On February 21st, the Pakistani government agreed to a permanent ceasefire agreement with the Taliban militants in Swat Valley—a location only 100 miles away from the capital, Islamabad. A day later the new District Coordination Office-of Swat Valley was kidnapped by militants, along with six of his guards. He was released later that day in exchange for two Taliban militants. The ceasefire was an agreement by the Pakistani government to allow sharia law in the area in return for peace. So far, it has not been very effective.
The Atlantic Council of the United States (the Atlantic Council) recently put out a report on the situation in Pakistan. It says, “Pakistan faces dire economic and security threats that threaten both the existence of Pakistan as a democratic and stable state and the region as a whole. Given the tools and the financing, Pakistan can turn back from the brink. But for that to happen, it needs help now. Such a reversal demands far greater and more urgent support and assistance from the international community in general and the United States in particular. And it needs to be based on focused policy changes and disciplined implementation by the Pakistan government, with adequate oversight to ensure that Pakistan can do the job.”
The report draws from the (Biden)-Kerry-Lugar proposal from last year that would give Pakistan $7.5 billion over a five-year period and the possibility of $7.5 billion over the five years after that. This report calls for “[a] total of $4-5 billion above the (Biden)-Kerry-Lugar proposals… Of this, about $3 billion should go to the economic and social sectors directly. About $1 billion of fresh or redirected funds would go to security forces—both military and law enforcement. Of this $1 billion, approximately $200 million would be applied to recruiting, training, and deployment of an additional 15,000 police within the next six months who are essential to bringing long-term law and order to all of Pakistan.” It asserts, “We cannot stress the magnitude of the dangers enough nor the need for greater action now. These challenges and dangers can be mitigated with relatively modest funding increases for Pakistan’s economic development and security of about $4 billion a year as loans or aid, above the IMF and other contributions.”
Although the Atlantic Council advocates so strongly in its report the need for American intervention, at one point in the report it does lay the responsibility where perhaps it really belongs, “Preventing such disastrous outcomes rests on Pakistan’s own determination to act boldly and on its ability to weather these storms while promoting representative government and the rule of law.” A brief moment subscribing Pakistan’s own responsibility in its future, and then a return to the rest of the world’s obligation to act: “Absent comprehensive supporting actions both now and for the longer-term, including more aid, conditions will further deteriorate.”
The report points out, “U.S. businesses and investors have major concerns about operation in Pakistan, which must be addressed if trade is to grow. The U.S. has been Pakistan’s largest investor, accounting for one-third of the country’s Foreign Direct Investment since 1990. However, concerns about political stability, security, corruption, and an often manipulated judicial system discourage greater inflows of American investment to Pakistan. In recent years the cost of extra security measures has further affected business confidence.” Why would businesses want to move into a failing nation that has problems with terrorists? It is not sound judgment on the part of the businesses to move into Pakistan.
The report also notes the “understandable reluctance” of Congress to spend money on a country with terrorist dealings during a time of economic trouble. Yet, understanding Congressional reticence does not lead the Atlantic Council to accept it: “Among the obstacles to success will be the understandable reluctance of the U.S. Congress to appropriate more funds for Pakistan because of the current domestic economic troubles, and a concern to make future American aid conditional upon Pakistani actions to take on terrorists and non-state actors, who are using Pakistan as bases for training, support, and cross-border attacks.”
Pakistan needs to clean up its act and figure out its priorities before the U.S. gives it another dime. Why should the U.S. pour billions of dollars into a country that can’t take care of itself? The problems in Pakistan are a lot deeper than what simply giving money can solve. To really fix Pakistan’s problems, the U.S. would have to move in and take over—a solution not acceptable to anyone, and a solution that the U.S. cannot arguably execute at this point. The only viable solution is for Pakistan to clean house—remove the parts of the government that are not working, and reevaluate where money needs to be spent. Pakistanis in serious trouble and does need help, But Pakistan has enough bright and honest people to start helping itself. Once Pakistan does all it can do for itself, then is the time that other countries can step in. Until Pakistan figures out its own government, more free money only exacerbates the issue.
Heather Latham is an intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia.
