After jailing Kashmiri lobbyist Fai, US is being fussy over its CIA agent?

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

One of the more sane pieces about the Dr Afridi saga coming out of Pakistan...

I would like to point out that Pakistani commentators, such as myself, have been making the following argument every since Afridi was first arrested:

Any agreement of intelligence-sharing is between two states and no individual can undertake that task on his own, not even ISI officials. The CIA breached this agreement by concealing information from the ISI and tasking a Pakistani government official for a job which they knew was illegal. They did not have any solid reason to hide information from the ISI in case of Osama because there is no instance of shared information being leaked and the target was forewarned. If that were the case, several senior al Qaeda leaders wouldn’t have been arrested in Pakistan with the help of the ISI. Of course, this is not to say that Dr Afridi doesn’t deserve a fair trial and punishment proportionate to his crime. However, the US administration is not justified in seeking his release, because they would never like any US citizen to work for a foreign intelligence agency either.

 

[Perceptron]

COMMENT: What the Afridi case says about Pakistan — Tony Letford

Why should a man who played a small part in the demise of the world’s most wanted terrorist merit 33 years in prison?

There is a question that usually sits at the back of my mind but is brought to the fore every now and again. Usually, it happens when we see yet another bit of judicial or political lunacy perpetrated by people who should know better. The current decision by the Pakistani authorities to defend the imprisonment of Dr Shakeel Afridi has made me reconsider that question with a renewed alarm.

From time to time, one hears of strange and unjust decisions in courts in rural Pakistan. Rapists are acquitted because of community influence or wealthy and powerful families use their influence to win cases they should have lost. These sorts of things are common in traditional communities throughout the world. However, when a central government upholds such a decision, despite the evidence in the case, then I believe we have a serious problem and this is exactly what has occurred in the Afridi affair.

A spokesperson for the Pakistan Foreign Ministry claimed, “...the case of Dr Afridi...was in accordance with Pakistani laws and by Pakistani courts.” This may be so but, even if we allow that a guilty verdict is justified, how do we find that Dr Afridi’s assistance to the US merits a punishment of 33 years incarceration when supporters of al Qaeda get less for murders of innocent civilians? There can be no doubt about what is at the heart of this case and there is no doubt about where this sort of incident will lead Pakistan.

When the Americans went into a private compound in Abbottabad and killed Osama bin Laden, there was relief and celebrations around the world that this terrorist would send no more innocent airplane passengers and others to their deaths. Nevertheless, in Pakistan there was a strange mixture of embarrassment and outrage. It was not that bin Laden was very popular but that, once again, the US had brought shame and humiliation to Pakistan. Rather than recognising that Pakistan’s own institutions were incompetent or unreliable, the US’s action was interpreted by many Pakistanis as typical US highhanded aggression.

In Pakistan, a virulent anti-Americanism is leading many Pakistanis, including high government officials, into a form of moral blindness, which is alarmingly similar to the situation that prevailed in Germany in the1930s and led to the rise of Hitler. The National Socialists blamed all of Germany’s ills upon Jews. There were no jobs because Jews had stolen them all; Germany was weak because of a global conspiracy of Jews and so on. This sort of poison was fed to the masses relentlessly until enough people came to believe it to enable the fascists to gain power at the ballot box. The German ruling class was not too concerned as it believed they could control Herr Hitler, whose mad rants would eventually moderate once he had gained power. Germany’s ruling elite believed the army would protect the status quo and nothing would change. The moderates who managed the institutions of civil society were eventually locked up, murdered, or pushed aside, and Hitler started the most destructive war the world has ever seen.

In Pakistan we see the same willingness of demagogues to blame all of the country’s problems on external causes. Pakistan is failing to keep up with India because of the incompetence and corruption of its institutions of government and education. Pakistan’s problems are caused by unwelcome foreign influence and so on and so forth. The Pakistani ruling elites accept this nonsense rather than to go to the heart of the issue and honestly consider why Pakistan, half a century after it gained its independence, still requires a hand-out of a billion dollars a year from the ‘Great Satan’, as well as untold millions from expatriate workers abroad, merely to stay afloat.

Dr Afridi got 33 years in the slammer not because he committed treason but because he, unwittingly, helped to show that the Pakistani authorities were incapable of finding the most wanted terrorist in history despite that fact that he had been sitting under their noses for five years.

Until Pakistan can look honestly at its own shortcomings and admit the source of its considerable problems is endogenous, its future is in doubt. Pakistan is not failing to develop economically because of western or foreign influences but because of a reluctance to discard intellectually bankrupt ideologies, which are a legacy of the foundation of Pakistan as an Islamic state. For the past 30 years, the rate of growth of Pakistan’s GDP has been trending downwards and while other Islamic states such as Malaysia and Indonesia can develop industrial bases and export industries, it seems too hard for Pakistan. On every measure of economic development, Pakistan is in the bottom quarter of the nations of the world.

Islam can coexist with capitalism in a modern economy, and Islam can coexist with democracy in modern political systems. But the models of coexistence that Pakistan uses are clearly not working and the future for Pakistan looks bleak, unless it can honestly ask why it is falling further behind the rest of the world’s economies.

A good place to start this re-examination will be the case of Dr Afridi, whose role in the end of bin Laden was extremely small. Why should a man who played a small part in the demise of the world’s most wanted terrorist merit 33 years in prison? Why is the Pakistan government not doing everything it can to right what the whole world believes is a massive injustice? Until we get honest answers to these questions, the greater question of the future of Pakistan cannot be answered with certainty.

Pakistan appears to be mired in the politics of the colonial era and the theology of the middle ages. Without a unifying ideology that the body politic can adhere to, or at least accept as a path to modernisation, it will fall further behind the rest of the world and drift towards chaos.

The writer is a freelance writer based in Sydney and can be reached at tony.letford@yahoo.com.au

 

[SMC]

We've already answered several times as to why he was jailed. That he was working with a foreign secret service without the knowledge of the Pakistani state. That is treachery even by the most narrowest definition.

The western media can put a blindfold in their eyes and never mention this very basic fact and keep on harping about how he helped find OBL, but that won't change the fact. They can make completely irrelevant arguments and diversions (and also ones that are not true) as to how we're blaming all problems on "external causes", that still doesn't the fact that he was working with an external secret service.

All I see in this article are either irrelevant arguments or ones where they're purposefully choosing to not mention basic facts.

 

[KingMamba]

They should just be happy they didn't hang the man.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The second oldest profession

By Lt-Gen (r) Asad Durrani
Published: May 29, 2012

The writer served as director-general of the ISI from 1990-92 asad.durrani@tribune.com.pk

And half as honourable, as someone rather unkindly added. After all, spying for one’s country, which has not infrequently washed the sins of many from the still older profession, cannot be all bad. Just look at the stakes. If nailed in hostile territory, one faced an uncertain fate. Even your own country might disown you, as well as the fact that in most lands the act carries the death penalty. All the same, there was some solace: one did it for the motherland. No salvation, however, if one was nabbed spooking for a foreign power; even it was the friendliest of all.

Israel is not just another US-friendly country. It can influence the foreign policy of the mightiest power in history, especially in the Middle East. What it cannot do is get its agents released from American prisons. Jonathan Pollard, a US citizen imprisoned in 1987 on charges of spying for Israel, still remains in the jug. The government in Jerusalem and their powerful allies in the US have tried all tricks, including ex post facto grant of Israeli citizenship, but to no avail. Another US national, Ghulam Nabi Fai, was asked to cool his heals for failing to declare funds, allegedly received from the ISI to carry out one of the most legitimate con jobs in the US: lobbying for assorted causes. (Hope our compatriots on foreign payrolls regularly submit their returns!)

So, why so much fuss over Dr Shakil Afridi! If he was involved in clandestine work on behalf of a foreign power, there was no way he could escape prosecution. If he did it for a common cause or for common good, that might have been relevant during the trial, or may make a difference in times to come. (Yes, there is always life after a trial, unlike in cases like Osama’s, where one is executed without even a formal charge.) I do not know if Afridi should have been tried by a jirga or in a court of law, under tribal decree or under the country’s penal code, but I do know that for him, it is not yet all over.

Espionage — like prostitution and war, and unlike politics — has been long enough in business to have evolved a working code of conduct (even a code of ethics). With hundreds of thousands of secret agents snooping all around the globe, a good number of them are very likely to land themselves in trouble. They are not only of great value back home, but are also a prize catch for the hosts. No doubt they would be made to cough out important information about their mission and more, but their real worth lies in their potential for a future exchange. Lest one forgets, the other side too was not solely relying on Peace Corps volunteers. I think Dr Afridi will get another chance to administer a polio vaccine; the next time in the Promised Land.

In the meantime, those who complain that his sentence, 33 years in jail, was too harsh for the crime committed — treason — may like to think again. It is of course possible that some of them also protested when a frail Dr Afia Siddiqui was charged with attempting to disarm a platoon of crack GIs, and sentenced to 86 years behind the bars. If she did in fact commit the act, she was either out of her mind and, therefore, unfit for a court trial, or a woman of great courage. In the UK, assuming that the British still retain some of the traits that helped them create the largest empire in history, a sporting judge would have bestowed upon her a Victoria Cross.

Now that we have owned the WOT as our war, we may also start owning up our heroes and swap them with theirs. It would be nice to award a Nishan-e-Haider to someone still alive, and a female at that!
Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2012.
The second oldest profession – The Express Tribune

All I see in this article are either irrelevant arguments or ones where they're purposefully choosing to not mention basic facts.

That pretty much describes the overwhelming majority of the commentary directed against the Pakistani decision to arrest, prosecute and punish Afridi.

The resort to emotional arguments, rants and mock indignation are strong indicators that those pushing this particular argument (that Afridi should not have been punished) have a very weak factual and legal case to support them.

 

[Moazam Khan]

I think it is more than enough for all naysayers, who are calling Afridi's incarceration illegitimate.


LA Clinton hath spoken. Thirty-three million smackers lopped off Pakistan’s aid budget because its spooks banged up poor old Dr Shakeel Afridi for 33 years after a secret trial. And, as the world knows, Dr Afridi’s crime was to confirm the presence of that old has-been Osama bin Laden in his grotty Abbottabad villa.

Well, that will teach the Pakistanis a lesson. Forget the CIA’s black prisons and rendition and water-boarding, and the torture of the innocents in the jails of our friendly dictators. Dr Afridi was just doing the free world a favour. And WOW, Dr Afridi got shopped by Leon Pannetta when he was CIA boss, and now Barack Obama is accused of letting him down.

Well, I pause here. Dr Afridi was brought before a secret trial in the Khyber tribal area – no charge sheets, no lawyers, no statements from the defendant or the prosecution, just a measly accusation of conspiracy against the state of Pakistan and “high treason”. I’ve never known the difference between “treason” and “high treason” but – since Pakistan’s security apparatus is a mirror image of the British Empire – I assume it was invented by us. “High treason” means treason against the monarch. By fingering Bin Laden, after using a ruse about vaccinating his family against hepatitis B to gain access to him, Dr Afridi was committing treason against King Asif Ali Zardari, otherwise known as the President of Pakistan.

But hold on a moment. Let’s suppose Vladimir Putin sent a KGB/FSB hit squad to Britain to murder a former agent called Alexander Litvinenko who had turned against his old spymasters. And let’s suppose that the Russians murdered Litvinenko. Which – in real life – they did. And Litvinenko – in real life – was indeed a trusted agent of the Russians, just as Bin Laden was a much-admired servant of the CIA when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

Getting a bit close to home? Well, let’s go a stage further. Supposing Litvinenko was murdered after being identified by a friendly British GP – working for the KGB/FSB – who vaccinated the Berezovsky family against hep B. What do Messrs Cameron and Clegg and the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord High Executioner and all the other nabobs do? Do they accuse the British GP of treason, clap him in irons, stage a hush-hush trial covered by the Official Secrets Act and send the chap off to rot in the Tower of London for – say – 33 years?

Or do they accept a bribe from Moscow of, say, $33m (£21m) to let the GP out of jug so he can potter off to Moscow to be given a new home and restart his career as a doktor for the nomenklatura?

In other words, are the Pakistanis being so dastardly when they lock up a national who has helped a foreign power murder an exile inside his own country of Pakistan? And, more to the point, wouldn’t we do the same?

And let’s take the story of hypocrisy a stage further. Wasn’t there a brave Israeli citizen called Mordechai Vanunu, who, in opposition to the nuclear weapons that his country was amassing in secret, spoke out to the world about this outrageous threat to international world order and was subsequently kidnapped from Italy by intelligence agents, tried in Israel for “treason” – in secret, of course – and spent 18 years in prison? Now I grant you that’s 15 years shorter than poor old Dr Afridi, but Vanunu still lives under grave restrictions to his liberty and has twice been imprisoned again for the heinous crime of chatting to foreign journalists.And has La Clinton threatened to suspend a single dollar of Israel’s annual $3bn in aid from the United States for the next 33 years in order to protest Israel’s treatment of Vanunu? Not to mention – not even to utter the words – Sabra and Chatila, Gaza, a 45-year occupation, illegal colonisation of West Bank land, etc, etc, or, indeed, for producing nuclear weapons. And we absolutely must not mention Jonathan Pollard, the former CIA and US Navy intelligence officer sentenced to life in prison in 1987 for spying for Israel. For if Pollard is not released, is Israel threatening to cut its aid to America? Hold on, that doesn’t quite compute, does it? But you get the point.

It’s about hypocrisy. Sure, Pakistan is a corrupt country. Sure, it is corrupt from the shoeshiner up to the pinnacles of power. But I suppose in the end, if you’re going to prostitute yourself to America – financially and militarily, as Pakistan has done for decades – that’s the price you pay. Which is why hypocrisy will win. For Dr Afridi, I predict, will be quietly given a substantial reduction in his sentence, will be released – or disappear – from his Pakistani prison and, in a few months/ years, when Zardari has scored enough points from Dr Afridi’s imprisonment, the good doctor will pop up in the US with a fine medical practice and the pleasure of knowing – of course – that La Clinton has re-endowed Pakistan with its missing $33m.

 

[mohsinkid]

33 years is extremely unjust!!!
.
.
.
.
it should have been 33 pieces

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

PAK didn't answer what OBL is doing in Military Garrison and who are people that hided them, Is the PAK trying to convey that , PAK state is responsible of hiding OBL? Why didn't those people got caught which help in hiding OBL? house didn't build on no mans land and that to beside military land?

only question is what is PAK trying to project that they will hide terrorist and they are on their side. OBL scene is one of them, in this instance US done unilaterally taken a action against PAK Army which infuriates them.

 

[TaimiKhan]

PAK didn't answer what OBL is doing in Military Garrison and who are people that hided them, Is the PAK trying to convey that , PAK state is responsible of hiding OBL? Why didn't those people got caught which help in hiding OBL? house didn't build on no mans land and that to beside military land?

only question is what is PAK trying to project that they will hide terrorist and they are on their side. OBL scene is one of them, in this instance US done unilaterally taken a action against PAK Army which infuriates them.

Misconception, that he was hiding in a military garrison. He was living outside the boundary of the military garrison. This was a civilian area and no military presence in a few KMs of the military installations.

Had we been on the side of AQ, we would not have helped in getting caught many of the most important and operational leaders of AQ and handed them over to US. OBL was nothing, he was not running the show, he was just a figure who was cut from his people as told by the US itself. Thus Pakistan helped the US in real way by getting them the people who mattered.

 

[Jango]

PAK didn't answer what OBL is doing in Military Garrison and who are people that hided them, Is the PAK trying to convey that , PAK state is responsible of hiding OBL? Why didn't those people got caught which help in hiding OBL? house didn't build on no mans land and that to beside military land?

only question is what is PAK trying to project that they will hide terrorist and they are on their side. OBL scene is one of them, in this instance US done unilaterally taken a action against PAK Army which infuriates them.

It was not a military garrison. It wasn't even a Cantt area. PMA is not a military garrison, it is a school/college. There is no fighting infantry and all that stuff in Abbotabad in numbers, to call it a Garrison.

 

[SpArK]

Insecurities Over Sovereignty: Why Pakistan Sentenced Shakil Afridi

Aziz Nayani

While American politicians may be furious at Pakistan for its sentencing of Shakil Afridi, the decision by Pakistan's government to move forward with Afridi's conviction reveals a larger insecurity within the Pakistani psyche. Afridi, the doctor who assisted the CIA in its attempt to collect DNA samples to confirm the presence of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, was found guilty of acting against the state of Pakistan, and has been sentenced to 33 years in prison for his collaboration with the United States.

On the surface, it makes little sense for Pakistan to convict the man who assisted in operations aimed at capturing bin Laden. Bin Laden, after all, was responsible for a series of attacks within Pakistan, and his Al-Qaeda outfit has been a significant contributor to instability and violence that has plagued the country for well over a decade. Regular terrorist attacks and suicide bombings within Pakistan's largest urban centers can be attributed to the presence of groups backed by Bin Laden and the extremist ideology his group propagates.

Further, Pakistan's decision on Afridi strengthens accusations from many in America and around the world that Pakistan is not a sincere ally of the US, but instead has acted as a sanctuary for terrorists that the U.S. and NATO forces have spent over a decade combating. A partnership with Pakistan cannot be relied upon, and Islamabad's interest lie not with NATO, but with terrorist organizations.

This becomes an increasingly difficult notion to argue against, particularly when one considers the fact that bin Laden, the man Pakistan has supposedly been working with the United States to capture, was found living comfortably in Pakistan. After such an intelligence blunder, assuming that it was a blunder, it makes little sense for the Pakistanis to prosecute anyone who assisted in achieving the stated objectives of Pakistan and the country it publically claims to be its ally -- the United States.

But as recent imbroglios surrounding Pakistan and its foreign policy have taught us, Islamabad has a propensity to disregard any attempt to strike a balance between what is popular with its own citizens, and what is needed from a diplomatic perspective.


The U.S. raid on Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad last May, unbeknownst to Pakistani intelligence or military, ignited a flurry of emotion amongst Pakistanis, who felt that such a raid was an attack on the state's sovereignty. Many claims are justified, as it is rare for such operations to be executed within the borders of military allies, but concerns from Washington surrounding the secrecy of such a mission were valid as well. Regardless, the raids prompted an increased anti-American backlash, which had already begun to stir following the Raymond Davis affair a few weeks earlier.

The conversation within Pakistan following the raid centered upon the country's sovereignty, and the necessity of other countries, mainly the U.S., to respect and recognize that sovereignty. Such a dialogue reopened a self-conscious examination of Pakistan as a state, and insecurities that have been associated with the country since its inception.

Since the country was created in 1947, it has continued in a constant paranoia over the ambitions of the nation it separated from -- India. The two countries have fought multiple wars since, frequently skirmished over the disputed territories in Kashmir, and have built some of the largest military and nuclear capabilities in the world. Pakistan, for one, has neglected social, economic, and welfare programs for years in an effort to beef up its military capacity, as an inordinate amount of the state budget is allocated to the armed forces.

Pakistan lives in constant fear of an attack by India. Its military reigns supreme in the country because of precisely this anxiety. More recently, Pakistan and India have taken divergent economic and diplomatic paths, as India's economy has taken off, and its reputation amongst other countries has improved to the extent that its place as permanent member of the UN Security Council has been touted. Pakistan, clearly, is not keeping up. Such divergent paths, coupled with a history of war and distrust, have always contributed to Pakistan's fear that India has an eye on reclaiming and annexing parts that Pakistan claims control over.


Through their existential clashes with India, Pakistanis have always had trouble reconciling their own sovereignty -- they have always had to sleep with one eye open, regardless of the merit of such fears. Recent clashes with the U.S. have only exacerbated such fears over sovereignty. The backlash that ensued following the Abbottabad raids, including the sentencing of Afridi, are nonsensical reactions that seek to assuage deeply rooted insecurities. Unfortunately for Pakistan, mitigating such insecurities is further damaging its image and relationship with the world.


Aziz Nayani: Insecurities Over Sovereignty: Why Pakistan Sentenced Shakil Afridi

 

[gubbi]

New Details on Conviction of Pakistani Doctor

Tribal court documents show that the Pakistani doctor who helped the Central Intelligence Agency track down Osama bin Laden and who was sentenced to 33 years imprisonment, had not been charged with treason, as had been widely reported.

The doctor, Shakil Afridi, was instead convicted under Pakistan's opaque tribal justice system of colluding with a local Islamist warlord, to whom he was accused of donating over $20,000.

Like I had asked earlier, what Pakistani treason laws did the Doc violate. Apparently, NONE!! All those baying that the Doc was pulled up for treason stand corrected.

Of all the crimes one could be accused of in the given context, the doctor was accused of colluding with Islamic Terrorists!! Oh, the IRONY!!!!

Happens only in Pakistan!


Pakistani doctor who helped U.S. track bin Laden convicted for militancy, not helping CIA, official says

 

[gubbi]

I would like to point out that Pakistani commentators, such as myself, have been making the following argument every since Afridi was first arrested:

Any agreement of intelligence-sharing is between two states and no individual can undertake that task on his own, not even ISI officials. The CIA breached this agreement by concealing information from the ISI and tasking a Pakistani government official for a job which they knew was illegal. They did not have any solid reason to hide information from the ISI in case of Osama because there is no instance of shared information being leaked and the target was forewarned.

Since when do the spooks play by the book? And regards that intelligence sharing, isnt it on a need to know basis only? All parties involved play the game. So your complaints hold no water.
Havent there been instances when intelligence about particular individuals was shared, somehow it was 'leaked'. So instead of crying about this particular intelligence not being shared, it would be prudent to ask why it was not shared.

If that were the case, several senior al Qaeda leaders wouldn’t have been arrested in Pakistan with the help of the ISI. Of course, this is not to say that Dr Afridi doesn’t deserve a fair trial and punishment proportionate to his crime.

Small fry vs the big slippery fish. Again, what crime did Dr. Afridi commit?

However, the US administration is not justified in seeking his release, because they would never like any US citizen to work for a foreign intelligence agency either.

And yet, you have very famous cases of even FBI/CIA personnel working for the Communists during the height of the cold war! So, basically you want to play the dirty game with the big boys, but complain about their rules?

 

[RayKalm]

Pakistan had said that the doctor's case was not linked to Bin Laden, rather it was linked to his ties with militants, as you guys discussed in another thread (thread linked below).



But all of a sudden, there's this news piece (look at the bold), RIGHT AFTER Pakistan had said that his jail sentence was not linked to Bin Laden.

Pakistani Taliban vows to kill bin Laden doctor - CNN.com

Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- The Pakistani Taliban vowed on Thursday to kill Shakeel Afridi, the jailed Pakistani doctor accused of helping the CIA in the search for Osama bin Laden, a spokesman for the militant group told CNN.

"We will cut him into pieces when we find him," Pakistani Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told CNN by phone. "He spied for the U.S. to hunt down our hero Osama bin Laden."

Pakistani officials say Afridi is being held in a prison in the city of Peshawar in northwest Pakistan.

And now even further, the Daily Star is reporting the following.

Pakistan militant group denies link to doctor

THE DAILY STAR :: News :: International :: Pakistan militant group denies link to doctor

PESHAWAR, Pakistan: A Pakistani militant group has denied any links with the doctor who helped the U.S. track down Osama bin Laden, threatening Thursday to kill him for working with the Americans.

The statement by Lashkar-e-Islam was the latest twist in the case of Shakil Afridi, whose plight has angered Washington and opened up another crack in relations with Islamabad.

Afridi ran a vaccination campaign on behalf of the CIA as a way of collecting blood samples from bin Laden’s family in their house in northwest Pakistan.



Read more: THE DAILY STAR :: News :: International :: Pakistan militant group denies link to doctor
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: THE DAILY STAR :: Breaking News, Lebanon News, Middle East News & World News)

 

[SamranAli]

whatever but he got what he did. Let him Enjoy in jail.