Talat Hussain v/s Hillary Clinton

[HasanG20]

Live With Talat – 28 October 2009 Pakistan Politics


I watched it live on Aaj.tv good anchor.

[Neo]

I didn’t come only for happy talk: Hillary

By Anwar Iqbal
Saturday, 31 Oct, 2009

Hillary Clinton chats with tribal people during her meeting with them in Islamabad.—AP

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday defended her decision to publicly air America’s grievances against Pakistan, saying that she had not come to the country for ‘happy talk’ alone.

Her three-day trip, which ended on Friday, was aimed at getting frank, open discussions going about the fight against terrorism — and that includes presenting US concerns, Mrs Clinton told CNN.

She stunned Pakistanis on Thursday when she told a gathering in Lahore that she did not trust Pakistan’s version of its engagement with Al Qaeda.

‘Al Qaeda has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002. I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn’t get them if they really wanted to,’ she said.

Commenting on her outburst, the New York Times noted: ‘It is extremely rare for an official of Mrs Clinton’s rank to say publicly what American politicians and intelligence officials have said in more guarded ways for years.’

The newspaper also noted that Mrs Clinton’s remarks upset her hosts, ‘who have seen hundreds of their soldiers and civilians killed’ in the war against the terrorists.

‘But the remarks gave voice to the long-time frustration of American officials with what they see as the Pakistani government’s lack of resolve in rooting out not only Al Qaeda, but also the Taliban leadership based in Quetta.’

In her interview with CNN, Mrs Clinton said it is time to ‘clear the air’ with a key US ally. She added: ‘I don’t think the way you deal with negative feelings is to pretend they’re not there.’

‘I think it’s important, if we are going to have the kind of cooperative partnership, that I think is in the best interest of both of our countries, for me to express some of the questions that are on the minds of the American people,’ she said.

In a separate interview with the BBC, the Secretary of State clarified her comments and the US view of the Pakistan government’s commitment to combating militancy.

‘Of course we are very encouraged to see what the government is doing. At the same time, it is just a fact that Al Qaeda had sought refuge in Pakistan after the US and our allies went after them because of the attack on 9/11,’ she said.

‘And we want to encourage everyone, not just the Pakistan government or the military but Pakistani citizens to realise the connection between Al Qaeda and these Taliban extremists who are threatening Pakistan. They are part of a syndicate of terror.’

Secretary Clinton told CNN she was not suggesting that someone inside the Pakistani government might be complicit with Al Qaeda or might be failing to follow through in fighting the terrorist group.

‘No, no,’ she said. ‘What I was responding to is what I have been really doing on this trip, which is there exists a trust deficit, certainly on the part of Pakistanis towards the United States, towards our intentions and our actions. And yet we have so much in common, we face a common threat.

‘We certainly have a common enemy in extremism and terrorism, and so part of what I have been doing is answering every single charge, every question.’

Trust ‘is a two-way street,’ she added. ‘I just want to keep putting on the table that we have some concerns as well. And I think ... that’s the kind of relationship I’m looking to build here.’

Asked whether she had underestimated the level of anti-American sentiment in Pakistan, Mrs Clinton said: ‘No, because I’ve been following the research and the polling that’s gone on for a couple of years. I knew that we were inheriting a pretty negative situation that we were going to have to address.’

That’s why she wanted three days in the country, ‘a long trip for a secretary of state,’ she said.

‘I wanted to demonstrate that, look, we are not coming here claiming that everything we’ve done is perfect.’

‘I’ve admitted to mistakes by our country going back in time, but I’ve also reminded people that we’ve been partners and allies from the beginning of Pakistan’s inception as a country.’

‘Pakistan has helped us on several important occasions, and we are very grateful for that. So let’s begin to clear the air here.’

[Neo]

Clinton’s visit

Dawn Editorial
Friday, 30 Oct, 2009

It is good to see a softer side of American diplomacy, one that emphasizes opportunities and not threats. –Photo by APP

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Pakistan on a mission, it seems, to mend fences with the Pakistani public, media and opposition. Ms Clinton is the highest-ranking official of the Obama administration to have visited Pakistan in an attempt to mollify detractors here who have been aggrieved by the strictures contained in the Kerry-Lugar bill and the army and the government’s role in the ‘US war on terror.’

The words she has elected to use have been sensible. ‘Let us discuss and air the differences as friends and partners and let us not magnify them to the extent of exclusion of many areas of agreement and cooperation.’

Topping the list of those ‘areas of agreement and cooperation’ are two things — which many here are loath to admit: one, dollars flowing directly from the US treasury and indirectly from the IFIs that have helped stave off disaster for the economy; and two, cooperation in the fight against Al-Qaeda which menaces the state here and poses a threat to regional stability. Neither has gained much traction with the public or created goodwill for the Americans because the focus has been on the other ‘sins’ of a profligate, not-very-competent Pakistani government and the American ‘hidden agenda’ to undermine Pakistan’s security and territorial integrity. Be that as it may, and in fact reversing public opinion in Pakistan in the near term may be a lost cause, it is good to at least see a softer side of American diplomacy, one that emphasises opportunities and not threats.

Unfortunately, when it comes to strategic issues — the real meat of Pak-US relations — Ms Clinton’s trip has come perhaps a few weeks too soon. Reportedly President Obama will make a decision on his new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan after the presidential run-off in Afghanistan on Nov 7. What course Mr Obama elects to choose from the many, many options that have been debated internally and in the international media will have far-reaching implications on Pak-US relations in the years ahead. At the moment, the few signals being sent by a cagey White House indicate that the cut-and-run option is off the table and so is a significant drawing down of US troops in Afghanistan in the short term. Nor does a ‘Pakistan first,’ purely counter-terrorist strategy appear to be imminent. But between those baselines and Gen McChrystal’s full-blown counter-insurgency plan are many options, and the one finally chosen will be studied very closely in Islamabad and Rawalpindi for the implications on strategic relations between Pakistan and the US going forward.

[Neo]

Clinton kicks off last day in Pakistan

Friday, 30 Oct, 2009

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a group photograph with Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Quershi during her visit to the historic Badshahi Mosque in Lahore.

ISLAMABAD: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prepared Friday to wrap up a diplomatic mission to Pakistan overshadowed by an outburst against the government over Al-Qaeda and a massive bomb attack, AFP reports.

The top US diplomat was scheduled to hold talks in the capital Islamabad with Pashtun leaders, the ethnic group that dominates both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, journalists, police and lawmakers.

Clinton has sought to use her three-day visit to the troubled US ally to bolster the civilian government and counter rising anti-US sentiment as Pakistan wages a campaign against Taliban fighters behind a wave of bomb attacks.

But after calling for a new start in the often uneasy relationship at round after round of meetings, she appeared to lose patience during a face-to-face with senior Pakistani editors and business leaders late Thursday.

There was no immediate public response from Pakistan. A military statement released after her talks with army chief of staff General Ashfaq Kayani said only that ‘both exchanged candid views on matters of mutual interest.’

A massive car bomb ripped through a crowded market in Pakistan’s Pashtun capital Peshawar on Wednesday, just hours after Clinton arrived in the country, killing 105 people and underscoring the gravity of the extremist threat.

[Neo]

Hillary wants action beyond Waziristan

By Baqir Sajjad Syed
Saturday, 31 Oct, 2009

Despite appreciation from many people, Clinton’s ‘people to people’ diplomacy has been characterised by sharp disagreements and deep distrust which is a potentially worrying sign for officials in Washington hoping to reverse anti-US sentiment in the increasingly fragile nuclear Pakistan.

ISLAMABAD: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday jacked up pressure on Pakistan to take on Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups beyond South Waziristan for a lasting solution to terrorism.

‘With initial campaign in Swat and now in South Waziristan finished, I think the Pakistani military would have to go on to root out other terrorist groups or else they could come back to threaten Pakistan,’ Ms Clinton said at a town hall-style meeting of Pakistani professional women on the last day of her three-day charm offensive.

The secretary of state had stirred controversy when she said at a meeting with journalists on Thursday that Pakistan lacked seriousness in pursuing Al Qaeda. ‘I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and could not get them if they really wanted to.’

However, Ms Clinton, who for most part of her trip consciously stayed away from saying anything that could undermine the purpose of the trip, did not relent after the statement and in numerous media interviews tried to impress on the Pakistani leadership that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were as big a threat to Pakistan as were the local Taliban.

‘Our best information is that Al Qaeda leadership is somewhere in Pakistan. It is in the interest of Pakistan as well as our own interest that we capture or kill Al Qaeda leadership because that will give a very serious blow to terrorists everywhere. Let us work in that direction.

‘I understand priority for Pakistan will be focussing on those that are attacking you. That has to be your priority. But Al Qaeda is in league with those attacking Pakistan.’

Highlighting the nexus between Al Qaeda, Pakistani Taliban and other terror groups, she said: ‘The extremist and terrorist groups are part of syndicate of terror and Al Qaeda is head of that syndicate.’

Ms Clinton placed a lot of emphasis on this issue during her three-hour meeting with Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and ISI Director General Lt-Gen Shuja Pasha on Thursday night.

There are apprehensions in Washington that the Pakistan military is going after only those who threaten its own security while ignoring those who launch attacks in Afghanistan. Denials about the alleged existence of entities like Quetta Shura in Pakistani territory have also displeased UD officials.

As a means for resolving such contentious issues, towards the end of her trip on Friday, Ms Clinton proposed creation of ‘more open relationship between governments and people of America and Pakistan’ and underlined the need for ‘honesty in relationship’ between Washington and Islamabad.

Nuclear fear

The secretary, who left for Abu Dhabi in the evening, during her meetings with government officials discussed her fears about nuclear proliferation given that terrorist groups had been making relentless efforts to acquire fissile material.

She cautioned that there was always a possibility of nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists. However, she insisted that she had full confidence in the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. She urged Pakistan to work with other countries against proliferation.

Pakistan-India relations

Ms Clinton made it clear that her government wouldn’t be playing an active role in helping Pakistan achieve peace with India.

‘It is clearly in India’s and Pakistan’s interest to try to resolve the concerns they have. It is not for us to dictate solutions because that will last a minute, but it is up to us to encourage both sides to get back to the composite dialogue … We love to see good and peaceful relations between the two countries.’

Justifying American reluctance to play a peace broker’s role, she said both the countries had very strong feelings and the US couldn’t impose a solution despite its leading position in the world as the sole super power. However, she promised to help Pakistan in resolving its water dispute with India.

‘Water will be part of the strategic dialogue between Pakistan and the US and we will try to address international issues,’ she said at the town hall meeting.

Blackwater controversy

Ms Clinton compounded the confusion over the presence of the US private security firm Blackwater/Xe Services in Pakistan by saying that some of their personnel might be having diplomatic immunity, but most of them didn’t.

‘I understand the sensitivity of the issue, but I want to be clear why we have any contractors, well because we get dozens and dozens of threats every month directed towards our diplomats and public officials who are here for diplomatic activity. Our diplomats don’t carry arms, but on the other hand if they have to get out they need security.’

She said the US was working with Pakistan to chalk out a mechanism for providing security to diplomats and officials assigned to Pakistan.

The issue of private security contractors echoed at her meeting with lawmakers in parliament, where former information minister Sherry Rehman warned her that if the issue was not resolved, it could compromise the very democracy the US was seeking to support.

Ms Clinton clarified that the security company was not above the law of land and asked Ambassador Patterson to look into the issue and address concerns.

Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan called for an increase in trade and economic ties.

During her meeting with leaders from the NWFP and Fata, the secretary of state underscored American support for humanitarian and livelihood assistance, education, media and communications for people living in areas of conflict.

The secretary of state also visited the Police Line Headquarters to pay tribute to the personnel of Islamabad police who had sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. She expressed the resolve to stand with Pakistan in rooting out the menace of terrorism and secure future of the country.

According to a press release issued by the ICT police, she said: ‘It is a war against an enemy who tried to destroy the morale and life of police officers. It is the enemy that threatens the way of life and future of the people of Pakistan. It is a common enemy and common threat and we show solidarity with you.’

She said that US supported Pakistan police through training and increasing capacity and this cooperation would continue.

She laid wreath on the memorial of policemen and met members of their families.

[Neo]

Clinton faces Pakistani anger at drone attacks

Friday, 30 Oct, 2009

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gestures as she speaks with Pakistani elders in Islamabad on October 30, 2009. – AFP

ISLAMABAD: US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton came face-to-face Friday with Pakistani anger over US aerial drone attacks in tribal areas along the Afghan border, a strategy that US officials say has succeeded in killing key terrorist leaders.

In a series of public appearances on the final day of a three-day visit marked by blunt talk, Clinton refused to discuss the subject, which involves highly classified CIA operations. She would say only that 'there is a war going on,' and the Obama administration is committed to helping Pakistan defeat the insurgents and terrorists who threaten the stability of a nuclear-armed nation.

Clinton said she could not comment on 'any particular tactic or technology' used in the war against extremist groups in the area.

The use of Predator drone aircraft, armed with guided missiles, is credited by US officials with eliminating a growing number of senior terrorist group leaders this year who had used the tribal lands of Pakistan as a haven beyond the reach of US ground forces in Afghanistan.

During an interview broadcast live in Pakistan with several prominent female TV anchors, before a predominantly female audience of several hundred, one member of the audience said the Predator attacks amount to 'executions without trial' for those killed.

Another asked Clinton how she would define terrorism.

'Is it the killing of people in drone attacks?' she asked. That woman then asked if Clinton considers drone attacks and bombings like the one that killed more than 100 civilians in the city of Peshawar earlier this week to both be acts of terrorism.

'No, I do not,' Clinton replied.

Earlier, in a give-and-take with about a dozen residents of the tribal region, one man alluded obliquely to the drone attacks, saying he had heard that in the United States, aircraft are not allowed to take off after 11 pm, to avoid irritating the population.

'That is the sort of peace we want for our people,' he said through an interpreter.

The same man told Clinton that the Obama administration should rely more on wisdom and less on firepower to achieve its aims in Pakistan.

'Your presence in the region is not good for peace,' he said, referring to the US military, 'because it gives rise to frustration and irritation among the people of this region.'

At another point he told Clinton, 'Please forgive me, but I would like to say we've been fighting your war.'

A similar point was made by Sana Bucha of Geo TV during the live broadcast interview.

'It is not our war,' she told Clinton. 'It is your war.' She drew a burst of applause when she added, 'You had one 9/11. We are having daily 9/11s in Pakistan.'

Capturing a feeling that Clinton heard expressed numerous times during her visit, one woman in the audience said, 'The whole world thinks we are terrorists.'

The woman said she was from the South Waziristan area where the Pakistani army is engaged in pitched battles with Taliban and affiliated extremist elements – and where US drones have struck with deadly effect many times.

Clinton's main message on Friday was that the US wants to be a partner with Pakistan, not just on the military front but also on trade, education, energy and other sectors. She stressed, however, that Pakistan needs to do its part in demonstrating a real commitment to democracy.

Clinton also was asked about her remark on Thursday that she found it hard to believe that Pakistani officials don't know where leaders of terrorist groups are hiding in Pakistan.

On Friday she took a bit of the edge off that comment, saying, 'I don't know if anyone knows, but we in the United States would very much like to see the end of the al-Qaeda leadership, and our best information is that they are somewhere in Pakistan.'

In an interview broadcast Friday on ABC's 'Good Morning America,' Clinton was asked about the bluntness of her remarks.

'Trust is a two-way street. There is trust deficit,' she said.

'It will not be sufficient to achieve the level of security that Pakistanis deserve if we don't go after those who are still threatening not only Pakistan, but Afghanistan, and the rest of the world. And we wanted to put that on the table. And I think it was important that we did.'

Asked if she thought Pakistan was harboring terrorists, Clinton replied, 'I don't think they are. ... But I think it would be a missed opportunity and a lack of recognition of the full extent of the threat, if they did not realize that any safe haven anywhere for terrorists threatens them, threatens us, and has to be addressed.'

Later Clinton was to fly to Abu Dhabi in the Persian Gulf for a meeting Saturday with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. – AP

[HasanG20]

If you want to win Pakistani peoples heart please stop the drone attacks ; want operation beyond Wazaristan where now ? Punjab ? will it ever stop until we all die ? Hillary Clinton needs to get her facts straight and stop blaming Pakistan for her problems.

[Neo]

Clinton's Pakistan visit reveals widespread distrust of U.S.

Students in Lahore, Pakistan, protest against the visit of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. (K.M. Chaudary / Associated Press / October 29, 2009)

Even well-mannered college students and respected journalists question Washington's intentions in Pakistan. Some compare U.S. drone missile strikes to terrorism.

Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan - Every time Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to win over Pakistanis during her three-day charm offensive this week, they fired back a polite but firm message:

We don't really trust your country.

No matter how hard Clinton tried to reassure audiences in Lahore and Islamabad with talk of providing economic aid where it's needed most, Pakistanis seized on her visit as the perfect moment to lash out at a U.S. government they perceived as arrogant, domineering and insensitive to their plight.

At a televised town hall meeting in Islamabad on Friday, a woman in a mostly female audience characterized U.S. drone missile strikes on suspected terrorist targets in northwestern Pakistan as de facto acts of terrorism themselves. A day earlier in Lahore, a college student asked Clinton why every student who visits the U.S. is viewed there as a terrorist.

The opinions Clinton heard weren't the strident voices of radical clerics or politicians with anti-American agendas. Some of the most biting criticisms came from well-mannered university youths and respected, seasoned journalists, a reflection of the breadth of dissatisfaction Pakistanis have with U.S. policy toward their country.

In those voices, a sense that Pakistan was paying a heavy price for America's "war on terror" rang clear.

"You had one 9/11, and we are having daily 9/11s in Pakistan," Asma Shirazi, a journalist with Geo TV, told Clinton during the Islamabad town hall meeting.

Clinton's visit came at a time when Pakistanis' suspicions about U.S. intentions in their country were at an all-time high.

A five-year, $7.5-billion aid package to Pakistan recently signed into law by President Obama has stoked much of the animosity. Measures in the legislation aimed at ensuring the money isn't misspent have been perceived by Pakistanis as levers that Washington can use to exert control over their country.

Pakistanis also continue to be incensed by U.S. reliance on drone missile strikes to take out top Al Qaeda and Taliban commanders in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas along the Afghan border.

CIA-operated drone strikes have killed at least 13 senior Al Qaeda and Taliban militants in the tribal areas in the last 18 months. But Pakistani government and military leaders say the strikes have also killed hundreds of civilians and amount to violations of Pakistan's sovereignty.

At the Islamabad town hall meeting, a female student from a university in Peshawar, a city shaken by a car bomb blast Wednesday that killed 118 people, summed up the anger over the drone attacks.

"What is actually terrorism in U.S. eyes?" the woman asked. "Is it the killing of innocent people in, let's say, drone attacks? Or is it the killing of innocent people in different parts of Pakistan, like the bomb blast in Peshawar two days ago? Which one is terrorism, do you think?"

Pressed by the forum's moderator whether she thought U.S. drone missile strikes were tantamount to terrorism, Clinton answered, "No, I do not."

On the one occasion when Clinton struck her own assertive tone, the message appeared to get through. Her suggestion to Pakistani journalists in Lahore that elements within the Pakistani government likely were aware of the whereabouts of Al Qaeda leaders but were not acting on the information struck a chord on the opinion pages of major Pakistani newspapers.

"If we are honest, we cannot deny that much of what she said was true," remarked an editorial that appeared today in the News, a major English-language Pakistani daily.

Clinton repeatedly acknowledged the mutual lack of trust that has held back the relationship, and she stressed the Obama administration's commitment to addressing crucial issues for Pakistanis that reach beyond terrorism, such as shoring up Pakistan's beleaguered electricity grid and improving schools and healthcare.

Pakistanis, however, clearly remained unconvinced that Washington was as interested in improving quality of life in Pakistan as it was in tracking down terrorists. And on several occasions during her trip, Clinton was confronted by Pakistanis who blamed the previous U.S. administration's policies in Afghanistan for the militancy now wreaking havoc across Pakistan.

"Look, Madame Secretary, we are fighting a war that is imposed on us," journalist Shirazi told Clinton. "It's not our war. That was your war, and we are fighting that war."

Assessments of Clinton's trip in today's Pakistani newspapers were gloomy.

"One cannot help feeling that [Clinton's trip] was an abortive exercise," remarked an editorial in the Nation, an English-language newspaper, "and she went away fully conscious of that failure."

[HasanG20]

Originally Posted by Neo

Clinton's Pakistan visit reveals widespread distrust of U.S.

Students in Lahore, Pakistan, protest against the visit of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. (K.M. Chaudary / Associated Press / October 29, 2009)

Even well-mannered college students and respected journalists question Washington's intentions in Pakistan. Some compare U.S. drone missile strikes to terrorism.

Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan - Every time Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to win over Pakistanis during her three-day charm offensive this week, they fired back a polite but firm message:

We don't really trust your country.

No matter how hard Clinton tried to reassure audiences in Lahore and Islamabad with talk of providing economic aid where it's needed most, Pakistanis seized on her visit as the perfect moment to lash out at a U.S. government they perceived as arrogant, domineering and insensitive to their plight.

At a televised town hall meeting in Islamabad on Friday, a woman in a mostly female audience characterized U.S. drone missile strikes on suspected terrorist targets in northwestern Pakistan as de facto acts of terrorism themselves. A day earlier in Lahore, a college student asked Clinton why every student who visits the U.S. is viewed there as a terrorist.

The opinions Clinton heard weren't the strident voices of radical clerics or politicians with anti-American agendas. Some of the most biting criticisms came from well-mannered university youths and respected, seasoned journalists, a reflection of the breadth of dissatisfaction Pakistanis have with U.S. policy toward their country.

In those voices, a sense that Pakistan was paying a heavy price for America's "war on terror" rang clear.

"You had one 9/11, and we are having daily 9/11s in Pakistan," Asma Shirazi, a journalist with Geo TV, told Clinton during the Islamabad town hall meeting.

Clinton's visit came at a time when Pakistanis' suspicions about U.S. intentions in their country were at an all-time high.

A five-year, $7.5-billion aid package to Pakistan recently signed into law by President Obama has stoked much of the animosity. Measures in the legislation aimed at ensuring the money isn't misspent have been perceived by Pakistanis as levers that Washington can use to exert control over their country.

Pakistanis also continue to be incensed by U.S. reliance on drone missile strikes to take out top Al Qaeda and Taliban commanders in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas along the Afghan border.

CIA-operated drone strikes have killed at least 13 senior Al Qaeda and Taliban militants in the tribal areas in the last 18 months. But Pakistani government and military leaders say the strikes have also killed hundreds of civilians and amount to violations of Pakistan's sovereignty.

At the Islamabad town hall meeting, a female student from a university in Peshawar, a city shaken by a car bomb blast Wednesday that killed 118 people, summed up the anger over the drone attacks.

"What is actually terrorism in U.S. eyes?" the woman asked. "Is it the killing of innocent people in, let's say, drone attacks? Or is it the killing of innocent people in different parts of Pakistan, like the bomb blast in Peshawar two days ago? Which one is terrorism, do you think?"

Pressed by the forum's moderator whether she thought U.S. drone missile strikes were tantamount to terrorism, Clinton answered, "No, I do not."

On the one occasion when Clinton struck her own assertive tone, the message appeared to get through. Her suggestion to Pakistani journalists in Lahore that elements within the Pakistani government likely were aware of the whereabouts of Al Qaeda leaders but were not acting on the information struck a chord on the opinion pages of major Pakistani newspapers.

"If we are honest, we cannot deny that much of what she said was true," remarked an editorial that appeared today in the News, a major English-language Pakistani daily.

Clinton repeatedly acknowledged the mutual lack of trust that has held back the relationship, and she stressed the Obama administration's commitment to addressing crucial issues for Pakistanis that reach beyond terrorism, such as shoring up Pakistan's beleaguered electricity grid and improving schools and healthcare.

Pakistanis, however, clearly remained unconvinced that Washington was as interested in improving quality of life in Pakistan as it was in tracking down terrorists. And on several occasions during her trip, Clinton was confronted by Pakistanis who blamed the previous U.S. administration's policies in Afghanistan for the militancy now wreaking havoc across Pakistan.

"Look, Madame Secretary, we are fighting a war that is imposed on us," journalist Shirazi told Clinton. "It's not our war. That was your war, and we are fighting that war."

Assessments of Clinton's trip in today's Pakistani newspapers were gloomy.

"One cannot help feeling that [Clinton's trip] was an abortive exercise," remarked an editorial in the Nation, an English-language newspaper, "and she went away fully conscious of that failure."

It's a good sign seems Pakistan people are becoming more aware of who is a friend and a foe that will really help us in our WOT.I suggest country wide rallys against this current Gov't policies.Rehman Malik should be the first one to resign these people have no sense of shame they will look you into your eyes and lie they are dangerous very dangerous to Pakistan.The removal of this Gov't will be the happiest day of my life.I suggest give Imran Khan a chance because his public support is good.There should be mid-term elections in Pakistan its now or never.

We should deploy SAMs and manpads to counter the drone attack.

[Neo]

Clinton's 'new page'

EDITORIAL (October 30 2009): That the people of Pakistan should blow off their palm one of the most attractive foreign assistance packages offered by the United States, the Obama administration is naturally concerned. From its perspective, thanks to Ambassador Haqqani's close rapport with the American lawmakers and his lobbyists' hard work, the government of Pakistan was fully on board with respect to both the letter and spirit of the Kerry-Lugar bill, which is now a law.

US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is here "to reverse some of the misperceptions". She would like to "discuss and air the differences as friends and partners and let us not magnify them to the extent of exclusion of many areas of agreement and co-operation". But even more significantly, she would like Pakistani leadership to give its input to President Obama's strategic review that is now in its final stage.

And that's important for us, as more than any other country Pakistan will be most profoundly impacted by any change he brings to the US commitment in Afghanistan - be it in terms of military engagement or political patronage. But confusion persists as to what that strategic review would throw up. In the wake of General Stanley McChrystal's demand for 40,000 additional troops, a kind of struggle has erupted between the White House and the Pentagon.

While the former, mainly inspired by the Biden-Kerry duo, wants minimum military presence in Afghanistan and greater reliance on selective drone attacks, the generals in the US military headquarters, led by the author of the 'surge' in Iraq General Petraeus, want full compliance with McChrystal's plea. VP Biden's approach is that rather than trying to defeat Taliban, the US ought to focus on targeting al Qaeda and other terrorist groups wherever they are, and that is of some worry to Pakistan also.

The generals dispute his viewpoint - giving grist to the media perception that General Petraeus has political ambitions, a la General Douglas MacArthur who defied President Truman over the Korean War in 1951. Plausibly, President Obama is going to take the middle course by agreeing to send half the number of troops, something like four brigades, whose main responsibility would be to protect some 10 Afghan population centres, leaving the countryside at the mercy of the Taliban.

That's quixotic to say the least. Notwithstanding White House Press Secretary Robert Gibb's loud assertion that President Obama has assured the world that it had no plans to quit the region, the concept that only a few towns should be protected is nothing but conceding defeat and walking out of an embattled Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is essentially a part-agricultural and part-pastoral economy. There is very little industry that can feed the people in the cities, cut off from the countryside. That also means handing over rural Afghanistan to the Taliban, forever. Obviously any such move would place Pakistan on the horns of a dilemma.

It would jeopardise the outcome of its ongoing military operation in South Waziristan for the reason that the militants would have unimpeded inflow of manpower and weapons from across the border. But more importantly and fundamentally, the people in Pakistan would then ask the government: how come you are still fighting the Taliban when its principal adversary, the US, has offered it 'a live and let live' option.

No doubt, eight years on, the whole context of the war on terror and the rationale for a joint struggle against terrorism has undergone a complete metamorphosis. Secretary Clinton is right in pleading for expanding co-operation, much beyond the narrow groove of the anti-terror co-operation, of which the Kerry-Lugar bill is seen here as an off-shoot.

She says that the Obama government would like to deepen relations with Pakistan and find new opportunities for partnership with the private sector, including universities, NGOs, civil society organisations and religious institutions. Let her charm offensive succeed, and in it she can also contribute by telling us why drone attacks cannot be halted, what is this Blackwater thing and who is behind the Jundullah.