Friendship of sorts
American bullying is putting its friendship with Pakistan under extreme strain, Iffat Malik reports from Islamabad
The relationship between Pakistan and the United States since 11 September 2001 can best be described as a "compulsory friendship". As the world's only superpower, the United States has managed to force its weaker "friend" to support it in the so-called "war on terror". Pakistan has generally complied with whatever was asked of it, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that it will no longer unquestioningly accept whatever its powerful "friend" orders.
In the past, the differences between Islamabad and Washington have manifested themselves in more subtle ways. White House spokespeople would commend Pakistan for its support in the hunt for Al-Qa'eda, while urging the government to do more to catch suspected terrorists in the country. Similarly, General Pervez Musharraf would stress Pakistan's commitment to the "war on terror", while acknowledging that sections of his population were not happy with the government's policy. Both sides would strive to ensure that the differences between them were played down and, at least in public, present a united front.
An incident last week on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan has posed the biggest challenge yet to that delicate consensus. The incident took place in the South Waziristan Agency of Pakistan's tribal belt, adjacent to the Afghan border. According to available reports, US and Afghani forces on the Afghan side of the border accosted a man in Pakistani border-guard uniform, ordering him to return to Pakistan. As he was doing so, he opened fire on the Americans, injuring one of them in the neck. He then entered a school building. The Americans responded by calling in their air-force and dropping two 500-pound bombs on the school. Fortunately the building was empty at the time, and no civilian casualties were reported.
The significance of the incident lies in the fact that the school was situated in Pakistani territory. As such, the US has mounted its first direct assault on its ally, Pakistan. This is deeply embarrassing for the Pakistani government, which was not consulted about the decision to bomb the school.
The Americans are well aware of the embarrassment they have caused Musharraf's government. They defended their action with the claim that the school was in Afghani territory. The Pakistan-Afghanistan border in the region is not well-defined, making such a defence feasible. It did not, however, satisfy the Pakistan government. Military spokesman, Rashid Qureshi, insisted that the school was in Pakistani territory. However, Qureshi did not comment on the fact that the US had bombed its ally. Pakistan's religious parties were not so reticent. The Muttahidda Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) alliance of religious parties was quick to condemn the US action as a violation of Pakistani sovereignty. "American jets have violated the air and geographic frontiers of Pakistan," said Ikramullah Sheikh, an MMA member of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) provincial assembly. The MMA heads the provincial government there. On Wednesday, the assembly passed a unanimous motion condemning the US bombing as a violation of Pakistani airspace and sovereignty. The MMA followed this with a nation-wide protest call on Friday.
The primary target of the demonstrations was the US, which was condemned for the bombing in Waziristan, its general operations within Pakistan, and for its plans to attack Iraq. Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman, the MMA's nominee for prime minister has even stated that a US attack on Iraq would be an attack on the whole Muslim world. Another MMA leader, Maulana Sami-ul-Haq warned that, should the US attack Iraq, no American would be safe in Pakistan.
The Pakistani government was also condemned for its support of US policies. Referring to the bombing incident, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, the leader of Pakistan's Jamaat-e-Islami, accused the country's leaders of being too submissive: "Our country is like an orphan. There was no protest. This is tragic," he said. Until the weekend, the government had stuck to its usual policy of playing down differences with the US. But a statement by a US military spokesman at Bagram air-base near Kabul forced them to abandon that stance. Captain Alayne Cramer stated, "Yes, we can enter Pakistan, that's the policy." Another US spokesman stated, "We do reserve the right to go after them [enemy forces] and pursue them and that is something Pakistan is aware of."
If so, that was certainly not the impression being given by the new civilian government. Faisal Saleh Hayat, interior minister in the Jamali cabinet, was adamant that, "There is no room or legal sanction for any cross-border operation by US forces to pursue fugitives into Pakistani territory. We have no such policy."
Pakistan subsequently lodged a written protest with the US ambassador in Pakistan. A senior Pakistani official warned that, "They [the US authorities] have to ensure that such an incident is not repeated," otherwise Pakistan would have to withdraw its cooperation from the US-led campaign.
The seriousness of the situation has also prompted a number of telephone conversations between senior Pakistani and American military officials, and between Colin Powell and General Musharraf. The outcome of those discussions was announced by Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri, "both [sides] agreed that the incident which happened on 29 December may have occurred due to a misunderstanding on the ground."
For now, the two sides appear to have reached an agreement: the US will avoid such high profile embarrassing incidents being repeated, and where necessary will quietly carry out hot pursuits into Pakistani territory. The Pakistan government, on its part, seems willing to allow this, provided it is not publicised. Thus, the US- Pakistan cooperation in the "war on terror" goes on, but one has to question how long it can survive in the face of such strains.
