Login | Sign Up

«
»

Elements in state apparatus reluctant to trust elected leaders: Haqqani

Monday, January 23rd, 2012

“There are forces in Pakistan that want us to live in fear — fear of external and internal enemies.” So warns Husain Haqqani, until November Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington and now a de facto prisoner of the Pakistani generals whose ire he has provoked.

“But just as the KGB and the Stasi did not succeed in suppressing the spirit of the Soviet and East German people, these forces won’t succeed in Pakistan in the long run, either,” Haqqani told the Wall Street Journal in a wide ranging interview at the Prime Minister House. “I did not craft or write the memo that is currently the cause of controversy,” Haqqani told the Journal.

Admiral Mullen claims to have only a hazy recollection of having received, but not taken seriously, an unsigned memo that did not bear the imprimatur of the Pakistani government. The upshot, as Haqqani points out, is a Pakistani scandal that “involves a memo written by an American and delivered through an American (retired Gen Jim Jones), to an American military official who consigned it to the dustbin.”

“I lived in the United States and taught in the United States,” Haqqani says, referring to his time as professor of international relations at Boston University and his stint as ambassador. “But I never sought American citizenship because I wanted to be able to contribute to the process of reform and the idea of civilian supremacy in Pakistan.”

Haqqani says one of the reasons some people in the establishment hate him so much is because of his book — “Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military”. “In fact, when I was made ambassador, somebody said to me that until you recant your book, you will never be forgiven by the Pakistani establishment.”

He explains that “Pakistan has a long history of military intervention in politics. There were years when the military did not directly intervene but used proxies. “Throughout the 1990s, we had four changes of government and forced early elections each time. For example, among the first allegations against Benazir Bhutto was that she was somehow going to compromise the country’s nuclear programme. So, there are elements entrenched in the apparatus of state who are very reluctant to fully trust the elected leaders of the country.”

The Journal pressed Haqqani on the invisible pressures on President Asif Ali Zardari’s unpopular government. “Soon after I resigned President Zardari fell ill,” he notes. “The psychological-warfare machine tried to give it the colour of President Zardari fleeing the country. He went (to Dubai) to get treated and then came back.” Speaking perhaps as much to reassure himself as to lend some support to Zardari, Haqqani adds that “In all psychological warfare, if the targets keep their nerves, then nothing happens.”

As ambassador in Washington, Haqqani was often referred to as “silver-tongued,” a man able to communicate effectively with officials of different political persuasions. Cultivating a relationship with a senator based on shared appreciation of a book on, say, tribal warfare, was the kind of thing that came easily to him. He says he represented Pakistan diligently at a time when US-Pakistani relations were deeply strained. “There is a longstanding culture of grievance in Pakistan,” he says. “A lot of Pakistanis feel the US has not always been responsive to Pakistan’s geo-strategic concerns. The Pakistani national narrative also says that Pakistan has been deserted by the United States many times. And the US has not done enough to try and change that national narrative.”

As for the current US administration, he says that it “does not have the human resources right now to fully understand the complexities of Pakistan and engage with them. They don’t have the people who understand.”

The traditional pattern of US-Pakistan relations has been that American intelligence wants working relations with Pakistani intelligence, and the State Department wants working relations with Pakistan’s foreign office. “The US will have to find a balance between their immediate needs and the long-term usefulness of their actions,” says Haqqani. “They always say the civilian government is ‘too weak’ for them to engage with. But how will the civilian government become strong if, on all major issues, US officials keep running to Pakistan’s military leaders for advice and consultation?”

Still, Haqqani is not about to blame the US for Pakistan’s failures to develop into a normal state. The progressive dreams of the country’s founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, have been “shattered by religious extremism and repeated military interventions in politics.” Enunciating his words carefully, he adds: “While I respect the Pakistani armed forces, I certainly do not support the idea of a militarised Pakistan.”

“Sometimes I wonder if Salman Taseer’s fate awaits all those of us who stand up for a different vision for Pakistan.”

Originally appeared in The News International.


Tags: , , , , ,

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Comments

Newer Comments »
Newer Comments »

Leave a Reply

Name *:
E-Mail *: (will not be published)
Website:
Comments:
CAPTCHA Image
*
 

Powered by Hashe!