Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Pakistanis See US as Greatest Threat
WASHINGTON - Amid reports that the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush is considering aggressive covert actions against armed Islamist forces in western Pakistan, a new survey released here Monday suggested that such an effort would be opposed by an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis themselves.
The survey, which was funded by the quasi-governmental U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) and designed by the University of Maryland's Programme on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), also found that a strong majority of Pakistanis consider the U.S. military presence in Asia and neighbouring Afghanistan a much more critical threat to their country than al Qaeda or Pakistan's own Taliban movement in the tribal regions along the border with Afghanistan.
Only five percent of respondents said the Pakistani government should permit U.S. or other foreign troops to enter Pakistan to pursue or capture al Qaeda fighters, compared to a whopping 80 percent who said such actions should not be permitted, according to the poll, which was based on in-depth interviews of more than 900 Pakistanis in 19 cities in mid-September.
As a result, the survey did not take account of the tumultuous events that have taken place in Pakistan since then, including the six-week state of emergency declared by President Pervez Musharraf, the sacking of the Supreme Court, the return from exile of former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, and Bhutto's Dec. 27 assassination which has led to the delay of scheduled parliamentary elections from Jan. 8 until next month.
To what extent those events may have influenced public opinion in Pakistan on the range of issues covered by the survey -- particularly toward the Pakistani Taliban, one of whose leaders, Baitullah Mehsud, has been accused by the government of carrying out Bhutto's killing -- cannot be known.
But the underlying attitudes revealed in the poll, especially toward the U.S., can offer little very little comfort to the administration, which has become increasingly alarmed about recent events in Pakistan, particularly Bhutto's death, the Pakistani army's reluctance to take on the Taliban, and intelligence reports that al Qaeda and its local allies, including the Taliban, have intensified their efforts to destabilise the government.
On Sunday, the New York Times ran a front-page article regarding a White House meeting Friday in which top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, reportedly debated pressing Musharraf and his new military leadership to permit the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) to carry out more aggressive covert operations against selected targets in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), the quasi-autonomous tribal areas that have come become increasingly dominated by the Pakistani Taliban who have more recently extended their influence into the Northwest Frontier Province. The U.S. currently has about 50 soldiers in Pakistan acting primarily in an advisory and intelligence capacity.
While some administration officials reportedly believe that recent events have persuaded Musharraf and the army that they need such assistance to curb the growing Taliban-al Qaeda threat, regional specialists both in and outside the administration have argued that such an intervention risked further destabilising the country by triggering what the Times called "a tremendous backlash" against the U.S. and any government that was seen as its accomplice.
Despite the nearly four-month hiatus since the USIP-PIPA survey was conducted, its findings would certainly appear to support the latter prediction.
While the survey found that a large majority of Pakistanis hold negative views of radical Islamists, including the Taliban and al Qaeda, and strongly reject their use of violence against civilians, their views of the United States and its intentions toward Pakistan appear to be considerably more hostile and distrustful.
A whopping 84 percent said the U.S. military presence in the region was either a "critical" (72 percent) or an "important" (12 percent) threat to Pakistan's "vital interests".
By comparison, 53 percent of respondents said they believed tensions with India -- with which Pakistan has fought several wars -- constituted a "critical threat"; 41 percent named al Qaeda as a "critical threat"; 34 percent put "activities of Islamist militants and local Taliban" in the same category.
Asked to choose from a list of alleged U.S. goals in the region, 78 percent cited Washington's alleged desire "to maintain control over the oil resources of the Middle East" (59 percent said it was "definitely" a goal, 19 percent said "probably"); 75 percent (53 percent "definitely") cited "to spread Christianity"; and 86 percent (70 percent "definitely") said it was "to weaken and divide the Islamic world". Only 63 percent (41 percent "definitely") chose the option "to prevent more attacks such as those on the World Trade Centre in September 2001."
Moreover, a majority of respondents said they believed that the U.S. controls either "most" (32 percent) or "nearly all" (24 percent) of the recent major events that have taken place in Pakistan, compared to 22 percent who attributed "some" control to the U.S. and four percent who said "very little". Eighteen percent declined to respond.
As to Pakistan-U.S. security cooperation, less than one in five respondents said it had either benefited Pakistan primarily or both equally. Forty-four percent said it had mostly benefited the U.S.; and 11 percent said neither party had benefited.
Distrust of the U.S., however, did not translate into support for radical Islamists, the Taliban, or al Qaeda, according to the survey. While they were considered much less of a threat than the U.S., six out of 10 respondents said they considered the Taliban and al Qaeda either a "critical" or an "important" threat" to Pakistan.
And even as huge majorities opposed any U.S. or foreign military intervention against the two groups in Pakistan, pluralities approaching 50 percent said they would support the Pakistani army entering the FATA to capture al Qaeda fighters or Taliban insurgents who have crossed over from Afghanistan.
Comparable pluralities said they favoured phasing out FATA's special legal status and integrating its areas into the country's overall legal structure, but also prefer taking a gradualist approach that includes negotiating with the local Taliban over using military force to impose the central government's control.
The survey also found overwhelming support for government based both on "Islamic principles" and on democratic ideals, including an independent judiciary and being governed by elected representatives. While six in 10 respondents said they supported a larger role for Islamic law, or Shari'a, in Pakistan's legal system, only 15 percent said they wanted to see more "Talibanisation of daily life", a common phrase used in Pakistani media to refer to extreme religious conservatism.
Indeed, more than eight in 10 said it was important for Pakistan to protect its religious minorities; more than three out of four said attacks on those minorities are "never justified"; and nearly two out of three said they support government plans to regulate religious schools, or madrassas, to require them to teach secular subjects, such as math and science. Only 17 percent said they oppose those reforms.
In general, those respondents who supported the expansion of Shari'a and government based on "Islamic principles" also tended to favour both democratic ideals and educational reforms at higher rates than others.
© 2007 Inter Press Service
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


28 Comments so far
Show AllDuh! Won't see this report in the MSM.
Yes we did...called 'Mission Accomplished', remember? [A better show than Mission Impossible, wasn't it?]
One of these days The media will Wake up to the Fact that little george started a religious crusade of a world War and now everybody Hates us ....er at least Little George.
"quasi-governmental U.S. Institute of Peace"
Hahahahahaha!
Our efforts are also going unnoticed in Africa. Check out www.africom.mil for the latest on the US occupation in Africa.
We're the greatest threat? They must not see MSM or hear Rush Limbaugh in Pakistan. __ Dopes, it's Iran, El Queda, North Korea and Osama. ___ Which Osama?
As most people here know, the USA is the #1 obstacle to world peace.
Thanks to economic hitmen and our insanely greedy economic & foreign policies, the USA is also a leading cause of abject poverty in Latin America and on the African continent.
===========
Be sure not to miss:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1fiubmOqH4
Excerpt of Paul Hawken's speech at the bioneers conference on the worlds largest movement, the hundreds of thousands of grassroots organizations that are working for social and environmental justice.
==========
Power to the People!
Well, dear Pakistani people, you can be assured that Obama will pay even less than Bush does to your wishes when he invades your country in search of the "evil one".
The Pakistani people seem to be a lot more informed and wise about the running of their own country. Religous tolerance, secular government, diplomatic means of integration of the FETA region....Now, let's see...How would the average American consumer (we aren't citizens anymore) respond to such a poll?
Headline: Pakistanis Not as Dumb as You Think!
So Pakistanis see the US as the greatest threat? Well I guess they would when you have an Administration and also Presidential candidates (on the Democratic side for heaven's sakes) that are willing to violate Pakistan's sovereignty with suggested violent activities. Hardly rocket science.
I don't remember which economist said this, but a year or two ago he opined that, although it would be tough for U.S. citizens, the world might be better off if the U.S. were to suffer an economic recession that would make it impossible for it to continue its militarization of trade and aid and foreign relations and its arming of the whole world. I am inclined to agree.
This nonsense about chasing down and killing every "terrorist" in the world is nothing short of madness.
The United States is the biggest threat to every country in the world.
I just wish Canada would get it self armed with 1000 nuke rockets for self protection.We are going to need them.(rockets)
No kidding! That Pakistanis consider the USA under the thrall of Dubya, Cheney, & Co. their biggest threat is not surprising. What would be surprising is if the American mass media actually report this and spend enough time to explain why beyond the tired lie of, "They hate us for our freedom."
What kind of joke is this, "U.S. Institute of Peace"?????
RebelFarmer -- "Religous tolerance, secular government, diplomatic means of integration of the FETA region"
I wish this were true but its not. To begin with the Pakistani people do not have a choice in anything, its the Army that runs the friggin place. Secondly Pakistan was founded as an Islamist state and secularism and religious tolerance is not one of its strong points ! Having said that, most Pakistanis are in general moderate in their outlook and if a democratic government is allowed to flourish they would, in all probability emulate their neighbours.
Something 'off topic':
Usually I get my news from google news. Yes I know, You might say there lies the problem.
No seriously. The mainpage is comprised of nine segments with each six headlines. It starts
with 'top stories', followed by 'world', u.s., 'business', 'elections', 'sci-tech', 'sports', 'entertainment'
and 'health'.
54 headlines of which
14 were 'New York Times',
5 usatoday,
4 'reuters'
3 'fox' 'news'
3 'l.a.times'
2 'washington post'
and the rest mostly right wing media outlets.
F**ck google. They are entirely taken over by nazi propaganda.
Great job. I hope nobody visits their stinking website ever again.
I made screen pictures of it to prove it...
Raper ... while its true the Pakistani Army has been involved in supporting/creating and strenghthening the fundamentalists, its a stretch to damn the country as a whole as most Pakistanis would rather be left alone and frankly would not support the extremists.
Right now, especially after the events of the last 6 years, the U.S. is the most hated country in the world and pretty much every country in the worl considers the U.S. as a threat. This is not unique to Pakistan alone. 95% of the worlds population cannot wrong !!
Also the only way to prevent the American bullies from invading your country is to own nuclear weapons and the countries aquiring them are fully aware of this. You would too if i threaten to vaporize your ass.
Were US to withdraw its troops back to their woodwork, most of the miseries the world today faces would abate—one reason why the superpower is hated all over the globe. Pakistani army has been used as mercenaries on hire to kill their own people. Whenever Bush says Musharraf is our ally, General's standing among his compatriots goes down a few notches. After all, there was no terrorism or extremism in Pakistan before the NATO forces stormed into Afghanistan to secure oil routes from central Asian states.
Can you imagine what utter chaos would be the result if 15-20 % of the Pakistani populace were to become refugees afer US invasion? The world would not be able to ignore the humanitarian crisis on this scale as it has been ignoring the Iraqi refugee horrors (about 20 % of 2003 Iraqi population are now in refugee status.)
There are so many of us harboring serious misconceptions about the events of the world, misconceptions engendered by Bush propaganda and John Wayne movies, vis-a-vis the simplistic world view and adrenaline fueled foreign policy of those like Reaper....
How many events will it take before those like this poster understand that military solutions are futile and actually increase so-called acts of terrorism. At the height of its power the USSR got its collective ass kicked in Afghanistan, one of th epoorest nations on th eplanet. The largest military in the world, the USA, was pushed out of Viet Nam by a people willing to accept a million deaths to accomplish this. There is no defense against suicide bombs, other than the sophomoric and unletttered '"nuke 'em and pave the whole damn place" school of imbecility.
There are 1.4 Billion followers of Islam in this world, estimates are that AlQaeda comprises about twenty thousand. If we used our heads the billion or so would overwhelm the twenty thousand, solving our and their own problem. Food, education, jobs, security, health services and hope for the future are the weapons that will win the battle against religious extremism, superstituion and stupidity. Sending troops, allying with militaristic strong men who deny their own people human rights may be desirous to corporations who invest billions in those nations, but it sows the seeds, every damn time, for war and oppression.
Grow the hell up Reaper.
Hmm... a US recession might be the best thing for thee world.
Maybe this would be the best time for a major boycott of US corporations?
Bernice - I agree. We should set a goal of becoming a second string country with a small, funny government, an economy dependent on the export of carpentry tools and a perfunctory army of soldiers with shiny hats to march in parades.
I continue to be impressed by how informed the opinions of the people of Palestine and Iraq and Pakistan are. I think if we got rid of the media altogether and just relied on gossip and rumor we would have a better handle on the truth than we do today.
Reaper - I'll tell you where the terrorists are. They're hiding in that dark closet between your ears.
surfer -- "After all, there was no terrorism or extremism in Pakistan before the NATO forces stormed into Afghanistan to secure oil routes from central Asian states."
Its true there wasnt any terrorism in Pakistan before 9-11 , however Pakistan was Terrorist Central and exported their well trained terrorists to Afghanistan and India. They supported and trained these motherf!@#s and provided moral and diplomatic support. The Pakistan Army is culpable and responsible for this. This is essentiallt the Frankenstein effect, the monster you create comes back to bite you in the ass.
Reaper,
What the hell happened to your post? did you ask the CD moderator to remove it?
Reaper,
Be careful what you wish for; I'm giving it to you.
A terrorist terrorizes people for their own reasons or goals, whatever they may be. Since you seem to be so much pissed off at terrorists that you want half of Pakistan bombed, I will give you a much bigger terrorist and a larger target.
Of the following two people, you choose which one is the bigger terrorist, and then go ahead and bomb the hell out of half of their country.
Osama destroyed a couple of buildings and killed nearly 3000 people. Bush has destroyed a whole nation and killed more than a million--and counting.
Osama's agents didn't rape and then kill innocent civilians, whereas Bush …
Osama's action did not cause millions of refugees, whereas Bush…
I guess I've given you enough to set you on your mission. Good luck.
While the Pakistanis may hate the US but they all want a green card.
Rebel Farmer--- in a previous post you asked a question of a poster---- I can't think at the moment who---- but it had to do with psycohpathy--- Google "psychopathy, The Mask of Sanity" for the entire material that was excerpted and posted without attribution. for further info on the subject--- Google "Ponerology"