Pakistan is victimized on the issue of bin Laden. This is shear injustice on the part of the rest of the world to devoid Pakistan of the credit due to it . People all over the world are asking why bin Laden was living in Abbottabad so close to the military academy, but they don't realize that it was Pakistan , and no one else who provided intelligence to CIA on this issue and on any other issue.
The fact that Pakistan provided the intelligence on the basis of which Americans conducted the operation , is not something that requires empirical evidence; it is a priori true and it is a logical truth, necessary , essential and universal. One cannot imagine that CIA , who has no roots in Pakistan, who has no strength on the ground, can gather intelligence on its own.
Just consider the example of the man who live tweeted bin Laden operation. How clearly it shows that only a person on ground, living there , can be the first to inform . To be there is the first , necessary and essential requirement to become the first to inform about or report an incident; whatever technology others have, whatever resources others have, if they have no presence on the ground, they cannot become the first to know what happens on the ground. So, Pakistani intelligence agencies also unknowingly provided information of the possible presence of an Al Qaeda leader in Abbottabad. And it on this information that CIA conducted an operation that resulted in Osama's death; even CIA did not know it for sure that Osama was there.
With an exception of Indian media, who looks at every transaction between US and Pakistan with suspicion, everyone else is confirmed that Pakistanis were not informed about the operation; and Pakistanis say that even CIA acted on the basis of 60% level of surety, that they were only 60% sure about the presence of bin Laden in the compound.
CIA, with all its equipment, technology and effectiveness, could not know anything about whats happening on the ground; it is beyond there power to know this; they can see things happen, but they cannot interpret incidents. They cannot live through the reality on the ground.
So, those who are saying that CIA knew it on its own, and did not get any information from Pakistan is unbelievable , is not a trustworthy statement. It was Pakistan , and no one else who provided the intelligence on bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.
President Obama acknowledged this fact; however rest of the world is criticizing Pakistan owing to their biases about Pakistan- biases that can potentially discourage Pakistan to help the world community in dealing with this issue.
Pakistan Army chief and political leadership has pointed out this issue , and they have shown their concern over this. Pakistan army chief has said that in future no such activity will be tolerated. Pakistani political leadership has also criticized David Cameron because of his negative statements on this issue.
Pakistan is helping the world in this war of terror, and the world should realize that Pakistanis can gather intelligence because they are on the ground and they can relate themselves to terrorists; this means intelligence gathering presupposes Pakistani security agencies' relation with terrorists; this is a pre condition for any intelligence gathering. And it is because of this reason Pakistan can gather intelligence and others cannot. So if someone criticize Pakistani security agencies on this issue, that person does not understand the basic things.
Islamic militancy in Pakistan is not organized as a criminal organization; it is socially organized, it has social roots. It has its advocates, supporters and participants everywhere; its a widespread movement. It has a great support in Pakistan and its roots are deep. How can a security agency deal with it without difficulties. People in the West think that militancy can be easily dealt with; they don't know anything about it.
Where Islamic religious sentiment enters the boarders of militancy, it is from there the work of intelligence agencies starts. And religious sentiment is the essential attribute of Pakistani populace, whether they are Muslims, Hindus, Christians , Jews or Sikhs. So if every one is religiously sentimental, owing to the education they received during the first Afghan war, then it is hard to find where religious sentiment actually enters militancy.In Pakistan every one is religiously sentimental, however the western thinkers believe that only terrorists are religiously sentimental. Which is utterly wrong.
In the West the the way of thinking , that separates the subject from the object , this dichotomy of the subject and object, is a hindrance in understanding indigenous reality. This should be understood that subject object dichotomy is to give scientific validity and objectivity to the knowledge; but one should not change the reality according to one's method of perception.
This subject object dichotomy that systematically removes all subjective layers from the phenomenon to grasp it in an objective manner, is nothing but a will to dominate other cultures and indigenous realities . Western thinkers and policy makers should decide whether they are interested in dealing with the problem , or are more interested in maintaining their perspectives.
Social world is not a scientific objective reality, neither it should be reduced to this level. Better than this subject object dichotomy is the method of pragmatism, but no one even tries to think pragmatically about this issue.
The fact that Pakistan provided the intelligence on the basis of which Americans conducted the operation , is not something that requires empirical evidence; it is a priori true and it is a logical truth, necessary , essential and universal. One cannot imagine that CIA , who has no roots in Pakistan, who has no strength on the ground, can gather intelligence on its own.
Just consider the example of the man who live tweeted bin Laden operation. How clearly it shows that only a person on ground, living there , can be the first to inform . To be there is the first , necessary and essential requirement to become the first to inform about or report an incident; whatever technology others have, whatever resources others have, if they have no presence on the ground, they cannot become the first to know what happens on the ground. So, Pakistani intelligence agencies also unknowingly provided information of the possible presence of an Al Qaeda leader in Abbottabad. And it on this information that CIA conducted an operation that resulted in Osama's death; even CIA did not know it for sure that Osama was there.
With an exception of Indian media, who looks at every transaction between US and Pakistan with suspicion, everyone else is confirmed that Pakistanis were not informed about the operation; and Pakistanis say that even CIA acted on the basis of 60% level of surety, that they were only 60% sure about the presence of bin Laden in the compound.
CIA, with all its equipment, technology and effectiveness, could not know anything about whats happening on the ground; it is beyond there power to know this; they can see things happen, but they cannot interpret incidents. They cannot live through the reality on the ground.
So, those who are saying that CIA knew it on its own, and did not get any information from Pakistan is unbelievable , is not a trustworthy statement. It was Pakistan , and no one else who provided the intelligence on bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.
President Obama acknowledged this fact; however rest of the world is criticizing Pakistan owing to their biases about Pakistan- biases that can potentially discourage Pakistan to help the world community in dealing with this issue.
Pakistan Army chief and political leadership has pointed out this issue , and they have shown their concern over this. Pakistan army chief has said that in future no such activity will be tolerated. Pakistani political leadership has also criticized David Cameron because of his negative statements on this issue.
Pakistan is helping the world in this war of terror, and the world should realize that Pakistanis can gather intelligence because they are on the ground and they can relate themselves to terrorists; this means intelligence gathering presupposes Pakistani security agencies' relation with terrorists; this is a pre condition for any intelligence gathering. And it is because of this reason Pakistan can gather intelligence and others cannot. So if someone criticize Pakistani security agencies on this issue, that person does not understand the basic things.
Islamic militancy in Pakistan is not organized as a criminal organization; it is socially organized, it has social roots. It has its advocates, supporters and participants everywhere; its a widespread movement. It has a great support in Pakistan and its roots are deep. How can a security agency deal with it without difficulties. People in the West think that militancy can be easily dealt with; they don't know anything about it.
Where Islamic religious sentiment enters the boarders of militancy, it is from there the work of intelligence agencies starts. And religious sentiment is the essential attribute of Pakistani populace, whether they are Muslims, Hindus, Christians , Jews or Sikhs. So if every one is religiously sentimental, owing to the education they received during the first Afghan war, then it is hard to find where religious sentiment actually enters militancy.In Pakistan every one is religiously sentimental, however the western thinkers believe that only terrorists are religiously sentimental. Which is utterly wrong.
In the West the the way of thinking , that separates the subject from the object , this dichotomy of the subject and object, is a hindrance in understanding indigenous reality. This should be understood that subject object dichotomy is to give scientific validity and objectivity to the knowledge; but one should not change the reality according to one's method of perception.
This subject object dichotomy that systematically removes all subjective layers from the phenomenon to grasp it in an objective manner, is nothing but a will to dominate other cultures and indigenous realities . Western thinkers and policy makers should decide whether they are interested in dealing with the problem , or are more interested in maintaining their perspectives.
Social world is not a scientific objective reality, neither it should be reduced to this level. Better than this subject object dichotomy is the method of pragmatism, but no one even tries to think pragmatically about this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment