Why Donald Lu’s Pak testimony in the US Congressional hearing is significant

Tara Kartha 

Donald Lu was the ‘accused’ in the conspiracy theory launched by Imran Khan, which involved slinging out Khan, allegedly because he decided to visit Moscow

One of the most interesting and debated Congressional testimonies in recent years was surely that of State Department Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary of State in the State Department. That was not just on social media, but in the House itself. The chair commented on the number of Congressmen at the hearing, while there were clearly a large number of Pakistanis in the audience.

It’s not just that Donald Lu was the ‘accused’ in the conspiracy theory launched by Imran Khan,which involved slinging out Khan, allegedly because he decided to visit Moscow. It’s that the hearing occurs just after one of the most ‘selected’ elections even Pakistan has ever seen. It had some unusual features, to say the least.Advertisement

Prepping for the testimony

This was an important testimony for the present government in Islamabad and the Pakistani military, and they were preparing for it in their separate ways.

Days before, a Cabinet committee on energy cleared the construction of a section of pipeline to connect to the (already constructed) Iran pipeline, which had been in the works since 2013 but stalled due to US sanctions. According to Lu’s testimony , Pakistan did not ask for a waiver, and there is no indication at all that they have the money for it, but that move alarmed Congressmen anyway and led to a directive to ‘engage’ Pakistan on the issue.You May LikeDreaming of a perfect kitchen? HomeLane makes it a reality in just 45 daysHomeLaneGet Quote  by TaboolaSponsored Links

Second, days earlier, air strikes were conducted against Afghanistan border areas in reaction to an alleged attack against its own soldiers. Pakistani officials went on record to talk of attacks on ‘safe havens’ for terrorists in Afghanistan, which is as ironic as it can get, given that the US has identified at least 12 designated terrorist groups operating inside Pakistan.

But the strike became an add-on to the narrative of ‘Pakistan in danger’. Also active were a raft of Imran Khan supporters who booed and called out Donald Lu as a liar time and again, until they were removed from the House. In other words, this was domestic politics being played out on US soil.Advertisement

Lu’s testimony

Donald Lu’s testimony was a model of bureaucratic caution. He praised the Pakistani people fully but condemned attacks in the run-up to the elections, restrictions on the internet, and that a well-known watchdog had been denied access to half the constituencies.

In further pointed questions from the House, the official roundly denied any attempt to ‘influence’ the elections (read, the US did not threaten the Pakistani ambassador to remove Imran Khan or else as alleged), to cries of ‘liar liar’ from the audience (which were greeted online with huge pride).

Most shocking was Donald Lu’s statement that he had received death threats due to this allegation. In response to a question on how the State Department saw Pakistan-Afghan relations, the official simply said tersely, ‘with suspicion’.Advertisement

No flies on Donald Lu, but clearly the Department also wants Pakistan involved in shaping the Taliban’s policies. The core of his testimony was that while aid to Pakistan (which has plummeted) will continue, no rise in defence ties was envisaged, that certain security forces were not eligible for aid at all, and that private sector investment would need large-scale reforms and a functioning economy. In sum, no large-scale investment is envisaged. The state has no great opinion on Pakistan’s future.

Congressmen and their agendas

US lawmakers have become far smarter and more aware of the realities of Pakistan. Rep Philips (Minnesota), for instance, not only pointed out ‘fraud and interference’ in elections, the pushing out of millions of Afghans, and questioned Pakistan’s economic stability, but unwittingly fell into the trap by referencing the air strike and pointing out the common ‘interest’ in working with Pakistan, ‘particularly’ after the US exit from Afghanistan.Advertisement

In other words, the US would still need to rely on the ISI for intelligence purposes. On the complete opposite side was Congressman McCaul from Texas, who pointed out Pakistan’s ‘mitigating effect’ on the dangerous situation in Afghanistan as US forces left the country. That smacked of complete ignorance, obfuscation, or both.

Few can forget the ‘victory’ moment of former DG ISI Gen. Faiz Hameed sipping tea in a Kabul hotel as the Taliban took power. The Congressman had clearly been briefed well, observing that Pakistan was ‘ground zero’ for the Chinese Belt and Road initiative, implying that it was in US interest to engage with Pakistan.Advertisement

Most shocking of all was the intervention by Rep. Dean Philips, who asked Lu—completely out of context, as he himself admitted—about the State Department’s response regarding the allegations that India had planned to assassinate a US Sikh American (Gurpatwant Singh Pannun). Rep McCormick in turn chose to call out ‘India and Pakistan’ for transparency and democracy but had no compunctions in asking that noisy Pakistanis (Imran supporters) be removed.

Another Congressman predictably also raised the Iran-Pakistan pipeline, to which Lu seemed to rule out the pipeline ever being built, given not only the lack of international funding but also that the State Department had additionally conveyed its ‘reservations’ on the project. Clearly, the State has a handle on Pakistani policy pranks.

The crux of the questions was the forceful interjection by Rep Brad Sherman (who knows Pakistan), who wanted to know what the US intended to do to release Dr Afridi—the man who identified Bin Laden—out of Pakistan or even get US citizens out of Pakistan who are not allowed to leave, even as top generals were allowed to visit Washington. Lu had no answer.

The sum of it. The hearing showed the impact of an active and rising Pakistani diaspora —numbered at about 5,54,000 and the second fastest growing one—most of whom are US-born and want a credible democracy. That is as it should be, with a previous letter from 31 Congress members urging President Joe Biden not to recognise the new Pakistani government and push for an investigation.

As Lu pointed out, the US has no such policy of ‘recognition’. It can only choose to engage or not engage. Clearly, the tilt is towards the latter, especially with the US still wanting engagement due to terrorism in Afghanistan.

In other words, rather like a cat, Islamabad will always land on its legs, using its terror status, insolvency, Chinese debt, and economic decay for its own ends and pleading for a greater US role. That may not be that easy.

The US government has gotten a lot smarter and is in no mood to underwrite a state hand held by Beijing. For India, the raising of the Panun question, completely out of context, is a disturbing indication that parts of Congress still seem to favour ‘hyphenation’, which Delhi has worked mostly successfully to remove. Clearly, more work needs to be done on that front.

Meanwhile, the very real concerns in the House on why Pakistani generals are being given visas while their own citizens are on an ‘Exit Control List’, need to be aired in the Indian context.

Delhi has time and again demanded that Pakistani generals engaging in terrorism be blacklisted globally. It was time the Congress took that up and denied visas to those generals who like to stroll around Fifth Avenue with their families or park their funds in food chains in the US. For a country that denied a visa to a sitting Indian chief minister on unfounded grounds, that’s surely a miniscule step.

The writer is a Distinguished Fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi. She tweets @kartha_tara. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.TagsDONALD LU