PAKISTAN YAHYA AGGRIEVED By : Werner Adam
FAR EASTERN ECONOMIC REVIEW July 24, 1971
Islamabad
While the Pakistani troops in the Eastern wing face a sudden accumulation of bomb attempts and other acts of sabotage which, for the first time, indicate a more sophisticated resistance and signal further difficulties in “normalizing” the situation, Islamabad is becoming increasingly irritable about its external critics.
India, sympathizing openly with the secessionist forces, remains a major target, but it now shares this distinction with former colonial ruler Britain whose public and official opinion still carries disproportionately great weight in Pakistan.
The Pakistan Press launched a campaign against Eng¬land’s mass media in general and the BBC in particular.’ It was followed by a strong protest from the foreign office over certain parts of an “agreed statement,” issued at the conclusion of talks India’s Foreign Minister Swaran Singh recently had with his British colleagues Sir Alec Douglas Home and Prime Minister Edward Heath; their call for a political solution to the Pakistani crisis “acceptable to the people of East Pakistan” and the tributes Sir Alec paid to India’s ‘'restraint and generosity” in dealing with the refugee problem.
The Islamabad note alleged New Delhi’s idea of a political settlement was agreement with the leaders of the defunct Awnmi League who, by agitating for East Pakistan’s secession, had brought on the present crisis. India, it said, had not only been sending infiltrators into East Pakistan and sustaining a “Provisional Government of Bangla Desh” on its soil, but was even now training and equipping “as much as 40,000 miscreants and supporters of Bangla Desh within its territory.”
Not content with this, the press reproached Sir Alec for having urged the aid Pakistan consortium to suspend its financial and economic assistance to Pakistan pending a political solution to the East Bengal crisis.
Mirza Ahmed, President Yahya Khan’s economic adviser added official weight to press complaints ; “if the present attitude of the aid-giving countries, constituted an attempt to influence our domestic political solution, it is wholly contrary to their own profession that aid to developing countries is without political strings.”
Hard upon all these troubles came Canada’s decision not only to prohibit the further export of defense equipment to Pakistan, but to suspend the shipment of 46 crates of F-8S Sabre Jet parts destined for Karachi. Of the Western countries only the United States, seemed willing to deliver military goods. President Richard Nixon’s special envoy Henry Kissinger was given a warm welcome in Islamabad this month as a representative of country which had shown “understanding and helpfulness towards Pakistan’s difficulties”, as the Pakistan Times put it.
Whether this honeymoon will survive the present arms delivery remains to be seen particularly as the U.S has fully adopted the consortium’s wait-and-see policy towards Pakistan. Islamabad cannot however afford to fall out with leading western power since the Soviet Union has, from beginning, taken the same view as India of the Bangla Desh problem. For Islamabad the only international alternative would then be China which, notwithstanding its firm political support for the Pakistan generals, is, by no means, in a position to replace the western donor countries.
Freight On Board By : Michael Malloy
Washington
The mystery over arms shipment to Pakistan continues. Two things are clear that an embargo was imposed by the U.S. in March ; and that arms are still reaching Pakistan. American attempts to explain the situation are, however, gloriously confused. 45 officials in Pakistan have claimed Washington purposely continued the arms flow in secret in order to retain some influence of the treatment accorded to Bengalis. In Washington it was maintained they were still being sent because President Richard Nixon didn’t want China to become Pakistan’s sole arm suppliers.
Last week-end the refusal of American Longshoremen to load the Padma brought the affair into sharp focus—without however, clarifying anything. The U.S. State department, having announced in April that no arms had “been provided to the Pakistan government or its agents since March 2, and nothing is now scheduled for such delivery”. The Pakistan freighter had contracted to carry exactly U.S. $ 1,231,153 worth of arms, some of which had already been loaded in New York, the rest to join the ship at Baltimore. It included three piston aircraft engines of repair test standard.
On Sunday the Padma set sail, with the Baltimore Dockers surprisingly expressing themselves convinced by an as¬surance from the owners, backed by International Longshoremen’s Association President Thomas Gleason, that there were no arms on board. There was no comment from Washington.
If the State department had its facts wrong, it was politically a remarkable error. And it had been unaccustomed precise. Was it trying to anticipate a public row, or replying to the New York Times which had made the original discovery about the Padma when it was being loaded in New York'?
Or was it retaliating on the President for putting it in an impossible position ? It appears the embargo had been pro¬posed, vetoed by Nixon and then announced anyway. Less than a month later another Pakistan vessel, the Sunderbans was steaming home with a load of armored personnel carriers. Several more shiploads are scheduled. The sale of arms to Pakistan has had a murky history since 1965 when the first embargo was placed on both India and Pakistan. Sales resumed two years later of weapons termed “non-lethal” a category which soon appeared to include any weapon the government finds embarrassing to describe in greater detail, and covered shipments put at up to $20 million a year in value.
Meantime, Pakistan has served a useful purpose as a secret take off paid for Kissinger. Islamabad must be hoping Nixon will appreciate its co-operation more than the views of informed opinion at home.
Islamabad
While the Pakistani troops in the Eastern wing face a sudden accumulation of bomb attempts and other acts of sabotage which, for the first time, indicate a more sophisticated resistance and signal further difficulties in “normalizing” the situation, Islamabad is becoming increasingly irritable about its external critics.
India, sympathizing openly with the secessionist forces, remains a major target, but it now shares this distinction with former colonial ruler Britain whose public and official opinion still carries disproportionately great weight in Pakistan.
The Pakistan Press launched a campaign against Eng¬land’s mass media in general and the BBC in particular.’ It was followed by a strong protest from the foreign office over certain parts of an “agreed statement,” issued at the conclusion of talks India’s Foreign Minister Swaran Singh recently had with his British colleagues Sir Alec Douglas Home and Prime Minister Edward Heath; their call for a political solution to the Pakistani crisis “acceptable to the people of East Pakistan” and the tributes Sir Alec paid to India’s ‘'restraint and generosity” in dealing with the refugee problem.
The Islamabad note alleged New Delhi’s idea of a political settlement was agreement with the leaders of the defunct Awnmi League who, by agitating for East Pakistan’s secession, had brought on the present crisis. India, it said, had not only been sending infiltrators into East Pakistan and sustaining a “Provisional Government of Bangla Desh” on its soil, but was even now training and equipping “as much as 40,000 miscreants and supporters of Bangla Desh within its territory.”
Not content with this, the press reproached Sir Alec for having urged the aid Pakistan consortium to suspend its financial and economic assistance to Pakistan pending a political solution to the East Bengal crisis.
Mirza Ahmed, President Yahya Khan’s economic adviser added official weight to press complaints ; “if the present attitude of the aid-giving countries, constituted an attempt to influence our domestic political solution, it is wholly contrary to their own profession that aid to developing countries is without political strings.”
Hard upon all these troubles came Canada’s decision not only to prohibit the further export of defense equipment to Pakistan, but to suspend the shipment of 46 crates of F-8S Sabre Jet parts destined for Karachi. Of the Western countries only the United States, seemed willing to deliver military goods. President Richard Nixon’s special envoy Henry Kissinger was given a warm welcome in Islamabad this month as a representative of country which had shown “understanding and helpfulness towards Pakistan’s difficulties”, as the Pakistan Times put it.
Whether this honeymoon will survive the present arms delivery remains to be seen particularly as the U.S has fully adopted the consortium’s wait-and-see policy towards Pakistan. Islamabad cannot however afford to fall out with leading western power since the Soviet Union has, from beginning, taken the same view as India of the Bangla Desh problem. For Islamabad the only international alternative would then be China which, notwithstanding its firm political support for the Pakistan generals, is, by no means, in a position to replace the western donor countries.
Freight On Board By : Michael Malloy
Washington
The mystery over arms shipment to Pakistan continues. Two things are clear that an embargo was imposed by the U.S. in March ; and that arms are still reaching Pakistan. American attempts to explain the situation are, however, gloriously confused. 45 officials in Pakistan have claimed Washington purposely continued the arms flow in secret in order to retain some influence of the treatment accorded to Bengalis. In Washington it was maintained they were still being sent because President Richard Nixon didn’t want China to become Pakistan’s sole arm suppliers.
Last week-end the refusal of American Longshoremen to load the Padma brought the affair into sharp focus—without however, clarifying anything. The U.S. State department, having announced in April that no arms had “been provided to the Pakistan government or its agents since March 2, and nothing is now scheduled for such delivery”. The Pakistan freighter had contracted to carry exactly U.S. $ 1,231,153 worth of arms, some of which had already been loaded in New York, the rest to join the ship at Baltimore. It included three piston aircraft engines of repair test standard.
On Sunday the Padma set sail, with the Baltimore Dockers surprisingly expressing themselves convinced by an as¬surance from the owners, backed by International Longshoremen’s Association President Thomas Gleason, that there were no arms on board. There was no comment from Washington.
If the State department had its facts wrong, it was politically a remarkable error. And it had been unaccustomed precise. Was it trying to anticipate a public row, or replying to the New York Times which had made the original discovery about the Padma when it was being loaded in New York'?
Or was it retaliating on the President for putting it in an impossible position ? It appears the embargo had been pro¬posed, vetoed by Nixon and then announced anyway. Less than a month later another Pakistan vessel, the Sunderbans was steaming home with a load of armored personnel carriers. Several more shiploads are scheduled. The sale of arms to Pakistan has had a murky history since 1965 when the first embargo was placed on both India and Pakistan. Sales resumed two years later of weapons termed “non-lethal” a category which soon appeared to include any weapon the government finds embarrassing to describe in greater detail, and covered shipments put at up to $20 million a year in value.
Meantime, Pakistan has served a useful purpose as a secret take off paid for Kissinger. Islamabad must be hoping Nixon will appreciate its co-operation more than the views of informed opinion at home.
Posts
0 Comments :
Post a Comment