TRUDY RUBIN: Fooled again on Pakistan?

When Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif came to Washington this week, I couldn’t help thinking of the adage: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

Sure enough, despite a long history of U.S. presidents being duped by Pakistani leaders, President Obama plans to restore more than $1.5 billion in blocked assistance for Islamabad.

The aid was blocked because Pakistan never came clean about who helped Osama bin Laden hide for years in Abbottabad.

Never mind. When it comes to Pakistan, hope seems to spring eternal. If the United States eases tension with Islamabad, administration thinking goes, the Pakistanis may finally press the Taliban to endorse an Afghan peace accord before the U.S. withdrawal in 2014.

But why expect different results now from a country whose leaders have deceived Washington for decades about their links to terrorism – and who regard anti-Western jihadis as a useful tool in fighting India?

“The United States may have to be more up-front about the relationship between Pakistan and terrorism,” says Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington and author of “Magnificent Delusions: Pakistan, the United States, and an Epic History of Misunderstanding.” “This would bring to an end the ability of Pakistani leaders to deny what is happening. The days of going along with pretense should end.”

Early on, Pakistan enticed U.S. presidents to supply arms so it could counter the Soviets, while intending to use the weapons against India. In the 1980s, Pakistan persuaded Washington to provide mountains of cash to train the Afghan mujahedeen who drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan. However, the Pakistani ISI intelligence agency funneled that cash to the most militant jihadis and, later, helped the Taliban seize power in Kabul – setting the stage for the rise of al-Qaida.

Deception followed deception.

After 9/11, Pakistan finally agreed to help Washington combat al-Qaida, but permitted Taliban militants to maintain safe havens in their country.

Pakistan also tried to deny responsibility when ISI-trained Pakistanis killed 166 people in Mumbai, India, in 2008; it has never jailed the mastermind of the attack, who still openly preaches jihad. Pakistani leaders also gloss over that the failed Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, trained in Pakistan, as did other would-be bombers nabbed in Europe.

As a senior U.S. diplomat once complained, the United States and Pakistan operate in “parallel universes” in which Pakistanis speak about everything but terrorism, which they pretend isn’t happening.

So it wasn’t surprising to hear the prime minister deny any Pakistani connection to terrorism, in a Tuesday speech to the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington.

In a move guaranteed to divert attention from Pakistan’s links to terrorists, Sharif complained about America’s use of drones. He never mentioned that, for many years, Pakistani leaders privately gave the green light to drone attacks while condemning them in public – or that the attacks would not be necessary if Pakistani leaders weren’t supporting jihadis.

“Pakistan wants to be able to act like Assad’s Syria while demanding that the United States treat it like Israel,” says Haqqani. He suggests “lowering expectations of cooperation while increasing honesty about what each side thinks of each other.” What a good idea.

The more the United States indicates it needs Pakistan, “the more Pakistan jacks up the cost,” says Haqqani. He adds that aid will not change Pakistani behavior, nor will Pakistan deliver the Taliban.

So why not insist that U.S. aid and cooperation with Pakistan will go nowhere until both sides can talk honestly to each other (and their publics) about terrorism and drones? Previous administrations have demanded that Pakistan come clean, then backed down, and I know such a display of U.S. backbone is unlikely this time, but it would certainly be a refreshing change.

Trudy Rubin is a columnist and editorial-board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer. Readers may write to her at: Philadelphia Inquirer, P.O. Box 8263, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101, or by email at

Click video to hear audio

  • Guest Person

    It is really quite simple Trudy don’t make it any harder than it needs to be. Over half the Pakistan population hates the guts of anyone from the west. Half of that group are religous fundalmentalists which adds another level of crazy to the mix. The other half of the population really just wants to go about their business and be left alone – they do not have the money or the energy to battle the crazy side so they let them piddle over on the western side of the country. Now we have to add to the mix a couple of nuclear bombs that the normal side of the country has under it’s control. It would not be practical to send American troops in to get these since it would cost too many lives and a whole lot of money – besides there is nothing to stop them from building more.

    The next best thing is to give them 1.5 billion dollars so the normal side will feel happy and be able to keep the nukes out of the hands of the religous nut cases.

    Think about it – for the cost of less than one month of the war in Iraq we can keep the peace for a year and no American soliders die. Go figure.

  • barney fife

    Pakistan has more than once bitten the hand that feeds them. Enough is enough. Take that money and turn it inward. Want to stimulate the economy? Give one million dollars to each tax-paying individual over the age of 50 with the single stipulation that a portion of it is used to purchase a house outright and live in it for 5 years.

  • Winston Smith

    There’s a Pulitzer Prize winning book called “Ghost Wars” written by Steve Coll that I would highly recommend to anyone that wants to learn more about the CIA, the ISI and our involvement in Afghanistan.