Pakistanis insist that they wanted CIA-operative Raymond

prosecuted for murder, but if they had, some commentators

worry that the consequences would have been far worse.



Pak Tribune, Pakistan

Raymond Davis and the American 'Indo-Zionists'


"It is well known that the U.S. Indo-Zionists (commonly but wrongly called neocons) have been arguing that the Iraq invasion and plans to invade Iran miss the mark. It is Pakistan, they say, which already has nuclear weapons. India never misses a chance to assert that America must devastate Pakistan the way it devastated Iraq before it is forced to withdraw from Afghanistan. Raymond Davis was instructed by those who hold that view."


By Usman Khalid


April 6, 2011


Pakistan - Pak Tribune - Original Article (English)

Students chant slogans at a rally against Raymond Davis in Lahore, Mar. 6.


BBC NEWS VIDEO: CIA contractor Raymond Davis freed over Pakistan killings, Mar. 16, 00:02:19RealVideo

There are several centers of power in the United States, each with separate roles and policy inclinations. But their work is complementary. The diversity of the U.S. system make policy changes possible and allows outside forces to combine with domestic pressure groups to accelerate change. Since the U.S. is still the sole superpower, it's vitally important for other governments and to have the capacity to deal with different centers of power and media to understand how the American system operates.


When Raymond Davis shot and killed two Lahore motorcyclists in broad daylight and the vehicle sent to rescue him struck and killed another, it was not only Pakistanis but people across the world who were shocked.


Why should a White American pursuing espionage and clandestine operations under contract with the CIA in Pakistan be so crudely "showing off"? Ordinarily, a U.S. State Department apology should have come within hours. But no apology came. Instead, what came were threats of dire consequences if Raymond Davis wasn't promptly released.


America insisted, wrongly as it turned out, that he was a diplomat who enjoyed immunity from prosecution under the Vienna Conventions. Once again the question arose: why? The Pakistani press rightly focused on two issues:


1) Was Raymond Davis an accredited diplomat? - and:


2) If not; why shouldn't he be tried and punished like any other foreigner who commits a crime in Pakistan?


Crude efforts by the Zardari Administration to hush up the outcry notwithstanding, the Pakistan media won that round, and it was established that Davis was not an accredited diplomat and that he was rightly being tried by a Pakistan court for murder.


But the politicians lost the plot. They began focusing on who was to blame for allegedly mishandling the case - the provincial government of Punjab or the federal government? Thus, this non-issue became the center of the political debate and the federal government - the main practitioner of appeasing India and America - was off the hook.


The media's success in staying on message came to nothing. But the questions remain: who benefited and why was it so important to the U.S. that a murderer not be punished?


To understand who benefited, one must identify the objectives of the parties involved. There are several views on U.S. objectives, but it's hard to know for certain because there are so many centers of American power. The U.S. Congress and president are the two recognized centers of power in the American presidential system. The U.S. Constitution is based on the principle of the "separation of powers. Unlike in a parliamentary system, members of the president's cabinet are not members of parliament (or Congress, in the case of the United States).


There is no party line or party whip; every member of the Senate and Congress is free to vote according to the interests of his constituency or his own prejudices and inclinations [Editor's Note: Actually, there are party whips and party lines - although in practice, lawmakers are not bound to obey them]. The president supports or opposes bills, but the Congress often ignores his views and it is up to the president to broker compromises to get a bill through. On domestic policy, the U.S. Congress is a genuine center of power.


But on really vital issues, particularly in foreign policy, the president and Congress back the same "official line." The Raymond Davis case, quite surprisingly, came to be one such issue, where the president and Congress read from the same hymn sheet. Why was he so important? I don't believe this was due to his person or his mission. What was important was concern about revelations of the true purpose of those who instructed Raymond Davis.


It is well known that the U.S. Indo-Zionists (commonly but wrongly called neocons) have been arguing that the Iraq invasion and plans to invade Iran miss the mark since neither country has nuclear weapons. It is Pakistan, they say, which already has nuclear weapons. India never misses a chance to assert that America must devastate Pakistan the way it devastated Iraq before it is forced to withdraw from Afghanistan. Raymond Davis was instructed by those who hold that view.


Within the U.S. government, the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA are independent centers of power. They all operate under the U.S. president, but enjoy great operational flexibility because they have statutory roles and responsibilities for which they require no permission from the president.


Take for example the CIA: its work is not subject to presidential or Congressional scrutiny until some sinister aspect of its work becomes public. It's almost certain that the conduct of Raymond Davis was duly authorized - but his mission was of a sinister nature. I agree with Commodore Tariq Majid that Davis' role was to create so much hatred and anger against the United States, that it would become easy to justify to the American public "appropriate actions" against Pakistan.


What is so difficult to divine is what that "appropriate action" might be. The U.S. supplies its troops in Afghanistan with a long supply line through Pakistan. It has been trying to find alternatives but no viable one has been found. Pakistan has been careful to keep the supply route open; but difficulties persist when supplies pass through the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Afghanistan. Any "action" against Pakistan would certainly close that supply route; therefore, one can assume that the Pentagon would disapprove of any adventure that would close it.


Even though the U.S. State Department hesitatingly and the CIA enthusiastically supported Raymond Davis' mission and many like him who operate in Pakistan, the Pentagon was opposed and the president lukewarm. The leading lights of the U.S. establishment favored the line of the Indo-Zionists, and it is quite likely that if the Raymond Davis case had dragged on, as many idiots in Pakistani politics and the media wanted, American public opinion may well have turned: "forget Iran, let's deal with Pakistan first."


Pakistan's media made the point that Raymond Davis was not a diplomat and that he could and should be tried in a Pakistani court. But then the focus was blurred. Prosecuting and convicting an American to send the U.S. the massage: "don't trifle Pakistan," became the focal point of media debate. Those who argued for leniency were easily sidelined as American agents.




The Daily Jang: 'Frozen Mindsets' in the U.S. and Pakistan

Dawn, Pakistan: Pakistan Report - '851 U.S. Officials' Enjoy Immunity

The Frontier Post, Pakistan: If Davis is Freed, Islamabad Will Not Be Forgiven

Guardian, U.K.: Raymond Davis: This CIA Operative is No Diplomat

The Daily Jang: Ruling Party Spokeswoman Says Davis Enjoys Immunity

Frontier Post: Pakistan Courts Must Prosecute U.S. 'Killer' Raymond Davis

The Nation: Pakistan Should Prosecute Davis; 'Welcome' Cut in U.S. Ties

The Nation: Iran 'Sets Example' By Prosecuting Americans


Bookmark and Share


Eventually, wise heads prevailed. I suspect that the source of that wisdom was U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Mentor. He persuaded the U.S. State Department to support his line, which was to meet the requirements of Pakistan law as well as that of the ISI, [Inter-Services Intelligence], the role of which had been grossly undermined by operatives like Raymond Davis and the many others like him.


The ISI wanted and I believe secured the identification of all people like Raymond Davis and an agreement to have them removed from Pakistani soil. This was the right action and was in the best interests of the United States as well as Pakistan.


It is in the American interest that the CIA call off the most sinister clandestine operation mounted against Pakistan, and thus save itself from complete loss of credibility in south and central Asia as well as the Middle East and North Africa. If the Raymond Davis case was still in the headlines, the tsunami of hatred for the U.S. in countries ruled by American puppets would have been much more devastating.


Since Pakistan, too, is ruled by American puppets, the wave of hatred would have risen even higher in Pakistan - and the Indo-Zionists would have been gleefully congratulating themselves at destabilizing Pakistan. But the crisis isn't yet over. The military establishment saw an opportunity in the Raymond Davis case to end America's most serious clandestine operation against Pakistan, but as the media rightly showed us, there several other CIA operations still in progress that deserve attention. So the task is far from finished.


Raymond Davis and scores like him were permitted by our ambassador to the U.S., Hussain Haqqani and with the concurrence of President Zardari, to infiltrate into Pakistan - bypassing ISI scrutiny. And Pakistan's ambassador to the UAE issued visas to operatives of India's Research and Analysis Wing without clearance from Islamabad - again with the blessing of the president.


The media should not let up on the way our country's senior leaders co-operate with the enemy to facilitate clandestine operations against Pakistan. We should recognize that the Raymond Davis operation came to an end because the ISI wouldn’t let CIA operatives off the hook, despite the president and the interior minister being on the side of the enemy. In the end, the U.S. State Department came aboard to "modify" this dangerous policy of destabilizing Pakistan.


But the Indian operation against Pakistan continues. Sabotage in Baluchistan and attacks by Pakistani Taliban, both of which are clandestine operations of RAW, are continuing. CIA-operated drone attacks on Pakistan have not ceased. RAW and CIA operations will end only when those who gave them authorization in the first place and are facilitating them now are removed from power. 



Pakistan politicians often talk of the "supremacy of Parliament," but they have no idea what that really means. They are familiar with Great Britain's constitutional history, where it means that Parliament and its leader, the Prime Minister, not the sovereign, i.e. the King, Queen or Emir, is the repository of executive and legislative power.


It is only in a presidential system like that of the U.S., which is founded on the separation of powers, where Congress (or parliament) is supreme. In Pakistan, Parliament has no role. Pakistan is not a democracy: it is not ruled by a despotic monarch or a military dictator. Pakistan is much worse. It is a plutocracy. Perhaps "mafia rule" is a more fitting description of Pakistan's present system.


The Raymond Davis case once again underlines that mafia leaders can circumvent public anger and outsmart the establishment. But Pakistan, too, has multiple centers of power: the executive, the judiciary and the military. If the executive branch has come under control of Mafiosi, it is for the other two institutions to act and establish a government that operates according to and under the law.


blog comments powered by Disqus



































[Posted by WORLDMEETS.US April 11, 4:39pm]



Bookmark and Share