The United States "...needs a Pakistan government that can keep order and has legitimacy" and which will not allow the country to be used as a platform by insurgents or those advocating the annexation of areas in either Afghanistan or India, Teresita Schaffer, a senior former US diplomat, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Schaffer, who heads the South Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, told the Committee, which had convened a hearing on the future of Pakistan, "Pakistan today is going through the most severe crisis it has faced in the past eight years," and that its future "...matters profoundly to the United States and to the region."
She said a priority for Washington is to "...put its weight behind a return to civilian rule" in Pakistan through free and fair elections, even while urgently trying to strengthen and broaden the anti-terrorism consensus within Pakistan.
Schaffer said the July 20 Pakistan Supreme Court ruling reinstating the chief justice that President Pervez Musharraf fired was a serious embarrassment for the general. It also interfered with his "...strategy of seeking re-election later this year," she said.
She said the Supreme Court's ruling had given the US and Pakistan "an opportunity to stand up for the rule of law," and argued, "This is the only way to set Pakistan on the course toward enlightened moderation that many Pakistanis believe is their country's birthright."
Schaffer lauded the administration for welcoming the Supreme Court decision, but said Washington now had to make clear that it expected the coming elections to be free and fair, with Musharraf choosing between the offices of president and army chief.
Acknowledging that this may seem like an odd time for the US to be backing a return to a freely elected government and democratic institutions, she argued that the policy was not just a reflection of American values.
"It also reflects a hard-nosed judgment about the relationship between the Pakistan army and the militants who threaten to destroy the progressive, modern Islamic character of the State that underpins real policy cooperation with the United States," she said.
Schaffer recalled that in earlier crackdowns by Pakistan on extremists, the army has often pulled its punches, making sure that militant groups remained alive and available for work across Pakistan's tense borders.
"That policy," she said, "...is doomed to failure. Extremism cannot be kept half-contained in this fashion. It poses a mortal danger to Pakistan's domestic well-being. As long as the army managed policy, it is unlikely that extremists will be treated like the enemy they are.
Schaffer said, "Doing this requires a committed political government, with full legitimacy. While the army would have a critical role to play in enforcing the government's policies and defending Pakistan this role needs to be anchored in a set of institutions in which elected political power is firmly in change, and fully accountable."
On the problem in the tribal areas, she said she strongly opposed direct US military intervention, saying, "I can think of no quicker way of turning all of Pakistan against the anti-terrorism goals that are so important to the United States, and turning the Pakistan army into a hostile force."
While military assistance was an important way of expressing the long-term commitment the US has to the people of Pakistan, Schaffer said it is important to draw distinctions the US had not made earlier.
"Military sales should focus in the first instance on equipment that will help Pakistan with its vital counter-terrorism goals. Military sales that relate more to general defense upgrading should take a backseat, and should be contingent on Pakistan's effective performance in countering militant extremists, both along the Afghan border and elsewhere," Schaffer said.
"If we continue to find that Pakistan's army is hedging its bets in Afghanistan and providing support for the Taliban, or for domestic militant groups, we should put this type of military sales on hold," she said.
She castigated the Bush administration's defense of Musharraf as the only game in town noting that "the administration has tended to speak of Musharraf whenever it is asked about policy toward Pakistan."
Schaffer argued, "We need to shift our emphasis to the whole of Pakistan. Obviously, leaders are important, especially in troubled countries at troubled times. But the sustainability of Pakistan's political system and its ability to grow new leaders are absolutely critical to the goal of combating terrorism that has been at the top of our list for the past six years."
"This means we need the Pakistani political system -- or as many parts of it as possible -- to buy into the goal of eliminating extremist influence in Pakistan."
She said "especially since the invasion of Iraq, this has become a very tough job in a country where public opinion now regards the United States as a country that 'attacks Muslims."
"It is imperative "...to listen to what Pakistanis are saying about their hopes for a better future for their country.
"If, as I suspect, there is widespread but amorphous sentiment for 'enlightened moderation,' we need to help strengthen and deepen that, and to show by our actions that this is where we want to go, together with Pakistan," Schaffer said.
