Exclusive:
Pakistan ambassador says he hasn't been fired (yet?)
Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, Husain Haqqani, has not been fired from his job and doesn't expect to be, he tells The Cable in an exclusive interview.
After the fallout over the cool reception in Islamabad for the Kerry-Lugar Pakistan aid bill, Pakistan's Dawn newspaper reported Monday that Haqqani would be replaced in Washington amid criticisms that he was responsible for the public relations snafu. But that is not (yet) the case, he said.
"I serve at the pleasure of the president and prime minister of Pakistan and will follow any instructions I've been given," Haqqani said,calling in from a trip to Fort Worth, Texas, where he was attending a ceremony to mark the rollout of the first of 18 F-16 fighter planes being sold to his country.
"So far I've not been asked to alter my responsibilities nor have any questions been raised about my conduct," Haqqani said, adding that he does plan to meet with Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi during the latter's trip to Washington tomorrow.
The scene of Haqqani celebrating the F-16 deal, a long-awaited accomplishment of the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, amid the backdrop of the rumors of his sacking, show the complicated dynamic surrounding him. A consummate Beltway insider, his close relationships throughout the Washington establishment are both the root of his success and the reason he is a target of elements in Pakistan who disapprove of close ties with the United States.
U.S. officials in Washington and Islamabad have been conducting triage to stem the bleeding from the negative press coverage surrounding the controversial rollout of the bill. Sources tell The Cable that top American officials dealing with Pakistan are on the case, including special representative Richard Holbrooke, who has made personal calls to Pakistani opposition leaders meant to allay concerns about the aid conditions in the bill and encourage their begrudging support.
The emerging narrative from Pakistani sources close to the issue is that the furor over the bill was largely a tempest in a teapot, a perfect opportunity for anti-American forces in Islamabad to accuse the government of President Asif Ali Zardari of being too close to the Americans, serving their domestic political agenda, as well as exhibiting their general dislike for Haqqani's long-held stance against military rule.
The crux of this argument can be found in a Washington Post column penned by David Ignatius, which includes:
Some of the popular anger in Islamabad is being manipulated by the Pakistani military, which should know better than to toss a match in the dry tinder of the U.S.-Pakistani relationship. And some of it, frankly, is a sign of Pakistani political immaturity. But the larger point is that this hiccup in the relationship is unnecessary. It's a product of gratuitous language that was written into the legislation despite warnings that it would trigger just this sort of reaction.
Insiders point out that that the aid conditions, which require the U.S. government to report on the Pakistani military's efforts to combat terrorist groups in their midst, were available for all to see well in advance. Moreover, they say, similar conditions were included in U.S. aid packages dating back to 2001, when President George W. Bush and President Pervez Musharraf were the respective leaders.
Ironically, it is Musharraf's allies, now in the opposition, who are now harping on such conditions. Regardless, Haqqani has become the poster child for the criticisms surrounding the rollout of the bill, largely because he is seen by some as too close to the United States. His allies point out that his U.S. ties are exactly what makes him an effective representative for Islamabad.
They also say that if the Pakistani government ends up removing Haqqani, that will only do more harm to U.S.-Pakistani relations and fuel the anti-American forces in Islamabad. "Most people don't have the courage to tell the Pakistani people we need the United States, so most of the discourse in Pakistan is anti-American," one Pakistani source said, adding, "Do they want a spectacle where they will say, 'We removed an ambassador for having good relations with the U.S.?'"
These sources also say that Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora's box of controversy that the government would not appreciate, which he might do if forced to defend himself after being fired.
In the end, the Kerry-Lugar aid controversy is likely to play out as follows: American officials and lawmakers will make symbolic apologies for failing to explain the aid conditions in the bill, the Pakistani parliament will reluctantly approve the deal, and the money will get spent.
Meanwhile, each side will hopefully have learned a lesson about dealing with the other. "Washington made a mistake in not understanding Pakistani sensitivities," one Pakistani source said. "But in reaction, Pakistanis are making a big mistake in not understanding American realities."
Photo via Pakistani Embassy
http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/article_detail.php?id=825
If Fired, Haqqani Threatens To Reveal 'Reams' of Pakistani Secrets
Ahmed Quraishi, ISLAMABAD, October 16, 2009
Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani has served a legal notice of Rs. One billion PKR toMr. Majeed Nizami, the editor-in-chief of The Nation for publishing this report. Mr. Haqqani tried to send a limited message to the Pakistani military and intelligence using an American media outlet. What he did not know is that a small leak to an American website would be exposed in Pakistan on the front page of a major Pakistani national daily. What also was not expected is that Mr. Haqqani would sue the man who played a crucial role in Mr. Haqqani's meteoric rise.
The Pakistan Embassy in Washington continues to convey a wrong picture to American officials and politicians on the uproar in Pakistan over the condescending language in the Kerry-Lugar bill. Embassy 'sources' are feeding a consistent line to US officials and media that the uproar in Pakistan is 'manipulated' by the Pakistani military, President Zardari's political opponents and the "anti-American forces in Islamabad." This line is increasingly finding space in most US media reports that quote Pakistan Embassy sources on the issue.
One US media report even quotes a 'source' saying that the personal attacks against Ambassador Haqqani are the result of what one US journalist has termed as Mr. Haqqani's 'anti-army' position in the years before he joined the elected government last year. While attempting to defend his position, suspicion is growing that Ambassador Haqqani is doing a huge disservice to his country and to his hosts by misleading both on the real issues that have generated the latest tensions in the relationship between Islamabad and Washington.
And the complaints are not just coming from Islamabad. Even some Americans are beginning to identify this communication problem between the two capitals. At least one former US military officer who now works as an analyst focused on US-Pakistan relations has told The Nation from Washington that US officials are "badly misinformed" about the real debate in Pakistan. US officials do not know, according to him, that the problem is not the so-called 'anti-American forces' in Pakistan but the offensive language in the bill.
The latest development in this story is that the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine is now quoting sources close to Ambassador Haqqani that he is contemplating going public with embarrassing Pakistani official documents that he laid his hands on during his official capacity if he was fired from his job for playing a deliberate role in inserting anti-military and nuclear-related clauses in the Kerry-Lugar bill. Bill Rogin, a correspondent for the Foreign Policy magazine covering Pentagon and the State Department, interviewed Mr. Haqqani on Tuesday over telephone for the online version of the magazine as the ambassador attended the rollout of the first of the 18 F-16 fighter planes being sold to Pakistan at Forth Worth, Texas.
After several 'exclusive' quotes on the record from Ambassador Haqqani, Mr. Rogin went on to quote 'sources'. One quote is quite ominous and damaging for Pakistani interest and appears as if a serving government officer is blackmailing his employer:
This is how Mr. Rogin has phrased this quote, "These sources also say that Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora's box of controversy that the government would not appreciate, which he might do if forced to defend himself after being fired."
The issue now is that due to Mr. Haqqani's own insecurity about his position after several calls by Pakistani politicians for his removal, he is rendered ineffective in removing the latest misunderstandings between Pakistan and the United States. Even the Americans are beginning to understand this. Ambassador Anne Patterson has conceded some of the language in the bill was a 'mistake.' Washington Post columnist David Ignatius has blamed some US congressmen for the overbearing language. But the general message that US officials and the media are receiving from the Pakistan Embassy remains distorted.
Here is an example from Foreign Policy's Mr. Rogin, from the same piece where Mr. Haqqani is quoted: "The emerging narrative from Pakistani sources close to the issue is that the furor over the bill was largely a tempest in a teapot, a perfect opportunity for anti-American forces in Islamabad to accuse the government of President Asif Ali Zardari of being too close to the Americans." A retired US military officer, well informed about Pakistan-related diplomacy in Washington, told The Nation over telephone that Ambassador Haqqani is part of the problem why the Americans are not getting the real picture about why Pakistanis are so upset with the aid bill.
"The problem is that American policymakers have been badly misinformed," says the retired US military officer, "and Haqqani has not set them straight or allowed others to do so." The stunning part is that the picture that this retired US military officer paints about the message is completely different from what most Pakistanis think they are telling Washington. This is how he puts it: "You will notice that the most onerous provisions have to do with nuclear proliferation and the ISI. Our government is filled with people who believe that A.Q. Khan was running around giving rogue nations turnkey access to nuclear weapons and that he still has confederates doing so.
Basically, for the above, you can say that Haqqani refused to work with people who could have helped set them straight because he was not willing to share the spotlight with anyone. There is also the fact that Haqqani, like the PPP itself, had spent the nine years before the PPP regained power concocting tales about all the sinister activities of the ISI. Having spouted all of this ridiculous bullcrap for years, and having refused to admit that they had concocted the stories, they cannot now make a convincing argument to their American counterparts that the ISI are great guys and an asset to Pakistan. The Americans just say: "Of course the PPP is saying good things about the ISI. What do you expect? They are terrified. If they didn't say good things about the ISI, their lives and those of their families wouldn't be worth a dime."
"In other words," concludes the US analyst, "the PPP is now compelled to sleep in the bed it made for itself." This officer does not want to be named here because his work entails direct contacts with the governments of Pakistan, the United States and the embassy of Pakistan in Washington. This analysis confirms that despite the best efforts many Pakistani politicians and also the Pakistani military in their direct consultations with senior government officials in Islamabad, the message reaching Washington remains distorted and is being painted as a 'tempest in a teapot'.
AhmedQuraishi.com & PakNationalists
Haqqani spares US publication and sues Pakistani one!
ISLAMABAD - October 17, 2009
Mr. Husain Haqqani, Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States, has served a legal notice of Rs. 1 billion against the Editor-in-Chief of The Nation for publishing a report titled, "If Fired, Haqqani Threatens To Unveil 'Reams' of Pakistan's Secrets", written by Ahmed Quraishi and published on Oct. 14, 2009. The legal notice was received at the offices of TheNation in Lahore. He also used the platform of the official news agency, APP, to distribute the full text of the notice. Mr. Haqqani is demanding an apology and retraction and is threatening to press charges if his demands are not met.
This is The Nation's response to his legal notice:
Ambassador Husain Haqqani has chosen the safer course of suing a Pakistani newspaper [The Nation] and spared an American news publication [Foreign Policy magazine] that originally published the information in the report in question. This alone demonstrates that Ambassador Haqqani's purpose in serving this legal notice is damage-control inside Pakistan more than anything else, and he wants to do this at the cost of The Nation.
By sparing the American publication and targeting us, Ambassador Haqqani is making a political statement for the consumption of the domestic audience in Pakistan. Ironically, Mr. Haqqani, who has worked for several US media organizations at different times during his stay in the United States, chose to give a pass to his American colleagues and instead targeted The Nation, a newspaper that gave unprecedented space to his views and positions many years ago when he was not as well known as he is today.
Ambassador Haqqani's legal notice begins with the claim that, "The services of Mr. Haqqani for Pakistan military are undeniable as because of his sheer hard work, dedication and excellent diplomatic skills Pakistan secured F-16 from USA."
The truth is that public and official record of the Government of Pakistan will confirm that the contract for the supply of 18 new F-16C/D Block 52 aircraft was signed between Pakistan and US governments on September 30, 2006 after a long series of negotiations and with predetermined delivery schedule. All Mr. Haqqani did is to pursue an existing project, which is a responsibility that came to him as part of his official duties as Ambassador. So this attempt by the Ambassador to use the legal notice against us for self-serving propaganda does not stand.
As for what Ambassador Haqqani describes in his legal notice as his 'services for the Pakistani military', it is enough to quote the wording of a question that an American television anchor posed to Ambassador Haqqani in a recent interview he gave to the TV show 'Frontline' on PBS [www.OBS.org] where the American anchor asks as follows [transcription available at the website]:
"You [Ambassador Haqqani] have said over the years that one of the reasons that the Pakistanis haven't been able to get at the Taliban is because the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] has protected them, that Musharraf's ISI has protected the Taliban."
This is just one sample of the 'reams' of his writings and interviews where he has accused Pakistan's military and intelligence services of various allegations. It would also have been part of acceptable journalistic discourse to raise such questions about various existing reports, some recent and some not so recent, that allegedly accuse Mr. Ambassador of misconduct especially in the case of a classified letter to ISI chief written by Ambassador Haqqani in July that ended up being revealed by an Indian news organization in New Delhi, and whose content was exclusively damaging for the ISI and Pakistan's military.
Raising all of these questions, responsibly and with proper attribution to evidence both hard and circumstantial, is part of journalism and part of the art of political analysis. TheNation in its report, however, did not raise any of the above. All it did was to quote an interview that Ambassador Haqqani himself gave to a prestigious American publication, Foreign Policy magazine, published on its online edition and available there, and which Mr. Haqqani has not denied to date.
The remainder of the legal notice is as misleading as this deliberately false introductory remark about the Ambassador's role in securing F-16 jets. The other points are as follows:
1. Mr. Haqqani lists ten different quotes from TheNation's report to conclude they are 'devastatingly defamatory.' Ironically, he accuses TheNation of defamation when the publication was in fact reproducing, with due acknowledgement, an article published in the prestigious American magazine, Foreign Policy, which ran a story on Oct. 12, 2009, titled, ' Exclusive: Pakistan ambassador says he hasn't been fired (yet?) . [Link: http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/10/12/exclusive_pakistan_ambassador_says_he_hasnt_been_fired_yet].
2. The American writer authored his piece with the stated understanding that the article is based on a telephone interview that Ambassador Haqqani gave to the American writer. Ambassador Haqqani has not sent a denial or a legal notice to the American writer who has written the following line in his article and which The Nation reproduced in the report verbatim: "These sources also say that Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora's box of controversy that the government would not appreciate, which he might do if forced to defend himself after being fired".
3. TheNation, while professionally and faithfully adhering to journalistic norms, not only printed the paragraph as it is, but it also ensured that the word 'Reams' used in the title of TheNation's report is kept in parentheses in order to signify that we are quoting, and not conjecturing.
4. Why does Ambassador Haqqani not sue his friends in the US media for a paragraph they have published and which he finds objectionable when a Pakistani newspaper picks it? Was the purpose of the said paragraph [which amounts to blackmail in the analysis of most people who read it] to send a message to the Pakistani government and other players including the military, and the paragraph was not supposed to be published or reproduced in the Pakistani media?
5. The clauses (i) through (vii) in the legal notice [the quotes from TheNation report] are legitimate, carefully-worded and well-reasoned journalistic reporting based on what an American news publication has published, which in turn was based on an interview with Ambassador Haqqani and which he has not denied until now.
6. The clauses (viii) and (ix) are direct quotes from a source in Washington that spoke to TheNation's reporter by telephone. In utmost professionalism and in the interest of full transparency, TheNation's report made sure to disclose to its readers the nature of the source being quoted in order to demonstrate why the quotes were relevant. TheNation's report introduced the authoritative source in Washington as follows: "A retired US military officer, well informed about Pakistan-related diplomacy in Washington. This officer does not want to be named here because his work entails direct contacts with the governments of Pakistan, the United States and the embassy of Pakistan in Washington."
7. The portions of the report that are not direct quotes were written by TheNation's reporter. These are carefully-worded and well-reasoned findings and conclusions that seamlessly sync with the information being quoted in the report from different publicly available news sources and are based on a calibrated analysis of the news. These portions of the report passed through a process of fact-checking by seasoned and experienced journalists at TheNation, which is one of the largest media houses in the country.
8. Mr. Haqqani asserts that The Nation's report gives the impression - and we quote from the legal notice - that "the Honourable Ambassador is involved in and is guilty of wrongdoing, that the Ambassador is conspirator, corrupt, dishonest, unethical, immoral and lacks integrity." This interpretation by Mr. Haqqani of TheNation's report is malicious, seeks to raise a false alarm, and is a deliberate distortion of the professional effort that has gone into writing the published report. Nowhere in TheNation's report has the reporter used or alluded to any of the adjectives claimed by Mr. Haqqani in his legal notice.
9. In discharging his duty of presenting credible and well sourced information and analysis, written in a manner that would help contribute to an ongoing national debate on a matter of immense importance to Pakistanis and to Pakistan's national security, the reporter has not, as explained above, indulged in any reckless conjecturing or the use of known and recognizable defamatory language. The question that TheNation would publish and apology does not arise.
Ambassador Haqqani's legal notice is an attempt at diverting attention from the inflammatory report published by an American publication based on an interview that Mr. Haqqani gave to it. Mr. Ambassador is seeking to punish TheNation for highlighting the said information in the best interest of a raging debate on a matter of national importance to all Pakistanis. The Ambassador should press charges against the prestigious American Foreign Policy magazine, if he can, for publishing the remarks that he seeks to dispute.
The Nation stands by its report - The Editor
If fired, Haqqani threatens to unveil 'reams' of Pakistan's secrets
The Pakistan Embassy in Washington continues to convey a wrong picture to American officials and politicians on the uproar in Pakistan over the condescending language in the Kerry-Lugar bill.
ISLAMABAD - October 14, 2009
Embassy 'sources' are feeding a consistent line to US officials and media that the uproar in Pakistan is 'manipulated' by the Pakistani military, President Zardari's political opponents and the "anti-American forces in Islamabad." This line is increasingly finding space in most US media reports that quote Pakistan Embassy sources on the issue. One US media report even quotes a 'source' saying that the personal attacks against Ambassador Haqqani are the result of what one US journalist has termed as Mr. Haqqani's 'anti-army' position in the years before he joined the elected government last year.
While attempting to defend his position, suspicion is growing that Ambassador Haqqani is doing a huge a disservice to his country and to his hosts by misleading both on the real issues that have generated the latest tensions in the relationship between Islamabad and Washington. And the complaints are not just coming from Islamabad. Even some Americans are beginning to identify this communication problem between the two capitals. At least one former US military officer who now works as an analyst focused on US-Pakistan relations has told The Nation from Washington that US officials are "badly misinformed" about the real debate in Pakistan.
US officials do not know, according to him, that the problem is not the so-called 'anti-American forces' in Pakistan but the offensive language in the bill. The latest development in this story is that the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine is now quoting sources close to Ambassador Haqqani that he is contemplating going public with embarrassing Pakistani official documents that he laid his hands on during his official capacity if he was fired from his job for playing a deliberate role in inserting anti-military and nuclear-related clauses in the Kerry-Lugar bill.
Bill Rogin, a correspondent for the Foreign Policy magazine covering Pentagon and the State Department, interviewed Mr. Haqqani on Tuesday over telephone for the online version of the magazine as the ambassador attended the rollout of the first of the 18 F-16 fighter planes being sold to Pakistan at Forth Worth, Texas. After several 'exclusive' quotes on the record from Ambassador Haqqani, Mr. Rogin went on to quote 'sources'. One quote is quite ominous and damaging for Pakistani interest and appears as if a serving government officer is blackmailing his employer:
This is how Mr. Rogin has phrased this quote, "These sources also say that Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora's box of controversy that the government would not appreciate, which he might do if forced to defend himself after being fired."
The issue now is that due to Mr. Haqqani's own insecurity about his position after several calls by Pakistani politicians for his removal, he is rendered ineffective in removing the latest misunderstandings between Pakistan and the United States. Even the Americans are beginning to understand this. Ambassador Anne Patterson has conceded some of the language in the bill was a 'mistake.' Washington Post columnist David Ignatius has blamed some US congressmen for the overbearing language. But the general message that US officials and the media are receiving from the Pakistan Embassy remains distorted.
Here is an example from Foreign Policy's Mr. Rogin, from the same piece where Mr. Haqqani is quoted: "The emerging narrative from Pakistani sources close to the issue is that the furor over the bill was largely a tempest in a teapot, a perfect opportunity for anti-American forces in Islamabad to accuse the government of President Asif Ali Zardari of being too close to the Americans." A retired US military officer, well informed about Pakistan-related diplomacy in Washington, told The Nation over telephone that Ambassador Haqqani is part of the problem why the Americans are not getting the real picture about why Pakistanis are so upset with the aid bill.
"The problem is that American policymakers have been badly misinformed," says the retired US military officer, "and Haqqani has not set them straight or allowed others to do so." The stunning part is that the picture that this retired US military officer paints about the message is completely different from what most Pakistanis think they are telling Washington. This is how he puts it: "You will notice that the most onerous provisions have to do with nuclear proliferation and the ISI. Our government is filled with people who believe that A.Q. Khan was running around giving rogue nations turn key access to nuclear weapons and that he still has confederates doing so.
Basically, for the above, you can say that Haqqani refused to work with people who could have helped set them straight because he was not willing to share the spotlight with anyone. There is also the fact that Haqqani, like the PPP itself, had spent the nine years before the PPP regained power concocting tales about all the sinister activities of the ISI. "In other words," concludes the US analyst, "the PPP is now compelled to sleep in the bed it made for itself." This officer does not want to be named here because his work entails direct contacts with the governments of Pakistan, the United States and the embassy of Pakistan in Washington.
This analysis confirms that despite the best efforts many Pakistani politicians and also the Pakistani military in their direct consultations with senior government officials in Islamabad, the message reaching Washington remains distorted and is being painted as a 'tempest in a teapot'.
--
If a man like Muhamed were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness.
- George Bernard Shaw
Civilization begins with order, grows with liberty, and dies with chaos.
- Will Durant
Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.
- Will Durant
Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent-many for appointment by the corrupt-few.
- George Bernard Shaw
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.
- George Bernard Shaw
May you live every day of your life.
- Jonathan Swift
Pity the nation... that welcomes its new ruler with trumpeting, farewells him with hooting, only to welcome another with trumpeting again.
- Khalil Jibran
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends".
- Dr Martin Luther King, Jr.
"Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music."
- Angela Monet
"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains."
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau
"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do."
- Voltaire
"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."
- Samuel P. Huntington (author The Clash Of Civilisations)
-
No comments:
Post a Comment