You can't bribe an entire state. I don't mean that in a philosophical sense; I mean that any state gets to decide what's legitimate support and what's bribery.
They are champions of democracy but the leader of the most popular party is being railroaded in false cases their silence more than anything tells us what is going on. How come they are not saying anything apart from it being a countries internal matter when a democracy is being destroyed but had statements about human rights every week against the previous democratic government.
Comments like this irk me, obviously if the US has a choice here, allow Pakistan to remain non-aligned but democratic or closely aligned and non-democratic, one of these choices is better for advancing US interests. The cable itself barely says anything: “hey if you put friendly people in power we will be friendly”
If the US purely operated on principle I wouldn’t be surprised if we had many more enemies than we do now, politics is about trade offs, it’s not black and white.
Fwiw I don’t think it’s morally right necessarily, but these kinds of decisions happen all the time in diplomacy, it’s really easy to arm chair criticize decisions but getting the alignment of all of these countries against Russia is a difficult problem.
Being a dual Pakistan/USA citizen, I am deeply saddened by this meddling by US in Pakistan's internal politics. Imran, who I don't support BTW, was a hugely popular leader. Him being thrown out, then clandestine kidnappings of 10s of thousands of his party members, and finally the press and media not being allowed to even utter his name (yes, they are not allowed to say his name on air), is a civilian martial law that is as anti democratic as it gets.
I hope future US governments actually act as the flagships of democracy that we claim to be.
1) At the end of the day, no one told Pakistan military what to do about journalists, media, kidnappings, etc.
2) Ukraine sold Pakistan battle tanks in the 90s when no one else would and also took Pakistani side on Kashmir. If this was the result of “interagency consultations” people in the Foreign Office need to find new jobs
As a Paki citizen and resident, the US document is predictable and disappointing...but practically meaningless.
IK was brought to power by the Establishment[1]... and the Estb giveth and the Estb taketh away.
It's irrelevant on why they brought him to power, and it's irrelevant why they removed him. Maybe they were feeling itchy, or it was the phase of the moon, divining their true intentions is a fool's errand.
When they wanted him, they directed their stooges to join his party/coalition, (and supressed those that were not aligned) and he suddenly went from a essentially being a one-man show to an actual viable candidate.
When they didn't want him (for whatever reason), they didn't have to do anything actual coup-ing; they just had to direct their stooges to leave, (and let competitors know they have free reign, for now), and suddenly IK had no leg to stand on.
They have played this game before and they will play it again, in one form or another. A politician's own merits are unimportant[2], in a parliamentary democracy you need numbers, and Estb always has a steady supply of numbers they can lend or take away.
That the US was interested in the play is besides the point, when have not stuck their own hand in every pie? What's relevant are the main actors, and they should not be provided a cover by pretending American interest in anyway initiated what was a pre-mediated effort by a bored Estb anyways.
____
[1]: Establishment refers to any officials who have power but are not elected, but are instead selected or appointed, such as civil servants, judges, military personnel etc. In a more narrow definition refers to the Military top brass, but the other groups are often not that far behind in throwing their weight around.
[2]: that's a bit of an exaggeration but the point stands. Politicians can have merits but they can only go so far in swaying and cajoling the public to vote for them, and more importantly, their fellow party members.
Much easier to just bring in established "electables", people who for one reason or another, have a strong hold in a constituency, in to your fold.
Quite a few of such "electables" look for the Estb for guidance on where to go at any given election cycle.
The US has a weird habit of supporting shitty regimes for short term, small gains. Then being shocked when they turn out to be big problems in the medium term. You tell me: would you rather have a slightly more self interested democracy in Pakistan OR continue with a totally self interested, money hole, dictatorship that hid Osama Bin Laden?
You see the exact same thing in Saudi: short term small gains and long term enormous costs. And the inverse with (say) India: refusing to bow to all US demands means the world's largest democracy is basically rejected in favour of its theocratic military junta neighbour...
I actually think this is the last remnants of secrecy in government: in few other areas can the executive secretly do dumb shit. But they can here. So they do. But that does not make it any less dumb...
How does the war in Ukraine advance US interests? The US helped provoke Putin's invasion of Ukraine, by trying to get Ukraine to join NATO. How is it in the best interests of the US to instigate a war against Russia?
Back in 1962, the Soviets put missiles in Cuba, infringing the US sphere of influence. The US retaliated with a blockade.
Moving NATO to the doorstep of Russia is analogous. Not surprisingly, the Russians retaliated with force.
Of course Putin is a corrupt thug, but you don't go poking a bear with a stick and then complain when he slashes you with his claws.
The idea that Putin needed to be provoked and acted out of self defense is tankie fan fiction. They ran out of stuff to give their elites after the annexation of Crimea and needed more.
Russia is not the USSR, Ukraine is not part of an aligned block (however forced) but a separate country.
Stop making the equivalent excuse of “she was wearing skimpy clothes and provoking me”, a rapist is a rapist and a war criminal is a war criminal.
I didn't say that Putin is a nice guy. Regardless of how despicable he may be, his actions are understandable. They're not just senseless violence. That's the point I'm trying to make.
It’s as understandable as Amazon CEO going into your shop, burning it down, raping your daughter, abducting your children because you decided to make a business partnership with Google.
In a “well, I understand, Jeff actually owned my ass” and I’m not an autonomous person but his property because my dad was his dads indentured servant once” kind of way understandable. Oh and you gave him your shotgun 20 years back because he promised security guarantees but since then already invaded and annexed your patio and constantly kept making threats.
The same way of understanding that people extended for Hitlers need for Lebensraum. He was literally forced to invade Poland, right?
It’s understandable to fascists rejecting the rule of law and craving rule of the strongest because they think they’d win in that scenario.
For one, Ukraine used to have Russian business interests but now that's considered poison, there is room for US businesses to move in. Blackrock, for example, is helping out with war reconstruction.
>The US helped provoke Putin's invasion of Ukraine, by trying to get Ukraine to join NATO
Why do these blatant Russian lies keep getting posted here?
Putin and many other Russian warmongers consider Ukraine to be a "fake nation", a "historical mistake", that should not exist. The bullshit about "NATO neo-Nazis" is just propaganda aimed at a foreign audience.
Here's the pertinent paragraph from the cable (the rest is at the very bottom of the article), make up your own mind:
I asked Don if the reason for a strong U.S. reaction was Pakistan’s abstention in the voting in the UNGA. He categorically replied in the negative and said that it was due to the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow. He said that “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” He paused and then said “I cannot tell how this will be seen by Europe but I suspect their reaction will be similar.” He then said that “honestly I think isolation of the Prime Minister will become very strong from Europe and the United States.” Don further commented that it seemed that the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow was planned during the Beijing Olympics and there was an attempt by the Prime Minister to meet Putin which was not successful and then this idea was hatched that he would go to Moscow.
"Erst kommt das fressen und dann kommt die moral."
Pakistan is highly dependant on external imports. Democracy and other virtues are highly irrelevant, if you have the population of the us squeezed into such a area. Add to this dependency on the world stage and thus empire allegiance a political caste, that is more loyal to dependency-clans and family and you get a recipe for disaster- democracy or not.
Pakistan is bankrupt and will talk to any empire willing to extend more loans.
The EU does this to member states regularly, no cable document leaks needed, yet there is no outrage. When the US does it for a good cause everyone loses their mind.
