s credibility in Pakistan suffered a serious blow when it supported dictators (Zia and Musharraf) who suppressed the people”s rights and now it is getting a bad name for supporting a government that is too weak to serve the ordinary citizens. A major reason for the growth of anti-American feeling in Pakistan, as indeed elsewhere, is the public grievance against the international organisations, especially the UN and international finance organisations, that are believed to be subject to the US will. The US gets the blame for all the economic hardships the less affluent majority faces because of the policies of the IMF/World Bank. Thus, factions and groups of different dispositions have one after another been crossing over to the anti-American ranks. One wonders whether the US think tanks have been able to grasp the causes and magnitude of this drift. True, it is easy to blame any people”s misery on a super-power without its having done anything against them. In Pakistan, as perhaps in many other countries, anti-Americanism has become a useful tool for gaining advantage in domestic politics especially by political careerists who have nothing positive to offer. Off and on, American diplomats and academics express amazement that Pakistanis berate them while they know how much the US is giving Pakistan in economic and military aid. They may understand the situation better if they realise that the aid they give mostly makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. The main problem is Washington”s inability to realise that the world can no longer be managed by a super-power, especially if it has no better instruments than the weapons and ideas that had been effective in the middle of the 20th century. Besides, a prolonged reliance on physical might invariably breeds arrogance and that makes matters infinitely worse. Not only the image of the Ugly American will disappear but matters could be better managed if the US conceded its friends and allies their right to have a say in matters of mutual interest, their right to defend national interests as seriously as the US fights for its interests. This is especially true of the rising nations in Asia, Africa and Latin America. They have arrived and the rest of the world has to learn to live with them. Party line Political parties are pro- and anti-America, depending on the issue in question By Ammara Ahmad Pakistani political parties have a tough time deciding their policies towards the US. Populism demands that they take a harsher stand against the US. Yet, the increasing economic strain, the need for IMF loans and the war on terror makes the situation more complicated. “Anti-Americanism is due to the past US-Pak relations which were one-sided, especially during the Musharraf regime when it came under the US pressure and undermined our sovereignty,” says Ahsan Iqbal, Information Secretary, PML-N. “ PML-N wants friendly ties, explore the US export market, technology, human resource training, and investment prospects but based on bilateralism and draw a red line to protect the national interests.” “Pakistani politics has no US interference but we do have a unique state-to-state relationship that goes back 60 years,” says Samiullah Khan, PPP”s General Secretary, Punjab. “But where Pakistani independence and defending our national interest are concerned, PPP has never compromised, no matter how frail our economic state may be.” “The US is a friend that has given the maximum amount of aid during these floods, without which our state machinery couldn”t work,” says Haji Adeel, a senior leader of ANP. “Yet this relationship should be dignified, reciprocal and answerable to the parliament.” The recent killing of two boys by an American named Raymond Davis and the consequent murder of another youngster when a US Consulate car hit him have caused a hue and cry among many sections of the society. “MQM has a clear stance on the Lahore shooting by Raymond Davis,” says Waseem Akhtar, MNA, Mohajar Qaumi Movement (MQM). “The law should be implemented, those murdered should be provided justice in the courts, and transparent investigation should take place without any regard for the nationality of the accused.” “In Raymond”s case, the US will of course pressurise the parliament and the political parties because Raymond is an American citizen. Similarly, Pakistan has been stepping up pressure for the release of Dr Aafia. However, Raymond”s case involves the US, Pakistani federal and provincial governments as well as the courts. Hopefully, all three will face the pressure together and hold trials in Pakistan,” adds Samiullah Khan. “Raymond”s visa had expired, the legality of his weapons is questionable and the type of bullet he fired has long been banned,” says Haji Adeel. “If he has some diplomatic immunity, it still does not allow him to go around killing. If it was in self defence, it has yet to be proven in the court.” Drone attacks are one big bone of contention between the Pakistani people and the political parties. According to daily The News, all parties had reached consensus by December 28, 2010, about ending the (drone) strikes altogether. Whether it was Professor Khursheed Ahmad, senior leader of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Haji Adeel, senior leader of the Awami National Party (ANP), spokesman for the JUI-F Maulana Amjad, senior PML-Q leader Mushahid Hussain Syed, PML-N senior leader Pervaiz Rashid or the PTI chief Imran Khan, everyone said that they wanted the strikes to end, but without much success. Imran Khan went as far as to file a petition in the Supreme Court to declare the drone attacks as unconstitutional. He filed the petition under article 184(3) of the constitution, under which the apex court can take action to protect the fundamental rights of citizens. However, according to political analyst Hassan Askari Rizvi, 80 percent of the criticism against the drones comes from the religious right wing which is directly under attack by the US and the Punjab. Punjab also contains conservative and religious influences. Besides, it has led the country”s anti-India and anti-US sentiments since partition. “We are not hiding from the people the fact that drone attacks are taking place,” explains Samiullah Khan. “We are negotiating on acquiring the drone technology and taking action ourselves. The drone attacks by the US have prompted extremism in Pakistan.” “Drone attacks cause more harm than good and should be stopped. Besides, intelligence and technology of the drones should be shared with the Pakistani forces and these operations should be done by these forces and not the foreigners,” adds Wasim Akhtar. “No one should be allowed to enter the Pakistani border without the consent of the Pakistani government,” says Haji Adeel. “May it be Taliban, al-Qaeda, safe heavens for terrorists or US drones, we are against all of them and very vocal about it.” “Drone attacks are the boon of the former puppet regimes and the resentment keeps growing,” adds Ahsan Iqbal. “There are reasons behind misinformation against the US. For one thing, the US aligned itself with Musharraf”s dictatorial regime, prompting the idea that the US would have thrown Pakistan back into the stone age if it wasn”t for him. The US should respect Pakistan”s sovereignty. The government should be transparent and not offend its 170 million people with such actions.” Vox pops Generally, what the people in the street are saying... By Ather Naqvi Every man in the street seems to have something to say about the United States of America, known in the local parlance as “Amrica”. TNS spoke to people asking what they had to say about a country they have formed a love-hate relationship with. “Tell me one positive step the US took for us and that benefited us,” asks Muhammad Nazir, owner of a tandoor in a busy market. “I don”t think the benefit of aid we get from the US, as we”re told, trickles down to us in any way,” he says, adding, “What this American (referring to Raymond Davis) has done to us says a lot about how the US deals with us.” “Don”t you see what the US has done to us over the years?” asks Asif Butt, a helper/driver working at a private organisation. Butt is critical of the US for the drone attacks and the ensuing suicide bombings in Pakistan, “They are the reason behind suicide attacks in our country because they have launched drone attacks, killing hundreds of innocent people.” Butt categorically states he would never go to the US
even if he is offered a job there or his children are given an opportunity
to There are others who hold contradictory views about the US. Azhar Khan, Admin Officer at a private organisation in Islamabad, blames the US for most of the ills Pakistan is confronted with. Still, he says he would not mind if he finds an opportunity to travel to the US and spend a month or two there, “I want to roam around in the US. Especially, I want to go to Hollywood and have a stroll in the city.” Azhar says he can never think about settling down in the US, “I cannot settle in the US for good. That is simply not possible because I hate the country for reasons we all know, such as mishandling the drive against terrorism in Pakistan.” Muhammad Khalid Ibadullah, Manager Human Resource at a media organisation, believes the US should not be blamed for the situation Pakistan is in, “We have done nothing to find a respectable place in the world. Unlike the US, we have never spent on education and in the health sector, etc. So, I find no reason for hating the US. They are ruling over the world just as we did a few centuries ago.” “I don”t hate the US, but I don”t like the country as a super power either,” says Communication Officer at a multi-national development organisation in Islamabad who does not want to be identified. “We should give credit to the US for the fact that it is serious about the well-being of its citizens, at home or abroad.” She says we should keep into view the fact that the US is a major donor to Pakistan, “The organisation that I work for, for instance, gets its major portion of funding from the US. That is one way of looking at things. In fact, we have lost confidence of the US, and the rest of the world for that matter. The US helped us greatly after the 2005 earthquake besides other countries. But we seem to have mishandled the whole affair due to corruption and now we can see how difficult it is to get aid from the US and other countries.” Bilal Akbar, a young dairy farmer based in Lahore, is among those who don”t approve of what the US is doing but believe hating the US is not going to solve the problem, “Instead of wasting our time and resources hating the US, we should try to engage the country and its people in a dialogue so that people in both the countries are able to clear misconceptions about each other.” Bilal believes we can learn a lot from the US, “We can criticise the US for what it is doing in this region or elsewhere. In the same way, we can also learn a lot of positive things from them such as how have they improved the standard of living of their people and invested in human resource. Pakistanis living in the US have also benefited from the system, such as in education and other fields. My family, living in the US, do want to come to their homeland but considering the condition in Pakistan, they prefer to live in the US.” The new face of jihad The religious right uses anti-Americanism to fuel its politics By Waqar Gillani “If the government declines to extend help in contesting the cases of the victims” families against American shooter Raymond Davis, this mob of thousands of patriotic Muslims will fight their case,” roared a Jamaat-e-Islami leader, addressing a procession of more than 30,000 people, Sunday last. “Will you fight their case? Will you fight for these
families against America?” asked the stage secretary. The answer was
“yes” Maulana Fazlur Rehman, chief of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) whose party recently quit the coalition government of the ruling PPP in Islamabad, “warned” the federal government that if Davis was released or handed over against the court verdicts no one in Pakistan will respect the court verdicts in the future. The religious parties and radical Islamic groups use anti-Americanism to fuel their politics and take negative meaning out of every American endeavour for Pakistan or the Muslim world through their literature and publications. “The killing of 190 Muslim youth in American jails against no reason has been confirmed. These youngsters belong to the field of Jihad. And mostly they were captured from Afghanistan and Iraq. According to the official documents released by American Civil Liberties Union after getting the reports from the government through proper request under the law,” reads a prominent news item which appeared in one of the recent issues of Jamaatud Dawa, publication called “Jarrar”. “Our people need not be afraid of America. No need for it. America is struggling for its survival and depending on India to target Pakistan. Both, America and India, are joining hands against Pakistan and Islamic world We need to stand up against them and this is the time for Pakistan to take the right decision to fight against them and show unity in our ranks. And we need to demolish them with their conspiracies and what we need is to take a decision which is required at the earliest,” reads another editorial of the same paper while writing against the summoning of Pakistani”s top intelligence agency – Inter Services Intelligence – head and later the summoning of JuD chief Hafiz Saeed by an American court. Al-Qalam, another largely circulated publication of Jaish-e-Muhammad, defunct jihadi organization – has termed the government”s sabotaged plan of bringing changes to blasphemy laws an American demand and conspiracy against Islam. “Pope”s demand for releasing blasphemy accused Asia Bibi and the special prayers and services of Pakistani churches for assassinated Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer has clearly indicated that America and the west are behind the moves to bring the changes in blasphemy laws,” reads a report published in the recent issue of Al-Qalam. Muhammad Amir Rana, executive director Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS), a non governmental organization observing radicalization tells TNS that many studies have shown that lower middle classes” prominent driver is the subject of politics. “The West and America have a major role in this politics according to the narrative drawn by the religious parties which has been strengthened by religious groups whether they are radical militant religious or other,” he says, adding, “That is why ultimately this narrative has dominated and been borrowed by mainstream political parties.” He adds that “anti-Americanism” has a role because of various national and international issues for the religious right because of Kashmir, Palestine, Afghanistan etc. For the past many decades, the narrative is the same without any hope of any positive change in this dogma as there is no strong counter strategy. vaqargillani@gmail.com In black or white terms Media is
guilty of creating perceptions and By Farah Zia That Pakistani media loves
to take an anti-American line is not an overstatement. Whether it carries
out anti-Americanism as a Raymond Davis is a case in point. In the first two hours of the incident, we got to know that the police were trying to portray the two men killed as “thieves”. The people were led to believe that the reports of the two carrying firearms and committing robberies before the incident could have been the “work” of the police who are cunning enough to have registered false cases on behalf of imagined citizens. We were told Davis was not a diplomat and the two men were shot from behind. The analysis that came out was that both the federal and the provincial government are eager to let the American out and are passing the buck to each other. What was not attempted by the media was to recreate the chain of events as they occurred. The question that was not raised was: why would an American citizen suddenly kill two Pakistani men in broad daylight? It could perhaps do some investigations into who Raymond Davis was, glean some more information on the two men killed in that encounter, and perhaps bring out an analysis of the laws under which Davis could possibly be tried. But the media seemed eager to do more than all this, in black and white terms, without venturing into the grey areas. It did project the scene of the crime and the state”s response in a certain fashion. In this case, it fed on the anti-American perceptions it has helped create over the past years -- that Pakistani lives are like flies to wanton American boys. The ready reference in people”s minds was the US drone attacks in Fata that routinely kills “innocent civilians”. Raymond Davis reinforced the earlier media reports that there were under-cover American agents and Blackwater private security personnel roaming around in the country. And that armed Americans have been harassing residents in Peshawar and Islamabad. The media persons were quick to take a smug view “We told you, didn”t we?” Truth is that the media, while making those wild allegations, did not do its job properly nor has it done now. One view is there are structural flaws within the media which, in the absence of an institutional framework, acts in a supposedly anarchical way. It wants to enjoy the freedom and shirk responsibility. By relying too much on sensationalism and populism, it fails to fulfill its professional obligations -- of creating an informed opinion. On television, the structure of the programmes prevents any research, quality and substance and has a tendency of playing to the gallery; ditto for print medium. Anti-Americanism thus falls in the line of populist and sensational subjects that raise both TRPs and readership. Analysts who believe in “media”s structural flaws” theory like to see the Hillary Clinton interview with tv anchors July last in that light. Each anchor in the programme, they think, was trying to put the US secretary of state down. They were not asking her questions but proving their loyalty and patriotism to their people. That this is not the media”s job was proved when, at the end of the programme, the anchorpersons only exposed their ineptitude. The other point of view tends to see a method in this anarchy. They point out a certain direction in this anarchy which, they believe, is kind of calculated. The media is overwhelmingly rightwing, statist, patriotic and in many cases pro-military and thus anti-India. The dominant discourse on the media is that the imperialist United States wants to capture an important Muslim country, a nuclear power, just the way it invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Some serious-looking analysts have even claimed that 9/11 was an inside job by the Americans/Jews. The Hameed Guls have been arguing on the media that US motives in Afghanistan and its support for the India-friendly Karzai regime is detrimental to Pakistan”s interests of strategic depth in Afghanistan. The media is reluctant to expose the middle ground between Imran Khan”s anti-Americanism and the terrorists” anti-imperialist discourse. The unanimous stand of the media on Aafia Siddiqui and against Kerry Lugar Bill is ominous, these critics of media say. Neutral observers, however, defend the anti-Americanism of media as a balancing act -- against the media”s disapproval of extremism and terrorism. Media stands neither on this side nor that, they say. In the final analysis, the consumers of media products would be the best judge as to which of the above assessments is correct. They may conclude that, to a degree, they all are. Partners or patrons? Billions of dollars of aid in tens of sectors that never find a mention in the dominant anti-US public discourse By Aoun Sahi Relations between the
United States of America (USA) and Pakistan have seen many ups and downs,
but the latter remains one A new era of economic cooperation has started between the two countries after Barack Obama”s election as the president. The U.S. Congress passed the Kerry-Lugar-Berman (KLB) legislation to authorise US$ 1.5 billion in non-military assistance to Pakistan annually for 5 years. President Obama signed it into law on October 15, 2009. After the passage of the KLB, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Pakistan in late October, to engage with Pakistani government and people and forge a renewed economic and strategic cooperation. Both the countries agreed to a Strategic Dialogue to be held at the ministerial level for the first time. The first such dialogue was held in Washington DC on March 24-25. The delegations from both sides engaged in sessions on agriculture, defence and security, economic development and finance, social issues, energy and water, and communications. A letter of intent was signed to upgrade major road infrastructure in northwest Pakistan, as well as implementation agreements for three thermal power stations, rehabilitation projects that will aid in combating electricity shortages in the country. At present, the US is working actively in seven main sectors in Pakistan as part of their civilian cooperation. These areas include democracy and governance, economic growth, energy, gender, health, education and assistance to people affected by natural (earthquake and floods) or man made (IDPs) disasters on humanitarian grounds. A special initiative to support development in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) was also launched in 2006 with US$ 750 million over a span of five years. Most of the assistance is being extended to different sectors and departments under the civilian cooperation through USAID. Under the democracy and governance programme, USAID since the 2008 election supported the training of 32 percent of National Assembly and Senate parliamentarians, and 30 percent of all representatives from the four provincial assemblies (including more than 50 percent women) to improve their skills as legislators. It has also improved the skills of almost half of secretarial staff of all assemblies. “Support to the Election Commission to modernise operations and improve its electoral registry. Development of financial management systems in 55 tehsils” municipal administrations to increase revenue and improve service delivery. It has also trained thousands of voters and election monitors. It also funded the design and construction of the $9 million Pakistan Institute for Parliamentary Service which will provide training, research, analyses, legislative drafting and staff support to parliamentarians thus increasing the quality of legislation and oversight. Under the economic growth programme, the US helped the Ministry of Finance and Board of Investment to draft a major report specifying how to upscale innovation and boost Pakistan”s competitiveness and long-term growth. It has also worked with Punjab and Sindh provincial governments in drafting and technical support for agriculture marketing policy reform laws. In addition, it has extended support to small and medium enterprises (SME) in the gems-and-jewellery, dairy, marble and granite, horticulture, furniture and surgical instruments sectors, leading to the investment of over US$ 110 million in private and public funds and generating policy reforms to enhance SME competitiveness. It facilitated mango exports through training of 2,700 mango farmers and managers and construction of three on-farm mango processing centres. It has also extended micro-grants totaling US$ 2.1 million to households in flood-affected communities in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, southern Punjab and northern Sindh. It has also granted US$ 5.2 million assistance to over 200 Swat hotels and fisheries to support post-flood and post-conflict reconstruction. Education and health are the sectors where the US has invested a lot both on physical infrastructure and human resources development. Along with awarding dozens of Fulbright scholarships every year for the Pakistani students who want to get higher education in American universities, it has also started a scholarship programme for students from underserved areas of Pakistan to get education in Pakistani universities. So far, more than 1,400 students have availed this facility. It has also helped in training teachers, building libraries, improving adult literacy and improving the enrolment rate in primary schools. On the health front, it has so far treated 2.8 million children for diarrhea. Besides, 1.5 million babies have been immunised against diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus, upgraded 89 community health facilities, established 80 “well-baby” clinics, trained and equipped more than 1,000 community mid-wives, improved communication and counseling skills for 11,000 lady health workers and provided health facilities to more than 50,000 IDPs. USAID has also completed wind and solar energy resource assessment maps to assist the government of Pakistan in responding to its energy needs and develop renewable energy resources. It has helped in launching a wind power project of 150-megawatt at a cost of US$ 375 million in the Gharo Corridor of Pakistan. USAID promises to provide US$ 66 million to finish the Gomal dam and Satpara dam projects. It has also helped to repair and maintain the main thermal power stations of Pakistan. The US response to Pakistani floods was also very quick and comprehensive. It has been working on recovery of agriculture, road infrastructure and health facilities in flood-hit areas. So far it has provided US$ 590 million to Pakistan as humanitarian assistance for flood affected areas. The US has been training and providing physical resources to police forces in different provinces.
|
|
anti-American sentiment among the Pakistani people has touched a new peak.
The way the war against extremists is being conducted is fuelling public
bitterness against the US and this in turn is adversely affecting
Islamabad”s capacity to fight terrorism. Unless effective damage control
measures are adopted the vital interests of both countries could suffer
grievous harm.
study in the country. “Before availing the opportunity to go to the US I
would rather see what is happening to the Pakistanis who are based in the US
and those who have gone there recently. We read in newspapers what happens
to Pakistanis at US airports for holding a green passport,” he says,
adding, “I”m very happy where I am and would prefer to live within my
means.”
which the excited religious activists shouted while waving the flags of
their parties. This was the gathering of Pakistan”s mainstream religious
and jihadi organisations, including defunct groups, that showed their
strength under the banner of Tehrik-e-Namoos-e-Risalat (Movement for Dignity
of Prophet Muhammad) to reject the plans to change blasphemy laws,
presumably, being made on “the West and American pressure.”
project or as calculated propaganda is, however, moot. One thing is clear,
though, that over the years it created perceptions and emotions that it fed
on subsequently.
of the largest recipients of US aid. According to Overseas Loans and Grants
(Green Book), the US has given Pakistan a total of US$ 33.606 billion in
economic and US$ 8.932 billion for military assistance from 1947 to 2006.
Most of this aid in both forms has been given during military dictatorships
in Pakistan. The economic partnership between the two countries changed
significantly after 9/11 when Pakistan agreed to support the US campaign
against its war on terrorism. The United States has boosted its economic
assistance to Pakistan, providing debt relief and support in education and
health reforms. In 2003, President Bush announced US$3 billion in economic
and military aid over 5 years to Pakistan.