Honour vs national interest
by
Javed Hafiz |
|
The sudden release of Raymond Davis in Lahore a few days ago has evoked divergent reactions. Imran Khan, the religious parties and some Punjab lawyers think this was a national betrayal. Imran Khan is also of the view that the manner in which this case has been finally resolved would increase extremism in Pakistan.
There have been rallies in various cities condemning the way this issue was resolved. People are angry and embarrassed by the impression created that all Pakistanis have a price tag. That is far from true. I know it for a fact that there are scores of people in this nation who cannot be purchased. But will this emotional outpouring and chest thumping serve any purpose? I do not think so for the following reasons.
The US government kept saying that Raymond was a diplomat and was entitled to blanket immunity under the Vienna Convention of 1961. Pakistani authorities were not so sure. What strengthened the Pakistani impression were contradictory statements from the US Embassy in Islamabad, US Consulate in Lahore and Raymond himself.
The circumstantial evidence clearly showed that he was intelligence operative with connections to some local extremist outfits. Whether he was trying to use those connections to destabilise Pakistan or to further US war aims in Afghanistan is not clear. The foreign ministry settled the immunity issue when it told the High Court in Lahore that it had no record of Raymond as a diplomat. Subsequently the High Court ordered that the case be sent to a lower court. It was the Additional District and Sessions judge who ordered Raymond’s release after the relatives of the deceased received blood compensation money under the Qisas and Dia’t law.
Contrary to the emotional response, there have also been some balanced and, should I say, sane assessments. Their argument is that the case has been decided by a Pakistani court and under Pakistani laws. By paying the fine for possession of illicit arms, Raymond himself and the US authorities by implication, have conceded that he did not enjoy diplomatic immunity. Other US nationals of this kind would now be much more careful. Indeed, some credible reports say that their role has now been clearly defined.
I am myself happy with the decision to the extent that it would limit further damage to Pakistan-US relations, which are vital to both nations. However, I am firmly of the view that this was an excellent opportunity to get rid of all similar US personnel in Pakistan. Their abominable presence was allowed by General Perwaiz Musharraf in 2006.
Had Raymond been awarded jail sentence or capital punishment, it would have had serious implications for the bilateral relations and the war in Afghanistan. It is in Pakistan’s interest that this war comes to an end as early as possible. Extremism stoked by the US presence in Afghanistan has taken a heavy toll of Pakistani lives and the damage to its economy is incalculable.
The advocates of national honour would have liked the same situation to continue for a decade or two. That gives them a punching bag at the political rallies. Under normal circumstances, the religious parties in Pakistan have never been able to get more than 8 per cent votes at the national polls. With Raymond gone, that punching bag has been taken away from them. Thank God, the three biggest political parties have adopted a less emotional approach.
The government of Pakistan rightly decided that this vital bilateral relationship could not be kept hostage to this single unfortunate incident. In the process, the families of the deceased were adequately compensated according to the Islamic injunctions. I am told that the right wing parties were pressurising the families not to accept the blood money so that Pakistan could stand up to the United States. That was hardly a sane advice.
In international relations, the national interest and power equation prevail over morality. In case Pakistan wanted to stand up to the US and other developed nations, it must achieve the following: Double the tax collection to formulate balanced budgets; achieve 8-10 per cent growth rate to create enough jobs to obviate immigration; establish quality universities so that Pakistani students can get international level education at home; become self-sufficient in arms production; export as much as it imports and finally eradicate corruption. Is this too tall an order? I do not think so and firmly believe that all this can be achieved in a decade or two. But for that Pakistan would need a capable, committed and honest leadership.
Imran Khan, Maulana Fazal Ur Rehman and Munnawar Hasan should first dedicate themselves to create a strong Pakistan over the next 20 years and then talk to all other nations from a point of strength. They know all this but still raise anti-US slogans to win votes of a gullible public.
(Javed Hafiz is Pakistan’s former ambassador to the Sultanate) |
Other comment for Javed Hafiz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
