Islamabad, August 07: In over 30 years in diplomacy, I had learnt that the most crucial requirement in sizing up a foreign visitor is to carry out an assessment of the domestic and international political standing, the likes and dislikes, the negotiating skills and professional knowledge of the visitor. This had to complement detailed knowledge of internal developments and foreign policy strategies of the country the visitor represented. But what was striking about Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar was the reaction of our media, our “liberal intellectuals” and even some of our politicians and officials, to the visitor.
No one bothered to inquire about Hina’s political standing, her personality traits, or knowledge of international diplomacy. This was very different from the public and media reaction when just a week earlier, Hillary Clinton visited New Delhi and Chennai. Her visit was marked by discussions on issues like US policies in Afghanistan and our Eastern neighbourhood, availability of H1B Visas, investment in India’s infrastructure development and bilateral cooperation in areas ranging from agriculture and education to space, nuclear energy and defence. We have serious problems in our relations with Pakistan, yet nobody appeared interested in the relationship of the visiting foreign minister with Pakistan’s military. The media dealt with Hina as if she was a fashion model.
Let me explain how Hina fits into Pakistan’s ruling structure, where the army calls the shots on foreign and security policies. Pakistan’s political elite is drawn predominantly from the feudal land-owning classes. Feudal families hedge their bets with their feet in the camps of both the PPP (founded by Bhutto) and a faction of the Muslim League (PML), which is a creation of the army, during a period of military rule. Hina’s father, Ghulam Rabbani Khar, is a southern Punjabi landlord who owns hundreds of acres of sugar and mango plantations and fisheries. He has been linked to the PML. His brother Ghulam Mustafa was an influential figure in the PPP in the Bhutto years and earned international notoriety in a book about him by Tehmina Durrani, one of his many wives.
Hina entered politics in 2002 as a candidate of Musharraf’s PML, and spent the next six years singing his praises. She had, in the meantime, married a Lahore businessman Feroze Gulzar and taken to managing the Polo Lounge, an upmarket restaurant—a field in which Hina had obtained a Master’s degree from the University of Massachusetts. Hina joined Zardari’s PPP when she was denied a PML ticket in 2008 and became Minister of State for Economic Affairs. She was thereafter shifted to Foreign Affairs. Hina was a source of amusement while dealing with economic affairs because the palpable nervousness she manifested when presenting the Budget in 2010. But she was well-tutored for her discussions in New Delhi and had evidently absorbed and memorised the briefs she had been given.
What our political pundits and scribes failed to understand is that Hina had been programmed to adhere to a brief scripted by the army. The Pakistan army is under siege along the country’s western borders with Afghanistan. The Americans are now linking their economic and military assistance to Pakistan, to actions by the Pakistan army, against the Taliban. Moreover, they are even threatening further cross-border raids after eliminating Osama bin Laden. The army, therefore, does not presently want tensions with India. It is, however, continuing its backing for jihadi groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba.
Hina fulfilled the army’s objectives by appearing to be moderate and reasonable, even while assuring the separatist Hurriyat Conference leadership of continuing support. India had already diluted its stand on the salience of terrorism in the dialogue process and thereby forsaken key options to mount diplomatic pressure on Pakistan. Thanks to our Government’s pusillanimity, the families of those killed on 26/11 will in all likelihood never see the perpetrators of the terrorist outrage brought to justice.