We were guests of the World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh, a private organisation whose mission is to bring the world to Pittsburgh by way of seminars, scholarships, and visiting speakers. It was my second trip to Pittsburgh to speak about Pakistan, and the first time — in April 2008 — suddenly seemed a very long time ago.

Fawad and I spoke at an informal dinner with 35 or 40 local citizens. I stressed the seriousness of the situation for the three million displaced persons in the NWFP and the way Pakistanis feel about the drone attacks, and I argued that we all — both Americans and Pakistanis — need to trust in President Obama’s wisdom and intentions and appreciate that he’s not Bush. I also highlighted the lawyers’ movement and quoted Aslam Mughal, a man I met in Lahore a few days after March 16: ‘When the people at large join a movement, it is very difficult to stop it. And that is exactly what happened. It was amazing. People from all walks of life. Children, women, older people. I have never seen anything like it.’

Fawad emphasised the role of non-profit groups in addressing Pakistan’s problems both acute and chronic, particularly in education and healthcare. Not everything can be done by the state or the private sector, he argued. And he talked on a theme I’ve also been big on lately: the important role the affluent, talented Pakistani diaspora is in a position to play, both in Pakistan and here in the US. He pointed out especially that if aid from the US is channeled and deployed through established and trusted Pakistani-American NGOs, it could go a long way toward mitigating mistrust of American intentions.

More stimulating than the dinner, though, was the full morning we spent beforehand with 80 or so high school students taking part, during the first week of their vacation, in the annual Summer Seminar on World Affairs. Fawad and I spoke to the students for about an hour, then they broke into smaller groups to devise policies toward Pakistan and Afghanistan that they would recommend to President Obama. Many of the students’ ideas were refreshing and encouraging.

‘Our first step would be to talk to the village leaders,’ said one group. ‘We also want to support the lawyers to lead to a stable, democratic government.’ The same group spoke of encouraging microcredit, building trust, and establishing a guest worker programme to employ Afghans in Pakistan on public works projects such as the Gwadar port. ‘I think Pakistan will find it in their best interest to have a stable Afghanistan without the Taliban,’ said the group’s spokesman.

Ideas for combating opium production ranged from the whimsical suggestion of ‘a huge bagel factory’ to make poppy seed bagels, to the perhaps more realistic notion of encouraging pharmaceutical companies to invest in Afghanistan, because the opiates in poppies have legitimate medicinal uses. In FATA, the students hoped to ‘try to make some agreements with the Taliban, and also utilise natural resources.’

They were asked to decide whether they would continue the Bush policy of considering those who harbour terrorists to be terrorists themselves. Most groups would change that policy. ‘This would give a bad image to the US, because civilians would feel they were being punished for harbouring radicals,’ said one student. ‘A lot of the harbourers might be acting out of fear, so I don’t think they should be considered terrorists themselves.’ Another said: ‘We think the fighting will slow down if we stop that, because people will feel more secure.’ One group, though, said they would continue the policy: ‘If you see something that’s wrong and you don’t do anything about it, that makes you as wrong as the person doing it.’

Most encouraging of all was this: ‘A main focus of ours was stopping the drone attacks. If somebody is against your policies and you continue doing it, they’re less likely to sit down with you. We should find a less invasive way to combat terrorism, not putting innocent people in harm’s way.’

http://www.ethancasey.com