Secretary of State Clinton is losing Her Cool!

May 12, 2010
Secretary of State Clinton is losing Her Cool!
By Saeed Qureshi
Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, the former first lady and a charming person, is losing her cool. Such are the pressures of international diplomacy and the strain and stress of tricky minefield of interstate relations. As the former first lady and the better half of a popular president Bill Clinton, notwithstanding his lewd proclivities, she seems to not learn the intricacies, pitfalls, twists and turns in the domain of foreign relations. Her sentimentalism has taken better of her when she lambasted Pakistan for a crime for which, in no way, can it be held responsible.
A person, who gets his education in the United States, marries here, has a wife and children, a good job and not a lousy life, plans in his convoluted mind to commit a dangerous deed which if carried through would have caused great calamity. Now incidentally he descends from Pakistan like countless others from other countries. He remained all these years encompassing almost a decade in a state of oblivion like other expatriate folks.
The only emphasis that is being repeated is that he was a Pakistani with links with Taliban. It would be, to an extent digested as far as the media (fond of sensationalism) and people with narrow mindset are concerned. But for the U. S. Secretary of State to despise and castigate Pakistan for the act of an individual who has already lived in America for over a decade and that too in rude and rough language is incredibly bewildering.
President Clinton and Hillary Clinton nurse a soft corner and tilt for India, and it is no secret. But to denigrate and undermine the dignity of Pakistan which is another important state in the Indian subcontinent and to use bitterest diction against a friendly country is patently the display of an unlovely diplomacy. The position of Secretary of State is extremely sensitive and tremendously responsible. A single wrong word can make the difference and can be variously interpreted; all the more of the American foreign minister who sets the tone of the global politics and international diplomacy.
As such she has thrown a clumsy spanner into the bond of trust that has so far existed between America and Pakistan as allies in the historic war on terrorism. In her fuming interview given to CBS TV channel, she has used very sour and strong language imparting an impression that it is not Faisal Shehzad but the state of Pakistan or its institutions or some individuals within the establishment that were behind such terrorists. The phrase of severe consequences is heavily loaded and can be elaborated as the invasion of Pakistan to the extension of pilotless Drone attacks to the territory of Pakistan. It can as well mean taking back the naturalized citizen status of Pakistani descendents which they earned by dint of hard work and as lawful residents of this great country.
Secretary Hillary has proven to be novice and hasty in apportioning blame and hurling accusation on a close friend of United States whose armed forces are on the forefront of a conflict that is being written with blood of its soldiers. The astonishing victories that Pakistan army have scored in the inaccessible tribal regions of Pakistan must be the envy and mere dream of such military networks as NATO that is languishing for years in the sandy soil of Afghanistan without any worth mentioning achievements. Hillary forgets all these glaring facts and chooses to pinpoint Pakistan for a highly uncalled for censure.
Beyond plunging its army into war front and sacrificing human lives, entailing fatalities, suffering from monetarily losses, indigenous terrorism and social upheaval, what else Hillary expects of Pakistan to do. Pakistani leaders and the army commanders do not possess esoteric knowledge that they should inform the American authorities well in advance that someone was up to a grievous mischief and was about to resort to terrorism. Thus they can catch him before he spills disaster and pre-empt and foil the nefarious attempt.
This is exactly what the threat of Madam Hillary connotes that if there was any further such act of terrorism from a Pakistani naturalized person, it would be Pakistan that would be made to suffer seriously. So in order to save herself from American wrath and from the projected threat, Pakistan should devise a way how to forestall such a threat and convey that to America well in time. Only thus can Pakistan be immune from the revenge of a friend for whom it is spilling its soldiers’ blood and suffering civilian casualties from suicide bombing. It can be only wished if Pakistan had known such magical powers and occult knowledge to forewarn America about an impending tragedy.
The remarks of Hillary have left most of the Pakistanis aghast. The Army appears to be perplexed; the political leadership is taken a back and is utterly non-plused how to justify its war on terror on behalf of America. There is a roaring storm of bitter reaction from the people of Pakistan who question the sincerity of American friendship and trust that is shot away on mere suspicion. They question if Pakistan is repaid and returned this kind of compliment for the mammoth work it is doing for America, then it hardly matters whether you fight for America or not, becuase at the end of the day you will get a scornful rebuke and a thankless rebuff.

The mutual bond of trust that has been severely dented by Madam Hillary’s emotional, frenetic and frivolous anti Pakistan outburst cannot be repaired so soon. To claim that lower level minions know about the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda , Mullah Omar and the leadership of the Afghan Taliban is ostensibly a preposterous claim, which implies that that Pakistani agencies or officials were sheltering these dangerous individuals and were clandestinely in league with each other . In her blitz of castigation she did not much appreciate Pakistan’s monumental and blazing feats on the battlefield.
So Pakistani leadership and the army bosses must be in a quandary about the usefulness of Pakistan’s military cooperation with NATO and the United States. They should be under the cogent dilemma whether to carry on this thankless military offensive that has brought more harm to Pakistan than to the NATO forces. Pakistan got a filthy nickname of American stooge and a mercenary because of its alliance with America in the fight against the radical Islamic militants.
Shall Secretary of State recant from her harsh and uncharitable remarks against Pakistan and thus put a balm on the wounds that she has caused to Pakistani nation? She is under obligation to assuage the hurt feelings of the people of Pakistan.
For comments and to unsubscribe write us at qureshisa2003@yahoo.com