President Barack Obama recently signed the Kerry-Lugar Bill into law. The bill which was initiated by veteran Senators John Kerry and Richard Lugar envisages tripling of non military aid to Pakistan to an annual outlay of $1.5bn for five years. However, the bill comes with strings attached and clearly that has drawn the ire of the Pakistani people. The legislation kick started a series of heated debates on live television in the competitive and booming Pakistani media and the final punch before the knock out was the announcement by the Ex-Premier Nawaz Sharif, currently the country’s most popular politician, of his party’s rejection of the bill. The combined effect of these forces means that President Asif Zardari’s weak administration has received yet another blow and will see it’s fortunes plummet further.
Matters have not been helped by the way the whole exercise was handled by the ruling coalition and the vibes from the army, the most powerful institution in the country. Overnight the functionaries of the Government, ministers and other important officials of the ruling party went on a media blitz trying aggressively to salvage pride and defend the bill resembling clumsy marketing bosses angry at the failure of their products launch and the justifiable media coverage to its side effects some of which may cause death on an overdose. The Foreign Minister rushed to and fro between Washington and Islamabad managing to get an explanatory note from the Americans on some provisions and conditions of the bill, his efforts culminated in an impassioned, thunderous yet short on detail appeal in the Parliament to accept the bill and a declaration of victory of the ruling government on achieving an important milestone.
An important milestone it may be but clearly the Kerry Lugar bill has failed in one of its main objectives which is improving the American image in the eyes of the common man in Pakistan. It has on the contrary led to a further battering of the already beleaguered US image in Pakistan and its people many of whom, fed on a mixture of conspiracy theories, rumors and more recently by the wild growth of informed, lively, independent and outspoken media in Pakistan stand convinced that the bill is yet another hostile American intrusion into the affairs of their country. It is, many believe, the instrument of micro managing Pakistan. While it may hold true for the latter, those who drafted the bill clearly left a lot to be desired and a reading of the bill certainly gives one that feeling. Let us examine two of its most controversial clauses being regularly debated in Pakistan. Consider Sec 203 which details limitations on certain assistance, the gist of which is the requirement by the Secretary of State to certify periodically that Pakistan is working to dismantle the illegal nuclear proliferation networks. The US also has to certify that Pakistan is no longer supporting militant groups. One of the most contentious parts of the bill is Point 2 under Section 203 which many opine was included in the bill due to the influence of the Indian lobby on the Capital Hill, it is this part which according to many looks like it has been hand written by an Indian diplomat. It contains more than one reference of action to be taken by Pakistan against terrorist groups and entities involved in terrorism against its “neighboring countries” , specifically pointing to Jaish e Muhammad and Lashkar e Tayyaba, two formidable terrorist outfits with a history of waging terrorist violence in Indian held Kashmir. The text states boldly enough and includes taking into “account the extent to which the Government of Pakistan has made progress on matters such as (A) ceasing support, including by any elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agency, to extremist and terrorist groups, particularly to any group that has conducted attacks against the United States or coalition forces in Afghanistan, or against the territory or people of neighbouring countries”. Sec 205 details on the requirements for civilian control of certain assistance which includes civilian oversight of “direct cash or security related assistance or non assistance by the United States to the Government of Pakistan may only be provided or made to civilian authorities of a civilian government of Pakistan”. This has raised eye brows within the Pakistani security establishment and its agencies for the text makes plain the distrust of the American security establishment for their Pakistani counterparts. The Bill has other stringent conditions placed over aid such as Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, Strategy and the inclusion of Appropriate Congressional Committees including the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.
What could have been done to avoid this disaster? This is perhaps the question both the Americans and Pakistanis must ask of each other. Let’s start with the Americans; clearly a noble intention has been misfired. The bill could have gone a long way in improving America’s standing in an important Muslim country, vital to its strategic interests and plans in the long term at a crucial time. A higher level of economic assistance should have been provided in the first place, the conditions put on the bill make it look like a huge chunk of American aid money is going to one country only. The losses being suffered by Pakistan are greater than any amount of billions can do justice to, most certainly not a paltry $1.5 yearly. This too, when the Americans are spending billions more in the war effort in Afghanistan, Iraq and in doling out aid to countries like Egypt, Israel which can possibly never come close to the death and destruction that Pakistan has and continues to face. Secondly, the largest part of the money should be going to a) infrastructure projects, roads, railways, dams, energy by providing the requisite technology to Pakistan and b) by a massive infusion of cash and expertise in Pakistan’s collapsing education, health sectors. Thirdly, the flow of security related assistance to Pakistan must continue even if steadily, a greater emphasis of this must be anti terror equipment and technology including the drones which will become a Pakistani requirement with or without Nato/Coalition forces success or failure in Afghanistan. This will also help to keep the all important Pakistani military and its security establishment at ease with the whole enterprise. Lastly, the wording of the bill could have been more careful and a un necessary furore avoided.
For the Pakistani side, there are many lessons to be learnt. Firstly, the dismal response and handling of the Government has only compounded the problem and added to the fury against the bill. Secondly, other donors such as EU, the FODP (Friends of Democratic Pakistan) and even bilaterally many countries would be hesitant to offer aid in packages which are likely to include conditions which will again be seen as intrusive by the people of Pakistan. Thirdly, those responsible in Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry or its Mission in Washington must be held accountable for clearly the bill could not been passed without going under their eyes. Fourthly, the Pakistani military should not have come out with the sort of statement that it came out with at the end of the meeting of the Corps Commanders, the military should have conveyed its feelings through proper and better channels of communication rather than going public with it and lastly, the Pakistani people and Government must realize that the menace of terrorism threatens to destroy Pakistan for good if both don’t close their ranks to fight the threat together. No amount of aid can save a nation if there isn’t a desire on the part of a government and its people to do so by themselves, if the latter doesn’t happen the Kerry Lugar Bill will go down in the annals of history like the Pressler and Glenn Amendments and the later did more harm than good.
The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at distantcitylights@hotmail.com
Turkey-Japan Relations: The Need to Think Beyond Trade
