Is it again time to redefine national interest?

NEWS ANALYSIS – It was one phone call that had made General Pervez Musharraf redefine Pakistan’s “national interest” in 2001. The nation and all political parties without any exception still continue to condemn him for the “sell-out”, albeit anyone in his place would probably do the same. The Americans, however, paid him back and did not withdraw their support until he himself made a “strategic mistake” or for that matter was duped into a situation that brought the entire nation on roads against him for sacking Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. It was a turning point in his self-assumed political role and as he lost whatever support he had, his mentors also disowned him.
A similar situation has again developed. This time it’s an individual, whose fate, in case he is not provided blanket diplomatic immunity or vice versa to keep the United States engaged in a teetering strategic partnership, may seal the fate of many. Again a “critical” time to redefine the national interest – damned the government would be if it goes against the popular sentiment and the legal process is bulldozed with trouble-shooter Interior Minister Rehman Malik dishing out “an evidence” to prove that the killer is a diplomat and even more damned it would be if it takes a position that upsets the Americans.
Shah Mehmood Qureshi is the first casualty. As foreign minister, he had refused to take dictation from the presidency and instead chose to seek technical advice from his office to determine whether Raymond Davis, a killer of two Pakistanis, had enjoyed diplomatic immunity or not. The Foreign Office, he claimed, informed him that the man did not fall in the category of diplomats to seek immunity. Qureshi took a position that was not in the interest of his political masters, who were already annoyed with him for not toeing the line and defending them on a number of issues. Hence, he was shown the door.
The notion that our foreign office does not move on such sensitive matters without the approval of the security establishment cannot be ruled out. Our intelligence agencies are already, and they must be, displeased with thousands of undercover Americans roaming in the country unchecked after having been given visas under duress with arm-twisting by Washington threatening to block aid to Islamabad. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, without mincing her words, had raised this issue during her visit to Pakistan and hundreds of held-up visa applications were approved.
The military establishment might also have got upset with the way the matter of Raymond Davis had been (mis)handled as the United States may impose curbs on aid to the armed forces of its ally fighting the war on terror in view of the gravity of the issue which, as a diplomat put it, is expanding beyond the American media and the state department as this will surely be on the agenda of the US Congress that goes into session next month.
Notwithstanding the position Qureshi had taken, foreign secretary Salman Bashir also supported the argument of his former boss as he made it clear while talking to a group of journalists last week that he would not claim diplomatic immunity even if he had committed a criminal act. Though the foreign office did not come up with a clear stance telling the nation whether Raymond Davis enjoyed diplomatic immunity or not, the foreign secretary’s insistence that all state institutions were on the same page on this issue unambiguously suggested that the killer was not a diplomat and this was the simple reason that a legal course had been initiated against him.
Now Qureshi being out of foreign office, the chances are that the foreign office may be asked to reply to “an unanswered letter”, which the US embassy claims to have written seeking diplomatic status for Raymond Davis, and declare him a diplomat. The interior minister’s claim that the file of Raymond Davis was with him is intriguing as it should have been with the foreign office. There are two options: if the government declares the killer a diplomat, he will go scot-free and if he is not considered a diplomat, he will be tried on the charge of double murder.
While all official mouthpieces of the government are tight-lipped on this issue, what came as a surprise on Monday was the statement of ruling party’s information secretary Fauzia Wahab saying that Raymond Davis was a diplomat and he could not be arrested. Fauzia Wahab said it was her personal opinion. Information minister Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan said the government’s position was that the court would decide the issue of diplomatic immunity.
Does this make us believe that the PPP and the government are not on the same page? Certainly not. There is a clear indication that the government prepares to backtrack on this issue as it has already started feeling the heat and the option understandably is to appease the Americans. The opposition parties also do not seem to annoy their real masters as none of them has taken a clear position on this issue. Whatever, the courts are “independent” and their decisions are final in legal matters.