Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

What a New Leader in Pakistan Will Mean for the U.S.

By Robert Scheer, Truthdig. Posted November 28, 2007.


The U.S. government fears that Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan's "president-in-exile" who just returned, will be soft on Muslim fanatics. Those fears are well founded.
Robert Scheer

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Robert Scheer

The Tortured Law on Torture
How has our government managed to justify one of the most egregious assaults on the rule of law?
May 14, 2008

Battle of the Hawks
Both McCain and Clinton have shown a dangerously cavalier attitude towards the option of a nuclear strike against Iran.
May 7, 2008

No Country for Old Men
McCain's age matters; especially if he picks his running mate from the crazy wing of the Republican Party.
Apr 30, 2008

More stories by Robert Scheer

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

It was a very good week for Saudi Arabia. The royal family's favored Pakistani "president-in-exile," Nawaz Sharif, returned in a triumphant homecoming, throwing down a major challenge to the rule of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who's still favored, for the moment, by the United States.

Although Sharif can claim to be the true pro-democracy choice, given that he was deposed as prime minister by Musharraf's 1999 military coup, the U.S. is hoping to throw the deeply corrupt but Westernized Benazir Bhutto into the mix out of fear that Sharif is soft on Muslim fanatics in his own country as well as on the Taliban.

Those fears are well founded, given that Sharif, inspired by Saudi-style Wahhabism, attempted to introduce sharia, Islamic law, in his last years in office. It was his administration that green-lighted the test of the Muslim nuclear bomb and condoned bomb builder A.Q. Khan's nuclear proliferation efforts, which aided the nuclear weapons programs of North Korea, Libya and Iran. Finally, it was Sharif who strongly supported the Taliban, sponsors of Osama bin Laden, in securing power in Afghanistan.

Now, to be fair, Musharraf and Bhutto also favored Pakistan's nuclear program and actively supported the Taliban. I am not referring to the fact that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the only countries to extend full diplomatic recognition to the Taliban. No, Pakistan's sponsorship of the Taliban, under all three leaders, goes far deeper than that, as revealed by the release in August of declassified portions of seven years' worth of cable traffic between the U.S. State Department and its embassy in Pakistan.

As the National Security Archive, based at George Washington University, summarized the new information, "The declassified U.S. documents ... clearly illustrate that the Taliban was directly funded, armed and advised by Islamabad itself ... including the use of Pakistani troops to train and fight alongside the Taliban inside Afghanistan."

That support for the Taliban is traced in the declassified documents back to 1995, when Bhutto was Pakistan's prime minister. One cable on Dec. 22, 1995, states that "Pakistan has followed a policy of supporting the Taliban" in its effort to seize power. On Oct. 22, 1996, again with Bhutto very much Pakistan's prime minister, the U.S. Embassy warned Washington that "U.S intelligence indicates that the ISI is supplying the Taliban forces with munitions, fuel and food."

ISI refers to Pakistan's hugely powerful and secretive Interservice Intelligence Agency. By the end of Bhutto's tenure, a U.S. cable reported, "Pakistan's ISI is heavily involved in Afghanistan," but the cable added that the mostly Pashtun Pakistan Frontier Corps was also pitching in: "These Frontier Corps elements are utilized in command and control; training; and when necessary -- combat."

Those Frontier Corps fellows are the same folks that Musharraf and Bush are now counting on to capture bin Laden and his gang, operating on Pakistan's frontier with Afghanistan. The good news, I suppose, is that the religious militant Sharif acted not much differently from U.S.-supported wonders Bhutto and Musharraf. The bad news is that they have all provided decisive support for the Taliban, which harbored bin Laden.

But all was forgiven by the Bush administration after 9/11, when President Bush dropped the sanctions against Pakistan (imposed in reprisal for its testing a nuclear bomb) as a reward for Musharraf letting American forces use his air space for the invasion of Afghanistan. We also gave him $10 billion in aid as an incentive to help us catch bin Laden, but that hasn't quite worked out yet.

In addition, we rewarded the two Arab oil sheikdoms that had supported the Taliban by knocking off their nemesis Saddam Hussein. As a result, the world is much safer, democracy has spread throughout the Muslim world, and the price of oil is so high right now that the Saudis are ordering $20 billion of American-made military hardware.

It's been a good deal all around. Dick Cheney's old company, Halliburton, profited so much from the Iraq war that it could afford to relocate its world headquarters from Texas to Dubai. And this Tuesday, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority agreed to help salvage Citigroup by becoming the beleaguered bank's largest shareholder. Probably not a very smart financial move, given the unknown depths of Citigroup's liabilities in the sub-prime mortgage scandal, but what are friends for if they can't help out in tough times? It's not the sort of thing Saddam Hussein would ever have done -- and that's why he's now history.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: sharif, pakistan

Robert Scheer is the co-author of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq. See more of Robert Scheer at TruthDig.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Pakisham
Posted by: Chickaboomer on Nov 28, 2007 12:17 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chickaboomer.blogspot.com:
The slimy, corrupt, greasy-palmed, opportunistic marionette of Bush AND Osama, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf wins re-election in a "landslide" amid protests. [Fox] [MSNBC] [CNN] The voters were politicians. Parliament and four groups of lawmakers in farflung provinces. Musharraf missed a rout by five votes in Parliament (National Assembly and Senate).

Humor me on a Serious Political Issue. Pakistan's elections. Tee Vee talking heads are wringing their collective naive hands wondering if Bush puppet with strings leading to Osama, President Pervez Musharraf, is in jeopardy after former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto dropped in unexpectedly from exile etherland.

Musharraf is Bush's good bad guy playing both sides of the fence. Osama and Bush. Although the WH publicly "supports" Musharraf, Bush wants to neutralize the corrupt, pendulum-swinging pol. Bush would like nothing better than to jettison Perez. Enter Benazir Bhutto.

These clueless Tee Vee news bozos were swimming sperm, eager eggs, or were still sucking pacifiers when Benazir's slick, handsome, sophisticated, debonair, Westernized (went to USC, UC Berkeley, and Oxford U in London) prime minister father was executed in 1979 by the wacko thug general, President Zia, who later expired in a mysterious plane crash.

Tee Vee numnuts: Bush's War On Terror in Pakistan is only reinforced by the entry of Miz Benazir, Bush's new Pakistani Play-Doh.

Champagne corks aren't popping yet. The crafty, clever-by-half Musharraf's election must be ratified by the country's highest court. General Musharraf has promised to give up his military position as the country transitions from military to civilian rule. The double-crosser has figured out by now he's on the way out even if he remains prez. The fed-up Bush administration is propping up Benazir.

The opposition party boycotted the elections. Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Musharraf supposedly are talking about power-sharing but that ain't gonna happen. Some sort of under-the-table arm twisting persuaded Pervez to drop the "corruption charges" against Benazir that prompted her flight from Pakistan years ago. I've rounded out this story earlier by pointing out Benazir's prime minister father was executed in 1979 for "corruption." The execution ordered by Pakistani prez General Zia who later exited the planet in a mysterious plane crash.

If you're a spy and you're sent to Pakistan as CIA station chief, you've scored a plum gig. The Pakistan station is a big deal. My former grad school prof in U.S. foreign relations at American University in DC was a former Pak station chief in Islamabad. The late Sidney Sober. Acting ambassador during the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war that created Bangladesh from East Pakistan, and President Nixon's famous "tilt" to Pakistan dissing the formerly favored India. Later Sid came stateside as a deputy assistant secretary of state.

Which brings me to torture. In 1984 CIA's station chief at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut under "political officer" cover, William Buckley, was kidnapped by Hezbollah. He was tortured for more than a year and finally died after blabbing all. Buckley's body didn't turn up until 1991.

The torturers sent three videotapes of Buckley's torture. Then-DCI William Casey nearly cried when he saw the first one. I heard other CIA veterans broke down in tears. Casey pulled out all stops to find Buckley because he knew "too much." The CIA went full-tilt boogie analyzing Bill's mind to predict how he'd react to the torture, and later the videos. Read this disturbing account of the torture Buckley endured. Not only did the terrorists torture him into an unrecognizable pulp, they played with his mind via mind control.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pakistan needs a new start
Posted by: robchapman on Nov 29, 2007 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pakistani politics are unusually tumultuous and dangerous now.

Pakistan has a sad history of war with its neighbors, retarded economic development, corruption and military dictatorship.

The result of this sad history will be a meaningless and rigged election between three candidates dominated by foreign powers.

Neither Musharif, Sharif or Bhutto can make a legitimate claim to broad based popular support.

Similarly, all three are dependent on their foreign patrons for support as national candidates.

Mr. I. Khan, the former cricketer,has a proposal to bring Pakistan back from the brink of chaos.

He is campaigning to organize a boycott of the upcoming national election.

If the boycott is able to succeed it would be by preventing a quorum of eligible Pakistani voters from participating in the travesty of an election the government is sponsoring early next year.

Since there is no legal requirement that a set number of voters is required to establish a national quorum, Mr. Khan's movement would have political and moral- but no legal- force.

However, the political and moral force of a successful boycott would be overwhelming.

The moral force of the boycott would be enhanced if voters actually went to the polls, registered their vote, entered the booths and then left without casting a ballot.

This would unmistakeably demonstrate that the abstention was deliberate and not the result of intimidation, apathy or any other such rationalization the government would concoct.

Unquestionable Musharif would continue the state of emergency after such a loss, but it would become increasingly untenable and the status of Musharif, Sharif and Bhutto as illegitimate pawns of foreign powers would stand unmasked.

At some point Mr. Khan and other Pakistani leaders, representing the legitimate interests of the Pakistani would emerge, form political coalitions wage and win an election.

At the end of that process, the interests of the Pakistani people would be served and Pakistan would be welcomed into the ranks of democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad Advice
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Dec 1, 2007 8:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The US's meddling will only make things worse. Sharif would be a nightmare, and the corrupt Bhutto wouldn't be much better. Musharraf could have been induced to moderate his position instead of cutting his own throat, but the extremists of the Bush administration would never give such wise counsel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]