Am I An Indian Convert To Pakistani?

An Indian reader using a Pakistani name emailed me a response to my column 'India & Hate' telling me that I was basically a Hindu convert who shouldn't write criticizing the policies of Mother India.

He suggested that Allama Iqbal, Pakistan's national poet, would endorse the idea of being Indian and so I shouldn't object.

I gave him a short reply which I'm sharing here:

"My forefathers were Arab with extensive intermarriages with Afghans, Turks and possibly Indians. This makes me a thorough Pakistani. Allama Iqbal wrote his poetry in Persian, Urdu and some Arabic. I see many Pakistanis with Aryan ancestry/cultural links, like some Sindhis, Kashmiris, Baloch, and the Rajputs in Punjab and others. Even Indians who converted to Islam are now part and parcel of the Pakistani ethnicity and identity. [Yoy probably don't know that a majority of the original Indians living under Muslim rule remained Hindu, and there’s nothing wrong with that. We respect our neighbors.]  

I respect Indian people and culture. My criticism is focused on Indian policies toward Pakistan and in the region. But at the same time, I don’t see Pakistanis as Indians. And I certainly am not a Pakistani descendant of Indian Hindu converts. But even if I were, there's nothing wrong with that. I don’t care if there are Pakistanis who come from that descent. My only concern is that almost all Pakistanis share distinct ethnic and cultural backgrounds, most of them similar, which make them Pakistanis.  

My advice to you: Focus on the political disputes between Pakistan and India and don't worry too much about Pakistani ancestry.  One good area most Indians should focus on is the fact that India’s Hindi-speaking ruling minority continues to use religion, Hinduism, to create and perpetuate problems with Pakistan and leads other non-Hindi speaking Indians to wars and conflict.  

Don’t concern yourself about the history of Pakistanis. Pakistan emerged in 1947 but has a history that goes back at least ten centuries of Muslim dynastic rule in Central and South Asia. Pakistan and Pakistanis inherited this history and culture as their historical and cultural legacy. Even the ancient, pre-Islamic history of Pakistan sets this country apart from the landmass to our east."

Do I Hate Husain Haqqani?

A US-based Pakistani Aqil Nadeem is sympathetic to Husain Haqqani, the disgraced former ambassador of Pakistan to United States.  So he asked me a couple of questions on Facebook. My answers were brief and I'm sharing them here.

I am doing this because this is a subject I've written a lot about, professionally, since there's nothing personal at play.

Mr. Nadeem accused me of hating Mr. Haqqani. And then he accused the judicial commission probing Haqqani's role in writing a treasonous anti-Pakistan memo to US military of leaking the conclusions of forensic experts who believe Haqqani is guilty as charged.

I have no hatred or grudge against Mr. Husain Haqqani. Never met him or crossed path with him and so I have no personal agenda or feelings for him.  However, I do have very clear feelings and ideas on the need to curb the growing trend of Pakistanis being recruited to work for foreign governments. This has happened after 2002 with US invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and the subsequent destabilization of the region.  The United States and Israel have treated treason harshly and we should be no different. Those who do harm to this nation and people must be pursued and tried.

The alleged acts committed by Haqqani are very serious. See this following link if you want to get a clear idea about what Haqqani did wrong in this particular case: http://j.mp/wpCNso . I also have a very clear idea on what will happen to Pakistan if we don't get tough on treason, especially when we have seen massive covert operations and recruitment by CIA inside Pakistan, activities that have little to do with the war on terror and everything to do with other strategic American goals regarding Pakistan. See this link to understand this point better: http://bit.ly/yZlyoT .

On the second point.  Mr. Nadeem is partially right.  It is unusual that the Memo Commission is yet to make its conclusions public but a report quoting unnamed sources is already out claiming the commission's judicial experts are sure Haqqani is guilty of treason.

This leak is not unusual. But I am not sure there is deliberate leaking of information by Memo Commission.

If you live in Pakistan, you'd know there are hardly any secrets here. When GHQ and ISI requested closed-door meetings to brief the parliament last year, a lot of the info leaked out to TV and papers by evening and next day. When the forensic testing was taking place in London in Haqqani's case, there were diplomats and employees of the Pakistan High Commission in the building, their assistants, local Pakistani journalists, members of the commission, their support staffers, the forensic experts and their assisting teams. Anyone could have leaked the info.  It is incorrect to accuse the Memo Commission itself of doing this.

If the commission was leaking, it should have happened before too but didn't.

Then there are the diplomats in London. Haqqani doesn't have any allies or friends in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They hate him en masse over there. So anyone could have leaked this info about Haqqani's culpability in writing the anti-Pakistan memo. 

Pakistan's Biggest Enemy Is Its Failed Political Parties

Our failed political parties will destroy our country while we keep focusing on 'saving' democracy instead of 'reforming' it. Three parties have turned Karachi into Beirut in their fight for control over extortion money. Yet we still have people claiming things will be better with repeated elections. The only thing that will happen with repeated elections is these failed parties getting stronger to take over the country.

Today I've published a piece in The News International arguing that Pakistan's political parties are destroying the country and need to be fixed.

My solution is to have a strong civilian federal govt clipping the wings of these parties with the help of the armed forces. Naturally, such a strong civilian federal government can't come through elections. Our judiciary and the military can find other means to bring quality Pakistanis to the top.

Here's a quote:

"Where in Britain or Europe can parties do what we have allowed our parties to do here? Our parties can block major roads at will and forcibly shut down entire cities. Their ugly flags and graffiti blot the face of our cities and towns. They can brandish lethal weapons in public, confiscate and burn newspapers in Karachi, cut television cables and isolate Quetta from the rest of the country. Last year, one or two parties killed my colleague Wali Khan Babur, a young television reporter, in a sad attempt to ignite linguistic riots because that’s the only way these parties can flourish."

Read the full op-ed here.

UPDATE: Just to prove my point, reports are coming in that the leadership of MQM fled to Dubai as the city was brought to a standstill thanks to the gang wars between the armed wings of MQM, ANP and PPPP. The PKKH website reported that top leaders including Sindh governor Ishrat ul Ibad, Dr. Farooq Sattar, Babar Ghouri , Kamal Mustafa and others were spotted relaxing in the executive lounge of Avari Hotel in Dubai Tuesday night.

The Kandahar Massacre: Afghanistan's 3/11 & The Pakistani Young Man Who Coined It

Imagine this: a group of women and children are sound asleep in the dead of night in a village. Suddenly, a group of deranged men barge in, carrying machine guns. They spray bullets, pick surviving children and then shoot them on their foreheads. Then they burn the bodies. Then they walk out of the house and walk several kilometers for several minutes. They reach another house where they carry out a similar carnage.

A total of 16 Afghans, mostly women and children, are executed and burned.

Would this shake your conscience?

It did shake Tabish.

Tabish Qayyum is a young Pakistani from Karachi. He is one of the founders of a monthly magazine called The Fortress.

The tragedy in Kandahar moved him deeply. So he coined the term, 'Afghanistan's 3/11.'

He also wrote a great piece: Afghanistan's 3/11: We Will Never Forget.

One reason Qayyum's article is important is the eyewitness account. He wrote the following description of what happened from information given by multiple credible Afghan witnesses. Take this chilling sample:

"The houses attacked are at least two miles apart. It is not possible for a single gunman to kill and burn people in one house and then run several kilometers to do the same thing again without being resisted and overpowered. Eleven of the dead Afghans belonged to the same family and nine of the victims were children, including infants found soaked in blood close to the bodies of their mothers. Afghan sources in Pajwayi claim to have photographs of half-burned bodies of women and children. The media has already shown blood-spattered walls and floors of the two houses where American soldiers committed the massacre. Some local villagers have reported seeing two groups of soldiers. The Afghan defense ministry also believes in its initial assessment that there is a possibility of more than one soldier being involved. Afghan President Hamid Karzai believes in the possibility that more than one US soldier was involved. In his statement after the massacre, Karzai quotes a 15-year old survivor Rafiullah as telling him in a phone call that American ‘soldiers’ raided the house and woke up his family members before shooting them."

Qayyum is being farsighted when he tries to make this incident a watershed in America's occupation of Afghanistan, a 3/11 for the Afghans, equivalent to what 9/11 was to the Americans.

Why is this incident a watershed?

To get a brief and a stunning answer, read what the Afghanistan Analysis Team at PakNationalists PAC has written in a report titled, Are US Soldiers Turning Against Their Commanders In Afghanistan?

Here's a quote from this stunning report:

"The fact that US soldiers chose to kill Pashtun women and children in Kandahar is not accidental. This is happening because of irresponsible official American statements that blamed Pashtun Taliban ‘infiltrators’ for killing American military trainers. The truth is that Afghans from all backgrounds have participated in riots against occupying US army. The Afghan intelligence officer who killed a US Army colonel and major inside the secured interior ministry building in Kabul on Jan. 25 was not a Pashtun but a Tajik.  Despite this, US officials blamed the Pashtuns to hide the fact that the US-trained Afghan army, which is largely non-Pashtun, is now turning its weapons on American trainers."

While at it, you might want to see the video by AP at the top [or click here to see it]. It focuses on one of the largest US army bases inside the United States and why soldiers trained their often end up committing atrocities like the one in Kandahar on 3/11.

Our region has seen a lot of bloodshed. The American occupation of Afghanistan continues only because the CIA and US military's special-ops teams don't want to let go of this playground. Bad allies, like India, are advising the Americans not to leave so that India could continue using Afghan soil to foment terrorism inside Pakistan in the guise of religious terrorists. India is also linked to two fictional terrorist groups that it uses to carry out terrorism inside Pakistan. One is Balochistan Liberation Army and the other one is Sindh Liberation Army. The CIA is known to be helping the Indians with the first one, but the second one appears to be an exclusively Indian venture.

We, Pakistanis and Afghans, count on the good American people to counter the disinformation by Pentagon, CIA and their allies in mainstream media who are advising 'perseverance and patience' to camouflage their intention of never leaving Afghanistan.

An Afghanistan free of American, NATO and Indian occupation is good for the region and good for America and the world. 

Me, Saleem Safi And One Indian

Let me share something interesting. Last night known columnist and TV personality Saleem Safi and I were part of a panel discussion on PTV's Moeed Pirzada show.

Today, an Indian tweeted: 'AQ showing his ignorance. Salim Safi chewed him up.'

Now I don't know if Saleem chewed me up or if we had an ice lolly together, but it was interesting to see an Indian monitoring Pakistani talk shows closely. And he's not alone. Twitter is infested with such Indians who don't have much of a life besides commenting on Pakistani affairs considering, of course, that India is God's paradise on Earth.

So I tell him to buzz off, get a life and mind his own business.

Saleem, by the way, is a dear friend of mine. Coincidentally, I bump into him today afternoon at an Islamabad restaurant. I tell him about this hateful Indian. Saleem had a good laugh. He's not on Twitter yet so he asks me to convey a message to the Indian hatemonger. I share the message here for the benefit of everyone. So here goes:

"Ahmed & I can disagree on our local politics but when it comes to Indian policy he & I are on the same page!' - From Saleem Safi.

I tweeted this message to the Indian stalker. No reply as usual. But one of the best responses came from @i_am_ahad who sent me the following tweet:

"Give them a break sir. They're just busy being absolutely NOT obsessed with Pakistan. Their main focus is chai, na? #NotChina !

Thanks Saleem and Ahad. You both made my Saturday night.

P.S. For more info about activities of Indian hatemongers on twitter, see http://bit.ly/pACedo

P.S. After Saleem Safi left with his guest, my wife & I discovered he paid our bill in advance without our knowledge. Thx Saleem. Had I known this, I'd have asked u to leave your credit card with us for the round of green tea after the meal!

Pakistan And Israel

Pakistan maintains ties to Israel without having diplomatic relations. These are not full diplomatic ties but are meant to convey messages on critical issues to avoid misunderstandings. For example, Pakistan went on a high alert after our nuclear tests in 1998 when we received information India was considering allowing Israeli fighter jets to fly from Indian air bases to attack Pakistani nuclear installations. There was information that Israeli air force was present somewhere in India for that purpose. Pakistan conveyed to the US a warning: If Israelis participated in an Indian attack on Pakistan, then Pakistan will retaliate against both and not just India alone. This got the Americans worried and they arranged for a direct contact between the Pakistani and Israeli ambassadors in Washington. The Israelis gave the highest assurances they had no assets in India to be used against Pakistan. That contact diffused the immediate tensions.

Of course Pakistan was not imagining that Israel has a close military cooperation with India. Israel does have such cooperation.

In 1999, elite Israeli military units helped India avert a certain defeat in the Kargil heights of occupied Kashmir. The Israel military contribution in that small war was secret and largely remains so, but it was important enough to change the course of conflict. We are still not sure at what point Kashmiri and Pakistani fighters faced off with Israelis on the opposite side in Kargil in occupied Kashmir. Maybe Pakistani military would have more information on this. This Israeli participation in a Pakistani-Indian conflict would have remained a secret had not some Israeli diplomats in India alerted some Indian journalists, possibly as an attempt to show Indians how grateful they should be to Israeli assistance and, consequently, ensure more Indian orders for Israeli military hardware.

Israel is keen to have diplomatic relations with Pakistan. It is in Israel’s interest to win over a large Muslim nation. But whatever Pakistani contacts with Israel, Islamabad is not very keen on any immediate relations and can wait until Palestinians and Arabs sort out the dispute over Palestine and especially the question of Al-Quds, or Jerusalem, where Israelis want to control holy sites for Christians and Muslims.

A real Pakistani concern is how much Israel bolsters Indian military capabilities. In 2002, Pakistan Air Force shot down an Israeli-made unmanned Indian surveillance plane. So one can imagine Pakistani military planners are not happy with Israelis getting too much involved with the Indians.

We also need to be concerned about Israeli policy hawks who want an alliance with India because they believe the two countries can work together against Muslim nations. Many wiser Israelis and Indians understand such a policy would be suicidal for both. But such wise thinking is not enough unless it actually stops such an alliance from materializing. The verdict on this count is yet to come. One encouraging sign of this would be for Israel to hold back some technologies and weapons that India is sure to buy for one express purpose: to target Pakistan and fortify the brutal Indian military occupation in Kashmir. Let’s see how the Israelis balance this.

Overall, Israelis are keen to avoid talking or acting against Pakistan in public. They don’t want to see Pakistanis retaliating by helping Israel’s enemies. So you won’t see Israeli politicians or media condemning Pakistani nuclear program the way US officials and media do.

A little known fact: You can make telephone calls from Israel to almost all Arab and Muslim countries, possibly including Pakistan. But you can’t call Israel from Pakistan. Not that it really matters in the age of internet, but it gives you a clear idea where we and the Israelis stand in terms of policy red lines.

[Adapted from a note on Facebook where a young Pakistani politician asked about Israel’s interest in ties with Pakistan]

One Of The Best Comments On Bruce Riedel's Pakistan Theories

Bruce Riedel is a former CIA. He is trying to make a living perhaps by renting himself out to Indian lobbying machine in Washington. Otherwise why would any sane person advise Obama to start a confrontation with nuclear armed country of 170 million over a bunch of Islamists ranting on the streets. Isn’t it enough to show how sound his scholarship is? 

Beyond the usual platitudes on military and Islamists, or smoldering hatred of a religion and a country, what is there that is new or thought provoking in this article? Any sane person, with the exception of Indians of course, would know that it is just puffed up sensationalist garbage. 

A comment left by a reader who identified himself as Polar Bear on an article written by Riedel titled, Pakistan's Jihadist Threat: Obama's Terrorism Challenge In 2012, in December 2011.

Twitter Is Infested With Indians Spreading Hate Against Pakistan

Pakistan is a fascinating country that has generated a lot of interest. Many jobless researchers, journalists and documentary filmmakers have made a career out of becoming self-styled 'Pakistan experts': on women issues, religious schools, Islam, ISI and Kashmir. Recently, no less than the US government has turned to Sufism, not out of love for Islamic mystical orders but in the hope of pitching one group of Pakistani Muslims against another to serve American goals in our region.

So, interest in Pakistani issues is widespread and profitable. But when a large number of people from a particular country do nothing online except demonize another country, then we are confronting an organized propaganda effort. And when these hatemongers claim they are not obsessed with everything Pakistan and pretend to be the world's biggest democrats and liberals, then you know why this issue is important.

Several of our volunteers and interns working at PakNationalists.com, the Pakistani nationalist political lobbying group, are reporting something interesting. Many of them run our Twitter account @paknationalists. One of the interns, Majeda, emailed me with the following observation:

"After spending a month updating the Twitter account of PakNationalists, I noticed a strange trend. I found a large number of Indians updating and commenting on Pakistan. Some using names and others nameless. And I found unanimity in their views and direction, united in spreading hate and anti-Pakistanism. It's as if they are all one person or working for one organization. Could it be that Indians have a propaganda department funded by New Delhi and tasked with highlighting negativities and insinuations about Pakistan? Or is it simply the case of too many hateful Indians out there who are obsessed with Pakistan?  They deny this when you confront them but hating Pakistan is a constant theme on Indian television. They do this in their films, it's in their statements, in the fact that 60 Pakistanis believed Indian claims of peace and traveled to India in 2007 but were burned alive aboard a train by hateful Indians. [In contrast, not a single Indian visitor to Pakistan ever faced anything except legendary Pakistani hospitality].  Indians on Twitter avoid discussing anything Indian. They ignore endless Indian problems like massive poverty and disease, female infanticide, rising Hindu terrorism, and mass graves in Indian-occupied Kashmir. The chief suspect in the genocide of 2,000 non-Hindu Indians over 3 days nine years ago is yet to be indicted. There's so much in India to keep everyone busy. But these Indian hate campaigners won't discuss any of this. Talk to them and they'll cynically say the mass graves belong to terrorists, or that the 2,000 murdered Indians were Pakistani agents and so the genocide was justified."

Majeda's perceptive observations don't end here. She went on in her report to explain how a few Pakistani bloggers including some working for mainstream Pakistani media react to this organized Indian campaign on Twitter. These Pakistani journalists, she wrote, refuse to see how organized the Indians are on social media in spreading hate against Pakistan and Pakistanis. What's worse, these few Pakistani journalists often endorse and promote anti-Pakistan propaganda in the name of liberalism and ignore how many of these hateful Indians are religious extremists in their views and posts.

I have a Twitter account @AQpk and use it often. I spent the past three days verifying the observations of Majeda and our other social media team members. I can second her observations.

My only reaction is this: Pakistani tweeple should question these hateful Indians. Don't get into arguments with them. They are not there to exchange opinions. They have one agenda and that's spreading disinformation on Pakistan. Instead of arguing, confront them with issues India faces and ask them to mind their own business. Tell them to react to:

1. Mass graves of Kashmiris killed by India's occupation army. Ask them about 21st century's first genocide, in 2002, where 2000 Indians were killed in just three days for believing in the wrong religion.
2. Remind them of how Hindu extremists burned an Australian priest and his two underage boys alive not far from New Delhi as Indians stood by watching the priest's under-ten boys burn in flames.
3. Ask them what India is doing about being the world's Number One country in female infanticide in the world [killing baby girls at birth because it's not a boy]. India is also Number One in the world in female underage marriages. Also ask them about India's position as home to the world's biggest concentration of poverty, hunger and disease, according to various UN records. 

Many of these insecure and hateful Indians come online using fake Pakistani identities, using words such as Pashtun, Punjab and Balochistan. They try to use regional Pakistani languages to create differences.

It is important that Pakistanis see this organized Indian work against Pakistan and react to it. We need to raise this issue to answer those - Indians and Americans - who claim India wants peace but Pakistan is a hurdle. The Am-Brit media in particular conceals negative news out of India because of US and UK's strategic goals of installing India as an Anglo-American slave soldier in Asia assigned to fight future Am-Brit wars.

We want peace but we can't achieve it as long there are so many educated Indians out there intent on spreading hate.

UPDATE: This discussion cannot be complete without reading two more brief yet interesting posts:

How Hateful Indians Operate Against Pakistan - Read it at http://j.mp/ydoAEO

and;

Hateful Indians At It, Again - Read it at http://j.mp/yJXjOM

Should Pakistan Accuse Pentagon And CIA Of Murdering Rabbani?

Should Pakistan Accuse Pentagon And CIA Of Murdering Rabbani?

Ironically, the assassination removed a friend of Pakistan and served the interests of Pentagon, CIA and their Afghan allies. While avoiding confrontation, Pakistan needs to speak up and not let disinformation dominate the air waves. Here are key points that weaken American propaganda.

AHMED QURAISHI | Monday | 26 September 2011
PakNationalists.com

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—There is a reason why the United States has ignored the cold-blooded murder of ex-Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani and focused all its energies instead on the attacks on US embassy and NATO offices in Kabul.

The assassination neatly fits in with the interests of three parties: US military, CIA and their Afghan warlord allies. It might well be the first planned murder of a senior Afghan government official opposed to US meddling in Afghan reconciliation.

This is the work of the same American lobbies opposed to President Barrack Obama’s Afghan pullout plan and his defense budget cuts.

There is no credible confirmation yet on who exactly eliminated the man who served as President Karzai’s key manager of reconciliation with Afghan Taliban and someone who recently converted into a friend of Pakistan.

After the assassination, the United States military and intelligence tried to create a wedge between Kabul and Islamabad by invoking an alleged Pakistani hand. But this was effectively countered by Pakistani officials, who have become accustomed to American games. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s quick dash to Kabul to offer condolences and support and later army chief’s cool and calm response to Leon Panetta and Mike Mullen’s anti-Pakistan outbursts helped counter the attempt to poison Karzai’s newfound understandings with Islamabad.

Rabbani’s murder removed an advocate of bringing Afghan Taliban into government, and blaming Pakistan for his murder built pressure on Karzai to sever ties with Islamabad. Such a move would have destroyed Pakistan’s strategy of working closely with Karzai – and Rabbani – to reach a deal with Afghan Taliban and re-empower the Pashtuns despite American opposition.

In short, it is Pakistan that should be raising questions about the mystery of who killed Mr. Rabbani and not vice versa.

The only party that was well prepared to make the most out of Rabbani’s murder was Pentagon and CIA. Both of them moved quickly on two fronts: domestic politics and Pakistan. Domestically, the Panetta-Mullen duo organized a joint anti-Pakistan briefing on 22 September and later Mullen appeared before US Senate armed services committee.

The domestic objectives of Pentagon and CIA from this anti-Pakistan campaign are:

1.    Save the skin of US military and intelligence officials responsible for security lapses in Afghanistan

2.    Dodge accountability

3.    Send a message that major cuts in defense budget won’t be acceptable, and

4.    Underline that Afghanistan continues to require foreign military and intelligence presence

Afghanistan today is CIA’s largest base of operations anywhere in the world. The agency is loath to abandon an outpost that gives it direct access to the backyards of several strategic nations at once: Iran, Pakistan, China and Russia. No sane strategist would let go of such an opportunity. Mr. Rabbani’s peace mission may not have shown initial signs of success but it had already upset the policy direction favored by US military, intelligence and their Afghan warlord allies. India was also skeptical about the Rabbani-Karzai plans. Ending the isolation and punishment of the Pakhtun and incorporating them into Afghan power structure has never appealed to these parties. Another common denominator among these parties is their expressed anti-Pakistanism.

In fact, whoever assassinated Mr. Rabbani was also aiming at ensuring that Afghanistan remains an anti-Pakistan outpost. Islamabad has advocated ending the policy of isolating the Pashtun and worked hard to convince Mr. Karzai that friendship and respect for the legitimate interests of both Afghanistan and Pakistan is in both nations’ interests and would benefit stability in the region. Mr. Rabbani had made several overtures to Pakistan in recent months. In January he used the platform of Geo television to address Pakistanis. He spoke in Urdu as a special gesture.

PAKISTAN’S RESPONSE

Pakistan is pursuing the right policy with regards to American provocations. What is lacking in this policy is the media edge. For example, several Pakistani officials have sent strong direct and indirect messages to Washington recently. The list includes the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, Interior Minister, Chief of Army Staff and ISI director. But Pakistan faces a sweeping campaign of demonizing the country. This American policy continues since 2004. Both political and military establishments have failed to counter the American narrative. The danger in the massive American campaign is that it paves the way for stronger future actions and limits global support for Pakistani positions. An example is the intense propagandist reporting on Iraq’s WMD in 2002 which helped Washington invade that country on fake evidence.

We need to become more overt in questioning US positions with regards to several key issues. This includes:

1.    CIA support and safe havens for terrorists meddling in Balochistan

2.    TTP’s easy access to US weapons

3.    The freedom of movement granted to anti-Pakistan terrorists inside US-controlled Afghan territory

4.    The intense demonization of Pakistan primarily and largely in mainstream US media as part of an unstated American policy

5.    Transforming US-controlled Afghanistan into a hub for anti-Pakistan forces in the region

6.    Meddling in Pakistani politics

7.    Buying out Pakistani media and planting mouthpieces in print and TV.

We should also review the argument that we can’t abandon America’s war on terror to ensure US aid flow and to fight domestic extremism. Washington will keep Pakistan afloat but will continue to drag its feet on key strategic issues such as energy generation and access for Pakistani textiles to US market. The US won’t sign any written agreements on CIA’s illegal activities inside Pakistani territory and airspace. As for domestic extremism, apart from TTP terror group that is linked to the Afghan mess, all other forms of domestic extremism are an internal Pakistani issue and should be delinked from America’s Afghan war.

All of this strengthens the argument that we need to declare an end to our direct participation in America’s Afghan war, known as the war on terror. Bilateral Pak-US cooperation to find an end solution in Afghanistan can continue. The move will give us a chance to redesign our relations with Washington and get rid of the verbal commitments made earlier.

© 2007-2011. All rights reserved. PakNationalists.com

Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium

without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

A Meeting With Kuwait's Emir

In 2000, Kuwait's incumbent Emir Sheikh Sabah Al Ahmed Al Sabah was third in line when I met him for the first time. Even then he was so humble and informal that, at one point, I excused him to leave and stood up and walked four steps away when he suddenly gestured with his hand that he forgot to say something.

There was a senior royal family member seated between me and the Emir. The guest began talking to someone and I couldn’t cross him to the emir, so I sat on the sofa with the guest between me and the Emir. In his classic style, Sheikh Sabah had no problem reaching out to me from behind the back of the guest, me doing the same, and then saying a couple of words in my ears related to the subject we were discussing earlier.

I know this would’ve offended other junior sheikhs. But not this man.  Reporters and cameramen present were surprised to see Sheikh Sabah do this. Many assumed I enjoyed a personal relationship with him. Of course I didn’t and it just so happened that he was familiar with my work and seized the occasion to share information.

Kuwait’s present Emir is one of key persons who had a say in the royal family's decision to share the immense oil wealth with their people and pampering them from cradle to grave. I respect this because I know that these sheikhs could have done what Akbar Bugti and others have done and continue to do in our country: pocket all the riches from natural resources and leave their people suffer. Example: the people of Dera Bugti and many other strategic districts and towns in Pakistan.

I was checking YouTube videos and stumbled on this song, by Saudi singer Rashid al Majid, dedicated to Sheikh Sabah in January 2011 on the fifth anniversary of assuming the throne. I can understand the lyrics but the rest of you will enjoy the tunes. 

AQ On Karachi Turf War: Failed Politicians Fighting Over Money

How US Policy Created An 'Imported' Debate Of Sufi vs. Wahabi And Religious vs. Secular In Pakistan; Nation Needs Unity And Not Divisions That Serve Foreign Interests

I don't know why some of our 'liberals' love to confuse our national debate. [So do some of our religious extremists].

Foreign commentators [Read: Americans] decide that our national battle should be Sufi saints vs. Wahabi Saudi Arabia [to borrow from the 'imported' vocabulary, because 'Wahabi' is used in the US and the UK media, but never in Saudi Arabia], and our liberals adopt this line without questions.

Our foreign well wishers also decide to limit the entire great and magnificent reality of Pakistan into one single speech by our Quaid on 11 August 1947. Which is a great speech. The objection is that US's Pakistan policy has hijacked this speech to support its agenda of how the government should look like in Islamabad.

Our Quaid, God bless his soul, was a well versed man and had the courage of his convictions. He, and we, want Pakistan to be a modern state. Pakistan is a modern state barring some deformations that occurred after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Our Quaid was great at expressing his thoughts but he never used the word 'secularism'. And so the insinuations that US policymakers and their Pakistani poodles are trying to inject into his 11 Aug. 1947 speech should end. It's none of their business anyway.

Who says that Sufi vs Arab and 11 Aug speech vs. everything else is our main battle in Pakistan?

If some Pakistani citizens want to follow Sufi saints, that's their right. If some Pakistanis want to follow Arab schools of thought in Islam, that's their right too. If somebody here wants to be a westernized liberal Pakistani, that's their choice.

More divisions in a nation exhausted by fake political and linguistic divides are not welcome. A war between these fake divides is certaily not Pakistan's battle, regardless of what American think-tank types suggest.

The Pakistan of Quaid-e-Azam and Allama Iqbal can accommodate the Sufis and others, as well as those who are westernized or, to be more accurate, our version of 'liberals'.

Pakistan's real battle is to create and strengthen Pakistani Nationalism. And this nationalism covers our multidimensional identity that spans the Middle East, Central Asia, and parts of India/South Asia.

Our challenge of rebuilding the Pakistani State consists of many smaller challenges. Religious-liberal divisions are not one of them. Let's not get behind this ridiculous recipe offered to us by American think-tank types. If these think-tank types and their recipes were any good, they would've handled Iraq and Afghanistan better and prevented their nation from squandering their wealth and reaching the point of default in less than a decade.

   

The Death Of Zardari Sr. & The Jokes On The President

On Tuesday, 24 May 2011, former senator Hakim Ali Zardari, the father of President Asif Ali Zardari, passed away in Islamabad. Since this is one of those moments where politics should make way for humanity and compassion, I posted a condolence message on my Facebook page, sharing the grief of the President's family.

I wanted to send a message. As a harsh critic of President Zardari, I wanted to show our younger generation that your politics need not be devoid of compassion and humanity. This is important because Pakistani politics are run by families and tribes where differences are lethal. Political parties are normally controlled by a strongman or a group of strong men who pass on their seats to their children. New faces are not allowed to raise their heads and competition is brutally suppressed, sometimes violently. This is why Pakistan has no real democracy but only a large number of fake democrats who claim they are fighting for democracy.

So my message was: Let's temper and civilize our politics.

To my shock, someone posted something to the effect, 'We hope the son joins the father soon.'  In a short time, the space was filled with variations of this comment, written in the style of jokes. I know that normally Pakistanis do not politicize the sad occasion when a politician has lost a close family member. But this time, you could see how frustrated and demoralized Pakistanis have become, especially when you have a man of questionable abilities running the government, having attained power through indirect means [through a political marriage and a secret deal sponsored by two foreign governments and a runaway dictator].

There were some intelligent comments too. Imran Ali Shamsi asked, 'I am realy surprised to see a politician who goes to UK/Dubai for their minor medical problems ... but his father died in PIMS with nobody around him.I cant digest it AQ.'

Good point.

Here is another by a Pakistani mother who is an American married to a Pakistani: 'If there is going to be publication and space for public condolences, I would rather it be for a Mother who just lost her little baby in a drone attack. Imagine her loss. You always expect to lose your parents, but your baby?'

Aside from the jokes, all of these are legitimate comments. I also understand the jokes and sympathize with my countrymen and women who are worried about the mess our nation is in because of a decade of supporting the US occupation of Afghanistan and because of the self-serving policies [if you can call them policies] of our ruling elite.

At the same time, it is important that we rationalize and civilize our politics. Let's learn to say all of what my friends have said above, in the comments to my condolence message. Let's say all of that. But let's also condole in this case.

Having said this, I do have second thoughts when I read a third comment-maker say he is sure President Zardari isn't much bothered about his father and so why should we.

It's Pakistani politics. It drove John Negroponte and Richard Boucher mad. Just ask them.

A Pakistani Sikh, A Globalist Sikh: Sardar Suran Singh, Avatar Singh Sekhon

In response to the excellent brief comment posted by Ms. Imaan Hazir Mazari yesterday on the PakNationalists Mailing List, titled Excuse Me, Is CIA Calling Us Terrorists?, I received this email from a prominent leader of the global Sikh community, Mr. Awatar Singh Sekhon. Those who closely follow the issues of Pakistan and the region would find this letter very interesting:

Piare Bhai Sahib ji

Piare Barkhurdar Ahmed Quraishi ji,

Aslaam O Alaikum!

Let them do it. Please keep on working for the progress, development and dissemination of information to the great citizens of the Islamic Republic of Pakistam. This is your duty to look after the Awam of Pakistan and their betterment.


You, the Pakistan, has to find its place in the World Arena of Politics. To do this, you need sincere and committed citizens of Pakistan.

I wish you the very best. May the Khudawand Bakhshinda shower His blessing on you all.

Warmest regards.

Your brother,

Awatar Singh Sekhon (Machaki)
Editor in Chief
International Journal of Sikh Affairs ISSN 1481-5435

In response to my dear elder brother Sekhon Saheb, I would like to share with him this TV interview in Urdu with a Pakistani Sikh community leader who joined thousands of Pakistanis in the anti-CIA and anti-Drones sit-in in Peshawar last week that succeeded in blocking NATO supply route for three days.  In this video, this Pakistani Sikh quotes a saying of Prophet Mohammad PBUH to reaffirm commitment to defend the homeland against future attacks and violations by CIA and US military based in Afghanistan.

Video: In Four Minutes, The Story Of Kashmir Genocide

Forget the decades-old history of the Indian invasion and occupation of Kashmir, and the UN resolutions asking New Delhi to vacate the region. Here, in less than four minutes, you can cover this decades-old tragedy.

Lenin In Pakistan

Lenin in Pakistan? And Castro too. And Che Guevara.

Believe it or not, right in the heart of Pakistan. These pictures were taken last week at the 8th congress of the Communist Party of Pakistan [yes, we have one, too], headquartered in Hyderabad, Sindh.

The CCP's heydays were the 1970s, when communists and the Soviets were firmly lodged in next-door Afghanistan. The leaders of the CCP at the time entertained thoughts of a communist takeover in Pakistan. But the party never commanded large following in the country, though its rank and file boasted members from across the nation. These days, the CCP conducts peaceful politics and it's base is limited. But its presence is a sign of the colorful and lively political culture in Pakistan where different shades of opinion peacefully coexist, despite the bad repuation Pakistan has cultivated as a hub of religious violence after the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

President Zardari vs. Jang Group: All Hail The Pakistani Commander-in-Chief

Imagine this: despite one of the world’s top five standing armies and nuclear arsenals, an important strategic location, 170 million in human resource, and great economic potential, and yet Pakistan’s elected democratic rulers are fighting a pitched battle with a media organization. Just a media organization.

This is what President Asif Ali Zardari, the commander-in-chief, is doing in his protracted, proxy battle with the Jang Group, Pakistan’s largest media conglomerate.

How pathetic that a President of such a big country feels threatened by a media group run by a few journalists. Media management is an art that has eluded Pakistan’s political and military rulers. They just don’t get it. So Mr. Zardari’s aides hound the media group in multiple ways: blocking federal government advertisements, ordering the state-run media to produce counter-programs to the popular political talk shows on Jang’s television network, and try to scuttle Jang’s exclusive rights to broadcast sporting events.

The latest move by President Zardari’s government is to shut down Geo Super’s broadcast rights in Pakistan, leaving this subsidiary of Jang’s Geo Network with the expensive option of beaming its programming from a location outside Pakistan.

None of the successive Pakistani governments, including the five governments of President Zardari’s US-backed PPPP, paid any attention to developing a healthy sports culture in the country. The entire Pakistani political and media cultures are structured to provide maximum coverage to boring, divisive and destructive politics. There are no government-maintained sports facilities for the general public anywhere across the length and breadth of this 170-million-plus nation. Those that exist are few, privately-owned, and exclusive.

In fact, you won’t believe it if I tell you that a tennis court next to a commercial market in the F-6 sector of Islamabad is probably the only public tennis facility of its kind anywhere not just in the federal Pakistani capital but also in any one of the five provincial/state capitals.

In other words, if any businessman were to launch a 24/7 sports channel in Pakistan, it would be a losing proposition. You can’t make money from sports in a country that has no sports on the ground. A few dying national sports teams in squash, football, hockey, cricket and others don’t count.

So Jang’s sports channel was a money drain. And now that’s gone too.

It probably won’t make a dent in the media’s group’s earnings, and the only victims might by the staff. As for the public, they are left with two options:

One, to watch the recycled faces of Pakistani politicians as they grace dozens of talk shows every night regaling the nation with their absurdities and bad manners, barring of course a distinguished few.

And two, to watch self-styled religious channels where very few truly respectable individuals exist, with proper religious education from renowned Islamic schools. The rest offer multicolored turbans and opinions. I have talked to respectable Egyptian and Saudi men of religion and they are embarrassed by what we in Pakistan have to contribute to religion.

No wonder ours is a fatalistic nation, where doom and gloom abounds and most people have nothing to do after a day’s work except watching political TV.

My advice to Jang Group is simple: hit back. Don’t take the closure of your sports channel lying down.

Jang, with its influential talk shows and newspapers, has a unique ability to influence Pakistani public opinion. What it should do is to DOWNGRADE all politicians affiliated with the ruling coalition and its partners. All of them.

Yes. Downgrade them. How? Simple.

It should stop making them heroes by rotating them on its different talk shows every night, giving them free publicity and valuable airtime. It should do what one of its hosts, Saleem Safi, has admirably done: minimize the appearance of politicians on his show unless relevant to the story of the day and substitute them with other more intelligent Pakistanis.

Only a fraction of the 1,000 or so elected Pakistani politicians bore us every night on TV. There are many Pakistanis who can talk politics with more sense and creativity than many of these elected nincompoops. [Remember this: in Pakistan, the lowest you are in the cultural and intellectual development ladder, the bigger your chances of being elected and becoming Pakistan’s newest ‘democratic warrior’.]

So good for you, Mr. President. Don’t let us interrupt you. Please continue your battle against the media group. We have already wasted the first decade of the 21st century. We have nine to go and we’ll manage that with this kind of ruling elite.

India Invaded Pakistan In 1971: Know The Facts, And The Enemy

Click to enlarge

Time for some facts on India's 1971 invasion of Pakistan.

First of all, there was no 'Indo-Pakistan war of 1971'.

That's a misleading description.

India INVADED Pakistan in 1971. Use the right words because there is a big difference.

Pakistani history books, official and private, need to be corrected.

There was a full-fledged, one-sided invasion across an international boundary. And it was an unprovoked invasion, preplanned. A foreign country exploited a chaotic election in Pakistan to launch a snap attack without warnings.

Remember: there was no Lashkar-e-Tayyeba in 1971, nor was there an armed freedom struggle in occupied Kashmir. There was no excuse of ‘terrorism’. India invaded Pakistan to hurt and kill as much Pakistanis as possible simply because India saw a good opportunity and seized it.

To this day, India deliberately uses the term ‘India-Pakistan war of 1971’ to avoid admitting what it actually was: an unprovoked invasion of another country. Unfortunately, Pakistanis at all levels continue to use the Indian description for that invasion.

The Indian role in 1971 war is the dirtiest Indian secret. It’s been effectively hidden from the world. The Indians never discuss how they invaded Pakistan in that year. And Pakistanis discuss everything except the foreign invasion across international borders. The reason this invasion remains unknown is because of our inability in Pakistan to show the world what really happened.

This did not start out as a Pakistan-India war. It was a Pakistani election gone bad and political parties resorted to violence to make a point. Elections go bad everywhere and sometimes they get violent. It happened in Pakistan in 1971. India saw an opportunity in internal Pakistani chaos and invaded Pakistan across the international border without any provocation from the Pakistani side.

India exploited the fact that the Pakistani military was not on alert and that we did not have enough soldiers at that time in East Pakistan. Why weren’t there enough Pakistani soldiers to defend the territory against a foreign invasion? East Pakistan was geographically disconnected from the rest of the country. But more importantly Islamabad never thought that India would launch such a brazen attack on Pakistan without any reason, especially when Pakistan was a member in several US-led defense pacts. Pakistani planners miscalculated in believing they could rely on an ally such as the United States for help. [Indian government documents released this month show that Washington not only ditched Pakistan but also secretly told New Delhi it would support India in case China entered the war to help Pakistan.]

India’s blatant war of aggression was not a chance happening. It was meticulously planned. Two years before the ‘war’, India started secretly recruiting local peasants in areas of East Pakistan adjoining India. In two years, these recruits became foot soldiers for a terrorist militia known as Mukti Bahini that sprung into action as soon as the Indian army began the invasion. Indian soldiers and their terror militia went on a rampage, murdering Pakistanis on linguistic basis [Urdu, Bengali] to feed chaos and pitch Pakistanis against one another. This provided a cover for wanton killings by Indian soldiers because all killings ended up being blamed on Pakistan.

Wrong Pakistani political and military decisions helped the Indian invaders. Here is an excellent brief written by Mr. Mushtaq Sethi that helps in understanding the Indian proxy militia:

“Mukti Bahini were not just another insurgent force: on the contrary, their original core consisted of defectors from the former East Bengal Regiments of the Pakistani Army, who reached the Indian soil and also those Hindus who had fled East Pakistan and crossed over to India and had returned after having received complete training in the art of guerrilla warfare. They were soon reinforced by a considerable number of volunteers, mainly students, then during April and May, Pakistan had purged Bengalis from the armed forces. Many others defected, while those who remained were not trusted. Result was that the combat effectiveness of Pakistani units suffered considerably.  Once in India, together with other volunteers from East Pakistan, they were trained and organized into six new East Bengal Regiments in June 1971. By November 1971, the Mukti Bahini was reinforced by the addition of three artillery batteries as well as a small flying service (operating two Aérospatiale SA.316B Alouette III helicopters, one DeHavilland Canada DHC-3 Otter and a single Douglas DC-3 Dakota transport). They were counting up to 85,000 and their order of battle during the war in December was as follows:
K Force/Brigade, consisting of 10th and 11th East Bengal Regiment and No.3 Field Battery- S Force/Brigade, consisting of 2nd and 4th East Bengal Regiment, and No.1 Field Battery- Z Force/Brigade, consisting of 1st, 3rd, and 8th East Bengal Regiment, and No.2 field Battery.”

The Indian terror militia was dismantled as soon as the war ended with the surrender of the outnumbered Pakistani units. India crowned its invasion with orchestrating a secession, declaring the occupied Pakistani lands an independent country.

If Pakistan does not and cannot trust India, it is because of India’s treacherous unprovoked invasion in 1971. India set many examples later that prove it won’t miss an opportunity to hurt Pakistan when possible. The Indian ruling elite, especially the minority Hindi-speaking bigots in northern India, have wanted to destroy Pakistan since our independence in 1947. They have some strange notion that Pakistani territories somehow belong to them according to their religious history. Some of them cannot forget ten centuries of our rule in the region and have a deep fear and loathing of anything Pakistani. If there is a war in Afghanistan, India would be the first to exploit it to send saboteurs into Pakistan from the Afghan soil. If the European Union decides to allow importing Pakistani textiles, Indian diplomats would spring into action to object. Indian writers, analysts and commentators in the US and anywhere else in the world are the first to launch anti-Pakistan diatribes whenever there is a chance to do it.

It’s a deep seated hate for Pakistan in the north Indian Hindi-speaking belt. And this hatred was at the heart of India’s decision to invade Pakistan in 1971.

Yes, we committed mistakes in our internal politics in 1971 that helped the Indian enemy in its designs. But we have learned those lessons. What is important now is that every Pakistani man and woman understand that our homeland faced a treacherous invasion and a blatant aggression across international borders in that year. Whatever our own mistakes domestically, that cannot justify a blatant war of aggression by a foreign country exploiting our internal situation.

Know the history. And know your enemy.

Why Hosni Mubarak Is Still Better Than Pakistani Rulers

Hosni Mubarak in his speech a few minutes ago has proven he and his regime, including his new Vice President, do not understand and respect their people.

But there is one thing he said that resonated with me because I've seen it in his government for the past three decades.

I'd like to point out this one thing because it is very relevant to Pakistan's political and military leaderships.

Mubarak said at one point in his speech, 'I will not allow myself to be subject to foreign interference'.  At another place, he added, 'I will live and die in Egypt.'

Great words and they certainly don't justify his three-decade long tight grip on power, the corruption and now the refusal of the regime to understand its people.

But I watched President Mubarak say these words and thought about Pakistani leaders who, since the 1990s and until now in 2011, have become shameful instruments of foreign meddling in Pakistan. Mubarak is supposed to be a bigger foreign stooge and yet he never allowed foreign meddling in his country, and he won't now even in his defeat.

Even in his defeat Mubarak declared he will not subject himself to foreign diktat. And that he will die and be buried in Egypt and won't escape for safety and in some haven in Jeddah, Dubai, London and New York.

For Pakistan's ruling elite, these cities have become alternate capitals of Pakistan.

Mubarak refused to entertain offers to move to Germany or Saudi Arabia or Dubai. Sure, things can change in the future, but I read in the Arabic-language media that if worse came to worse, Mubarak thinks he could hand over power and move to his house in the resort city of Sharm el Sheikh, but never leave and die outside Egypt.

This is significant and let me explain why.

Even when Egypt under Mubarak was very pro-American and pro-Israel, it kept its national pride. Egypt was taking American aid but refused to accept American meddling. Mubarak knew Washington needed his country in order to protect Israel. So he delivered on that count but never permitted the Americans to meddle in Egyptian politics. When President George W. Bush rolled out his democracy agenda in the Middle East after 9/11, Mubarak was instrumental in failing it [along with the Saudis]. He just won't have it. Mubarak refused to allow the Americans to establish direct contact with Egyptian politicians or engineer any kind of internal change.

Egypt made peace with Israel but only because Egyptian nationalists were disappointed at what they saw as stabs in the back by Arabs and Muslims [For example, rich Arabs refused to bail oput Egyptian economy enough despite Egypt fighting Israel in four wars on behalf of all Arabs. Egypt was also shocked to see Pakistan in 1956 supporting the British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt, and other Muslim nations like Turkey and Iran not supporting Egypt in wars with Israel.]  All of this shaped the psyche of the Egyptian ruling elite and intelligentsia and helped push Egypt toward peace with Israel under American guarantees.

But Mubarak didn't allow his people to become American or Israeli puppets, and limited all forms of political interference.

I can recount many occasions when there were frictions between Cairo and Washington over one thing or the other and the mainstream US media was unleashed - as usual - to ridicule, harass or intimidate Mubarak and Egypt. But Mubarak won't have any of it. The Egyptians have always been very protective of their national pride.

Compare that to Pakistan. Every regime, from Benazir Bhutto to Nawaz Sharif to Pervez Musharraf to Asif Zardari, has handed over Pakistani citizens to foreign governments without an iota of national pride.

Some of them moved to Jeddah, Dubai, London and New York. Most of them have their wealth and properties abroad. Mr. Musharraf added something new to this shameful history when he launched Pakistan's first political party on foreign soil, in London and Dubai. And now most Pakistani politicians consider it kosher to conduct important political meetings outside Pakistan. Mr. Zardari has introduced another first: high-level meetings with foreign governments that relevant Pakistani government departments, like the Foreign Office, know nothing about. We have ambassadors and national security advisers who are appointed to protect the interests of foreign governments.

The regime's corruption and ruthlessness are the reasons why Egyptians want change. But Egypt progressed a lot under Mubarak's regime, unlike the Syrians or the Iraqis. 

For all of his ties to the Americans and Israelis, Egypt under Mubarak remained staunchly proud. As a Pakistani, I certainly don't want to see a Mubarak in Pakistan. However, we do need a Pakistani ruling class with the same sense of pride and history, one that won't turn its country into an experimentation zone for foreign powers. 

Hosni Mubarak and the Egyptian regime made peace with Israel but never allowed any foreign power to come and abuse Egyptians or bomb them through CIA drones. This honor exclusively belongs to Pakistan's ruling elite.

America's Aid To Pakistan Is Not 'Massive' Nor 'Lavish'

You have to love the language the US media uses when discussing American aid to Pakistan.

There is no new aid. But the latest coverage pertains to a report released by the American inspector general's office on the Kerry-Lugar-Berman aid bill.

The inspector general has released a report criticizing US aid's limited impact on improving civilian services in Pakistan.

This civilian aid was approved in 2009, $7.5 billion over five years, beginning in early 2010.

The new report questions the aid's impact, which is negligible. That's not news to us.

But there are bigger myths that surround this aid package to Pakistan in the US media. It's a classic case of US government spinning to itself and its people and then believing its own spin.

I was reading a Fox News report on this aid that described it as 'massive' and quoted unnamed commentators who opposed 'lavishing' US aid on Pakistan.

Massive and lavish? Hardly.

This aid package is not massive and not lavish. Pakistan has been undersold to US interests by two US puppets, Pervez Musharraf and Asif Zardari. If Pakistani nationalists were in power, US officials and media would have heard more frequently about more than US$ 64 billion that Pakistan has lost directly and indirectly because of America's war in Afghanistan.

Washington has knowingly hurt Pakistan's geo-strategic environment and interests in ways far worse than how it abandoned Pakistan after the Soviet defeat in 1991, leaving Pakistan to deal with thousands of militants that CIA gathered to fight the Soviets.

US officials are still hung on 1991 when analyzing Pakistani estrangement but are unaware of the new estrangement that has emerged because of the American mess since 2002.

Compared to a loss of $64 billion in eight years, the Kerry-Lugar-Berman aid package is peanuts. It is not massive nor lavish. It is nothing compared to what US is spending in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Israel. All of them prove that Washington has been paying lip service to its Pakistani ally while doing things that harm the interests of this supposed ally.

The list of things America has done to harm Pakistani interests is long. Many US officials know about this list but pretend it doesn't exist because the pro-US government in Islamabad never raises it, leaving the Pakistani public opinion to worry about it.

The result is that the US discourse on aid to Pakistan is couched in myths and will not help further US interests on the long run.

And despite all the noise to the contrary, US doesn't appear much worried about this. The Obama administration has resorted to gimmicks in how it uses the 2009 aid package. The flow of funds from the package is slow. Each cash installement released is geared toward creating positive headlines than having any real positive impact on the ground. Since 2009 Washington has been making aid announcements to meet various Pakistani needs as if these announcements indicated new aid. But in all of these announcements US officials forgot to mention this was not new aid but a reallocation of Kerry-Lugar-Berman funds.

In short, the US government has been recycling old aid pledges repeatedly to make them look new, and then embellish the story to make aid to Pakistan appear 'massive' and 'lavish'.

This is what the Obama administration did during last year's epic floods in Pakistan. The much touted US helicopters arrived only when pro-US politicians begged Mr. Holbrooke and Mrs. Clinton to cover up for their incompetence in view of the excellent performance of Pakistani NGOs and the Pakistani military.

This shows the level of US disinterest in genuinely helping its Pakistani ally. No wonder this is a troubled relationship. A pro-US government in Islamabad worsens this relationship by not addressing these issues because it needs US help to counter the Pakistani military and can't afford to talk tough to its protectors in DC.

So my advice to US commentators, especially those who toe the official line: Please spare us the spin.