South As ia Ne t - P ak is ta n

Glo bal W ar on Terr or: Wh o i s Payi ng Har d Pr ice?

Nayyar Zaid i
Published: March 11, 2008

Pakistan has been sacrificing lives of its soldiers and citizens in the US-led war on terror for
the last seven years and what it has to reap is a severe criticism from the American statesmen
and diplomats, from within and outside the US Congress. Their criticism is based on this claim
that Pakistan has been charging more financial price [and that also without providing payment
receipts] of its otherwise less worthwhile services and sacrifices. Pakistan was sanctioned an
aid of US$ 3 billion for a period of five years in October 2005, which comes out to be US$ 600
million per annum, divided equally into military and financial assistance heads.

This has constantly been dinned into our ears that the US has provided Pakistan with US$ 10
billions without any proportionate advantage. Dr. Stephen Cohen of Brookings Institute
claimed last year during his interview with an Indian weekly that Pakistan did nothing more
than handing over 10 Taliban to the US in reward of these 10 billions; the US this way had to
pay US$ 1 billion for one Taliban. Dr. Cohen is a veteran pro-Indian ‘scholar’ and can go
beyond the limits of uttering a white lie just to please Indians. And more satirical is the fact
that Pakistani Consulate there did not bother to counter this baseless blame. Such absurd
reports of the think-tanks go unanswered, perhaps, due to this very reason that senior foreign
office holders dream to get jobs in such organizations after their retirement or need to get their
children employed there.

As I have mentioned before, US$ 3 billions have yet to be received by Pakistan. The remaining
US$ 7 billions, which Pakistan got over the last 7 years, were meant for the US’s using
Pakistani military and communication facilities. Without Pakistan’s aerial and land facilities,
the US would have not been able to attack Afghanistan and provide weapons, food and other
supplies to its troops in Afghanistan. The US has been using this safest route for the last seven
years for its survival in Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s new National Assembly can demand that financial rewards received against
providing the US with these facilities be made public. The anti-Pakistan lobby in the US
Congress claims that Pakistan has charged at least 30 per cent more. If it is so, the past
government, which made this agreement, should be held accountable for this.

Nonetheless, it remains a fact, be it America or Pakistan, that even a taxi driver is never willing
to lead you to a dangerous zone during night. If he takes this risk he would charge more. Here
we hurled our whole country into fire and that too at the annual cost of just US$ 1 billion! The
Pakistani bigwigs who made these ‘alleged’ agreements have bullet proof cars, helicopters and
state-supplied security guards but will the US pay for the lives of common people who are
being killed on daily basis here in Pakistan? What is the basis and legitimacy of this
announcement by the government to provide Rs 0.2 millions to heirs of a person killed in this
war? Suppose the killed person was 20 years old and earned Rs 5,000 per month thus earning
Rs 60,000 for his family annually. He died by the blast at an age of 20; otherwise he might
have lived for another 50 years. This way he could earn Rs 3 million till his natural death,
provided his salary was to remain fix at Rs 5,000 per month. Add 100 per cent increment in his
salary over the entire 50 years span and he could earn Rs 6 million. This is very simple
arithmetic. You may need to go to some economist for accounts preparations and get receipts
to show to the US Congress and ask them in which account these Rs 0.2 millions fall? Then
prepare the accounts of 1,000 killed soldiers keeping in mind their salaries, promotions and
after-retirement benefits. This is matter of army men so one can hope for justice.

Pakistan’s help in the very first US attack had jolted the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
But al-Qaeda was resurrected there after the US and its allies established Karzai Government
in Kabul but its blame was put on Pakistan. In the meanwhile al-Qaeda established Iraq as its
stronghold after March 2003.

When an agreement on war on terror was made with the US, it should have been questioned
clearly in it that when Pakistani or American missiles will bulldoze the houses and kill the
tribesmen in tribal areas and they will retaliate in form of suicide and other attacks destroying
the state infrastructure, then who will pay for this damage? And who will pay for the lives that
will be lost in these attacks?.

If the new assembly is going to be a sovereign body, it should review the past of this war on
terror. But this may not be possible because ‘all’ will need an American visa for their treatment.
And when this government ends, most of the people in it will have to live there is USA as their
bank accounts will also be there.

Nayyar Zaidi is Washington based Pakistani journalist and contributes to English daily, The
News, and Urdu weekly, Akhbar-e-Jehan. This article has been reproduced in courtesy with
Akhbar-e-Jehan (Issue: March 10-16, 2008). The views expressed in this article are those of the
author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the PIPS.

http://san-pips.com/index.php?action=san&id=50