"Billions in US aid never reached Pakistan army"It looks like Pervez Musharraf may have used his position as both chief of staff and president to shunt those American dollars from military programs to peaceful purposes.
The Associated Press (October 4, 2009)
"The United States has long suspected that much of the billions of dollars it has sent Pakistan to battle militants has been diverted to the domestic economy and other causes, such as fighting India.
"Now the scope and longevity of the misuse is becoming clear: Between 2002 and 2008, while al-Qaida regrouped, only $500 million of the $6.6 billion in American aid actually made it to the Pakistani military, two army generals tell The Associated Press...."
"...'The army itself got very little,' said retired Gen. Mahmud Durrani, who was Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. under Musharraf. 'It went to things like subsidies, which is why everything looked hunky-dory. The military was financing the war on terror out of its own budget.'
"Generals and ministers say the diversion of the money hurt the military in very real ways:..."
Which is a nice way of saying that he spent American taxpayers' money on domestic programs to make himself look good. As an American citizen, I'm used to this sort of thing: it's standard operating procedure for that lot in Washington.
Problem is, in this case Musharraf isn't any sort of American official, and the money had been clearly intended for fairly specific military programs.
What a mess.
This is sheer speculation: but I wonder if this has anything to do with orders to shoot American soldiers who chased terrorists into Pakistan. (September 16, 2008) As I recall, the order (assuming that it was made) came from a high-ranking military officer.
At the time, it sounded like something between hyperactive patriotism and your usual anti-Americanism. Now, I wonder if maybe someone in Pakistan's brass had the idea that Yankees were in cahoots with Musharraf in keeping funds from reaching Pakistan's military - and were getting even.
Like I said, sheer speculation.
Banana Republics? I Really Don't Want to Go Back
I'm not one of these people who wax nostalgic over 'the good old days.' I remember the fifties - and they were no idyllic golden age.And I certainly don't want to go back go thinking about 'banana republics.' We'd have a different name for them, of course, since places like Pakistan aren't particularly known for producing bananas. Maybe we could call them 'olive oligarchies.'
Whatever the countries would be called, they'd be those pathetic places with:
- Chronically corrupt officials
- Laws based on the whims of whoever has
- The most thugs with loaded guns
- Nearest the presidential palace
- Abject poverty
- That's the fault of the Yankees
- Yanks are handy, that way
- Aid packages that are either
- Rotting on the docks or
- Available at inflated prices on the black market
- That's the fault of the Yankees
- Changes of leadership that tend to be
- Messy
- Frequent
- No improvement, one administration to the next
Like I said, I really don't want to go back to thinking in those terms.
But this latest news from Pakistan - assuming that the AP's sources aren't making up the whole tale - reeks.
Related posts:
- "News from Gaza: Making a Game of Death and Destruction"
(January 7, 2009)- "It's a variation of 'what's wrong with this picture?' "
- "Mumbai, 9/11, Lashkar e Taiba, Al Qaeda, and Lessons (Not?) Learned"
(November 30, 2008) - "The Marines Blew Up the Islamabad Marriott!"
(September 23, 2008) - "Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Foreign Troops: One Issue, Two Approaches"
(September 16, 2008) - "Pakistani Government Promises Objective Investigation of its Involvement in Bhutto Assassination Attempt"
(October 22, 2007)- Note: I said "Promises"
- There were many whacking great coincidences
- And some fairly imprudent decisions
1 comment:
Might want to fix this sentence: "And I certainly don't want to go back go thinking about 'banana republics.'"
Post a Comment