Rohrabacher Attempts to Justify His Meddling With Pakistan

Over the weekend, the Washington Post gave California Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher space so that he could attempt to explain to us why he is disrupting diplomatic efforts to repair US-Pakistan relations by continuing his quest for an independent Balochistan. Rohrabacher does manage a reference in the opening paragraph to the atrocities befalling the Baloch at the hands of Pakistani authorities, but his  column is more of a laundry list of what is wrong with Pakistan rather than why Balochistan should be independent.

Remarkably, Rohrabacher states “With this resolution, I do not seek to single out Pakistan”, but goes on to list a litany of complaints against Pakistan, most of which have nothing to do with the Baloch. Rohrabacher hits Pakistan for being an accomplice in the 9/11 attacks, for the fate of Shakeel Afridi and for harboring the Taliban. Coming from the man who coined the term “Freedom Fighters” to describe the Mujahedin while on Reagan’s staff and even going so far as to fight alongside bin Laden in Afghanistan against the Soviets, this is a remarkable level of hypocrisy. He also happens to mention that the Chinese have designs on the port of Gwadar. The clincher that Rohrabacher is simply punishing Pakistan comes in his penultimate paragraph:

It is time Washington stopped aiding Pakistan and developed a closer friendship with India and, perhaps, Baluchistan.

Yup, he’s not singling out Pakistan, he just thinks we need to stop supporting them and support their biggest enemy and those fighting from within.

Missing from Rohrabacher’s piece is any mention of what the Baloch are doing in their quest for independence. One would think that having been burned already by teaming with bin Laden out of hatred for the Soviets, Rohrabacher would look into the actions by those he is now supporting against Pakistan. Others appear to be aware that such examination will come soon, and we see a recent piece in Dawn where the independence movement attempts to justify some of its worst violence:

Brahamdagh [Bugti], whom the authorities in Pakistan have variously accused of financing, running and heading terrorist activities in Balochistan, rejected the perception that Baloch sardars were against development in their areas. He said the Baloch were, however, opposed to road-building projects meant for further exploitation of the province’s natural resources.

When asked about the murder of Punjabi settlers in Balochistan, Brahamdagh blamed the army. “When the army kills people, the family members [of those killed) have no choice but to react and take revenge,” he said.

The reason roads are being destroyed is that they are being used exploit natural resources and Punjabi settlers are being murdered because the Baloch have to kill someone in return for the Pakistani army killing their family members. What could possibly go wrong with supporting groups with these views?

 

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

11 Responses to Rohrabacher Attempts to Justify His Meddling With Pakistan

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @iPadMTG Yes, but at times the family does weigh in both on donation and when organs will be harvested. @LDoren
27sreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren Yes. But you're the one limiting her choice to make medical decisions, not me.
2mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren Mind you, in many cases, such a choice might make it impossible to donate the organs.
5mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren So if a fetus ends up killing the woman in that situation is it cool for her to donate her organs?
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren A medical decision made for medical reasons? Is "death" voluntary in your list of voluntary things that are mere "choices"?
10mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren So, yes, you are applying a non-medical term to a medical procedure, one which very often involves doctor's recommendations?
14mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren You know in medicine "elective" is reserved to operations that aren't necessary for health? Like knee replacement. This like that?
17mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren I'm hoping you can think about where your notion of the kinds of "choices" being made for late term abortions come from.
21mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren So you don't know? Know anyone who has had to get one? (Emphasis on "had")
24mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren "By choice." what is your understanding of why most late terms happen?
31mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren So mom's have MORE guardian authority over babies than they do over fetuses?
35mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @LDoren But if same mom's kid dies (or was always nonviable, another common late term issue), then it's okay for her to choose to donate?
37mreplyretweetfavorite
April 2012
S M T W T F S
« Mar   May »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930