25
Analysts and media men who have yet to be swept by the new wave of anti-Americanism roaring across Pakistan suggest that on most occasions such waves are a construct of the military-establishment. They believe that whenever the establishment wants to drive a hard bargain with the Americans, it whips up anti-Americanism with the help of sympathetic voices in the populist media and political circles.
The anti-Americanism then settles down as just background noise once the bargain is struck. However, in spite of the fact that the military has been able to strike various deals to its strategic liking with the Americans (in the context of war on terror in Pakistan and Afghanistan) there have been certain issues on which the Americans have simply refused to bend. One of the biggest in this regard is the mounting charge against Pakistan and its intelligence agencies of harbouring certain groups of extremists which, some believe, will help Pakistan protect its strategic interests in a future Afghanistan.
What’s more, many in the establishment explain this as being Pakistan’s inherent right; a right to negotiate a working relationship with some groups of the Taliban so once the US leaves Afghanistan, these groups can then look after Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan. Of course, not only has the US refused to come to terms with this thinking, scores of common soldiers, civilians and politicians have lost their lives due to the obvious dangers that such thinking attracts. As the deadlock on this issue between the military and Washington appears impossible to break, the game-playing between the two armies has become deadlier than ever. The message one can gather from the spiraling tussle is that the old ploy of pushing the US on the back foot by whipping up anti-Americanism among the people and media is now outmoded. Though this ploy has been used more frequently in the last one decade or so, its roots lie in the very first clear example of a maneuver to whip up anti-Americanism.
This line of thinking first emerged during the second year of General Ziaul Haq’s dictatorship in 1979. After Zia’s military take-over in July 1977 toppled an elected government, relations between Pakistan and the United States hit a sudden low (in 1978) when the government of President Jimmy Carter began raising concerns about the Zia regime’s human rights record.
Zia had begun to introduce various draconian laws against the press and politicians, including controversial Islamic edicts whose weight was mostly felt by Zia’s political opponents, the religious minorities and women.
Incidentally, when US’s criticism of Zia’s regime reached a peak, an armed group of religious extremists attacked and occupied the Grand Mosque in Makkah. The same year, Iran was in the midst of an Islamic revolution that had toppled the pro-America Shah. After the Makkah incident the Iranians blamed ‘Israeli and US agents’ of capturing Islam’s holiest site.
According to Yaroslav Trofimov in ‘The Siege of Mecca,’ the Iranians were well aware of the reality behind the takeover of the mosque by Saudi fanatics, but used the opportunity to embarrass both Americans and the Saudis by claiming that it was a part of an Israeli/US plot to ‘occupy’ Makkah. In Pakistan, though the state-controlled media kept rather mum about the event and only asked the people to ‘mourn the takeover’; the Zia regime advised PTV and Radio Pakistan not to let out any details of the occupation.
The people, though aware of the takeover, knew nothing about the men who’d executed the diabolic undertaking. They switched to BBC for details. But since Saudi authorities had blocked any news coming out of Makkah, BBC began to quote speculative views from other sources. One such report that merely quoted a speculative and unsubstantiated claim made by the Iranian state-controlled radio was picked up and treated as actual news by a few rightwing Urdu dailies in Pakistan.
Unimpressed by American criticism and facing further American sanctions, the Zia regime did absolutely nothing to reveal the details of the attack, in spite of the fact that the regime had offered military help to the Saudi monarchy to dislodge the Salafi fanatics from the mosque. Suddenly, unchecked by the Zia regime, the bogus news broadcast by Iranian radio and reproduced by some Urdu newspapers in Pakistan was taken as a plank by members of the student wing of the pro-Zia Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) to organise a sit-in outside the US embassy in Islamabad.
Accusing the US of the attack on the mosque, the sit-in was then suddenly penetrated by some loud young men who instigated the gathered people to attack the embassy. The mob then surged forward towards the embassy, setting it on fire. The attack lasted for hours, but the police stayed put. Pakistan army helicopters hovered over the burning building but only landed on the roof of the crumbling structure after the mob had killed two American and two Pakistani employees of the embassy. Two protesters also lost their lives in the chaos.
In December 1979, as Soviet troops rolled into Afghanistan, Carter’s criticism of Pakistan’s ruling janta came to a halt and the embassy incident was shoved under the carpet. But according to a 2004 article written by Cameron W. Barr for The Washington Post (on the survivors of the embassy attack), the embassy staff accused the Zia regime of failing to come to the rescue of the cornered staff and for allowing the protesters to inflict as much damage before being stopped by the Pakistanis.
The tactic worked to win over an estranged Washington, and to revert to ‘business as usual’. But today’s is a changed world, and it remains open as to what works and what doesn’t anymore.
We are like Sheikh Chili, cutting the branch on which we are sitting. Good luck Pakistan.
A really nice & informative article.Live long Mr.Paracha.
really great piece totally another side of picture in current scenario…
The article was good but you forgot to mention how the US played its part in toppling the Bhutto Govt and accepted in the Army
Dear Mr. Nadeem Paracha I am a regular reader of your columns. I am pleased that we have people like you among us. Your articles always provide insight. I pray for your good health and long life.
excellent…putting things in perspective…!
We should learn from the Americans, how
to protect our National Interest rather than our personal agendas.
Thank you, Paracha.. nice ride through the memory lane.
As usual, it is a pleasure to read facts coming from NFP. I wonder what will happen if US dollars
stop flowing into Pakistan ! May be Mr. Paracha will enlighten us.
Pakistan is better served without America. good riddens
Dear Nadeem has identified the heart of the problem with US-Pak relationship.Giving Pakistan the benefit of retaining some dangerous elements of Talibans to take take control of Afghanistan when US leaves in 2014 will undo all the objectives which US has set for itself.Us may not bend this time.Raising the stake further will harm Pak interests.They should be careful.
Great NFP..Few days ago i was reading these all incidents from wikipedia..You have been doing great job..I request you write the bottlenecks and problems that came in the path of this Government….Can we analyse these that "Where the fault exactly lies"…Is that Bureaucratic insincerity with the ruling heads, Economical conditions, Incompetency of Ministers, Lack of vision and scientific attitude at the policy making, Or mixture of all these…Corner your self, being unbiased, and come up with the rich analytic articles.. Because almost whole nation dznt know what are the actual reasons that are pushing back…
Its time to do Politics of rights not politics of parties and Personalities….I hope you would read and consider my request..
Good work as usual.
How else should the military react when 24 of its soldiers are killed? US started 2 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) in reaction to 3000 civilian deaths on September 11. Pakistan has scarified 35000 civilian/military men, what is the reaction do you recemmend military should have?
Thanks NFP, very informative. Kudos to your insight.
maybe the angry young men and women may learn how the emotions are misused in the name of religion and country. nice article NFP
Nice article. This shows how few manupilate news and masses fall for it too! Open society and education is the key for survival of nations in ME.
nice article. welldone . do
As a school boy growing up during ZIA-UL-HAQ regime only source for reliable news use to be a short wave radio. NFP you are filling in gaps of Pakistan history which where left blank during Zia dark years. I bet most of us Pakistani still believe pak army not French commandos freed the grand mosque.
So true. On a few occasions when I have mentioned that it were the French rather than Pakistanis my friends thought I had lost my mind.
Can't be French commandos
very true !
Well its just another typical writing and that's how dealings have been going back door's in all across the world…So whats new?
Ah, excellent Sunday treat!
Khube agha NFP! a well balanced writing on history. Somehow I fear that history is repeating itself. Iran is once again hot on the international agenda. I hope media can educate people on anti americanism. We need leaders who can start working on internal corrections in our society rather than how to get more aid out of US.
Another potent piece of history. Always a pleasure to read NFP on Sundays where he takes a slice of immediate history a roots it in the present. But we just refuse to learn from history.