The US & others working with Pakistan

[carl]

1. That it is important for the leader of Pakistan to not be perceived as selling out his/her country by subjugating the interests of Pakistan and the Pakistani people to the interests of some foreign power in exchange for favor and economic benefit. Arguably recent leaders of Pakistan have done this with the US.

2. That it is important for the leader of Pakistan to reestablish the tradition of non-interference with the tribal populaces shared with Afghanistan and to refrain from excessive efforts to exercise governmental control over the same.

3. Pakistan is in a challenging situation, and must carefully balance relationships with powerful neighbors, such as China and India; while at the same time also balancing the often odd demands of far away powers such as the US. No easy task between these nuclear powers. To add a degree of difficulty most of us Westerners cannot fully appreciate is the relationships the government must manage with the many diverse and distinct populace groups that live within and expand across her borders.

4. No Pakistani leader will be able to make everyone happy or answer to every powerful party's demands. To attempt to make all happy will make none happy, and only failure can come of that. One must choose, and recent choices seem to have been poor ones for Pakistan. For Americans, we must learn that an honest "no" is a far better answer to live with than a disingenuous "yes."

As to point 1. I think they already run that game on us. They talk all the time about the primacy of Pakistani interests, but then when they want the money, they say what good buddies they are. They choose to run the game.

As to point 2., I agree to an extent. They should stop supporting the expansion of the wild eyed Jihadis in the areas despite the opposition of the local people. The relatives of all the tribal elders killed by the Jihadis and the people represented by them would like that and would probably like to see a few killers come to trial.

Also, I read once that one of the problems of the border areas is that they are not subject to the same laws as the rest of the country. That results in some inequities.

As to point 3., no doubt.

As to point 4., I am somewhat puzzled. As far as I can see, there is no "leader" of Pakistan. The closest thing is Kayani sahib who is primarily interested in fostering the well being of his group, the army, everything else being secondary.

But your use of the word leader raises a question. Do you think it would be beneficial for Pakistan to have a system whereby there was something like a "leader"? Do you think the country would benefit if there was a civilian leader who could call up Kayani on the phone, tell him he wanted his resignation within 20 minutes, and be obeyed?

Your are darn right that we should learn to live with an honest no rather than a lying yes. But we have been the ones rewarding the lying yes, for years. Why on earth should they stop the lying yes if we give them money for it? That is our fault, not theirs. We're the frog, they're the scorpion.