Study from BNU 2- PAK-US RELATIONS, NATO AND DRONE ATTACKS

This is a cross post from media point where the research was originally published:

http://www.mediapoint.pk/study-from-bh-2-pak-us-relations-nato-and-drone-attacks/

Another study from students of  Beacon House National University, Mass Communications Department Lahore (BNU)  for the ‘mediapoint.pk’   on ‘”PAK-US RELATIONS, NATO AND DRONE ATTACKS ″ . We appreciate the hard work of the students and course instructor and feel pleasure in publishing this study for our readers. These studies may not have the experience of an analyst behind it but they certainly show the line of young and upcoming professionals in this field.

Course Instructor’s Remarks

MA Part II, of Beacon House National University, Mass Communications Department ,did a research study on ‘”Western & Local Media Coverage on Closure of NATO supply lines :Nov 2011-May 2012″ as their Final Exam Project for the subject of Media Laws under the supervision of Course Instructor Yasmeen Aftab Ali. The research study is being offered to be used,or part thereof, to Media Point.

Yasmeen Ali

The students doing the 4 segments is as follows:

M.A 11

  • Ayesha Yaqub: Group Leader
  • Aleena Naghman
  • Ali Hur
  • Amara Tanveer
  • Anam Saeed 

Summary of the Study

The study is mainly covered under three headings as under and conclusion:

  • PAK- US RELATIONS  , NATO AND DRONE ATTACKS
  •  FOREIGN MEDIA COVERAGE ON NATO SUPPLY BLOCADE– APRIL 2011- MAY 2012
  • LOCAL MEDIA COVERAGE ON NATO SUPPLY BLOCADE – APRIL 2011- MAY 2012

CONCLUSION


Pak-US relationship has been on a nose-dive since blockade of US made NATO Supply routes from Pakistan to Afghanistan in April 2011 as already discussed in chapter 1. US has more likely decided that Pakistan has a much deafening role in this issue as also viewed by Hilary Clinton’s Pak-disoriented speech in the latest Indian conference even though having full account of the already tormented relations between India and Pakistan.

NATO ATTACK 2011

Strained relations between both countries i.e. Pakistan and United States have fuelled speculation on the criteria of future alliance where the weaker stand is that of the Pakistani government being a developing country with less economic resources than the US. As this Western presence ebbs, Pakistan, whose tribal areas are considered home to Taliban and other militants, will be key in shaping Afghanistan’s future where the supply routes have been a major sticking point.

VARIABLES OF MAINTAINING ALLIANCE WITH FOREIGN DEVELOPERS

Strategies of a country’s alliance with foreign countries depend upon the variables of:

1.      ECONOMIC FACTORS

No matter how much Pakistan be right in its decision to stop NATO supplies, it has to face the consequences of American policy making, America being on top of the aid providers to Pak economy. One twist would be that of budget for the year 2013-2018 i.e. Pakistan has to pass the new budget for which it requires American aid and not opening NATO routes would consequently mean no future aid as already highlighted by the US Bill.

However, the Pakistani approach has been well-planned out as it has played safe in the eyes of the Pakistani nationals and the wide ranging Islamists etc by banning the supply route in consent to preserving the “integrity, security and defense of Pakistan” according to exception of article 19 of the constitution of Pakistan. The American Bill says that Pakistan’s aid has been made subject to their co-operation. The stakes are really high as this sensitive issue challenges the economy of both countries. However, the question lies that would Pakistani government put its state’s integrity at stake with the US policies, while also keeping in mind the previous lop-sided record of US’ assistance in the recent issues of Raymond Davis, Osama Bin Laden, Aafia Sidiqi and Shakil Afridi etc.

2.      SOUND FOREIGN POLICIES

Every country needs a foreign policy. Policies are often determined by vested interests or developed over a long period of gaining multi-party consensus and it doesn’t seem to be enough to point out shortcomings in policies. The foreign policy does not change for every other incident that takes place, be it NATO’s Salalah attacks or Afghan war etc.

The policies are for the future 5 or 10 years. Foreign policy should include Pakistan’s relations with Iran, Nepal, China, Sri Lanka and Turkey prior to relations with the US and Western countries in order to strengthen its support at home in the Asian region that will benefit Pakistan in the long run.

3.      MILITARY STRENGTH AND REGIONAL ALLIES

Countries have to have regional allies but along with that, there is a need to have sane policies to tackle with the problems resulting from the alliance e.g. Pakistan’s demand on supplementing the roads affected by the NATO trucks in carrying tons of supply every day cannot be given secondary importance.

However, the lack of policies does not render it the vigilance that needs to be put into this issue. The resistance against NATO is not from the government but the army due to the involvement of RAW agents. India thought that Pakistan will have a diminished role in the final equation of the Afghan War.

4.      GEO-POLITICAL PLACEMENT

Dismembering the NATO supply to Afghanistan eventually leads to the elimination of US combat troops posing security against war on terrorism. Consequently, making the US stop their aid to Pakistan’s growing needs for development of national interest. Pakistan’s placement on the globe is very strategically planned. America formed bases of Drone attacks in Pakistan. Therefore, Pakistan is in a strong geo-political position to threaten the US.

5.      QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP

The quality of leadership is very important in the governance paradigm of not only relations with foreign states but also with that of the natives living within the territorial boundary of a particular state. It is important for us to analyze the standard of credibility entrusted upon the officials by the locals of the area keeping in mind the flabbergasting incidents that appear on the headlines, most definitely that of Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gillani’s Contempt of Court on not writing a letter to the Swiss authorities on reopening of President Zardari’s cases which gives a shady impression at the motives of the officials themselves as discussed by the outburst of local and foreign media at the time. Therefore, PPP alleged government of Pakistan should keep a control and order situation on the media outburst since the PEMRA amendment 2007 has failed to do so.

6.      RESOURCES

Pakistan is undoubtedly rich in its natural resources of coal, gas, oil, minerals, mining, uranium and water etc which caters to fewer audiences as the means of extraction and usage are very rare and few. The foreign invader is usually attracted to such a treasure of natural resource and a structure open to industry and economic boost lacking just the adequate infrastructure needed. This is another passage of manipulation thus employed by the invader in setting foot on the area to make the Pakistani’s feel that they are being helped by superior powers of science and technology but rather fed blindness in the game of vested interests.

CHICAGO SUMMIT 2012

If presented as an “implementation summit” at which the alliance’s leaders could assess the progress of the program agreed during the Lisbon Summit in 2010 and designed to speed up NATO’s adaptation to the new security challenge, the Chicago Summit may in fact be an historical moment for the future of the alliance and for the transatlantic relationship as viewed by [1]Rabah Ghezali in his article posted on 17thMay 2012 in huffingtonpost.com entitled as “A Chicago Road To Perdition”.

The indication of the US to change its perspective on global security is more evident than ever. President Obama’s strategies of defense given the defense strategy report in early January, Washington made it crystal clear that U.S. defense policy is“shifting from the North Atlantic towards Asia”. Europe remained at the core of Washington’s security concerns since the Second World War. However, the challenges coming from the Chinese Republic have been on US’ major agenda lately.

SUSTAINING GLOBAL RELATIONSHIPS: PRIORITIES FOR 21ST CENTURY DEFENSE 2012

This document will be used to analyze the parallelism of the above discussed foreign and local media coverage on the NATO issue with the factual groundwork of policies and agenda’s as shown in the President’s assertion and how far the reporting of this has been kept in consideration by foreign and local journalism.

In the strategic plan of reviewing and improvising global relationships of US with other nations, the new diplomatic defense policies highlighted in the PDF of “Sustaining US Global Leadership- Priorities for 21st Century Defense, January 2012”[2], the US presidential and executive consent to the strategy has been shown that vests interests within the circumference of the American global policy circle as says President Obama:

“I am determined that …we emerge even stronger in a manner that preserves American global leadership, maintains our military superiority and keeps  faith with our troops, military families and veterans.”

The chapter entitled “The White House- Washington 2012, 3rd January 2012” gives account of President Barack Obama’s stance on the defense strategy as:

“Our nation is at a moment of transition. Thanks to the sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, we have responsibly ended the war in Iraq, put Al’Qaeda on the path to defeat- including delivering justice to Osama bin Laden- and made significant progress in Afghanistan responsibility…”

The sacrifices of American men and women in uniform thus remain honest with the American side rather than preserving world peace as will be discussed later in the coming chapters. The language of the report is so obliviously explaining the American agenda and its faith in America’s input on war against terrorism that is exemplified with “delivering justice to Osama Bin Laden” and the Afghanistan “responsibility”.

President Obama has thus unveiled the recommendations of a Defense Department study group that he said would produce a military that is “agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats”. That would be accomplished by smaller increases in defense spending, a policy telegraphed by Obama’s 10-year budget projections for fiscal 2012, which were $105 billion less than his 2011 blueprint[3]. The “contingencies” and “threats” posed emerge from the rapid global development and China’s threatening capability to emerge as the next hegemonic force against Uncle Sam’s ruling Court in the name of preserving World Peace as says the report:

“This review has been shaped by America’s enduring national security interests. We seek the security of our Nation, allies and partners. We seek the prosperity that flows from an open and free international economic system. And we seek a just and sustainable international order where the rights and responsibilities of nations and people are upheld, especially the fundamental right of every human being.”

Ironically, the preservation of fundamental rights of free speech as mentioned in the 1st Amendment to the US constitution pertains only to US media which can easily pronounce Pakistan’s anti-American agenda’s and sustained war with Al’ Qaeda as ally.

IMPORTANCE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REPORT

The importance and significance of the report given by US Secretary of State Defense and the strategies of Obama Administration of preserving “world peace” are important in analyzing the Pak-US relationship as it provides ample evidence of the US government’s lop-sidedness on defense against terrorism that has confined itself within the walls of the US territory rather than to the larger context of the global world. The structural form of this defense strategy exerts full pressure upon US allies and non-allies that the US can wage war against any state which asserts signs of danger against the US or targets world peace.

TIMELINE OF NON-COPERATION OF THE US

The defense report given by the US structurally denies co-operation with any factor posing threat to the US integrity and defense. No signs of cooperation were shown from the US side in the incidents of NATO attack on Salalah airbase primarily and also the recent incident following the attacks was the Shakil Afridi case where the alleged US officials accused Pakistan for its non-co-operation.

VESTED INTERESTS

Before these incidents, in 2011, the incidents of Raymond Davis and Osama Bin Laden’s assassination were major examples of US’ non-cooperation with the Pakistani officials, much to the accord of our ruling government as well which posed signs of ignorance and non-vigilance in making the US comply with swapping of Aafia Sidiqui with Raymond Davis. No action was taken by the Pakistani government in arresting this undercover US agent for carrying an unlicensed weapon and taking lives of innocent Pakistani citizens.

If the Pakistani government denies the responsibility of peace-keeping in its own region, then the foreigner is not to be held responsible for its ravenous attacks. The maintenance of peace at home is important to devise credibility and trust between the government and the locals. If the government does not help its people in times of war and crisis then who are they to look up to for their welfare. However, very unfortunate is the fact, that however much one denies it, there are interests within interests between the two governments upon which the integrity of state has been compensated where no measure was taken or policy devised to stop the attack on Salalah airbase that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

 UPCOMING ELECTIONS

Now interestingly, elections for the next government are very near in both countries, Pakistan and the US. The defense report for the Obama administration can be one psychological tactic to make the American public feel safe in the hands of a politically powerful government. On the other hand, not supplementing NATO’s application of opening supply routes to Afghanistan is a decision made by the Pakistani government to gain more credibility in the otherwise lost trust of Pakistani citizens.

LAST WORD

Again, no hard and fast conclusion can be given upon the future of this alliance as vested interests change overnight and govern the governance of the state government which eventually makes up policies for its public.

TABLE OF CONTENTS of Study

CHAPTER                                                                                       PAGE NO.

1)      INTRODUCTION: PAK-US RELATIONS, NATO AND DRONE ATTACKS

  1. Geostrategic and geopolitical significance of Pakistan for America…….2
  2. Drones: Evolution and Rise in Demand…………………………………10
  3. NATO Background………………………………………………………13
  4. Drone Attacks: History…………………………………………………..16
  5. e.       Statistics…………………………………………………………………19

 

2)      FOREIGN MEDIA COVERAGE ON NATO SUPPLY BLOCADE– APRIL 2011- MAY 2012

  1. Introduction to Foreign Media…………………………………………..26
  2. Timeline: television, blogs, magazines, newspapers……………………27
  3. Foreign Channels………………………………………………………..32
  4. Foreign Blogs……………………………………………………………42
  5. Foreign Magazines………………………………………………………61
  6. Foreign Newspapers…………………………………………………….80

 

3)      LOCAL MEDIA COVERAGE ON NATO SUPPLY BLOCADE – APRIL 2011- MAY 2012

  1. Introduction to Local Media…………………………………………..100
  2. Timeline: television, blogs, magazines, newspapers………………….101
  3. Local Newspapers……………………………………………………..104
  4. Local Blogs……………………………………………………………113
  5. Local Channels………..………………………………………………129
  6. Local Magazines………………………………………………………140

 

4)      CONCLUSION

  1. Chapter 1: Introduction: Pak-US relations, NATO and Drone Attacks……………………………………………………………………145
  • Chicago Summit and US Defense Strategy Report………………148
  1. Prelude to Conclusion of Chapter 2 and 3: Trends of Journalism………..152
  2. Chapter 2: Foreign Media Coverage of Nato Supply Blocade – April 2011- May 2012…………………………………………………………………154
  3. Chapter 3: Local Media Coverage of Nato Supply Blocade – April 2011- May

2012………………………………………………………………………165

  1. Chapter 4: Final Conclusion “United States: Friend or Foe?”……………174
Advertisements
Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • Minhaj  On June 16, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    YAA,
    Congrats on leading the group for conducting such a study.
    MQ

  • farhan ahmed  On June 16, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    It is totally unbiased and written according to realistic approach.It enable us to find which sectors needs to be addressed with attention. Overall it’s an good view.
    Pakistani nation such an approach to meet the challenges with honesty

Trackbacks

  • By URL on June 17, 2012 at 4:17 am

    … [Trackback]…

    […] Read More here: pakpotpourri.wordpress.com/2012/06/16/249/ […]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: