The following article reveals Ambassador Haqqani’s continuing links to Boston University; an earlier post (Good Islam, Bad Islam) had reported that he was on leave from the Hudson Institute. Footnotes, and comments in square brackets, have been added to the article to provide context.
The Boston Globe | By Farah Stockman | 4 November 2009
BU professor-turned-Pakistan-envoy draws fire
WASHINGTON – Professor Husain Haqqani, who took a leave of absence from Boston University1 to become Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States last year, is one of the most influential figures in his nation’s government. But in recent weeks, Haqqani has been fighting for his political survival, accused of something that can tank a government career in Pakistan: being too “pro-American.’’2
Some journalists in Pakistan have denounced him. Opposition members of parliament have given scathing speeches about him. Pakistani military officials have sought his dismissal.3 The attacks have been so nasty that Haqqani has filed a defamation lawsuit against a leading Pakistani newspaper.4
If he returned home, friends say, his safety could be threatened.
“It’s brutal,’’ said Michael Krepon of the Henry L. Stimson Center, a Washington-based think tank.
Ironically, the recent spate of criticism stems from Haqqani’s role in shaping a $7.5 billion, five-year US aid package to Pakistan that aims to strengthen the friendship between the countries.
The package, which triples US assistance for projects such as schools, clinics, and roads, was widely celebrated by Pakistan’s civilian leaders when it was announced in September.
But the aid – pushed by Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts5 who – has drawn an angry reaction from Islamist opposition politicians and senior officials of Pakistan’s military.6 They have called the aid bill insulting to the Pakistani armed forces7 because it suggests that military purchases should be tied to continued cooperation in the war against the Taliban, and because it promotes control of the military by [an American installed puppet] civilian government.
Two weeks ago, the Pakistani Observer newspaper called the aid “a slavery accord’’ and incorrectly reported that Haqqani would be replaced within 48 hours.
The furor has exposed a dangerous, continuing struggle between Pakistan’s powerful military, which Haqqani criticized as a professor, and the fledgling, democratically elected government.8
“The [Pakistani] military clearly has decided that it would like to have him removed,’’ said a US congressional aide who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak to the press.9
Haqqani declined to comment in detail on the situation. “Nobody in the government at any level has broached the subject of my going to any other job or any other role so far,’’ he said.
BU spokesman Colin Riley said Haqqani is welcome to return early from his two-year sabbatical, which is slated to end next June, but that he has not raised the issue. Haqqani has maintained ties to Boston University and continues to advise a student pursuing a doctorate who is defending her dissertation this month.10
Haqqani has a reputation for emerging victorious from political warfare in Washington and Islamabad. Born in Karachi, he was once a radical Islamist activist. Then he turned to journalism, and finally to politics.11
Known as charming and shrewd, he was a senior aide for two rival prime ministers. In 1996, when Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was ousted for a second time and went into exile, it looked as though Haqqani’s career was finished. But he managed to reinvent himself and rise to a more important post.
In 1999, when the Pakistani military toppled the civilian government in a coup, Haqqani’s political future appeared bleak. But after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Pakistan became an important US ally, and his writings sparked great interest in the United States. In 2002, he joined the Carnegie Endowment, a Washington-based think tank. In 2004, he arrived in Boston, becoming a popular professor whose office was packed with interested students.12
While at BU, Haqqani finished his book “Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military,’’ which detailed the troublesome alliance between Pakistan’s military and radical Islamists groups. In the book, he argued that the United States should use its aid to break the cycle of military dictatorship in Pakistan. Haqqani told his students that the United States needed to become a long-term ally of Pakistan’s government, not just a fair-weather friend to its army whenever Washington needs help fighting a war – a key principle enshrined in the new aid package.13
In 2008, Pakistan’s military leaders stepped aside and allowed for the election of a new civilian government. Ali Asif Zardari, the husband of the late Bhutto, became Pakistan’s new president and sent his friend [more accurately, was asked to appoint America's friend, an American resident if not citizen, who was already in the U.S.] Haqqani to Washington [from Boston].
Already on a first-name basis with many key congressmen, the professor quickly became an influential figure, a frequent visitor to the White House and Capitol Hill. An avid Red Sox fan who is more likely to wear an expensive suit than a loose-fitting traditional shalwar kamiz, Haqqani captivated US audiences with speeches about Pakistan’s woes.14
But his role in Washington has long caused consternation among those who say he is out of touch with Pakistan and too American in his point of view. Although his wife, a former CNN producer, holds a seat in Pakistan’s parliament, Haqqani hasn’t returned to Islamabad for eight months.
“Many Pakistanis say that they think he is too close to Washington, that he has spent too much time outside the country, that he doesn’t understand the demands of the Pakistani people,’’ said Daniel Markey, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who said complaints about Haqqani came up frequently during his meetings in Pakistan last week.15
Haqqani’s failure to predict or prepare for the outrage in Pakistan over the language in Kerry’s aid package “may be an example of that,’’ Markey said. “The embassy should have known that some people were going to try to make hay of it, and headed that off in advance.’’16
But Samina Ahmed, an Islamabad-based analyst for the International Crisis Group, said the attacks on Haqqani were carefully orchestrated by the military to weaken the government he represents. She predicted more will come.
“These are the first rumblings of the storm,’’ she said. “This is the beginning of the military trying to take down this civilian government.’’17
See Also:
Pakistan Military Growing Wary of United States?
- He is also on leave from the Hudson Institute’s “Centre for Islam, Democracy, and the Future of the Muslim World” established by Daniel Pipes in 2005, with intellectual support and guidance from the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) in Herzliya, a think tank with links to Israeli intelligence agencies. Reuven Paz, a 23 year veteran of Shin Bet, one of the three Israeli intelligence agencies, and Shmuel Bar, a 30 year veteran of the Israeli intelligence community, among other Israelis from Herzliya, are associated with the Center. ↩
- He is accused not of being too “pro-American’’ — a charge that few influential Pakistanis can deny — but of being too “pro-Israel’’ and too close to American Likudniks. In effect, many Pakistanis, especially those who are not persuaded that what is good for the U.S. is good for Pakistan, question whether he is working for the U.S. or for Pakistan? It’s a conflict of interest issue. ↩
- This seems to be self-serving; were the military to seek anyone’s dismissal, the person would be dismissed. In fact, Mr. Haqqani seems to be widely unpopular: on 27 June 2008, Ambassador Haqqani had to be escorted out from a meeting of Pakistani physicians association of North America, by American security guards! ↩
- For details, see If Fired, Haqqani Threatens To Reveal ‘Reams’ of Pakistani Secrets. ↩
- The bulk of the mischief was done by Rep. Howard Berman (“Before I was a Democrat, I was a Zionist”) through his parallel House Bill, and subsequent amendments to the Senate (Kerry-Lugar) Bill. This raised the question whether the final (Kerry-Lugar-Berman) Act 2009 reflected Mr. Haqqani’s malice or incompetence. ↩
- In fact, as the Los Angeles Times of 1 Nov 2009 noted: “The discontent is not just from radicals, even college students and respected journalists question Washington’s intentions in Pakistan. Some liken U.S. drone missile strikes to terrorism.” ↩
- Not just the armed forces, but to the nation as a whole. Google it! ↩
- This seems to be Haqqani’s line. The reporter should have done some independent research. ↩
- It would be more accurate to say because he didn’t know what he was talking about. ↩
- This is a serious conflict of interest; imagine appointing an American who had emigrated to Pakistan and was a permanent employee of a Jama’at-e-Islami research centre in Pakistan and a private Pakistani university, as the U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, while on leave from these institutions. ↩
- Politics? Mr. Haqqani has never contested any elections, or otherwise taken part any any politics in Pakistan. He was one of the first appointments in the current U.S. engineered puppet Zardari government of Pakistan. ↩
- Mr. Haqqani’s rise in the U.S. had to do with his willingness to play “native informant” to Daniel Pipes and other neo-cons and endorsing their anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan prejudices, for which he was rewarded (among others, with $275,000 in two grants through the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 2003 and 2004). Those who can remember the Vietnam era would recall Boston University’s links with C.I.A. in those days; apparently little has changed since then. Ron Suskind, in his The Way of the World (pp. 175-180), writes of Joe Wipple: “Wipple was fired as head of CIA’s Congressional Liaison Office in 2006. But, somehow, he remained on CIA’s payroll–and got another plum job, this time running a one-man intelligence ‘institute’ at Boston University. For a man twice fired, it was astonishing good fortune. Somebody up there must like him.” Emphasis added. ↩
- The flaw is that by supporting Musharraf and in order to install a government of escaped convicts as puppets, the U.S. has undermined the constitution and laws of Pakistan. With the result that the Americans, in practice, seek to support a lawless civilian set-up (calling it “democray” because it elects and selects a government accountable to no one, other than the U.S.), while defering the restoration of law to a later date. This lack of attention to sequencing mars the entire exercise. ↩
- The woes that Americans liked to hear; not the ones to which most Pakistanis subscribe. ↩
- Why, it might be asked, would the Pakistanis “complain” to Daniel Markey about their own ambassador? What would it say, imagine, if U.S. officials would complain about their anbassador to Islamabad to a Pakistani visiting Washington? Could it be that Ambassador Haqqani is seen as an American appointment to a puppet government in Islamabad? ↩
- It was not failure. The de facto set up is that Mr. Zardari reports to Richard Holbrooke and when the Foreign Ministry is to be by-passed, “Ambassador” Haqqani is used, as was done in the case of the the passage of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act 2009. ↩
- Again this is Haqqani’s line. As for bringing down this “civilian” puppet regime, Mr. Zardari doesn’t seem to need any help, thank you! ↩
Related posts:
- Are the Israelis Buying Property in Pakistan? [Translate] Real estate agents have reported a surge in property...
- Civil War in Pakistan: At America’s Behest, Zardari Rushes in where Curzon feared to tread [Translate] Times | By Anatol Lieven | 19 October 2009...
- Pakistan told to — you guessed it — do more [Translate] New York Times | By David E. Sanger and...
- With friends like the US, Pakistan doesn’t need enemies [Translate] Guardian | Article | By Simon Tisdall | 15...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.










