Posted By Josh Rogin
Thursday, February 23, 2012 - 4:11 PM
Share
House Foreign Affairs Committee member Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) has caused an uproar in Pakistan by introducing a congressional resolution calling for self-determination in the restive province of Baluchistan. But the 12-term California representative is unfazed by the criticism: If the Pakistanis don't like it, that's their problem, he told The Cable in an interview today.
"The purpose of the resolution was to create a much-needed dialogue about Pakistan and Baluchistan, and that's what it's done, so that's very nice," he said. "It's important to get over that phase where people are going ballistic and start getting serious discussion about an issue that's been ignored but shouldn't be ignored."
Rohrabacher said the Baluchistan issue and the human rights violations there have been ignored in Washington out of a fear of offending the Pakistani establishment, but that strategy isn't working.
"It's one of those issues that's been ignored as to not upset the Pakistanis because they are fragile friends," he said. "Well, they're not fragile friends, they are hard-core, two-faced enemies of the United States."
Rohrabacher isn't shy about his anger with the Pakistani government, its attitude toward the United States, and its actions related to America's war against the Taliban and al Qaeda. In fact, the discovery that Osama bin Laden was hiding for years in the Pakistani military town of Abbottabad was direct motivation for his Baluchistan initiative, he said.
"What made me really determined to get involved to the point where I was willing to author resolutions like this was when Osama bin Laden was discovered in an area which made it clear that Pakistanis had for eight years taken billions in U.S. foreign aid while giving safe haven to the monster that slaughtered 3,000 Americans on 9/11," he said. "At that point I felt, no more walking on egg shells around Pakistan."
Baluchistan is the largest of Pakistan's four provinces and is home to about 8 million people, many from the Baloch tribes, which have Persian and Kurdish origins. Nationalist movements there have fought the Pakistani government intermittently for independence over the past decades, with the most recent skirmishes in 2006.
There's no love lost for Rohrabacher on the Pakistani side of the relationship, either. There were street protests against the resolution and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said, "This resolution violates our sovereignty and we condemn it." A visiting U.S. congressional delegation in Islamabad had to distance itself from Rohrabacher's resolution.
"I can see why the prime minister of Pakistan wouldn't fully understand why people in various countries -- especially elected officials -- are free to comment on any policies they see fit in any country they see fit," Rohrabacher said. "That's what freedom is all about, but perhaps that's why they don't understand it."
One theory that became popular in the Pakistani press following Rohrabacher's Feb. 8 hearing on the resolution was that Rohrabacher was working with the CIA to try to pressure Pakistan to allow U.S. intelligence agencies to put listening posts in Baluchistan aimed at Iran.
"Anyone who believes that is totally out of touch with reality," Rohrabacher responded. "I've had no discussions with anyone in the CIA about this whatsoever and my guess is that if I did, they would be doing somersaults trying to prevent me from doing this."
In fact, he didn't even bother to confer with the Obama administration about the resolution at all, he said, and has not heard from any administration officials.
"It was my resolution and not theirs," he said of the administration. "Unlike our friends in Pakistan, they understand that in a democracy people elected to the legislative branch have the right to propose any legislation they want. I can see why the Pakistani government wouldn't understand that."
Rohrabacher compared the struggle of the people of Baluchistan to the struggle of the American colonies against the British Empire. "Like in the United States, where we gave a declaration of independence, we have a right to a country separate from Great Britain. That's what self-determination is," he said.
Beyond Baluchistan, Rohrabacher's top priority is preventing Pakistan from influencing the Afghanistan reconciliation talks to the benefit of the Taliban. He promises to fight giving U.S. aid to Pakistan if that's the case.
"The most important thing now is not to permit Pakistan to think they can do anything they want and there will never be any repercussions and they can side with any enemy of the West and still think we're going to pour money into their pockets," he said. "That ain't gonna happen."
SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
"Baluchistan is the largest of Pakistan's four provinces and is home to about $8 million people, many from the Baloch tribes, which have Persian and Kurdish origins."
Islamabad?
No baby! Islamagood.
Roarbacker is a putz. And besides Admiral Mullen beat him to the punch on this one a while back.
Dana is on Indian salary and doing a real good job pleasing the Indians, as for Baluchistan, except for causing a minor annoyance, even the Baluch have termed their own leaders the cause of all the trouble.
Dana has created a tempest in a teacup, its much bruhaha over nothing.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\02\24\story_24-2-2012_pg7_1
Today a large delegation of US Congressmen visited Pakistan and met with Pakistans Prime Minister and strongly distanced themselves from a 'nutcase' congressman.
Dana sit down, you have embaressed yourself enough.
Umm The US is the two faced beast.
"Bomb you back into the stone age' - Rumsfeld to Pakistan after 9/11 if they didn't cooperate.
Funny but predictable reactions from the Pakis
Anyone who says anything negative about Pakistan must be either a CIA stooge or in the pay of the Indians or Mossad (the only thing not mentioned as yet.)
And yes Balochistan is an externally created problem "reportedly" by India "according to Mullen" and the CIA themselves are supporting Balochis. The Pakis are blameless babes in the woods who want nothing but the best in mind for their Baloch and Afghan brothers.
They are misunderstood and blameless and the Baloch just need to see things as they are (else they'll get bumped off, disappeared, go missing thanks to the ISI, oops did I say that aloud?) ..
Pakistan itself is an aberration of History. It was created out of nothing by the British to please a few men. It was offered on a platter. No one struggled for it. It has neither a historical nor a cultural background. All it did was to create a Frankenstein which is churning out terrorists by the hundreds. Pakistan has given a bad name to Islam by following tribal, feudalistic, fundamentalist dogmas. It has made all the Muslims from the eastern tip of Indonesia to the Morocco suspect in the eyes of the world. The whole world is losing sleep over the unsecured Pakistani nukes. It has sent terrorists right from Philippines to Chile. Its time to cease this aberration.
I don’t know how you got that one, but I don’t see the British Empire as being benevolent upon “poor, hapless Muslims” and awarding them a hefty country without even having them asking for it. Maybe you can provide us with more data and Pakis will be able to stop regarding figures such as Muhammad Ali Jinnah among many more. Till then, you can amuse us with more doses of your wishful thinking. Also, as a side note, I recommend you to read Mushirul Hasan’s “India's Partition: Process, Strategy and Mobilization”.
Dear Mr. Mike Militis; There is a saying in India;(roughly translated) the elder daughter fights with her parents for gifts for her husband, the second daughter does not fight because whatever is given to the elder son in law, the same is given to the second son in law without a fight.
The same happened here. It’s the Congress Party that fought for independence. You require a struggle for freedom (in order to appreciate it) like the US against the English, Vietnam and Algeria against French, China against Japan, Philippines against Spain. The Indian Muslim League asked for Pakistan in 1940 and got it in 1947. Just within seven years. How many people struggled for it, none. How many took the gun, none. How many went to jail fighting for freedom like Nelson Mendela, none. As a minimum how many took to streets like Martin Luther King, none. Now I hope you understand what I mean; a country was given to them on a platter. In scientific terms such a thing is called a parasite; one struggles and fights for food, a parasite gets it free.
Second: All the Muslim League (IML) leaders were from the Indian part of the subcontinent. Jinnah, Iqbal, Liaquat. The soul of the IML was in Aligarh which is again a part of present day India. The only pan India Muslim figure from present day Pakistan was Khan Abdul Gaffer Khan from Peshawar. Iqbal died before independence, Jinnah immediately after independence and Liaquat was killed. Gaffer Khan was jailed for rest of his life. Now the power shifted to local Pakistan who were just feudal landlords or tribes. Whatever disciple that the British left, died with the first generation after independence.
Therefore what is now remaining is a feudal, tribal and imported fundamentalist culture. For 64 years nothing has been invested in education or industry. Population was 36 million in 1947, now guinea pigged to 180 millions. No effort is being made for population control. All the forward looking English laws have been guttered. The parasitic habit still continues; getting aid from USA, China and Saudi. There is not an effort nor even a thought to get away from aid.
I hope Mr. Mike you are answered.
See, I am no expert on partition of India, and therefore do not know the diminutive details you have been talking about. But, a quick search in Google, on my part ofcourse, refutes many of your statements.
1. Truthfully, the Congress fought for Independence from the very start and even before it. But you cannot rebuff the role of Muslims in 1857 Indian Mutiny. Surely, they had always desired independence; at the outset from the British only, afterwards from Hindus too.
2. “The Indian Muslim League asked for Pakistan in 1940 and got it in 1947. Just within seven years.”
I take it that it astounds you to even think that Muslims could acquire independence from the British in just 7 years. To me, it’s perfectly alright. The British were already weakened with the onslaught of the Second World War and the occasion was just ripe for demanding Independence. The Muslims and Hindus did that.
3. You inquire for the number of Muslims who “struggled” for Independence and went to jail. I can’t believe anyone can be so naïve to ask for it. I tell you what. You better Google that or get down to a good library at your end and read about that objectively.
4. Are you really serious about your second point? Mr. N, you gravely have a dire need to correct your facts first and commenting afterwards, if you want to be taken seriously. These leaders, among many more, hailed from the present-day Pakistan:
Muhammad Ali Jinnah (Karachi, 1876)
Muhammad Iqbal aka Allama Iqbal (Sialkot, 1877)
Fatima Jinnah (Karachi, 1893)
Muhammad Zafarullah Khan (Sialkot, 1893)
Sir Sultan Muhammed Shah (Karachi, 1877)
Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar (Peshawar, 1899)
As I said before, I am no expert but I got that all with a simple search. Please you better research well. Don’t be a propagandist.
5. As for the laws, I believe many a laws in Pakistan (such as Penal Code) are modified versions of their British counterparts. Oh yes, they have made some changes too with respect to Islamic principles. You can’t blame them for that, since it’s their country. They decide how they are governed, not you or me. Period.
6. “For 64 years nothing has been invested in education or industry.”
Oh boy! You would be shocked to know that they are a LOT better off today than what they were 64 years ago. Ever heard of socio-economic indicators such as literacy rate, GDP, industrial production, etc.
7. “Population was 36 million in 1947, now guinea pigged to 180 millions.”
I wonder what you have got to say about India (1,210 millions from 350 millions) and China (1,336 from 460 millions). Rapid population growth is an issue not confined to Pakistan only.
Let go through your points one by one:
1. 1857 was a Sepoy mutiny. Not a war of Independence. It has got nothing to do with the later struggle for independence.
2. Exactly as you say. Easy come easy go. Please read the examples I gave.
3. I agree I should have said "How many Muslim League members went to jail." Plenty of Muslims went to jail but were not members of ML.
4. Follow the logic: Henry Kissinger - born Germany lived USA, Einstein born Germany lived USA. Similarly Jinnah born Karachi lived in Bombay. Liaquat Ali Khan born India lived India. Do Kissinger or Einstein belong to Germany?
5. What happens in Pakistan is of much interest to India Just as Venezuela, Cuba is of interest to USA. And the drug cartels in Mexico.
6. As you have advised, please wikipedia about the quality and quantity of education in Pakistan. And especially the history books.
7. India and China have a full fledged and running family program to reduce the growth rate. Pakistan does not have such a program. In fact mullahs ask for more children so that they can out populate the world. Hence the use of the specific words.
The independence of India is very interesting. I request you to read more about it.
Finally the TRUTH and the FACT
Finally a U. S. Congressman is willing to speak out the truth and the fact at the top of his voice about true nature of Pakistani State and its people.
One can only hope that his message rings throughout this land of ours, through our government officials like Hillary Clinton and General Petraeus, trough our news media like ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and FOX news channels, through our all news papers like Washington Post, New York Times, USA Today and Boston Globe, through our magazines like Time, Newsweek and through our radio talkshows - we have mollycoddled Pakistan enough through the years.
It is time to wake up TO THE REAL THREAT EMANATING FROM THE ONE AND ONLY TERROR CENTER OF THE WORLD I. E. PAKISTANI STATE AND ITS PEOPLE.
What a thrilling experience it is to read your comments! Mr. Marty, you should really grow up and understand that just like any other country, there are always some good people and some bad people. Punishing good people for deeds of some bad ones is neither humane nor acceptable. Our standards should not shift, when dealing with other people.
Rohrbacher is such a weird dude
He was actually quite pro-Taliban in the 90's. And he was originally very critical of India and quite pro-Pakistan.
In the 6th grade my elementary school class visited his office in Washington DC where he regaled us with tales of how regulations of air pollutants was a liberal plot.
A non-intervention foreign policy is the only true American policy. If you wish to manipulate foreigner's policy then move there and become there citizens with a justifiable say in there government..
"Is rio orange war always forfait mobile" inevitable ?"
MaximB
John Hudson reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(14)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE