At the time of worsening relationships between Pakistan and the US, another blow has come for Pakistan in the form of the placement of ‘Bounty Money’ by the US of A on Hafiz Saeed, the patron in chief of Jamaat u Dawa Pakistan, a charitable organization. This is a move which has left many in Pakistan perplexed and bewildered.
The sheer audacity with which US issues such ‘financial fatwas’, under the state department’s ‘rewards for justice’ scheme is breathtaking. But this time US has even surpassed itself. For a nation that prides itself on rule of Law and Justice, to use of such ‘Cow boy’ tactics is nothing less than shameful. Provocative actions that play with emotions of the downtrodden in order to achieve political mileage with India by cornering Pakistan does not behoove the so-called ‘Leader of the Free world’.
What is the reason for this calculated madness by the United States?
The 61 years old Saeed is ‘suspected’, repeat suspected, of masterminding the attack on Mumbai in 2008, leaving 166 dead. However nothing has been proved against him so far. Saeed himself has decried the move stating it as ‘laughable and an absurd announcement”. In a press conference held in Flashman’s hotel in Rawalpindi, 40 minutes drive away from the US embassy in Pakistan, he announced ‘here I am sitting in front of everyone, not hiding in a cave and the US may contact me anytime’. Saeed who is not wanted, repeat not wanted, in any criminal acts in the United States, does not live in hiding. He lives and moves around freely and recently led rallies against the drone strikes that are very unpopular in Pakistan and result in scores of innocent civilian casualties.
Some reason to pass a financial fatwa on. ‘With United States or against United States’.
The whole episode leaves one compelled to ask what International Law allows one country to abduct citizens of another country and incite murder against them in return for a monetary reward? How are allegations proved against such citizens? What happens to ‘innocent until proven guilty’ principle or the due and fair process of Law, under such circumstances ? Or is it simply the Law of the Jungle?
Further a fair and burning question is, what about American ‘criminals of war’ who return home as heroes? Should Pakistan or any other country in disagreement with Uncle Sam set up monetary rewards to capture US citizens ‘suspected’ of committing a certain crime?
How about a monetary reward for the ‘psychologically disturbed’ US soldier, who killed more than a dozen innocent Afghan women and children, and then was flown away to the ‘safety’ of US law process.
Or in the words of one Pakistani official, shouldn’t the people behind the drones that have left many innocents in Pakistan dead, especially children, be brought to justice? And no sir, before you raise an objection, the drones are a reality, a stark cold reality that kill and maim. Drones are neither a figment of imagination nor a mere suspicion, and we all know who is behind the death fliers. The drone deaths are easily swept under the carpet under the term ‘collateral damage’.
How exactly is the value of blood measured? How do the great and good measure the loss of life. In US, UK and the west it is ‘the serious threat to humanity’ and in AfPak it is a shruggable collateral damage?
The US taking a high moral ground in such circumstances is not even laughable. It is simply disdainful, and beneath contempt. United States is a country that runs jails such as the Guantanamo bay, holding people captive for years without proving anything against them, and in the process destroying their lives forever. Oh and it is the same country that attacked I-rack, for ‘suspected’ weapons of mass destruction, killing hundreds of thousands and destroying the country in the process.
The US of A remains the only country in the world that has waged a war in one country or another, every single year after the Second World War. Let the facts speak for themselves. It has turned the world into a place of fear and trauma. While its Military Keynesianism serves the US financial interests very well, it has created sheer turbulence and unrest throughout the rest of the world. United States’ military adventurism fuels hatred, leads civilizations to clash and has generally led the world to be a significantly insecure place to live in.
So Should the bounty money be placed on capturing someone against whom only ‘suspicions’ of wrongdoing exist? Ah well, one may only conclude that the American Tax payer money is more suited for international political maneuvers and not saving some American lives in American hospitals, not educating American kids and not mending some broken sociopath American families. But I’ll leave that topic to be discussed later.
For the moment I want to finish with a thought. How much is ‘Raymond Davis’ worth? One crore rupees as the head money?