August 24, 2011, tribute to Pakistan or microscope on Pakistan? That country is a riddle to me. I am not sure if it is a firm ally or a pay for (sometimes) play, ally. The most recent example of Pakistani ambivalence is that Osama/Usama/Whatever was living in an area of Pakistan where there is a military presence, and no one knew that he was there?

Truthfully though, we cannot be too hard on Pakistan about having “guests” in the country without the knowledge of the authorities. The US has a similar policy of pretending to watch the front door, while leaving the back door wide open. “Guests” keep coming and coming. We pay.

About.com delves into the Pakistan role in the formerly named War on Terror. What is that now called? I think it is something about “Man-made Disasters.” That makes it sound really positive, giving props to man for having the vision to create disasters? I think I would go with “Killers, Inc.” That description gives the impression of a corporation. “Cold-blooded killers” would work even better. This article wastes no time in describing the role of Pakistan:

Pakistan plays a key and highly conflicted--role in the global war on terror. The country is a U.S. ally in the war, but is often accused of supporting Taliban and Al Qaeda presence in its northern provinces. Pakistan also has nuclear ambitions. This timeline of Pakistan's role in the war tells the story of Pakistan's complex relationship to terrorism and the war on terror since 2001.

“Highly conflicted” is a nice way of putting it. While the then leader of Pakistan, saw the advantages of his assistance to the US, roughly 80% of  of his people, preferred the other side. They were “Taliban-ized.”

There is a nice summation of the role of Pakistan in this Time.com article by Robert Baer. He concludes:

They want our money, but not our drones. They don't want the United States to fall into the arms of India, but they also do not intend to kowtow to us. They want to be a part of any settlement in Afghanistan, but they won't or can't bring the Taliban under control.

Maybe the US can learn from the Pakistanis. Most in the US are “straight shooters.” Maybe I should remove that “straight shooters” reference, lest I confuse anyone into thinking that I have changed from “cowardly woman,” to “pistol-packing cowgirl!” Nah – even we physical cowards like to talk tough. Anyway, maybe we in the US will have to learn how to obfuscate, vacillate, and negotiate. Mine is going to be a looooooong learning curve!

Back in 2008, after the Pakistan elections, Stanley Kurtz was not 
enthused. The following is troubling:

But let’s be clear: Pakistanis may abhor terrorists who kill Pakistanis, but all signs point to their being largely untroubled by terrorists who aim to destroy the West. Above all, as the Times noted Wednesday, the Pakistani consensus opposes military attacks on the tribal sanctuaries of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

But it’s too likely that the West has been snookered.

The West seems to be in a perpetual state of “snookery.” We get snookered. We pay – for more” snookery.” Maybe instead of a losing war on drugs, we should have a war against “snookery!”

In the three years before the attacks of September 11, Pakistan received approximately $9 million in American military aid. In the three years after, the number increased to $4.2 billion, making it the country with the maximum funding post 9/11.

Such a huge inflow of funds has raised concerns in the Indian press that these funds were given without any accountability, as the end uses not being documented, and that large portions were used to suppress civilians' human rights and to purchase weapons to contain domestic problems like the Balochistan unrest. Pakistan has stated that India has been supporting terror groups within the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Balochistan with the aim of creating unrest within the country.^[75]

The Indian press is concerned? The American taxpayer should be howling. I am afraid to look for any data for the subsequent seven years after that increase from $9 million to $4.2 billion. No wonder the USA could be on track to become a fourth world country. The term “third world” will not be sufficiently accurate to describe what conditions in the US could become, if the leaders of this country, do not stop the addiction to spending and paying for friends.

I do not want to finish this article without acknowledging that cooperation with Pakistan, although expensive with no accounting of the funds, did have some benefits, I guess. The US drones were welcome, somewhat. Usama/Osama/Whatever was supposedly killed on Pakistani soil. I will keep searching for other positives. Above all, I wish the people of Pakistan all the best. I wish for them, as I wish for all the people of the world, that the scourge of terrorism is wiped out.

For the US, the hymn Guide Me O Thou Great Jehovah comes to mind. May God bless the US, and preserve this Union. There will never be another like it.