![]() |
By Muhammad Khurshid (about the author) Page 1 of 1 page(s)
For OpEdNews: Muhammad Khurshid - Writer Mr Holbrooke and other officials of the US administration have been trying to arrange more money for the rulers of Pakistan, but the situation is going to worst from bad as the terrorists have increased their activities. The state is still providing support to terrorists. At the moment Pakistani establishment is divided into groups, the one is providing support to terrorists and the other one is fighting a war against them. The tug of war in the establishment is a source of terrorism in Pakistan. The main problem of Pakistan is the rampant corruption. The rulers of Pakistan have been fighting the war for the dollars. If the US continues funding the corrupt rulers of Pakistan then terrorism will be strengthened. Stop funding the rulers of Pakistan as they are the main reason for terrorism. At the moment state of Pakistan has been promoting and breeding terrorism. Mr Holbrooke will stop supporting the corrupt rulers. Come to the people if you are really serious in winning the war on terror. Pakistan needs further international support, US special envoy Richard Holbrooke said on Saturday as he warned that a pledge of five billion dollars was 'not enough' to stabilise the troubled nation.
At an aid meeting in Tokyo on Friday, donor countries pledged a total of 5.28 billion dollars to stabilise Pakistan, seen as a frontline state against Islamic extremism.
The United States and Japan pledged one billion dollars each at the meeting Tokyo co-hosted with the World Bank.
'Five billion dollars is not enough,' said Holbrooke, US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
'The terrorists in western Pakistan are planning other attacks around the world ... so we need to work hard to strengthen the government of Pakistan, to deal with the tribal areas with all its problems,' he said. 'We should – after congratulating the result yesterday – we should be very mindful of the fact that the problem is far from over,' he said.
He declined to give a figure on how much money was required to stabilise Pakistan, but noted that some economists say the number 'is as high as 50 billion dollars.' More than half of Pakistan's people live below the poverty line of two dollars a day and 'even in great cities like Karachi – which I would point out is the world's largest Muslim city – 17 million people (live) with only a few hours of electricity a day,' he added.
'I can't set a specific goal for 2012,' when Obama's term ends, said Holbrooke. But I will say this: the situation in Afghanistan cannot be the same in 2012.'
'The measurement of success in Afghanistan is returning the security responsibility to the local security authorities,' he said.
'Pakistan is even more difficult. There is a clear red line laid out publicly by the government. No foreign boots of the troops on that ground in Pakistan.
'So it's up to Pakistan to defend itself with the international assistance for economic and military,' he said.
He said the people fighting alongside the Taliban were divided into three groups, led by a small group of 'hard-core
Taliban who has extreme views on things like women's rights, sharia law.'
The second group were those who joined the militants 'because they have grievances against the government' over corruption or military operations that killed family members, while the third group was a large number of people who fought for the Taliban because they paid more than the Afghan army.
'When you talk about reconciliation, it's reaching out to those last two groups,' Holbrooke said.
Source: dawn.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
| 2 comments |
|
Sir
Sir, thank you for bringing this topic up. I was sickened when I heard Holbrooke speak, and tell us that we were giving the Pakistanis some billions of dollars. I agree. Pakistan is a fine country, and does not need our money. It is a country of educated people who are a nuclear power and know how to govern themselves. So why would we give them a billion or so dollars? To use the money to destablize them. I can't think of any other reason. Many of us think the war on terror is totally bogus. So it surprises me that you say that there is terrorism in your country, and it is a result of the corruption of your government. Wouldn't that make the so-called terrorists freedom fighters or some such thing? Or would it not make them just another faction vying for power? What makes one faction terrorist, and another not? Is it the techiques they use in warfare? Please educate me on this matter of terrorism in Pakistan. Is it real, or is it another trojan horse of the American government to get some goodies out of another country, using bribery money ripped off from the American taxpayer? Kindly...PD by Peter Duveen (17 articles, 0 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 309 comments [69 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:13:49 PM
|
|
Mr. Khurshid's truth
Mr. Khurshid, We all know the truth of the matter, that on the one hand Pak establishment is trying to extract money from international sources whereas international community is also keen to finance a sinking ship. Why so? However clever Pak may try to play it's cards it is the USA and it's allies who are going to ultimately make a Iraq of it. The greedy politicians of Pak are not interested in that but trying to fleece the country even at the risk of disaster--regards AT by AT (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Thursday, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:42:17 AM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |