View Single Post
  #37  
Old Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Predator's Avatar
Predator Predator is offline
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Karachi
Posts: 2,572
Thanks: 813
Thanked 1,975 Times in 838 Posts
Predator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to behold
Post

America’s new reach


By Shahid Javed Burki
Tuesday, 07 Jul, 2009


AMERICA’S sometimes on and sometimes off relationship with Pakistan is set to change. This is likely to happen in three significant ways.

The legislations that have worked their way through the two chambers of the US Congress will place the structure of America-Pakistan relations on new foundations. The roller-coaster ride should end and greater certainty should be introduced in the way Washington conducts business with Islamabad.

The bills that have cleared the House of Representatives and the Senate promise a long-term US commitment to Pakistan. The house version has a five-year time horizon during which assistance will be provided at an annual rate of $1.5bn. In the Senate version the commitment is for the same annual amount but the time frame is open-ended. The two bills will be reconciled by a conference committee that will be established by the two chambers.

The second significant departure from past practices is the clear division — each with its own set objectives — between economic and military aid. More conditions will be attached to the former; far fewer to the latter. In fact the Senate version of the bill is practically conditions-free while the bill passed by the house has several conditions attached to the timing of disbursements as well as their amounts.

The house bill reflects the work of the various lobbies that have an interest in the outcome. The most active one in this respect is the Indian lobby, made up of non-resident Indians, the NRIs. This lobby has emerged as a well-organised and well-financed endeavour that seeks to advance the perceived interests of the homeland. This lobby worked effectively in getting Congress to support the administration of President George W. Bush on the nuclear agreement it signed with the Congress party government headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. I will return to the role played by the diasporas in the American political system a little later in this article.

The third important difference between this approach and those followed in earlier periods is that the negotiations are with a civilian government in Pakistan rather than with an administration dominated by the military. The three previous periods of large US involvement with Pakistan was when the military was in charge of politics. This was the case during the periods of Ayub Khan (1958-69), Ziaul Haq (1977-88) and Pervez Musharraf (1999-2008) when large amounts of American assistance flowed into the country. A significant proportion of this was used for military purposes. It will be different this time.

Neither of the two bills will actually spend the money; they authorise the maximum spending limit and also specify key purposes and conditions of that spending. The actual spending levels and possible further conditions will be determined by the relevant sub-committees of the appropriations committee in each of the two chambers and the final appropriations bill. It is the sub-committee process that will be subjected to a great deal of pressure by the interested lobbies active on the Hill.

The Senate version of the bill has the support of the White House. In its original formulation, it was signed on by then Senators Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. It passed the Senate by a unanimous vote, a relatively rare occurrence in the American legislative process. The house bill

was approved by a narrow margin, reflecting the fact that some of the representatives more subject to the pressures from their constituents were not convinced about the form and scope of the aid that was being offered to Pakistan by the US.

The Senate version would triple non-military aid to Pakistan to $1.5bn a year as a long-term pledge to the people of Pakistan. The title given to the bill — the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 — reflects the overall objectives of the senators. The bill authorises $7.5bn over the next five years (2009-13) and clearly de-links military from non-military aid.

In the past, security assistance overshadowed development aid. The Pakistani military could bypass civilian authorities to focus resources provided on its own institutional development. Rather than locking in a level now for military aid which might not be in line with rapidly changing Pakistani capabilities and commitment, the bill buys flexibility for the US administration by leaving the quantum and content of military support to be determined on a year-by-year basis.

The final shape of US assistance to Pakistan will be determined by the political process in which ethnic lobbies will play an important role. It is therefore appropriate to discuss the political roles of the various South Asian diasporas in the US.

South Asia now has a large number of people living and working in several parts of the world. Formed over several decades, these diasporas now have about 40 million people, 23 million from India and 16 million divided almost evenly between Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Given the size of the diasporas and their economic strength, it is not surprising that they have begun to exert their political weight. The Indians have a considerable political presence in all the continents of the world, while the Pakistani community is better organised in the US. It is in that country that the economic presence of the Pakistani community is considerable. Numbering about a million people in Canada and the US, immigrants from Pakistan have a combined income of $50bn, a savings rate of $10bn a year and economic assets of about half a trillion dollars.

Some of this income and some of these assets are being put to use for both economic and political purposes. There are some two and half times as many NRIs as the Pakistani community. Their assets and incomes are proportionately larger. Unfortunately the two diasporas often clash as they seek to influence US politics. This has happened in particular with reference to the US approach towards Kashmir and is now happening in the case of American assistance to Pakistan.

It is important for the two diasporas to recognise that aid to Pakistan legislation as drafted by the Senate is in the interest of both countries since it focuses on the economic and social development of the country. The main US purpose as reflected in the draft bill is to contain the spread of extremism in Pakistan. That should also be the Indian concern.
__________________
No signature...
Reply With Quote