TNI executive editor Justine A. Rosenthal interviewed Pakistan's Ambassador to the United States, Mahmud Ali Durrani, on January 24.
TNI: Hoping you can tell us about how you see the situation in Pakistan after the Bhutto assassination. Do you think things are more politically fragile? Can you give us a look at the landscape from your perspective?
MAD: There has been a level of political instability since about March with the removal of the chief justice, culminating in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. There were two major arrows piercing the heart of Pakistan, which were causing the instability. One was the political development where the opposition party saw an opening, and they wanted to take advantage. The other was the insurgency and the increase in the militancy.
It's a matter of how much instability remains. I think since Benazir's death, a level of stability is emerging. It's not all there, but things have improved, I would say-marginally. Particularly now that the elections have been announced and almost everybody who's anybody is participating in the elections. That is on track.
The other is the war on terror, which is also moving in the right direction. I think if I were to compare December to now, things have improved. How? For example Swat in the North West Frontier Province, which was essentially under the control of militants for a couple of weeks, is now back in the government's control.
TNI: And what of the stability of the tribal areas?
MAD: The tribal areas are a restive area. It's nothing new, it's been like this for decades, even centuries. So there are problems. Initially the problems were in North Waziristan. But the military took very strong action there. It stabilized North Waziristan. Things are much better.
And the situation in South Waziristan is improving. As we talk there are operations going on, and the Masood area, which is surrounded by the Waziri area, is being squeezed from three different directions. From what I hear from the region today, they are asking for peace, a ceasefire. I think the government is not in the mood for that because this is the first time the extremists have come under serious pressure. Their supplies are limited, and they are being encircled. The government has a window of opportunity.
TNI: Now why do you think the government was able to counter the extremists this time as opposed to all the other times?
MAD: Well all the other times we had developed different strategies. The kind of reaction that we were getting was mixed from the tribal regions. We didn't want to have major casualties for the tribal regions. We didn't want to cause collateral damage, we wanted to use the stick very sparingly. There came a point where we thought if we didn't use the stick strongly enough, it was going to cost us too much.
TNI: What do you think was the breaking point? Was it the assassination, was it the growing instability?
MAD: Growing instability and the assassination. They were the same thing. The instability was expanding-and it was expanding out of the tribal area and I think then the government decided that you know, now we have to use force, and maybe we will not be as cautious about the collateral damage. We still want to use a multipronged strategy. That is, military force, development and empowerment of the people. We still believe that that will be the ultimate answer. Using force alone is not the answer.
TNI: How much do you think Pakistan's alliance with the United States has exacerbated these problems? How do you balance the costs and benefits of the relationship?
MAD: It's very difficult. Take, for example, what the U.S. has done for us and what they have given us in terms of support, in terms of money, and so on. We are grateful for that. That has helped us. But on the other side, the popularity of the U.S. is very low, and the caveats that Congress puts on the money creates problems. It's like giving somebody an ice cream cone and sprinkling a bit of red pepper on it. With so many caveats, good intentions get messy.
TNI: Why do you think then that the Americans weren't able to capitalize more on the aid they gave after the earthquake?
MAD: Some people called the United States "agents of mercy." But after at time that went away. When the things started going wrong in Afghanistan, then the blame game started: Pakistan is not doing enough, all the trouble is coming from the tribal areas. We think this is unfair. I think we get a lot of blowback from Afghanistan. We have footed much more in terms of effort, money, soldiers, fighting than anybody else has. And then we are criticized for somebody else's failings. People see this. People in Pakistan see what the government is doing, what the military is doing in terms of fighting extremism, and yet we have writers from the United States saying "you're not doing enough" and "the money is being wasted."
TNI: There has been criticism that a lot of people who are within the Pakistani military are born in some of the areas where they now have to go and fight, and that makes it almost impossible, potentially, for them to choose sides. Are these exaggerated?
MAD: This is a figment of the United States' imagination. They are fighting, they are giving up their lives, they are dying every day. They have to choose sides. This is difficult, but they are loyal to the military.
TNI: And what do you think are the potentials for the election? Do you think there will be more stability or will it be destabilizing? What do you think of the foreign presences that are going to be there for the election?
MAD: As far as the election preparations are concerned, I think this is going to be the best election in Pakistan as far as fairness is concerned. That has not been a strong point in the past. We all know that. In fairness this is probably going to be one of the best elections. Better than anything before, but not perfect. There are people who are going to lose, and habitually the loser is going to protest. So that could cause instability. Now that will depend on the people of Pakistan: how they take it, how they assess it, a lot will depend on the sentiment of the people. So I am not sure. I am only hoping that it will bring greater stability.
TNI: Do you think there are growing tensions between Pakistan and the United States?
MAD: Not between the administrations. Overall, as far as the administration is concerned, I think we have a good understanding between the government of Pakistan and the government of the United States. So I don't see major tensions there. I have been to Congress. Yesterday I was there. Almost everybody says we have to support Pakistan. Almost everybody. They are an important ally. They are vital for our fight against terrorism. Everyone says that. But then there are about half a dozen ifs and buts: Hold a fair and free election, do more for the war on terror…
TNI: Now, when they talk about U.S. troops going into the tribal areas-
MAD: First, we don't think that would be useful. It would be totally counterproductive. The popularity of the United States would plummet further. It will destabilize Pakistan's government because people will get after them for letting the Americans come in. So I think it will totally ruin the whole thing.
TNI: There have been arguments that the only thing that will destabilize Pakistan is a U.S. troop presence. Do you think that's true?
MAD: I would not say that Pakistan will remain stable in any condition. A lot will depend on how we manage our country. I will not make any assumptions that we will forever remain stable and that everything is fine. We have problems. We have to correct all the faults, we have to bring internal stability in Pakistan. And we can't blame the United States or any other country for that. That is our own problem. We have to resolve it. We have stability issues we have to resolve. But if you put in American troops, this will further destabilize the country.
TNI: How much of a problem would the tribal areas be for the Pakistani government were there not a U.S.-led war on terror?
MAD: I think with hindsight, we are always paying for the fallout from Afghanistan. I think if there was no war on terror and if what had happened in Afghanistan had not happened, tribal areas would have continued as they continued in the past, and I don't think we would have had many problems.
TNI: Do you expect that the United States is going to sit in judgment of this election? What happens if it is not considered "fair"?
MAD: No, the common man in the United States I don't think is bothered one way or the other. But there isn't a single voice in the United States. The biggest voice is the administration. Then there is the Congress, the media, and to a smaller level the academic community/think tanks. So everybody is going to stand in judgment because everybody here in the United States has got involved with the politics of Pakistan. I wish they would let the people of Pakistan decide things for themselves. There are a hundred and sixty million Pakistanis. And I don't think they're stupid. Let the people of the country which is affected decide. Why should anybody interject? I don't see it.
TNI: And how do Pakistanis see the U.S. presidential election? Is there a sense of concern, hope? Do they want the policies to change? Are you worried about an inconsistency if we have a change in party?
MAD: Generally, they feel that the United States is an unreliable ally. This is a very common perception. Rightly or wrongly. So they would like anybody who comes in to be reliable, to be a friend of Pakistan for the long term, and that it's not a matter of using Pakistan and then throwing it away. That's the perception there. So we hope whichever government comes in-I'm sure they're aware of this-will rectify this.
TNI: General Ashfaq Kayani has just been appointed chief of the army in Pakistan. Can you talk about this appointment, the changes that he seems to be trying to make and the timing of the changes?
MAD: I will request that the people of the United States, the policy makers don't focus on these individuals. Focus on a nation, focus on the country. Don't focus on this man or that man. Because you should have relations with governments, not with individuals. Because when you link your destiny or your agenda with a person, particularly when the popularity of the United States is so low in Pakistan, you're likely to ruin that person's credibility.
TNI: So anyone who has the hand of the United States hovering near them becomes potentially discredited?
MAD: It's not just a man of the United States. If a person is seen as being highly affected by any country's foreign policies, it will be unpopular in Pakistan. Our army chief should be seen as a Pakistani, for the Pakistanis. Not a lackey of another country.
TNI: What do you think of the policies Kayani seems to be instituting?
MAD: The policies he seems to be instituting are that of a professional soldier, and he's doing the right thing, as would anybody in his position. Normally people who come up to that level are competent professionals. So he's a good man, he's a professional, and he's doing what a professional soldier should be doing. He's asking the army not to get involved in politics, he's asking the army to focus on military training, that is what his job is. That is what he should be doing. But people are saying he's the United States' man, and that's the worst thing the U.S. can do. Don't focus on individuals, focus on countries.
TNI: Putting the focus back on governments, what about the United States' apparently renewed friendship with India? Does this concern Pakistan?
MAD: No. To thinking Pakistanis, to logical Pakistanis, this is a good thing. I don't think the relationship with Pakistan is influenced by U.S. relations with India. It doesn't bother us. Better relations with India may be, in the long term, better for Pakistan. And in some ways we think maybe the United States can influence India. So this relationship may have benefits. I think that is narrow-minded that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and vice versa. Because we are becoming friends with India, too.
TNI: Do you see Pakistan becoming closer to China and Russia over the next decade, rather than the United States?
MAD: That is a very difficult question. I really don't know. And let me tell you one thing: The people of Pakistan like the United States. They like your values. They like your land of opportunity. Today if there is a big rally in Pakistan and everybody is chanting "down with America" and there's somebody who comes and says "how many want a U.S. visa?", 90 percent of the people would say "Yes, I would." Because they like your system. They like your people. They like your freedom. Even if they don't like your policies. There is a difference between U.S. policy and people.
TNI: Any concluding remarks?
MAD: Yes, three things. First, the government is determined to have a fair and free election. In the presence of representatives of the various parties in the polling stations that announce the results right on the spot, rather than send it to the federal government to announce. And there's a number of measures they have undertaken so that the elections are fair and free because it is in the interest of the government and of Musharraf also to make sure that these are fair and free. The whole world's focus is on Pakistan. On fair and free elections.
Second, I want to re-emphasize our commitment to the war on terror. To be out fighting to support the international community, as well as for our own future. Moreso for our own future. We want a liberal democratic Pakistan with a moderate Islamic underpinning. This is the kind of vision that our founding father had. We don't like the vision of the narrow-minded extremists. You may disagree sometimes with our tactics and our strategy. We will differ with you at times on how to get rid of extremism. But don't doubt our commitment. That is firm and absolute.
Third, don't try to micromanage Pakistan. If you micromanage Pakistan, you will only create a mess. Trust a hundred and sixty or a hundred and sixty five million Pakistanis to do the right thing. Let them choose their destiny. Don't force feed them.
Justine A. Rosenthal is the executive editor of The National Interest.
