Farrukh Khan Pitafi’s Official Website

I must say it is quite a change to step back for a while, take a break from churning out opinions and see politicians and their toady intellectual peers make a mess of things. Evidently since I wrote last in this space some quality change has materialized and to much of our chagrin it is not at all a positive one. The quality of discussion has been reduced to low grunts and ill founded accusations. First came the New York Times story on Asif Zardari having enjoyed some “intimate” contacts with Zalmay Khalilzad, the man we all have learned to hate. Not only is Khalilzad the first Afghan to be a US ambassador to his native country that too under the US occupation, but he is among important players of the Neo Conservative movement also. It was clearly an assault on the faith of people like me who firmly believe in democracy despite their strong taste on international relations issues. Khalilzad it must be remembered is among the foulest creatures to stalk our land and may have a hand in events ranging from the 9/11 to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

Yet we also know that Mohtarma Bhutto had learnt to trust him more than a bit. The day she was assassinated it was plain to me that he may essentially have a hand in luring her to a false sense of security where she was to be killed so brutally. Khalilzad naturally would have commanded respect of many seasoned Asian leaders for himself was not only Asian in origin but also well educated and until fairly recently quite powerful in the US circles that count. Currently he holds a lucrative post as the US ambassador to the UN, quite an achievement for someone who would otherwise been viewed as the CIA’s mole out and out. Once Mohtarma had trusted the man she would have known albeit too late that she had been offered by Washington and Langley as the ritual sacrifice to the Pakistani establishment.

So you see how damaging the report of liaison between Khalilzad and Zardari could be? But I do not need to waste too much of your time in discussing how the names of the reporters and the story’s contents were quite a giveaway in understanding the motive behind such a story. During the Prime Minister’s recent visit to the US one of the two reporters had spilled the beans by reporting how the US administration was not chuffed with the ISI. Suffice it to say had indeed reported that the CIA’s second boss had traveled secretly to Pakistan to warn the Pakistani establishment of the ISI’s role. This was classified information and was leaked on purpose from Langley. The second biggest clue was the timeframe of Zardari’s contacts with Khalilzad. No doubt that the report hinted at the intensity of these contacts it was clear that these encounters were of recent nature with a special emphasis on this month. I mean you see the beauty of the plan? Bring back a tainted diplomat to approach the house of Bhuttos, help get rid of a useless asset like Musharraf, by doing so win the trust of the new regime and when the time comes leak this information to the press. If you understand what I mean you there is no need to question Zardari’s patriotic credentials. And in any case if Khalilzad was indeed directly involved in Benazir’s murder, there is little chance that Zardari would know. O come on folks the other man is a master of manipulation. Can’t you see that he right now enjoys the position of the most important diplomat of the US for some reason? If I am worried about something it is the possibility of the ISI’s involvement in such a defamation campaign. The pro Musharraf element has still no surrendered within the organization. And that leads me to believe that Asif Zardari’s life too is under constant threat. Things will perhaps continue in this way until he becomes the President.

The second damaging attempt came through a report in the Financial Times. We were told that Asif at a point in time had suffered from mental disorders. The proof was found in the submissions to the courts citing these problems in order to seek leave from hearing. I mean folks are you really that thick? Can’t you see these methods are usually employed by the victims of a hostile legal system where the courts have been manipulated and the justice seems elusive? No I am not falling for the allegations of untruthfulness. Untruthfulness does not count in potentially life threatening situations. Now claiming that the man is not mentally stable is sick in itself. Want a proof? For eight long years the country has been struggling to get rid of a dictator and we all failed. Only one man delivered that thing to us. It is no one but Presidential nominee Asif. Now tell me should I worry about any cranky reports on his alleged mental illness or admire his shrew? To me he is the finest candidate possible for president for the transition back to democracy.

Posted on August 30th, 2008 under General •  Print This Post •  Email This Post • RSS 2.0 feed • Leave a response, or trackback