Mazari vs. Patterson: Clarifications By Jang Group, Shireen Mazari & PakNationalists

The ambassador of the US in Pakistan has accused a prominent columnist and US critic of endangering the life of a US citizen without providing any evidence to support this claim. The newspaper puts the burden of proof on the columnist. The US ambassador gets away with making a serious allegation without proof. What is wrong with this picture?


The Editorial Board of the Jang Group issued a clarification published today, Sept. 7, reacting to a written complaint by US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson that resulted in knocking Dr. Mazari's regular column off the pages of the newspaper for one day last Wednesday, Sept. 3.

The newspaper published the regular column a day later, on Thursday Sept. 4, after back and forth with Dr. Mazari.


The clarification in The News also indirectly referred to a report published at PakNationalists/AhmedQuraishi.com and carried by several websites where the US ambassador's letter to the newspaper was described as 'private'. The paper says it was not 'private'.

It is unfortunate that a letter by the US ambassador, which was not printed or made public and as such can be legitimately misconstrued as an attempt at undue pressure by an envoy of a foreign government, has resulted in a misunderstanding between the esteemed columnist and the respected newspaper, ending a long relationship that goes back almost a decade.

The two- The News International and Dr. Mazari – are especially remembered for the bold decision taken last year by The News, one of Pakistan's largest English-language newspapers, to publish an exclusive report, written by Dr. Mazari, which prevented the Bush administration from quietly appointing an anti-Pakistan US army general as a defense attaché in Islamabad.

The ending of this relationship [Dr. Mazari joins The Nation as editor, columnist and television host as of tonight] must have engendered many smiles at the US embassy in Islamabad. There is a history between Dr. Mazari, a renowned defense expert, and the US mission here. In 2006, the US ambassador at the time reportedly approached Pakistan's Foreign Secretary to request that Dr. Mazari, who was heading a think tank financed by the Pakistan Foreign Office, be asked to stop writing columns critical of US policy in Afghanistan. Mr. Khokhar, according to Dr. Mazari, resisted the pressure. But last year, Dr. Mazari was unceremoniously removed from her post in one of the first few decisions taken by the new elected government. Mr. Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's envoy to Washington and one of America's most vocal Pakistani apologists, personally supervised the move.

The following is the clarification as published in The News International today, followed by the reply sent by Dr. Mazari to the newspaper [also received by us], and then a reply from PakNationalists, written by Ahmed Quraishi.



Clarification by The News


A press conference of Dr. Shireen Mazari was reported in the newspapers of Thursday (September 3) in which it was indicated that The News International had been pressurised by the US Embassy into dropping her article, although it appeared in the same day’s issue. Some websites have also alleged that the US ambassador has written a ‘private’ letter to the Jang Group pressuring that Dr. Mazari’s article be dropped.

We are surprised that someone as familiar with the Jang Group’s editorial policy as Dr. Mazari — an official turned politician and Information Secretary/ Spokesperson of the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf — should level such unfounded allegations. The facts of the matter are as follows:

* The US ambassador had sent a letter to the Jang Group complaining that in her article published in The News the week before, Dr. Shireen Mazari had levelled certain incorrect allegations that had endangered the life of a US citizen.

* In accordance with our policy, and accepted international norms, we referred the complaint to Dr. Shireen Mazari — for her feedback and comments.

* While this complaint was being investigated, Dr. Mazari sent another article on Tuesday (September 1), which was to be published the next day — that is on Wednesday. In this article she had again levelled certain allegations, which were also without attribution. Since certain contentions in the previous article had been refuted and were under investigation and she had not produced any evidence or reliable reference to prove the same (nor has she been able to do so till date), we reverted to Dr. Mazari and asked if she could substantiate these allegations. The concerned editor also informed her that her article had been referred to the concerned department to make sure that it was not libellous. As it happens, on receiving supporting comments from her, as well as advice from the concerned editor, the article was published the very next day — that is on Thursday.

* It is normal for embassies, political parties and other affected people and institutions to complain against perceived bias and the letter from the US ambassador was in the same vein. She neither asked us in the above letter nor any time in the past to drop articles by Dr. Mazari or by any other contributor holding similar views and writing for many years in The News. The ambassador also did not desire that the letter be kept confidential. While we take all complaints seriously, we allow them to exert no pressure on us or influence editorial policy or decisions. Therefore, at no point did anyone from the management or editorial staff of The News suggest to Dr. Mazari that this, or future, articles by her would not be published.

* We not only publish articles by some of the most respected columnists in the country, but as a matter of policy, give space to people holding strong and diverse opinions. Since years some of the fiercest criticism of US policies has been voiced on the pages of The News. We are sorry that she chose to go public with accusations that have no basis in fact.

Editorial Board - Jang Group



Dr. Mazari's Response


This is the response sent by Dr. Mazari to The News in response to the clarification [as received by us]:

With reference to my press conference on Wednesday, 2 September, I was clearly premature in assuming the newspaper would succumb to US pressure given its past stance on such occasions. So on that count I stand corrected by the paper’s clarification published on 7th September and appreciate the fact that I have not been victimised for my critical stance on US policies.

However, the thrust of my press conference was on multiple efforts by the US embassy to intervene in the media and I had cited my own earlier cases. Now The News has substantiated my position on this issue.

I am glad that The News has referred to US ambassador’s letter in which certain objections were made to one of my columns. My point is that she levelled a serious allegation against me – that of endangering the life of an American citizen. What proof does she have of that from my columns? Did I incite anyone to kill an American? Did I print pictures of the citizen in question? On what grounds did she come to this conclusion? Did The News editorial team ask her for substantiation of what is a serious charge? After all I was asked for so many “proofs”! Here was a foreign emissary levelling a serious allegation against a Pakistani citizen and where was the proof? My columns discuss issues and do not include any form of incitement.

The normal practice that one has seen in newspapers is for embassies to have their objections published which then allows the writer to respond to the allegations. It is strange that the US ambassador chose not to have her objections to my column published so that I could have directly responded to these.

Finally, I simply want to correct one error in The News’s clarification – I was never an “official” – otherwise I would not have been able to write a regular column. I was an academic for 16 years before I headed a research think tank as a researcher/technocrat.

I am presuming again that The News will, in its policy of fair play and equal access to all, publish this response and my appreciation once again of the paper’s ability to withstand all manner of pressures.

Shireen M. Mazari



PakNationalists Comment

Ahmed Quraishi comments:

1. The issue in question is not The News. The issue in question is a letter sent by US ambassador Anne Patterson to a Pakistani newspaper accusing a Pakistani columnist of endangering the life of a US citizen. Since Ms. Patterson provides no proof and does not seek to publish her letter, as is the custom when you dispute a published report, there is a possibility she is intimidating a known critic of US policy into submission.

2. The accepted practice is for politicians or ambassadors to send a letter that is published and then the concerned writer gets a chance to respond or apologize if he or she is wrong. This never happened. Dr. Mazari never saw a copy of the ambassador's letter or was provided proof from her writings that she was endangering the life of a US citizen.

3. US ambassador's serious accusation to Dr. Mazari of threatening a US citizen's life was taken at face value, without supporting evidence, and Dr. Mazari was asked to provide evidence for her opinions that she shapes based on circumstantial and/or factual evidence, which is what all established analysts do.

4. Nowhere in her articles did Dr. Mazari call for violence against any US citizen.

5. The US citizen in question was mentioned in several news mediums before Dr. Mazari referred to him. The US embassy never reacted in public or private to those stories, which were both in print and on television. This is why it is inexplicable why Dr. Mazari was singled out by the US ambassador, beyond the fact that Dr. Mazari is a fierce critic of US policy.

6. Several newspapers published the statements of a retired Pakistani intelligence officer accusing United States of engineering the assassination of Gen. Zia ul Haq. Did any newspaper ask him for evidence before publishing the story, which, according to the US ambassador's logic, endangers the lives of all US diplomats here since it implicates them in the murder of a former Pakistani president and almost the entire leadership of the Pakistan armed forces? It is strange, then, for the US ambassador to demand that Dr. Mazari provide evidence for her opinions and analysis.

7. The US media outlets have spread false alarm worldwide over the past two years by saying Pakistan's nuclear weapons risked falling in wrong hands. Did any one of these US news organizations provide evidence?

8. Dr. Mazari went public on the undue pressure by the US ambassador. She did not accuse the newspaper of anything, nor would it have been appropriate to do so in the first place. If anyone should be issuing clarifications, it is the US embassy because the US ambassador has failed to justify how Dr. Mazari endangered the life of a US citizen.

9. The core question here is this: Why should the US ambassador in Pakistan get away with accusing a Pakistani columnist of endangering the lives of Americans and the columnist gets a rough treatment where she is asked to produce evidence for her analysis? How do we know that Dr. Mazari is not being attacked by the US ambassador for her opinions critical of US policy?

There is no question that The News did not succumb to any pressure. The biggest evidence on this is Mr. Holbrooke's undiplomatic statement against the Geo television in June [See here].

But it is also true that the US ambassador did inadvertently get a special treatment when she got to accuse Dr. Mazari without evidence and without having her letter published for Pakistanis to see and question the veracity of her position and the position of the accused journalist, as is the custom when someone disputes a newspaper article.

In a country reeling under excessive US meddling in domestic affairs, we certainly did not need this reminder of where things stand.

Ahmed Quraishi