A waning resolve

If the federal Pakistani government had smarter politicians and media managers in office, they would have shown interest in Charity and Veronica Bowers. Almost eight years ago, the CIA asked the Peruvian Air Force to shoot down a plane over the Amazon river in the war against drugs. There were no drugs on the plane. But there were Christian missionaries, including 35-year-old Veronica and her infant daughter, Charity.

Last week, while American spy drones and missiles attacked mainland Pakistan, in a daring expansion of the undeclared war against us from the Afghan soil, CIA Inspector General John Helgerson released a blistering report accusing the CIA of repeated lies and cover up about the operation, about the downing of Bowers' plane, and more importantly about other incidents that never made the news.

This goes to all those in Islamabad who have been accepting the outcome of each CIA attack inside Pakistan as gospel. I am referring here to media reports – quoting no credible source – that mysteriously surface after each CIA missile attack inside Pakistan accurately identifying the dead when there is no way of verifying the mangled human remains on the ground.

Pakistan is not as weak and helpless as the Zardari-Gilani government's weak responses make us appear to be. The lack of resolve is breathtaking. It's as if no one in Islamabad is willing to own up and defend the country's legitimate interest if it means upsetting US officials.

Reaching out to our eastern neighbour for peace is commendable. But President Zardari, who can be tough if and when he wants to be, conceded major ground by telling the Indians his country won't be the first to use nuclear weapons if it ever came to that. For all its professed humanism, even the United States never made such a concession to the Soviet Union. It's a psychological bargaining chip, especially for the smaller party. Why did we make nuclear weapons in the first place, Mr

President, especially when hostile acts from the Indian government have increased in recent times instead of decreasing?

Despite the government's weak resolve, the Americans are beginning to take notice of Pakistani grievances, especially the question of how Washington has systematically cornered and isolated its ally in the past six years with the distinct aim of shifting the Iraq-Afghanistan war to Pakistan. The issue is widening the trust deficit in a way that is bound to hurt US interests in the region. But instead of accepting at least some of the Pakistani concerns, the Americans have once again deployed their massive media machine to deflect pressure and claim innocence.

The New York Times has just published what looks like a news report, again quoting no one, complaining how unreasonable Pakistanis are for thinking Washington wants to weaken their country and redraw its borders. The irony is that the report came on the eve of a US request to China to cease peaceful nuclear cooperation with Pakistan.

The best part of the report is the portion where the reporter reminded Pakistanis that U.S. was a 50-year-old ally who wouldn't do such things. The problem, however, is that our ally has actually been doing those things. Last year, the U.S. media launched what appeared to be an orchestrated campaign that attempted to demonize Pakistan and convince the world of the need for possible future American intervention a la Iraq. That was the most anti-Pakistan media campaign in memory. If we didn't know better, we'd have thought America and Pakistan were at war.

Pakistan's ability to project power and protect its legitimate security and strategic interests is in fast decline. Our ability to provide good governance, improve the quality of leadership and change an increasingly failing system will go a long way in arresting this decline. The question: Who will do it?



The writer works for Geo TV. Email: aqahmedquraishi.com