Tete a tete with Hillary Clinton

By Hassan Abbas Share

By Hassan Abbas

I conducted an interview on December 10 with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington, DC about Pakistan and the United States' relations with the Muslim world, originally published on my blog Watandost.

HASSAN ABBAS: During your recent visit to Pakistan, you won the hearts of many through your courageous outreach -- visiting Badshahi mosque, participating in television talk shows, interacting with students at country's premier educational institution Government College Lahore, and most importantly going to the mausoleum of Mohammad Iqbal, the poet-philosopher who gave the idea of Pakistan. Even those who are critical of the U.S. policy were appreciative of these gestures and it served an important message to those Pakistani politicians also who are not in touch with masses. 

What were the signs of hope that you gauged during this visit?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, the resilience and the courage of the Pakistani people. Everywhere I went, I met people who are speaking out and standing up and working hard, and that was extremely moving to me. I also felt like both the civilian government and the military leadership understood that the threat they faced had to be addressed. 

And I thought that was very promising, because the terrorist threat to Pakistanis growing and it's intense and it can only be defeated by the Pakistani people coming together and rejecting it, in the first instance, trying to present a different narrative than the one that the terrorists are putting forth, using military force where they must, but mostly by developing the democratic institutions, by developing the country, clearly demonstrating that Pakistan has no room for those who want to tear down, because the Pakistan people want to build. 

HASSAN ABBAS: During the said trip you also visited police offices in Islamabad to pay tribute to the sacrifices rendered by police officials in the fight against extremism. You are the first and so far the only foreign leader visiting Pakistan who thought of this. It is becoming clear in Pakistan that the country will not be able to win this battle especially in areas like Punjab and Karachi unless its law enforcement and police forces are reformed and upgraded. I must confess that this topic is of special interest to me as before my academic career in the U.S., I was a police official in Pakistan. Also Pakistan army cannot be expected to fight everywhere in the country. In this context, will the U.S. be supporting police and law enforcement reform agenda in Pakistan? 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we would be honored to do so, because I agree with you that the police truly are on the front lines. They often have to deal with the rush of violence that comes in cities or towns and they don't have the support they need, they don't often have the equipment that they need. And as you say, I met a number of police officers, both in Lahore and in Islamabad, who are very committed, but under-resourced. And I am more than happy to consider any request from the Pakistani Government to help the police force, because I agree completely that they're the front line of defense.

HASSAN ABBAS: Thank you very much. I am sure this would make a headline in Pakistan. I have been in touch with many of my former colleagues in the country and during my research on the subject, I found that Pakistan police is one of the very few organizations in the country where there is an internal institutional effort for reform. I hope your message of support in this sphere will be welcomed and appreciated in Pakistan. 

My next question is about U.S. relations with the Muslim world. This U.S. administration has certainly set a new tone of dialogue, reconciliation and respect in this realm. President Obama's speeches in Turkey and Cairo were absolutely great and gave the right message to the Muslim audiences around the world. What is the follow-up on that? What are the next stages of that relationship? 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, it's a great question because we've been working very hard on follow-up, and I recently attended a conference in Marrakesh, Morocco where we announced a number of follow-up actions. The one that was just embraced wholeheartedly was the idea of science envoys. I said at the time that much of the science that we take for granted today was really discovered and refined in prior times by Islamic scholars and scientists. And from astronomy to algebra, there's so much that we owe to the Muslim world, and there needs now to be a renewed emphasis on science, which is not incompatible with religion, and therefore, we're going to be sending Nobel science prize winners, former heads of the National Academy of Sciences, and so many others to visit universities and governments to try to rekindle that with our help.

We're also investing in more English language education programs. We're investing in more business programs, entrepreneurship programs. We're going to start a series of interfaith dialogues. There will be a lot of follow-up to Cairo because we have had such demand and we're going to try to meet it.

HASSAN ABBAS: You are known for your cordial relationship with Pakistani diaspora in the U.S. There is a large Muslim diaspora in the U.S. which I believe can act as a bridge between the U.S. and the Muslim world. Which are the other Muslim diaspora groups in the U.S. that you feel encouraged about and which can play a positive role?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That's a great question. Well, I do believe that the Palestinian diaspora has been galvanized around economic development. A number of my Palestinian American friends are making investments in the West Bank because the security has improved so much, thanks to the good work of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad. So there is a rather dramatic increase in the economic activity in the West Bank which many American Palestinians are investing in. 

There are a number of Indian Muslims who are very involved in interfaith and other outreach activities. I do a lot of work with the Bangladeshi community, which is not as involved as the Pakistani community has been in academia or in professional activity, but is really at the grassroots in a lot of countries -- or a lot of cities in our country. So I think those are some examples of what we're working on.

HASSAN ABBAS: My last question is about India-Pakistan relations. The United States has said many times that it would like to facilitate better India-Pakistan relations and I think there's no doubt about the sincerity of that purpose. But of course, U.S. has its limitations in terms of how much it can do to bring both parties on the table and perhaps India is not very comfortable with the idea of third party mediation because of its stature, and reasons of history. However, President Obama made an interesting statement on the subject during his recent visit to China. European Union also is interested in playing a role in this arena. 

Do you think there might be some possibility in future that E.U., China, and United States altogether can take an initiative to bring Pakistan and India together and help them resolve their differences. We continuously hear that peace in the Af-Pak region is considered the most critical issue for the global security concerns. A global approach hence can be relevant. Do you think such an international effort can work?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think it could be a guarantor or it could be a positive force for implementation. But I think that the impetus must come from the two countries themselves. And at some point, both countries might say we've gotten as far as we can get; therefore we need some support, we need some new energy. But we have to start with the two countries and with their commitment to pursuing this dialogue first.

**

Commentary. I was pleasantly surprised when out of the blue I received a message from the State Department inviting me to interview Secretary Clinton for my blog. I was also provided the opportunity to sit in during the interviews she gave to Riz Khan of Al Jazeera and a Pakistani news channel. Riz Khan's unending series of jokes were hilarious that kept us in good spirits while we all waited for the Secretary in a small and cozy room at the State Department. His fun performance was as spectacular as it was dramatic. However, I only came to know the next day that he was testing his jokes on us -- as I heard him repeat all those jokes in his role as the master of ceremony in the inaugural event of the American Pakistan Foundation (APF) in New York. Secretary Clinton was the chief guest at the event and she made a splendid speech warming the hearts of a largely Pakistani-American audience.

Hilary Clinton's passion for Pakistan was palpable during the conversations I witnessed. She also referred to a special feeling that President Obama has for Pakistan and earnestly hoped that the U.S.-Pakistan relations would benefit from this supporting factor. She admired the way "Pakistan has pulled together to go after those elements of the Taliban that are directly threatening them." What she left unsaid in this regard also says a lot about how U.S. is viewing the situation in Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. 

Her views about U.S. role in Afghanistan and globally were also insightful. There is a growing perception that U.S. is giving up the state-building goal in Afghanistan while focusing entirely on military 'surge.' She dispelled this impression effectively when in response to a question from Riz Khan she argued that, "military effort is essential to providing security, but long-term stability, peace and prosperity can only come through political reconciliation, through development, through the enhancement of the capacity of Afghan institutions, expanding the education system -- the kind of nuts and bolts that really build and sustain society" and emphasized that she is working hard for these objectives. The people of Afghanistan deserve this and U.S. owe it to them but the fact remains that U.S. cannot manage this alone. She acknowledged this limitation while responding to a different question: "There's not a problem in the world that the United States can solve alone, but I would quickly add there is not a problem in the world that can be solved without the United States." While the second part of this notion is a debatable proposition, it is also surprising why U.S. has not involved regional players to stabilize Afghanistan. India, Iran, Turkey, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and China besides Pakistan, all have stakes in Afghanistan and without a regional settlement U.S. will find it very difficult to turn the tables on growing insurgency in Afghanistan. Accommodating legitimate interests of Afghanistan's neighbors will help. 

Hillary Clinton's heartfelt concern for women rights in the Muslim world and highlighting a dire need for interfaith dialogue and harmony impressed me greatly. President Obama is lucky to have her on his side at a time when U.S. is aspiring to rebuild its image globally and looking for partners to ‘give peace a chance.' Her vision and guidance will surely prove to be a valuable asset for this administration. 

Hassan Abbas is a Bernard Schwartz fellow at the Asia Society in New York and a senior advisor at the Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy School. 

Riz Khan of Al Jazeera

 

BEENA SARWAR

11:57 PM ET

December 14, 2009

Re: 'AFPAK'

Thank you for posting this important interview of Secretary Clinton by Hassan Abbas, whose consistency in his pursuit of democratic politics, in Pakistan and abroad is admirable.
I must say, however, that I resent the term 'Afpak' under which this interview is posted (and knowing Hassan Abbas, I am sure he would agree with me).
For whatever reason it was coined, this term wrenches Pakistan out of its South Asian identity and lumps us with Afghanistan, with whom we have less in common than we do with the rest of the 'sub-continent'. Nor is Pakistan part of the 'Middle East', as various foreign policy specialists keep making us to be.
Pakistan's progressive, secular and democratic forces have been engaged with this struggle since the formation of the country, with the 'establishment' pushing us away from India because of its need to create a national identity based on religion.
It does not serve us well when respected fora like yours also fall into this trap and use terms like 'Afpak' just for convenience's sake.

 

DIRECT_HEX

7:52 AM ET

December 15, 2009

Its Afpak because they don't want to talk about India

Its a language game. Indian Lobbying in Washington has separated Pakistan from India. It means when you think of the problem you think of Pakistan and Afghanistan. The whole debate has become conflated in that way to make sure that the thorny issue of Kashmir is kept out of the limelight.

Now, it also enables the large multinationals that are based in the West to be able to conduct business with India, without any of the negative associations with Pakistan.

If you suddenly began to suspect that maybe India/Pakistan were in fact closer in culture than Iraq and pakistan - that might blow a hole in that illusion.

It's the Pakistani elite's own fault and the general uselessness of the Pakistani lobby in Washington and elsewhere that means they have no idea how to deal with this.

Instead they like to get their pictures taken with Hilary so they can do a Silahi-lite.

 

DIRECT_HEX

7:46 AM ET

December 15, 2009

Soft, sir , ver soft

I know that Hasan Abbas was enjoying his time in the spotlight, but seriously that isn't anything more than a PR job.

Why didn't you ask her properly about Kashmir?

Why didn't you point out the damage done by the Indian Nuclear deal?

How about the obvious lack of up-to-date equipment faced by Pak Army and Police forces?

Or seen as everyone is pressuring Karzai to end corruption - is the same pressure going to be applied to Zardari and the corrupt political class of Pakistan?

 

ZATHRAS

12:55 PM ET

December 15, 2009

Clinton

There are several important subjects Sec. Clinton avoids commenting on here, as any American Secretary of State would have to in public.

One is Kashmir, concerning which some Pakistanis want Americans to take sides with them against India.

Another is internal Pakistani politics, riven by corruption, faction and indifference to the public welfare and warped by the dominant position of the Pakistani army and security services. Some Pakistanis, feeling powerless to address these problems directly, choose to blame them on the United States and demand that America improve the situation.

A third -- in a sense, the most difficult -- is Pakistan's relationship with India. The salient fact here is the obvious one. India is many times larger and richer than Pakistan, its government (all problems admitted) more effective, its future role as the leading country in South Asia undeniable. India is a large trading partner and potential ally of the United States; Pakistan, frankly, is more a problem than anything else. There is no chance, none whatever, of the United States supporting the ambitions of the Pakistani security services to maintain Pakistan's status as a "rival" to India. Those ambitions, which long predate American interest in South Asia, require the outsized military and intelligence establishment -- and the otherwise superfluous nuclear arsenal -- that have made Pakistan such a problem in the first place. They make about as much sense as Canada thinking of itself as a rival of the United States', or Uruguay committing itself to an historic rivalry with Brazil.

Sec. Clinton adopts in this interview a tone of appropriate respect. It isn't her place to engage in public confrontation about those aspects of Pakistani society and governance that only Pakistanis can change. Pakistanis, though, will need in their own interests to change these things. In particular, Pakistan will never be able to develop into a normal country or build a future of prosperity for the great mass of its people as long as its leadership remains committed to a profitless battle for regional influence with its vastly larger neighbor.

 

FET

12:46 PM ET

December 17, 2009

Entirely...

Pointless.

I think this was a good photo-op, but that's about it. There were no difficult questions or insightful answers. Perhaps those were the conditions that had to be agreed upon before having this interview, but the result is an interview that benefits no one but the 2 people involved.

No mention of drone attacks which kill civilians, or the perception that the US is Pakistan's friend purely out of convenience in the War on Terror.

Given the Obama administration's half-hearted and sometimes Bush-esque foreign policies, I think Mrs. Clinton owes us better answers.

 

S M ALI JAFARI

2:58 PM ET

December 17, 2009

AFPAK

I could not agree more with Ms. Sarwar's comments regarding AFPAK. The term tries to blend the social, cultural and religious realities as one for both these countries which couldn’t be more further from the truth.

On the other hand, I do believe that Mr. Abbas did a decent job of touching the issues at hand. It’s naive to think that the really tough questions and answers can be accomplished in one short interview. A series of interviews is what is needed to discuss the multitude of problems and issues that Pakistan is facing at the moment. Additionally, as has been in the past, the people who only pursue with the so called “tough” questions are then not afforded an interview at all. A careful balance of sorts needs to be established to solicit the answers we are indeed looking for.

It’s unfortunate that as a nation we are more interested in spending our energies prosecuting Mr. Zardari rather than alleviating ourselves from the hell hole we have dug ourselves into.

 

ANK

7:42 PM ET

December 20, 2009

POLICE IS The ISSUE

Abbas has rightly raised The Issue. How can you develop institutions? Who is fighting so far in cities and villages of NWFP and Punjab? ...........Police. Just ask hundreds of people who have lost their family members in blasts and attacks and not many will acknowledge their sacrifices. Civilian institutions needs to be effective and well equipped and Abbas has raised this issue at right time. I think its time to be smart and candid rather than tough and rough!