McCain’s ‘failed state’ reference, challenged by ex-US Ambassador to Pakistan
The US Presidential debates are still over a month away, but the campaign frenzy is nearing its climax and mud slinging has slowly started to peak. The numerous comments made during last weeks Presidential debates are still being carefully analyzed with a magnifying glass and their subsequent meanings deciphered endlessly. As we may recall Pakistan was a hot topic in the discussion last Friday, due to its strategic importance on the war on terror, today an email report has surfaced where an ex-US Ambassador to Pakistan challenged McCain’s reference to Pakistan being a failed state in 1999 [I'm glad somebody stood up for us!! ]
During the debate if we may recall, McCain referred to Pakistan as a failed state in 1999 when President Musharraf came into power via a military coop, McCain in turn accused Obama to have not understood the problem in Pakistan and blamed him for an unrealistic plan of action. But in an interesting move William Milan the US Ambassador to Pakistan at the time of the coup, has categorically come forth to say that it’s McCain who doesn’t understand.
Matthew Yglesias asked Ambassador Milam about this issue and his response was
There are a number of interesting books, including a forthcoming one by me, that cover the 1999 coup by the Musharraf-led army. You might want to look at those already published by Steve Cohen, Hasan Abbas, Hussain Haqqani (long before he became the present Pakistani Ambassador), and especially Ian Talbot’s updated history of Pakistan.
I think that all of them would agree that, while there were a lot of things wrong in Pakistan during the years leading up to the 1999 military takeover, Pakistan was not a failed state as we normally define such states. I am on record as stating publicly that, having come to Pakistan from Liberia a year before the takeover, I had a pretty good idea of what failed states look like, and it was not one.
I feel this is a definite breath of fresh air, to see someone standing up for us and issuing a very strong statement for Pakistan, looking back I might partially agree with Ambassador Milam that in 1999 there was definitely a financial crisis but Pakistan was no where near to being labeled as a Failed State, though I must concede that there was definitely a buzzword around town talking about the failed state scenario but I am sure we were not at the brink of disaster back then, but if the ex-US Ambassador to Pakistan says that Pakistan was NOT a failed state, I would have to take his word for it and surely not be dependent on GHQ issuing a clarification of such sort back then
Comment Meta: Leave a comment | Subscribe to the Comment Feed | Upload your Comment Image
Some Related Posts:
Comments
Riaz Haq It’s sad to see that the definition of “failed state” has become a political issue in the US presidential campaign. Ambassador Milam, a Clinton-appointed Democrat, is quibbling with a Republican candidate on this definition to make McCain look bad. Compared with Liberia, Pakistan was not a failed state in 1999. But if you consider the fact that Pakistan was essentially bankrupt with only a couple of weeks worth of foreign exchange left, you’d understand what dire straits Pakistan was in. In 1999 Pakistan’s total debt as percentage of GDP was the highest in South Asia – 99.3 percent of its GDP and 629 percent of its revenue receipts, compared to Sri Lanka (91.1% & 528.3% respectively in 1998) and India (47.2% & 384.9% respectively in 1998). Internal Debt of Pakistan in 1999 was 45.6 per cent of GDP and 289.1 per cent of its revenue receipts, as compared to Sri Lanka (45.7% & 264.8% respectively in 1998) and India (44.0% & 358.4% respectively in 1998).
Do you consider an insolvent state as failed state? I do think an insolvent state is a failed state. If it was a corporation, it would have almost certainly folded with its remaining assets given to its creditors. Its management would end up in debtors prison and its employees would be fired.
Musharraf’s coup was widely hailed by Pakistanis. People understood that if Musharraf hadn’t taken over in 1999, the country would have suffered irreparable harm. Yet the people of Pakistan, who have a short memory, overwhelmingly voted to recycle the failed old leadership of the Nawaz League and the PPP in 2008 elections. No wonder, Pakistan is returning to the bad old days. Please read my post on this subject: http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/09/will-economic-mess-get-worse-under.html
guYasir @Riaz sb
I do agree pak is returning to its old days of 1999, our gullible public had no other choice but to participated on 18th Feb illusionary democratic election by voting btw 2 top parties.
These 2 parties rivalry is started in punjab province which won’t be good for pak public and its fragile economy.
I’m 29 yet I haven’t voted in any election bcuz I feel shame to take part in it neither I’ve got any involvement with any political party and politician. I feel shame to contact ‘em.
They are looters and loosers who are chosen by USA to spread her malevolent agenda.
J. Edgar Hoover famously said: “The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.”
yaseen ch gu yasir people like you are the blacksheeps who never vote . You are like simbiosis ,you suck food from Pakistan but don’t need it necessary to give something back. Americans are the dirt of this planet and i think from your site you are too dirt and burden of our planet. You should think thousand times before such false remarks about our politicians . They are not bush’s and mccains atleast. Atleast they didnt kill millions innocent people. Shame on you and tour bush”s and mccains and nixons.
Shah Riaz agree with your point.
I am really concerned though for Pakistan being high in Presidential Election in USA.
Who ever wins need to divert the attention of people from collapse of finanacial market.
The president can say ,We cannot afford war,we want peace.
Let us help these nations,to rebuild themselves and provide more oppertunities and education to facilitate democracy
Or
they can decide they need war to protect and defend American citizens from extremists.
guYasir Yaseen beta we eat on our own behalf we do pay taxes we don’t avoid taxes like choudharies one of the biggest culprits in pakistan you are poodles of perverse politicians to gain nepotism since 19990 what democratic politicians have given us no clean water no clean roads, no electricity.?
You are blackdog of choudharies and its create revulsion in my mind to think and talk to u who has got paindu mind we shame on choudharies.
Coming back to my original name/nick from LAVA to guYasir
Since 1999 US think-tanks/Magazines declare after every few years that Pakistan is under top-10 failed states.Bangladesh is far better dan Pak 19th position Pak 9th position in 2006 report now current position is 12th I guess. They declare us failed becuz our gov doesn’t have practical control on its territory like FATA. I disagree, dis shouldn’t be the measurement of failed-state status, rather it should be measure from political corruption like how far one’s country rulers are corrupted in which Pak can come in top-3 maybe #1
Because our leaders are kleptocratics instead of democratic.
Not democracy rather kleptocracy is a best revenge and in my view Pak is failed-state bcuz of Kleptocracy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4964934.stm