DRIVEN largely by the fear that Pakistan is on the verge of bankruptcy and could default on its international loans—thus plunging the country into a state of political and social turmoil—the Clinton administration is asking Congress to waive economic sanctions against both India and Pakistan.
On July 15 the Senate approved a measure that would give Clinton authority to waive most economic sanctions on India and Pakistan for up to a year. But, to be effective, the proposal will first have to pass through a series of approvals by Congress.
Administration officials and leading lawmakers such as Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan have expressed apprehensions that, if compelled, Pakistan might be tempted to sell its nuclear weapons technology to third countries—a move that would be contrary to US national security interests.
Assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs Karl F. Inderfurth, appearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs last week, warned, "We are concerned that with dwindling foreign exchange reserves, Pakistan could begin defaulting on its international obligations." He said that such economic consequences "can lead to political instability".
The panel's chairman, Republican Sam Brownback, said he supported economic waivers for India and Pakistan, but believed "we need to carefully review any defence-related waivers". Earlier, he was the co-sponsor of legislation to exempt farm credit programmes which were restored in the belief that sanctions were backfiring on American wheat farmers rather than punishing the new N-powers. Pakistan was the number three customer for US wheat but relied heavily on export credit guarantees to make the purchases. US farm lobbyists argued Pakistan would easily find another supplier, leaving their farmers in the lurch.
Indeed, an administration official told 바카라: "We are concerned about Pakistan. A crisis meeting of deputies is being called this week—chaired by the National Security Council—to decide what steps should be taken to rescue Pakistan. They may be just days away from defaulting. We do not want Pakistan to go into financial collapse because it would be destabilising to the region and we will do what we can to prevent that from happening."
Referring to the farm credit programmes exempted from sanctions, Sumit Ganguly, professor of political science at Hunter College, said the US had taken "the first sensible step by releasing the wheat". "The implications of a financial collapse are indeed horrifying," he added. "It would make it very hard for Pakistan to get loans in the future. The social consequences would be even more distressing with the mix of a possible government collapse, scarcity of commodities, private armies, food riots."
A senior administration official was dismissive of the report that Pakistan might sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) while de-linking it from India's signing of it. "If this relates to something that Gohar Ayub Khan said, we tend to take it less seriously," declared the official.
A Congressional source said that Pakistan's position on the CTBT has always been "in part true and in part disingenuous as they hide behind India's refusal. If what you say is true, it would signal a new kind of flexibility besides putting India on the spot. If they are doing it to prevent economic bankruptcy, then that is a powerful motivator. But this may just be the opinion of a single individual."
바카라 웹사이트An American journalist, who met with Pakistan Embassy officials last week, said Pakistan was seriously considering signing the CTBT because of economic considerations. Pakistani diplomats told him that conditions were indeed desperate and there was no alternative to signing the treaty if they wanted sanctions lifted.
