Naveen And Olmert

This comes a couple of weeks late because of the pressing situation in and around Pakistan. The Kazakh government hosted the annual Eurasia Media Forum in Almaty, the former capital of Kazakhstan.

This media forum is fascinating mainly because it is not a western [read 'British-American'] take on international issues. The Kazakh forum approaches the issues from a wider, internationalist perspective. This means, for example, that the war in Georgia last year was debated from both the Russian and the western angles instead of just the Georgian perspective that was heavily promoted by the American and the British media.

So it was refreshing to watch Naveen Naqvi, a Pakistani journalist who works for Dawn News, give a tough time to the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as she interviewed him via a satellite link. At least twice Mr. Olmert paused, appeared at a loss for words, and repeated twice smilingly, 'You are a smart, you are smart.'

Mr. Olmert couldn't stop himself from trying to soften Naveen by appealing to her ego. He kept sending subtle flirty signals and at one point expressed the desire to meet Naveen and have tea with her. But the beautiful and tough Pakistani lady wouldn't budge. Click below to see a clip of the event from my cell phone. The quality is not good but the entire Naveen-Olmert interaction will be posted at the PakNationalists Channel on Youtube very soon.

The debate over Georgia was itself very fascinating. Alexey Nikolov [pictured on this page with me and the Leonardo DiCaprio lookalike] who is the deputy editor of Russia Today television network, handed to me a DVD that showed how footage of Russian tanks filmed by one of his cameramen was used out of context by CNN as evidence that Russian forces were invading Georgia.

I was invited to speak as a panelist on media and blogs. But fun started when a senior official from OSCE, which is kind of an offshoot of NATO countries in Eurasia, began his remarks with a pressure tactic against the host government. The Rep almost condemned a bill that the Kazakh parliament is debating on regulating political blogging. My response turned the whole session into a trial of western interference in other nation's domestic issues. My argument was simple: The Americans and the Brits [The Am-Brits] destabilized Pakistan through interference in our local politics. They shouldn't be allowed to do the same to Kazakhstan. [Click here to check out clips from the session. The sound quality is low and the full version will be posted soon.]

The Leorardo DiCaprio lookalike [real name Ruslan Zhemkov] is a close aide to Dr. Dariga Nazarbayeva, the daughter of the Kazakh president and a stateswoman in her own right. Zalmay Khalilzad and Richard Holbrooke both call him Leonardo during their frequent trips to Kazakhstan. Those frequent trips are in themselves an interesting subject of a new column I'll be writing shortly.

I leave you here with a photo with Dr. Dariga Nazabayeva, daughter of the President, and Alex Kogen, a journalist from Israel.

Mrs. Zalmay Khalilzad, David, And I

Early last week I had a brief interaction with Mrs. Zalmay Khalilzad. Her name is Cheryl Benard, originally a Swiss citizen and currently an analyst for Rand Corporation, the think tank famous for its close association with CIA in the 1980s. I was on Aljazeera’s Inside Story hosted by Mr. David Foster, apparently a well known British TV host that few might know outside Britain. All I can say is that I wasn’t disappointed after hearing the views of Mrs. Khalilzad. Every bit a Pakistan-hater like her husband. The thing that struck me is her arrogance that reflects the arrogance of those who share her views on Pakistan in Washington DC. In every word she uttered, you could see how she saw herself as a better judge of Pakistan and what Pakistan should or shouldn’t do, as if the rest of us Pakistanis here are a bunch of imbeciles destined to look up to sheer talent in U.S. think tanks to run our country. Mrs. Khalilzad saw nothing wrong in America inviting India to Afghanistan. India is involved in terrorism against Pakistan and we’re concerned about Indian actions on Afghan soil. Even American commentators are beginning to concede this point. And American needs to listen to us if it is a real ally and not simply deceiving us and buying time for India. God forbid if Pakistan has some genuine security concerns. No sMrs. Khalilzad won’t have any of it. America should go on achieving its objectives in Afghanistan and screw up everything while Pakistan should shut up and play the role of a slave. That’s why I had a good time dealing with this arrogance in my own way. We Pakistanis have our own interests in the region and we will pursue them to our satisfaction. Click here to watch the video. But my surprise came from Mr. Foster, the British host who was extremely biased against Pakistan and personally took sides in the debate instead of open-mindedly moderate the views of all parties on such a sensitive issue. It was an apt reminder that it is the British and American media that is playing the dirtiest role in demonizing Pakistan. No other country or media is doing it. The big surprise was that after the show, a senior official from Aljazeera English called my cell phone and apologized for the behavior of Mr. Foster. To put this on record, I sent this email to Aljazeera English:

MR. NAZAR DAW
Senior Editor
Al Jazeera English
Doha, QATAR.

Dear Mr. Daw,

I am writing to you to bring to your kind attention something that immensely disturbed me during the recording of Inside Story on Sunday, 29 March 2009.

I was the guest from Islamabad, Pakistan, joining Mrs. Zalmay Khalilzad (Cheryl Benard) from Vienna and an Afghan speaker from Kabul.

Your host, one Mr. David Foster, the host, indulged in an overtly biased hosting. The subject was U.S. President’s new policy speech on Afghanistan. The host, Mr. Foster, was openly undignified toward the speaker from Pakistan and brazenly sided with the likeminded two guests representing U.S. and Afghanistan. Mr. Foster's objective was more Pakistan-bashing than to have an open minded discussion.

I have no problem with Mr. Foster’s personal views and sympathies. But I protest what happened next.

I was trying to represent a studied and reasoned critique of the U.S. President’s speech and policy, which I am sure is no crime. However, Mr. Foster, who has spent time in Kabul and is apparently openly sympathetic to the positions of U.S. and U.K., would have none of it. When the other two guests made outrageously inaccurate remarks about my country, Pakistan, Mr. Foster saw it fit not only to stop me from responding for the remainder of the show to the accusations made by the two guests back to back, but he also refused to allow me to respond to his own condescending rant when he joined the two guests in what appeared to be a gang-up.

This should have been an enlightened and open minded discussion. I am quite sure that in the midst of the constant one-sided Anglo-American propaganda on Afghanistan, your viewers would have appreciated to hear a refreshingly new take on the issue from a Pakistani speaker.

In the end, Mr. Foster had ample time to exchange niceties with Mrs. Khalilzad (“Could you be Afghanistan’s next First Lady” and “Will you go to Kabul to twist the arm of your husband”) but he could not spare 20 seconds for me to quickly respond to factually erroneous allegations against Pakistan made by the two guests and joined by the host himself as the third party.

I am left wondering why you invited a speaker from Pakistan if the purpose of the show was to praise Mr. Obama’s speech and suppress any opposite views.

Mr. Foster could have hidden behind an excuse such as time constraints, but he didn’t. When I protested in the end saying this wasn’t fair, his rude and quick answer was, ‘this is television.’ There was a hint of racism in Mr. Foster's concluding remarks when he joined his only European guest in dismissing the two other speakers from Afghanistan and Pakistan by saying 'they will keep fighting'. The tone and tenor of Mr. Foster was demeaning, as you can see if you review the tape. I could be wrong on this last point and my judgment might be impaired on this point because of my disappointment at the generally biased and rude attitude of your host.

I have little interest in Mr. Foster’s political sympathies with the U.S. and British occupation armies in Afghanistan and for their puppet government in Kabul. My concern is that for an organization as great as Al Jazeera, I as a viewer would expect your hosts to be open minded, learned and considerate. With due respect, no one knows who David Foster is in this part of the world, but everyone knows Al Jazeera.

Best regards.

Ahmed Quraishi