He noted that Pakistan currently had a relatively better track record in bilateral relations with the United States.
DG Rangers Sindh, Major General Muhammad Saeed. PHOTO: ARCHIVE PHOTO
ISLAMABAD:
Former Chief of the General Staff (CGS), Lieutenant General (retd) Saeed, has said that there is an “intense debate in Pakistan” over a recent statement by US Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard, noting that public reaction on social media suggests the view that “Pakistan is being presented as the next target, after Iran, with denuclearization being the ultimate goal.”
In a detailed statement on
He said an important point to note here was that Gabbard “did not single out Pakistan” and instead included it alongside Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Saeed said this was not the first time US officials had viewed Pakistan’s nuclear and missile program with concern, adding that since the Pressler Amendment in 1985, American presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of state, CIA directors and members of Congress had made “much more dangerous, offensive and specific accusations.”
In the current discourse there is “nothing new to be alarmed about,” he stressed.
The former CGS further claimed that private companies having even “mundane business relations” with Pakistan’s strategic organizations had been repeatedly subjected to sanctions, adding that such measures had been used aggressively over the last five decades.
He said the list of affected companies was “too long”, adding that alongside these developments, “relentless, sophisticated and massively funded propaganda campaigns” had helped shape two dominant narratives in Pakistan.
According to him, the first narrative was that “nothing happens in this country without Uncle Sam’s approval,” while the second was that political and military leaders had been “incriminated as being involved in the nuclear program.”
He rejected these notions and said that if there had been any truth in them, Pakistan could not have developed its current nuclear and missile capabilities. All leaders of the past five decades, he said, had treated the strategic program as a matter of survival and had handled US-led Western pressure “resolutely and intelligently.” “We should be proud of all of them.”
Referring to the broader geopolitical situation, he warned against comparing Pakistan to the fate of nuclear programs in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Iran, stating that those countries were “barely at the starting point”, while Pakistan was an “established and recognized nuclear power”.
He said no established nuclear power with various delivery systems has ever been denuclearized, adding that “no power on earth can do so against Pakistan.” He highlighted the need to trust the country’s strategic community and national determination.
Going back to Gabbard’s comments, he said that compared to previous statements, “what she said is insignificant, therefore we can conveniently ignore it.” He added that there was no need to respond publicly to every statement on such complex geostrategic issues, adding that if a response was needed, it should first be considered alongside the reactions of Russia, China and North Korea.
He noted that Pakistan currently had a relatively better track record in bilateral relations with the United States, although he described recent developments as potentially transitory and said American leadership remained “unpredictable and unreliable.”
Lieutenant General (retd) Saeed questioned the urgency of any reaction, stating: “what is the emergency?” He added that those responsible for safeguarding Pakistan’s strategic program will examine the statement in detail and determine whether a response is necessary, concluding that “we must trust them.”
