By: Hari Sud
harisud@hotmail.com
July 12, 2003

The author is a retired Vice President from a C-I-L Inc. and has lived in Canada for the past 34 years. A graduate of Punjab University and University of Missouri; Rolla, the author is a former investment strategies analyst and international relations manager.

There are two ways US influences the hearts and minds of the people in other countries. First, it cultivates the intellectuals and the wealthy of the country. Second it captures the hearts and minds of the people. Both are self serving and both have served US well in protecting US interests abroad in last 58 years.

In case of Pakistan the first one has been used successfully in the last 55 years. Reasons – US, at the advent of Cold War, was looking for allies to encircle the Soviet Union and Pakistan was the perfect ally. In return Pakistan was looking for a powerful friend, a generous military aid donor and a perfect big brother to stand by in case of trouble with India. US all along concentrated on the ruling establishment of the country and forgot to capture the hearts and minds of the people.

When Pakistan signed on to become an ally of the US, Great Briton, the former master of the Indian Sub-continent, cheered it on. While India was turning to be an anti-colonial, anti-imperialistic and pro Soviet state, Pakistan was embracing the West for its own needs. Succession of Prime Ministers in first 10 years of its existence made a perfect place for military take over. General (later Field Marshall) Ayub Khan stepped in and threw all the politicians out. Not only did he throw them out, he tried them under marshal law on various charges. US the Pakistan’s benefactor stepped in with economic and military aid. The masses cheered on both - the US as well as the Field Marshall Ayub. US influence was at its highest. The people accepted the aid and welcomed US.

British were the masters of Indian Sub-continent after Clive in 1757 grabbed the Dewani (Prime Ministership) of Bengal from a failing Muslim ruler. In next one hundred years until 1857, they became the master of all India, from Hindu Kush to Cape Comarin and from Balochistan to Assam. At that time, the rulers of Hindustan (as it was called then) were Muslim invaders from Central Asia and kin’s of present day inhabitants of Afghanistan. The population mix was roughly 80 % Hindus and 20% Muslims. The Hindus were merchants, landowners, money managers, intellectuals etc. and were being ruled forcibly by the Muslims. The latter formed the aristocracy of the country and they made it as their home. It was a crude rule forced upon the Hindu majority by the ruling of a Mullah or a Governor or a King (Badshah), all of them Muslims. Every now and then the rulers fought among themselves to rule and enlisted the help of Hindu majority for money, manpower and place to prepare for battle. This continued from 1100 AD till 1756 when Clive threatened their power with the European desire for monopoly on trade and a colony to rule and get wealthy. The quarrelsome rulers of various states of India, which had come unhinged after the decline of the power of the Badshah at Delhi, surrendered power to the British generals after a few minor fights in next 100 years. Hindu population was not unhappy with the developments. They wished an end of the Muslim rule by hook or by crook. Marathas, Rajputs of Central India did put up a fight when they realized that the power is slipping from Muslim into British hands (the latter being equally crude). But by that time it was all a lost cause. The British militarily were too powerful and they had corrupted the ruling Muslim and Hindu aristocracy (Marathas) into submission. The British realizing that power has been taken away from Muslims decided not to trust them.

But to rule effectively, they turned to the Hindu intellectual class to provide them with Clerks to man their businesses, civil service and the infrastructure. Army recruitments after the First War of Independence in 1857 was severely restricted to the so called marshal classes consisting mostly of Gurkhas, Sikh, Bundelkhand Rajputs, Dogras, Punjabi Mussalman, and sprinkling of others as needed. They were trustworthy and loyal to the Raj. By 1885, the Hindu majority of India under the rule of the British had taken control of almost all the various components of the government. The Muslim had a very limited hold to the power that too restricted to either their princely states or Muslim majority areas.

Muslim power was mostly in West Punjab (now in Pakistan) and East Bengal (now Bangladesh). The sparsely populated Sind was also Muslim but was less Muslim than the Muslims in Punjab.

The British realized about the transfer of power, which had happened under their ruler-ship since 1857 but could do nothing. For next 50 years there was no leadership left among the Muslims (as well as Hindus) to question the British. When, from 1918 till 1945, Gandhi and other Indian National Congress leaders asked for Independence, the Muslims decided to stay out of this struggle as long as possible. It was the British who encouraged the newly formed Muslim political parties to ask for their own homeland. This, the British very cunningly exploited to prolong their rule. But weakened by the WW II, they decided to leave in 1947, but not before dividing the sub-continent on the basis of religion. The Muslim provinces in the West formed the present day Pakistan.

Last 50 years of the British rule in India were spent on cultivating and creating an aristocracy for the upcoming creation of Pakistan. This aristocracy they modeled it on British aristocracy with a home base in West Punjab. Their main job was to effectively grab the country and form the core group to rule it. They will provide the civil service, the army and the intellectuals for the future governance. Today they are the wealthiest of all. To perpetuate their existence, they train there off spring in English ways in English schools.

When Americans came looking for place to park their U-2s in the South Asia in 50s, this core group was ready and willing to do their bidding.

In short this relationship of the masses in Pakistan to this core group is the same as serf’s relation to his master in Czarist Russia.

From independence in 1947 till today the Pakistani aristocracy provides the manpower to rule it. It is pro–British (pro West) and strongly nationalistic.

From 1947 till 1971 the masses towed the master’s line and stayed pro-West. After the 1971 War, a Bombay born aristocrat named Zulfikar Ali Bhutto came to power. At about this time the Pakistani government’s mood towards the West started to change. Although he was a wealthy man, Zulfikar toyed with anti West and anti US feelings. He felt hurt with the lack of US support over Bangladesh War and West’s ridicule over his desire to acquire the Atom Bomb. In eight years he ruled, he turned the army, the civil service and pro West establishment against him. But the masses disenchanted with the invincible Army’s lackluster performance during 1971 war, started to listen to him. A divide was visible. In 1978 the Army found an excuse and stepped in and removed him from power and then later hanged him. With his removal anti West feelings were discouraged by the Army. General Zia Ul Haq settled down to rule for next 11 years.

Zia a devout Muslim and a follower of Al Wahab, a 17th century Muslim fundamentalist, started to develop a nexus of the Army and the Mullahs. Other reasons for his action included desire to boost the morale of the Army, which had lost so many battles with Hindu India in last 40 years.

This relationship of Mullahs and the Army received a further boost when Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1978. US with a desire to defeat the Soviets encouraged Zia to further strengthen this nexus and provide recruits to fight in Afghanistan from the fleeing Pathans of Afghanistan and devout Muslim masses of the people of Pakistan. US victory in Afghanistan in 1989 was complete. It resulted in:
Breaking up of the Soviet Union

Pushing back Pakistan into the American fold
Creating a Mullah – Army nexus which will provide recruits for any terrorist action in India
Brought Osma Bin Laaden to the forefront
Started the most murderous civil war in Afghanistan
Set the ball in motion for 9/11 in New York and Washington.

Zia died under mysterious circumstances in 1989 and the power was handed back to Zulfikar’s daughter, provided she tows the Army line. A little later she was thrown out. She got herself re-elected again but not for long. An Army supported Nawaz Sharrif, defeated her in a rigged election and became the Prime Minister.

From 1985 to 1997 was an eventful period for Pakistan. The Army recouped its morale after its loss in 1971, Zia Ul Haq and his successors maintained a pro West line, the Mullahs became de-facto rulers of the hearts and minds of the Pakistani people and the country completed its Nuclear Bomb in 1989 but kept it untested.

The West was very unhappy with the rise of Mullah’s influence in the mainstream politics of the country and the acquisition of nuclear technology (mostly stolen from the West) etc. The US in particular showed its unhappiness by slapping Pressler Amendments on transfer of military hardware to Pakistan. This incurred the wrath of Mullahs and the establishment in Pakistan. Anti Americanism, which was largely absent till then started to grow in the streets of the country. The establishment was powerless to stop it as the Mullahs controlled the masses in the streets and also in the lower ranks of Army and the civil service.

Now the divide was complete. The establishment stayed pro West, but the masses became Anti American. They saw America as a great Satan. US’s pro India attitude during Kargil 1999 did not help. The Mullah’s became a political force to reckon with which the Army was happy to exploit. The 9/11 and later US unseating of Taliban from Afghanistan and killing of hundreds of thousands of Pakistani volunteer Jehadis in Afghanistan further provided Mullahs the ammunition they needed to turn the country anti West and Anti American. Aristocracy watched in horror as the country turned more and more fundamentalist and anti American. This was further aggravated with the American occupation of four military bases in Pakistan. A very vociferous anti American campaign was started. They chanted death to President Bush and burnt his effigy almost everyday in the cities of Pakistan. This anti West feeling has resulted in:

Electing a fundamentalist provincial government in North West Frontier Provinces
Preventing the capture of Osma Bin Laaden
Encouraging return of Taliban to Afghanistan

The US is finding itself in a quandary. It wants Pakistan. It has its establishment of Army, the civil service and the businesses in its pocket. But the masses are not with it.
Is there a disconnect between people of Pakistan and its Establishment?

This disconnect is visible everyday since the Kargil and the 9/11. The people of Pakistan think that Osma Bin Laaden is right in his pursuit to beat up the US. They consider the US as the great Satan. Qazi Hussain Ahmed, the MMA leader has gone to the extent of suggesting that the pro West Foreign Office look for ways to settle its dispute with India to prevent Pakistan sliding further into the American influence.

The people are against this unholy alliance of Pakistani establishment with the US. Sooner or later the dispute is going to spill into the streets. The visible signs are already there. There are only two ways out of this situation for Pakistani establishment.

Start a war with India to keep them busy Or readjust there thinking to become a bit less pro West i.e. stop chasing Osma Bin Laaden, help Taliban recapture Afghanistan and ask America to leave the Pakistani soil.

Is there a disconnect between American policies and Pakistani people?

Yes there is. This is true in spite of influx of huge cash into Pakistan by the Americans. The above is not a healthy sign for $3.0 Billion future military and civilian aid promised last week by President Bush (and $600 million already paid for leasing four military bases in 2001 & 2002). This money is going to go waste. The promised reform of the education system with this money to prevent hold on young minds by Mullahs will not materialize. The military aid promised to upgrade the Army infrastructure lacks the punch and psychological feeling of superiority for the common soldier and the citizens. Other disadvantages include, unhappy India, inability to capture Osma and unhappy Iran on the Western Front, which is blaming Pakistan for letting the Americans into the region permanently.

No aid or friendship ever succeeds, if it is directed towards one section of the community. To the contrary it polarizes the society. It has happened in Pakistan. Americans may feel happy that they have purchased Pakistan with the money. As a matter of fact, the establishment has been bought out but the masses are completely disconnected.

Result – Prevailing Anti Americanism will deepen its roots. Generals and civil servants will come and go. Religious feelings and deep distrust of the West will be there for generations to come.

Conclusion
In the end, all that money which America sank into Pakistan from 1954 to 1965, again from 1978 to 1989 and now with 9/11, is a net waste. People of Pakistan do not like America; they are not ready to be bought out as yet. The Mullahs and Osma Bin Laaden wish to establish a theocracy in Pakistan, this money will not stop it.

What will stop this slide is, money spent to improve the economic well being of the people, removal of Army and Mullah nexus, return to democracy where people very regularly elect leaders or eject them if there performance is unsatisfactory, remove general feelings of mistrust among the people of Pakistan towards the West. Short of that all the promised aid is as good as not spent.

Hari Sud