Author: Team ET
Publication: The Economic Times
Date: September 15, 2001
While the US has received support
from its NATO allies and from many other nations in its move to wage a
war against the groups linked to Saudi dissident Osama Bin Laden for their
alleged involvement in the recent terrorist attacks in the United States,
the Pakistani media has been less than whole hearted in its support for
the US. Though the leading Pakistan newspapers have denounced the terrorist
attacks, they have been equally critical of American policies as well interestingly,
no Pakistani paper has found fault with their own country's approach in
dealing with terrorism.
"The American policy-makers, intellectuals,
mediamen and of course, top brass, seem to invariably confuse terrorism
with crime, and have surprisingly failed to look deeper into the behavior
of the Arab suicide bombers and Kashmiri Mujahideen," says the Business
Recorder, a leading Pakistani business daily, in today's editorial. According
to the Business Recorder the inhuman act of terrorism was "parrot-like
ascribed by western media to Osama bin Laden and Muslim revivalist movements,
out of a deeply ingrained hatred and despite the absence of any evidence".
The paper further dubs the various
actions taken by the US government after Tuesday's attack as "war hysteria
or terrorist phobia". It notes that "... in US the chain of command suffered
a hiatus in which some zealots, carried away by the media campaign, felt
it was time for them to take an initiative against the Taliban threat".
According to it the US's retaliation plans were part of a "great satanic
programme conceived and carried out by people in key positions in the US
military establishment".
The Nation has warned the US that
it might lose widespread sympathy if its action are seen to be "targeting
people as innocent as the American victims." it further adds that: A responsible
state should not act Eke a bunch of terrorists. The paper has criticised
NATO for invoking Article 5 of its Treaty which states that an armed attack
on one or more of the allies shall be considered an attack on all. 'The
US must either review the policies provoking such animus, or work out how
it is being misunderstood,' says The Nation.
The Dawn feels that president Mushrraf
acted promptly and correctly' when he offered Pakistan's lull cooperation
to the United States in the fight against terrorism.
However, The Jung has raised the
issue of risks involved in offering full cooperation to US government.
'The issue (of offering full cooperation) is of considerable importance
as Pakistan's experience of fulfilling the roles it was given by US or
voluntarily took up to ingratiate itself with its ally have not always
been salubrious,' feels The Jung. The paper has noted that 'the worst was
the role Islamabad played' with regard to the developments in Afghanistan
during the 1980s as a close partner of the US.
'It was not only the onus of extending
every kind of assistance to the jihad and the Afghan people by allowing
the inflow of millions of refugees, but also of bearing the collateral
effects of the task Pakistan was performing', says The Jung. It further
says that "Participating in any Unites States operation will be just as
hazardous as not participating in it. Islamabad faces a virtual Catch-22
situation, and much as it might want, its options are limited".
