Aid-givers do what they will; aid-receivers should do what they will. The Kerry-Lugar bill was passed by the US Congress, not by the Pakistani parliament. —File Photo

SO then, the Kerry-Lugar bill has been signed into law by President Obama. While there are still some squeaks emanating from various ‘quarters’ to the effect that it is a national disgrace to ‘accept’ it, not one voice is saying any of the ‘quarters’ will turn down any moneys that come their way under the self-same Bad Old Bill.

Well, gentlemen, now is the time to say in another press release that you simply will not accept even a single Pakistani paisa (let alone all those luscious, mouth-watering, hundreds of millions of US dollars!) until the language of the bill is changed by the US Congress so that it no longer remains ‘insulting’ and the more ‘furious’ among you are mollified.

And while you are at it, perhaps a separate press release refusing in advance to accept American weapons and equipment surplus to, or left over from, the Iraq mission, including transport such as Humvees and jeeps and heavy vehicles which press reports tell us will be transferred to Pakistan upon American withdrawal from that country.

Whilst some of our Rommels and Guderians who are ‘furious’ today were not even in the army when the great CJ-3 and CJ-5A jeeps and Dodge and 3 and 5-Tonner trucks served us so well, they will have heard how tough and resilient those vehicles were. By the way they were surpluses/used vehicles from the Korean War. One did not detect any ‘fury’ then.

However, American security assistance simply must be rejected by the ‘furious’ because Shah Mehmood’s ‘rushing’ (as friend Ardeshir Cowasjee so well puts it) hither and yon much as a headless chicken, apart from costing the national exchequer another couple of million rupees in expenses has brought us zilch in terms of ‘amending’ the bill.

If I know my English, we received a well-deserved kick in the pants when the Americans said right at the outset of the ‘explanatory’ note that all they were attempting to do was to explain the language of the bill. Indeed, two hours after Shah Mehmood’s claim that the explanatory note would be attached to, i.e., become part of the bill, the White House spokesman said no way was that happening.

As veteran aid receivers (!), we should know that the US, or for that matter any aid-giving country, will attach conditions to that aid. The important, indeed critical, question to ask is why we make such fools of ourselves at regular intervals, making a spectacle of ourselves before the world which well knows us and our shenanigans?

Why do we, most particularly our Guderians and Rommels, forget that during all the years of the Afghan jihad of the 1980s President Reagan used to annually certify to Congress that Pakistan was not in the process of producing nuclear weapons? Where was our ghairat (honour) then? Where was our ‘fury’? Or is it merely the case that there was no grandstanding then because one of their own was ruling the roost?

Or is it the case that the only reason the American boot has landed on the proverbial cat’s tail is because the US Congress wants to see more civilian control of the military; its budget; its promotions to higher ranks et al, all of which happens in democratic, civilised countries? (By the by, in India, promotions and postings of brigadiers/commodores/air commodores and above are subject to approval by the civilian authority.) But no, not in our country where the army considers itself above all else, and arrogates to itself the right to rule supreme. It forgets, of course, that its sycophant’s songs of praise notwithstanding, it has always left the country in a bigger mess than it was in when it took over.

This brings me to a totally misplaced, almost dishonest, likening of the ISPR’s ill-considered press release with the protest of Foreign Office (FO) officers to prevent the posting of a junior DMG officer to Paris as ambassador. How are the two similar, please? The FO did not come out with a statement by its spokesman opposing the appointment. What happened there was that retired ambassadors wrote articles in the press and some FO officers went to court in opposition to the posting. In which way are the two actions comparable?

Also, what is so wrong with the Americans demanding the army stay within the limits imposed upon it by the constitution of Pakistan when all of us have been demanding the exact same for years? Furthermore, it is none other than successive American administrations, mainly Republican, who have supported military dictators against the people of Pakistan – remember the struggle to restore our superior judiciary?

So, if the present American administration under the wise leadership of Barack Obama is trying to cleanse our polity why are we protesting? Remember (as I illustrated last week) the symbiotic relationship, albeit subservient, of our army with the Americans.

But seriously, aid-givers do what they will; aid-receivers should do what they will. The Kerry-Lugar bill was passed by the US Congress, not by the Pakistani parliament. The language used is because the $15bn that were pumped into the country during the Commando’s time in the sun were not accounted for properly. I might add that I was among those who repeatedly pleaded with the Americans through these very columns not to give a single penny to us without setting clear benchmarks and milestones so that the money was used for the purpose it was meant to serve and not diverted elsewhere leaving us in the same hole we were in already, i.e. at the mercy of the yahoos.

If someone doesn’t like the language, let him/her refuse the money. It is as simple as that. Beggars as we all know, cannot be choosers. Finally, let me say that I am all for doing without any aid whatsoever; I am for stepping back a little, and learning to stand on our own feet. If we have to beg for diesel for our tractors why not use bullocks instead? I am serious.

In the end, might I exhort President Asif Zardari to immediately implement the Charter of Democracy?

kshafi1@yahoo.com