The United States has also started talking in India’s tone and terror on the issue of terrorism besides hurling identical threats to Pakistan. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has, in a TV interview, threatened Pakistan with ‘very severe consequences’ if any more terror plot like the failed Times Square bombing was traced to its tribal territory. The threat is, of course, not different from New Delhi’s warning of dire results should another Mumbai like incident take place in India. Like Indian outbursts, Hillary’s statement is also totally uncalled for since she has, in the same breath, acknowledged Pakistan’s positive role in the fight against terror. It’s rather provocative in view of Pakistan’s predicaments that it has long endured due to its support to the US military operations in Afghanistan.
Hillary’s statement was backed by US Attorney General Eric Holder. ‘If Pakistan fails to take appropriate action against the Taliban, the US will’, he said. He, however, played down the prospect of a direct US military action in Pakistan by saying that ‘Islamabad has been cooperative with us and we have been satisfied with the work they have done’. There is, however, glaring contradiction in the statements of the Obama administration and US military officials on the issue of accused Faisal Shahzad’s conduct. Gen David Petraeus, chief of the US anti-terror war in Afghanistan and Iraq says that Faisal was the ‘lone wolf’, who was ‘inspired’ by militants in Pakistan but doesn’t have direct contact with them. His view was endorsed by Secretary for Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. But Attorney General Eric Holder and Chief counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan have taken a totally different stance. Holder firmly said that the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan was behind the failed attack. ‘We have now developed evidence that shows the Pakistani Taliban were behind the attack…we know that they helped facilitate it, they helped finance it and that he was working at their direction’, he said.
Interestingly, The New York Times has termed this contradiction as a calculated measure to increase pressure on Pak army to attack the Taliban’s bastion in North Waziristan. It’s evident from the contradictory statements that the incident is being used as a pretext to intimidate Pakistan to make it submit to the persistent US demands for military action in North Waziristan agency that the Pak Army has hitherto hesitated in order to avoid opening of new fronts since the forces are already committed in several areas in the Tribal Areas. It’s disgusting that that the United States has opted to play tricks with Pakistan even after a decade of its unwavered cooperation in its war against terror during which Pakistan has rendered more sacrifices than any other country in the world. The casualties suffered by Pakistan’s military and civilian population are far more than the NATO forces in Afghanistan. It has also committed more troops in the anti-terror war than the combined strength of the NATO forces. Yet it’s being pressured to ‘do more’ in utter disregard to the objective realities.
The truth is that Faisal is not a Pakistani citizen even by descent. He is US citizen and has nothing to do with the Pakistani Taliban. He has never received bomb making training in Waziristan as alleged in the after-thought assertions by the Obama administration officials contrary to Gen Patearus’s categorical statement that he was the ‘lone wolf’ inspired by the terrorists in Pakistan. The ugly aspect of the situation is that Pakistan is being made scapegoat for no rhyme or reason. Hillary Clinton’s threatening tone talk is totally uncalled for. The people of Pakistan have obviously been dismayed at her statement as they had the presumption that she is an ardent supporter of truth. Their presumption has unfortunately been shattered. No one knows better than the US Secretary of State herself that Pakistan itself is the victim of terrorism. It has also amply proven through its conduct over the past decade that it’s opposed to the menace of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
Islamabad has had enough of the bitter consequence of its support to the US invasion of Afghanistan as well as its war against al-Qaeda in the landlocked country. It has long endured death and destruction at the hands of terrorists, who have not spared even the places of worship and killed Pakistan’s men, women and children mercilessly in the pursuit of their heinous agenda. Pakistan has fought bravely against the terrorists. Its recent military operations in Swat and SouthWaziristan agency have been acknowledged worldwide as its unequivocal commitment to weed out the menace from its soil. Yet the threat of ‘very severe consequences’ in case of an incident like the one at Times Square is simply regrettable. It’s a brazen attempt to focus as if Pakistan is directly involved in the incident with no justification whatsoever. The people of Pakistan don’t mind such outbursts from the India that is yet to reconcile to the existence of Pakistan as a sovereign country, but a statement of this kind from US Secretary of State is totally unwarranted.
It’s rather offensive. Pakistan’s tragedy is that it’s not only being targeted by the terrorists and militants but is also being subjected to unabated drone attacks by the United States resulting in massive civilian casualties. There have been 34 missile strikes so far this year, at least two every week, according to figures compiled by the New America Foundation. This compares to 53 for all of last year and 30 during the last year of the Bush administration. It’s also reported that the size of the drone fleet deployed over Pakistan has been doubled since Obama took office in January 2009. Civilian deaths caused by Western arms are a source of deep anger in Pakistan. Indeed, while claiming that only a handful of civilians have been slain in the missile attacks, US officials acknowledge that the CIA does not know the names of the more than 500 people it admits to have been killed. According to the New America Foundation, of the up to 247 people reported killed in attacks carried out so far in 2010 only seven have been publicly identified as militants.
No comments:
Post a Comment