Congressional Statements

Pallone says disturbing pattern of Pakistani actions demands serious scrutiny by the Administration and Congress

Press Release
November 19, 1999

Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., D-NJ, strongly criticized the failure of the House Republican Leadership to bring to a vote a Resolution condemning the recent military coup in Pakistan. He called for a much stronger U.S. response to what he described as a disturbing pattern of recent Pakistani actions. The text of his statement, made on the floor of the House of Representatives on Thursday, November 18, is as follows:

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday in this House, we approved, on a bipartisan basis, a Resolution congratulating the people of India and their government for the successful Parliamentary elections recently conducted by that thriving democracy. I was pleased to support that Resolution, and to speak in favor of it.

Unfortunately, action on another Resolution that has been approved by the International Relations Committee and is ready for consideration on this Floor has been delayed. That other Resolution would express the strong opposition of Congress to the recent military coup in Pakistan that overthrew the civilian government. While individual Members of Congress, including me, have spoken out against the Pakistani coup, it is important for the House of Representatives to go on record collectively stating that we do not tolerate the overthrow of an elected government. I'm very disappointed in the Republican leadership for the continued delay in bringing up this Resolution. Since we have now adjourned, it's likely that this Resolution is dead for the year.

Last month's coup was one in a series of disturbing actions in Pakistan that deserve very close scrutiny - and clear condemnation - by the United States government, the Congress as well as the Administration. One of the most shocking of these was last week's rocket attacks against American and United Nations targets in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. The rockets were aimed at buildings in the heart of the capital, including the U.S. Embassy, a library and cultural center known as the American Center, and an office tower housing several U.N. agencies. Thank God no one was killed, although one person was injured, a Pakistani guard at the American Center. The attacks came two days before UN sanctions were scheduled to go into effect against the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan unless that country turns over Osama bin-Laden, the international terrorist who has masterminded attacks against American and Western targets in various countries. There has been solid evidence in the past linking bin-Laden's operations with Pakistan, so this connection is extremely plausible.

As the New York Times reported last Saturday, November 13th, "The list of possible culprits is short. Apart from the Taliban itself, Pakistan is home to several well-armed paramilitary groups sympathetic to the Taliban and hostile to the United States, in addition to thousands of Pakistani militants who over the years have trained side by side with Taliban members in Islamic schools."

I should add, Mr. Speaker, that Pakistan has for years been identified with the violent separatist movement in India's state of Jammu and Kashmir, causing the deaths of thousands of civilians and the displacement of hundreds of thousands from their homes. Pakistan's role in sowing death and destruction in Kashmir was exposed to the world earlier this year when Pakistani military leaders - many of the same elements who carried out last month's coup d'etat - precipitated a major crisis by unleashing an attack against Indian positions in the area of Kargil, along the Line Of Control that separates Indian and Pakistani controlled areas of Kashmir. Pakistan's actions were condemned by the United States and the international community, and Pakistan was forced to essentially withdraw. But the attacks by Pakistani forces on Indian army positions continue, causing casualties on both sides and threatening the stability of the entire South Asia region.

You have to wonder, Mr. Speaker, why the U.S. continues to try to win the favor of the Pakistani regime, given the proven collaboration between Pakistan and the fundamentalist Taliban militia in Afghanistan, and with Osama bin-Laden. Bin-Laden and the Taliban represent the height of violent anti-Americanism, and yet here is the Pakistani regime tolerating - if not directly supporting - the operations of these movements in their country.

We've recently seen another example of the lack of respect for democracy and the rule of law on the part of the new Pakistani military regime with the initiative to indict the deposed Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, on trumped-up charges of treason and hijacking, charges which carry the death penalty. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not want to get carried away singing the praises of Mr. Sharif. He was deeply involved in the ill-fated military campaign in Kashmir earlier this year. But he was the recognized, legitimate leader of the nation. He had apparently attempted to dismiss the Army's Chief of Staff, General Pervez Musharraf. Instead, the General turned the tables and dismissed the Prime Minister, indicating who's really in charge in Pakistan. The turn of events indicates that the notion of democratic, civilian leadership and the rule of law are not well developed in Pakistan. Reports in the last day out of Pakistan indicate that Prime Minister Sharif, who has been in military custody since he was deposed in the October 12th coup, has been moved to the port city of Karachi in a military aircraft, in preparation for a court appearance.

Mr. Speaker, there are some who seem to welcome the seizure of military power by the military in Pakistan as a recipe for "stability." I believe this is misguided thinking. First, as the rocket attacks against American targets last week indicates, the military regime is no better at maintaining stability and security than the previous civilian government. Furthermore, this year's Pakistani attack on India in Kashmir demonstrates behavior that is highly destabilizing and could lead to a wider war that would devastate much of South Asia. It was the military brass now in charge of the country who precipitated that conflict, and who continue to promote the ongoing border incidents. Finally, the fact that Pakistan has been under military dictatorship for approximately half of its 52 years of independence inevitably led General Musharraf to conclude that it was his right to dismiss the Prime Minister, not the other way around. Until that type of thinking changes, Pakistan's prospects for stability and democracy are dim. While we may not be able to change Pakistani behavior, the United States should not be playing the role of enabler, out of cynical expediency or in the misguided belief that the military regime will bring "stability." This Body should go on record expressing our condemnation of this year's turn of events in Pakistan.