Benazir Bhutto with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Chelsea Clinton after a dinner reception in Pakistan in 1995. (Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The above photo is from an article that appeared recently in The New York Times (click here). The nation of the USA, all to easily forgets the improvement in relations that took place while "The Clintons" were in The Executive Branch. Well, I didn't forget and Hillary needs to remind the nation of her accomplishments as First Lady as well as that as Senator. It was difficult to find references (which goes to show how the media believes women are insignificant regardless of what they say) regarding the influence of The First Lady with Pakistan to cite here, but, there are some and I have my own opinion as well.
I thought this was endearingly interesting. Two women, both leaders, seeking to support each other in the only way they could, by interview of common experience:
Nurturer-in-Chief (click here)
Advice for Hillary Clinton from the former prime minister of Pakistan.
By Jennifer Senior
Published Sep 24, 2007
...Are there criticisms of Hillary you sometimes hear that you know are code for something else?
One thing people often say to me is that Bill Clinton is a very warm leader and that Hillary is much colder. But I think that women leaders tend to be a little bit withdrawn, to protect themselves from unkind comments. When a male leader is warm, it’s not misinterpreted. Whereas if a female leader is warm, it can have certain connotations. So a female leader has to be more restrained, in a sense....
First off, any interview with Michael Moore, no matter the subject will be controversial. It just will be, but, it was darn decent of him to take on this challenge and rise to the occassion to bring about an 'insider's view' to the Democratic candidates. In defense of Hillary, it's probably just one more interview she feels she shouldn't have to under take because she has been saturated with appearences and debates and interviews already and who wants to be interviewed by The King of Truth anyway?This isn't just about Pakistan, but, it's an interesting policy issue to realize was 'opened' by The Clintons for a change in policy. The change in USA policy took place shortly after this visit in 1995. This foreign policy change by the way, is currently 'enjoyed' by George Walker Bush. The return to aid for Pakistan began while there was strong leadership that favored Democratic government processes in Pakistan, namely the influence of Benzir Bhutto as Prime Minister. Previous to the change of US Federal Policy under Clinton of Pakistan, it was cut off from aid under George H. W. Bush, setting up much of the turbulence that still exists today, which Musharraf enjoys.
Back in the day, 1990, it was 'suspected' Pakistan had nuclear capacity in it's arsenal so aid was denied them under George H. W. Bush based on the Pressler Amendment. The amendment was never challenged until The Clintons took the initiative to make in roads to Pakistan and find venues of aid that would support leadership benevolent to the USA in combatting terrorism and finding a foothold near Afghanistan to stop Osama bin Laden. That resulted in a threat, al Qaeda could not tolerate, hence the corrupt advance of Musharraf in a coup of the military in 1999.
The point is The Clintons knew full well what needed to be done to secure an initative against al Qaeda, but, it was mostly abandoned by Bush/Cheney when they were corruptly lead into office in 2000 through maneuvers by those in Florida sympathetic to Jeb, then governor.
It was during the 911 Commission hearings that we heard from those inside the White House immediately after September 11th, revealing the disasterous focus of Bush/Cheney in indicting Iraq rather than following the trail already established by The Clinton White House.
SUMMARY (click here)
U.S. aid and arms sales to Pakistan generally had been prohibited since October 1990 because the President could not make a required annual certification to Congress under Section 620E(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act, the so-called "Pressler Amendment," that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device. However, on February 12, 1996, the President signed into law the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for FY1996, which includes provisions that significantly relax previous restrictions on U.S. aid to Pakistan.
Section 559 of P.L. 104-107, introduced by Senator Hank Brown, provides a "clarification" of restrictions on aid contained in Section 620E(e) of the FAA. The revised Section 620E narrows the scope of the aid cutoff to military assistance and transfers. It expressly allows cooperation for such purposes such as countering terrorism and narcotics trafficking, promoting airport safety and security, and international peacekeeping. It also specifically allows military-to-military contact, including international military education and training (IMET).
The Brown Amendment specifically bars the delivery of 28 F-16 aircraft ordered and partially paid for by Pakistan, but allows the one-time release of $368 million worth of other military equipment ordered by Pakistan prior to October 1, 1990. New equipment transfers still would be prohibited under current circumstances. The Senate adopted the amendment on September 21, 1995, by a margin of 55-45, following an extensive debate....
And just in case you don't believe Musharraf is a coup leader with ties to Septemer 11th while completely disregarding USA policy, let me reassure you, it was after Musharraf's rise to complete control of Pakistan that the attacks on the USA occurred;
PAKISTAN MILITARY COMPLETES SEIZURE OF ALL AUTHORITY (click here)
By CELIA W. DUGGER WITH RAJA ZULFIKAR
Published: October 15, 1999
The new military ruler of Pakistan imposed martial law shortly after midnight today, suspending the Constitution, dismissing the Parliament and dashing hopes of a quick return to civilian rule in the world's newest nuclear power.
Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the army chief who led a brutally efficient but bloodless coup on Tuesday night, also proclaimed himself chief executive of Pakistan.
His soldiers sealed off the Parliament and its legislative offices here in the capital, and they continued to hold Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and some of his closest aides under house arrest.
As dawn broke today, the Parliament, the Supreme Court and the Prime Minister's headquarters were deserted, without a soldier in sight. ...
...Ms. Bhutto, who is living in London, said on Thursday in an interview with The Financial Times that she was trying to contact the military leaders in the hope of smoothing the way for a return to Pakistan.
Though the United States had cautioned against a coup, it has worked closely with military rulers in Pakistan before. The last military dictator of Pakistan, General Mohammad Zia ul-Haq, received more than $3 billion in military aid from the United States and served as a close confidant of the Central Intelligence Agency and a cold-war ally of Washington's in the 1980's.
He died in a still-unexplained air crash in 1988, ending an 11-year reign that began when he arrested and hanged his predecessor, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Ms. Bhutto's father....
Pakistan Treason Judge Quits (click here)
Published: January 13, 2000
The judge in the treason and hijacking case against the ousted prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, quit the proceedings, saying government agents were menacing his courtroom. A14
Wednesday, 8 March, 2000, 12:23 GMT
Analysis: Clinton's Pakistan compromise (click here)
Democratic rule
President Clinton will use his time in Pakistan to lobby General Musharraf over three key issues.
No timetable yet for restoring democracy
First and foremost, he wants the general to provide a timetable for Pakistan's return to democracy.
From the outset, Washington has condemned the takeover, even if it has been reluctant to implement sanctions against General Musharraf's regime.
The White House has made clear that President Clinton is making his visit because he's a friend of the Pakistani nation, not because he approves of the military government.
Terrorism
Secondly, he wants Pakistan to take action against what he says are terrorist groups operating from bases in Pakistan. Prominent among these is the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen group, which is widely believed to have been responsible for the recent hijacking of an Indian Airlines aircraft in Afghanistan.
Osmama bin Laden: Clinton will want Pakistan to use its influence
The president will also no doubt be eager to persuade Pakistan to use its influence over Afghanistan to bring the Saudi dissident, Osama Bin Laden, to justice. He is wanted in the United States on terrorist charges relating to the bombings of American embassies in Africa in 1998.
Nuclear worries
Thirdly, the president will continue his campaign to persuade Pakistan to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). The president may find himself in a difficult position here, because the United States Senate has also refused to sign it.
...after all that... if there is a doubt how far afield the USA is in regard to foreign policy then perhaps we need to look domestically at the issues that beset us which Hillary Clinton has strong view points and experience.
She needs to set the electorate of the USA straight as to what real compassion is, real dedication and real policy is:
Hillary Clinton Gives Taxpayers a Break (click here)
Published: February 4, 1993
To the Editor:
Re "Hillary Clinton to Head Panel on Health Care" (front page, Jan. 26): I have yet to read a discussion of the extraordinary generosity of Hillary Rodham Clinton. How common is it for a well-known lawyer, used to a six-figure income, to assume a major policy role in the White House without a salary? Ms. Clinton is taking this on in addition to the considerable ceremonial functions of First Lady.
It is clearly the only way in which she can have any role in the White House; accepting a salary would be political suicide. Nonetheless, taxpayers have gotten a break. If she weren't available, we'd pay someone to do this job.
ELLEN J. REIFLER Swampscott, Mass., Jan. 27, 1993
President and Allies Hail 'Milestone' (click here)
Mr. Gingrich, the once-triumphant leader of the self-proclaimed Republican revolution who recently had to face down a Republican rebellion against him, thanked not just the President but the First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Vice President and Tipper Gore for ''their willingness this year coming off their victory to reach out a hand and say, 'Let's work together.'
Mr. Gingrich called the pair of bills being signed proof ''that the American constitutional system works, that slowly over time we listened to the will of the American people, that we reached beyond parties.''...
....If the economy continues to perform as expected, the bills will eliminate the Federal deficit by 2002, and the Federal Government will have its first balanced budget since 1969.
The measures put in place more than $95 billion in net tax cuts over five years, including new tax credits for families with children, tax credits for higher education and reductions in the taxes on capital gains and estates.
More than $121 billion in savings are achieved over five years, mostly through limiting Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals. The measures also require that an additional $55 billion in savings be made through annual spending bills.
The bills include new spending as well, creating a $24 billion program to provide health care coverage for up to five million uninsured children. They would restore disability benefits for legal immigrants and some money for welfare programs that were eliminated last year in the new welfare law.
In some ways, the balanced budget agreement was as much a political milestone as a fiscal one, eliminating deficit reduction as the overarching issue preoccupying Washington and muting the sharp differences between the two parties that have existed on fiscal issues. It allows the great majority of Democrats who voted for it to say that they, too, support tax cuts, and gives Republicans the ability to say that they are in favor of education and health programs....
The difference between now and then, as today's Republicans remind us, is 'the war.' And which war is that exactly, the war that victimizes Americans by depriving them of a sovereign country, intact health insurance systems that actually insure health rather than profit from it, the deprivation of an educational system that produces world class leaders of all fields including science and math 'setting standards' other countries have to compete against rather than diminished SATs and low achievers or it is the war that costs exorbitant amounts of USA Treasury without actually protecting this country? That war? The illegal war? The war that would never have been fought had Al Gore found himself in the White House where he belongs? That war?
Hillary needs to set a lot of records straight, including the vast influence she carried in her diplomatic efforts as First Lady. She was not a typical First Lady.
The tone of the country is so different and adverse today, which started with the power brokering of Gingrich, followed by DeLay. Adversarial rather than 'citizenship.' The people of the USA have forgotten what it is to have peace and enjoy it. They have forgotten how to be civilized rather than hated or haters.
Hillary was a diplomat not only of the world, but of a domestic agenda that saw the USA to impressive high achievement rather than failing and devastating lows. In setting the record straight, I don't know of a better 'Truth Teller' than Michael Moore !
