Debating the Dangers of Pakistan You’re right, Newsweek, Pakistan is the hub of Islamic jihad (“The Most Dangerous Nation in the World,” Oct.29). Its intelligence agency, the notorious ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), and other agencies recruited and trained jihadists who were freely operating in Pakistan well before 9/11. Now these groups operate under different names and the training camps operate away from public areas to avoid the media. Key figures in the ruling party have admitted that they’ve been operating training camps. Lashkar-i-Taiba was operating in Pakistan openly, but after Dec. 13, 2001, the government was pressured to ban these jihadi organizations. So Lashkar and Jaish-i-Mohammed were disbanded, but the same people continue the work under different names, e.g., Jamaat-ul-Dawa—the new name for Lashkar. The posters, banners and signs remain the same. At issue is the mind-set of the Army establishment in Pakistan—from the time of Gen. Zia ul-Haq, they have all been extremists. President Musharraf presents himself as a moderate, but his policies don’t justify that claim. He gathered people in the name of PML-Q, the ruling party—all extremists and pro-jihadists. The recent attack in Karachi was an attempt to force Benazir Bhutto to stay away from public gatherings. The suicide bombers are not targeting the ruling party’s public meetings, they’re targeting the opposition—a result of the unholy alliance of jihadists and the ruling party. Abid Shakeel via internet
I think “The Most Dangerous Nation” today is America. A threat to world peace and a global bully, American adventurism has turned Iraq and Afghanistan into the battlefields that they are today. Tauqeer Muhajir Karachi, Pakistan
Pakistan’s geography and history have put it on the front line in the War on Terror. It deserves credit for sacrificing thousands of people in its struggle to stand up to terror. Its upcoming general elections will reinforce the reality that Pakistanis are moderate; religious radicals will then be marginalized. All the surveys conducted by reputable organizations bear out the fact that extremism and terrorism meet with the rebuke of the people of Pakistan. The robust performance of our economy also belies your assertion of Pakistan as a “dangerous country.” M. Akram Shaheedi Minister (Press), Embassy of Pakistan, Washington, D.C.
For us in Baluchistan, your report rang true. Pakistan is a real threat because it is both the breeding place and the haven for terrorists, jihadis, Talibans, mujahedin and Al Qaeda. The latter are financiers working through Pakistan’s ISI and MI (Military Intelligence) agencies. We are not free to talk against Al Qaeda, the Army, the ISI or the MI. If we dare to do so, we face dire consequences. We could be picked up from our homes by these agencies in broad daylight, our names would be published in the missing-persons list, or we could be killed in an encounter—even years later. The Bush administration provided millions of dollars of aid to Pakistan—dollars that have gone into the bank accounts of Army generals and religious ministers. Religious scholars are allowed to spread anti-American propaganda. Madrassas (religious schools) are used as hideouts for terrorists; young recruits were trained in these madrassas by the ISI. I know all this because I work with a government organization. We don’t have basic necessities like electricity, water and health facilities here, but our rulers are happy because, they say, “we have bombs for our enemy.” And the enemy is the West. Mir Javed Baloch Gwadar, Baluchistan
“Where the Jihad Lives Now” was right on the mark at capturing the logistical extent of the Taliban network in Pakistan. Where it erred was extrapolating this network to the Talibanization of the masses in the country. Despite the recent suicide attacks, it is unfair to correlate the Taliban’s actions with a general surge in militancy. Suicide attacks are tools of propaganda for militants because they attract media. The masses were involved in the emancipation of the judiciary from the shackles of self-serving interest groups. Is this not a coming of age for a country that’s viewed with suspicion? Pakistan has had plenty that was headed in the wrong direction but now it’s making a U-turn to change directions; it is looking at what’s wrong with its aspirations and adapting. Pervez Musharraf, an army general, has come of age as a statesman. His government has increased women’s representation in all areas—from politics to professional armed forces. He has banned organ trading, and invested in higher education and health care. Such nonflashy social development doesn’t make sensational cover stories. But NEWSEEK IS more than flashy stories, isn’t it? We like your in-depth coverage; it explores rather than judges. Nadir Husain Indianapolis, Indiana
At last, you’ve realized that Pakistan is a terrorists’ safe haven. Pervez Musharraf has sheltered terrorists in camps where they are trained in sabotage activities aimed at Western, non-Muslim countries and at India. George W. Bush has been fooled into believing that Musharraf is America’s trusted friend in the war against global terrorism, while the latter has been playing a double game with the United States by pretending to be a fighter against terrorism. Anantharamaiah Srikantaiah Bangalore, India
As a practicing Pakistani-American lawyer with experience working for the U.S. government, I was alarmed at your sensationalist cover story on Pakistan. It appears that the current view is to “rebrand” Pakistan as a dangerous nation after heralding it as a key ally in the U.S. War on Terror. Targeting a nation as “dangerous” or “evil” is painting with such a broad brush that reality is ignored. Pervez Musharraf’s support for a war president in the States has not wavered, despite the fact that America’s global reputation has dramatically plummeted among its friends and allies. Musharraf has distanced a segment of his own population by supporting President Bush’s policies. The Islamic parties in Pakistan have never been able to garner widespread popular support in 60 years of nationhood—until Musharraf supported Bush. This was the turning point and, since 2001, Islamic parties have dominated the political scene. They stand out like sore thumbs in a nation of (mostly) moderate Muslims. The best policy toward Pakistan is to build up the moderate majority and help alleviate poverty. That’ll do more to decrease radicalism than any “war” could. Amina Khan Washington, D.C.
Your cover story really takes the cake in irresponsible, sensational journalism. Yes, Pakistan has its fair share of issues, courtesy of decades of American interference, but the picture that was portrayed was lopsided and lacked facts. Farooq Ahmed Karachi, Pakistan
What would you think if a popular magazine ran a cover saying AMERICANS: OIL ROBBERS, and showed three pictures: Army personnel in Iraq securing oil wells, innocent dead Iraqi civilians and American citizens pumping gas into their cars? Raza Hasan Houston, Texas
Pakistan is not perfect. Its challenge is its weak system of governance misused by the military, and politicians who further their rule to perpetuate corruption. On the other hand, Pakistan’s asset is its 160 million people who want a moderate, stable and corruption-free nation where they can work for their family and country in an economically viable system. The change has to come from the people with encouragement from the media and Western powers. Sadly, the United States supports the Army and corrupt politicians, and this situation is being exploited by Islamic extremists. A more balanced report on the wishes and aspirations of the majority will encourage them to stand up for their rights and not be cowed by the extremists. Imran Niazi via internet
How did you conclude that Pakistan is more dangerous than Iraq? All the facts point the other way, and even an American like me will disagree with you. Almost 85,000 people have been killed in Iraq since the war—scores of people die there everyday. Sunnis, Shias and Kurds are killing each other; America has lost almost 4,000 servicemen. Last time I checked, no U.S. soldier had died in Pakistan. The economy of Pakistan has been growing at the rate of 7 percent per year. Does that compare to Iraq’s? You guys are totally off base. This article will damage NEWSWEEK’s credibility. Mathew Roger via internet
What a misleading picture of Pakistan! The situation here is as normal as it could be. Foreigners roam around our streets freely. It is tense in tribal areas, but things have been worse in parts of India—Kashmir, Nagaland, Assam. It is ludicrous to compare Pakistan with Iraq. Pakistan is fighting the United States’ war in the tribal areas. We are sacrificing our soldiers and our people. We expect back-patting instead of backstabbing. Haider Mahmud Rawalpindi, Pakistan
Pakistan has its fair share of problems typical of most emerging markets—perhaps even more. But I’d encourage you to look beyond the headlines and assess the real, positive undercurrents for this 160 million-strong nation. It is a nation of moderates determined to defy all odds, in spite of paying a heavy price for others’ adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. Islam is a religion of peace and principles, and it is important that we project its true picture. Haroon Ahmed Malik via internet
Why do you finger Pakistan as “the most dangerous nation in the world”? It is presidents like Bush and Musharraf and their selfish policies (not the nations they lead) that are dangerous. How can countries that are being bombed be dangerous? They are the victims of the policies of Bush and Musharraf. Syed Raiyan Abu Zafar Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Pervez Musharraf is not committed to the fight against terrorism—he is just using tactics to get financial aid and favors from the United States. The way he handled the very sensitive issue of AQ Khan is a clear example of his lack of commitment. How is it possible that the government knew nothing about that or about the Talibans’ entry into the tribal areas? It is impossible for the Taliban to cross the border in such big numbers (millions?) without the knowledge and consent of the government’s intelligence agencies. Terrorist organizations are still working and operating their training camps in different areas here. So, I do believe that Pakistan and Iran are, indeed, the two most dangerous countries in the world. Keep up the good work! Mushtaq Jaan via internet
Is Pakistan half as dangerous as the United States, which is responsible for the murder and mayhem in Iraq and Afghanistan? It is the United States that has gone and destabilized the whole world with its warmongering. Mahmood Jamal London, England
Pakistan has neither been able to tame the extremists nor to overcome them. The threat of a terrorist or suicide attack looms large. Waziristan, the Red Mosque episode and Swat Valley illustrate different patterns of extremism and militancy. Thus, as you note: “Militancy is woven into the fabric of Pakistani society.” Disturbingly, this is the price Pakistan is paying for its collaboration with the United States. Increasing extremism has taken the form of militancy, not limited to the border or tribal areas but expanded into settled areas, while suicide attacks in our cities are now as likely as in Baghdad or Kabul. The comparison of Pakistan to Iraq might sound harsh, but here’s a reality check: in October about 100 civil and military personnel died in suicide bombings in Pakistan, another 140 died in Karachi; in Baghdad, 116 died from Oct. 16 to Oct. 31. The government’s inappropriate handling of these challenges cannot be solved with a drastic measure like the emergency rule. Facing the insurgency in Waziristan and checking the challenge of the conflict in the Swat Valley calls for a national consensus, which means free elections and a smooth transfer of power. Noman Sattar Senior Research Officer, Area Study Center, Quaid-e- Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan
The Revolution in Genetics As an excited young geneticist— with eyes and ears wide open to the amazing wonders of science and current discoveries—I enjoyed your Oct. 15 article “The Year of Miracles” about the revolution that is currently taking place in the field of genetics. However, I felt disappointed that the article that followed (“The 10 Hottest Nerds”) focused on “10 of the most esteemed biologists”—all of whom are males. I do not wish to criticize NEWSWEEK for interviewing 10 men, I only want to ask, “Where are the female scientists?” Can it be that there is a lack of women at the cutting edge of biology and genetics? If so, where would an ambitious young scientist like me, looking for inspiration, find a suitable role model? I understand that the history of scientific discovery is dominated by men, but I doubt that the current scene continues that way. That cutting-edge science could still be male-dominated is hard to believe. I studied at the University of Helsinki, Finland, where females represented more than 50 percent (and most of the time earning a much higher degree) of the students in all my science courses. I am currently working at the National Public Health Institute under one of the pioneer geneticists in Finland, Prof. Leena Palotie, who is comparable in many ways to Kari Stefansson and could equally have appeared in your article for her research into the genetic basis of diseases using the relatively homogenous Finnish population and the country’s extensive and detailed medical records. There must be many other notable female scientists out there who are doing equally important work. It is important for young female scientists to hear about them. We need to be shown that women can be revolutionaries and pioneers, too. Women can be “hot nerds,” and they deserve their share of credit in the genetics revolution.} Diana Cousminer Helsinki, Finland
Your articles “The Year of Miracles” and “The 10 Hottest Nerds” call for celebration. I’ve lost many relatives and friends to cancer, so it was wonderful to read that in the future, losing loved ones will be a thing of the past. Many diseases and illnesses seem to be on their way to extinction. There may come a day when most illnesses can be prevented or treated. With most illnesses eradicated, what will we die of? Perhaps eternity may not be so far-fetched anymore. Scientists are already capable of making our bodies last longer. Will the future be overcrowded with centenarians who must figure out who should be “expired” to make way for new lives? That makes me shudder. Candilin Lee Yamagata, Japan
In your series of interviews with leading molecular scientists, you gave a mere pittance of two sentences to Rudolph Jaensch, professor of biology at MIT, in which he explains, in the briefest possible terms, the use of customized patient-specific stem cells. These cells are largely free of the ethics burdens of embryonic stem cells and, this being the case, the public has a right to know a little more about their potential. It is extremely important because in this breathtaking race for what is scientifically doable, the moral implications seem to have a way of being swept under the carpet. Perhaps ultimately, progress cannot be entirely free of conscientious compromise, but throwing all reservations overboard will scarcely benefit humanity. Werner Radtke Paderborn, Germany
Prof. Lee Silver’s second report on biological researchers of 21st-century America was both exhilarating and reassuring. I know that there are millions of young scientists, both male and female, working hard toward the improvement of our biological condition. Now I can proudly prove to the locals here in East Africa that the United States, my beloved country, is full of caring and creative citizens, contrary to its worldwide reputation as a nation of jingoists and atrocities. Margaret Taeko Boyer Kampala, Uganda
Depicting the Human Condition Charles Schulz is a cartoonist who’s left his mark on millions of readers worldwide (“A Dark and Stormy Life,” Oct. 22). His way of chronicling life in his comic strip appealed to young and old alike. In a world where adults were banned, his pen depicted the human condition from the standpoint of a realistic childhood, one imbued with failures, problems and sufferings as lessons of life to learn from. Although Schulz confronted his young characters with a disillusioned world, filled with the anxieties, frustrations and doubts of adults, his strip reflected a place where hope, faith and charity managed to survive and shine. No matter what biographer David Michaelis says—or what others say in future biographies of the artist—Schulz taught valuable lessons and dispensed precious hints of wisdom to his readers. Giulio Cicconi Teramo, Italy
Revamping Our Look Regarding your “new look,” thanks, Jon Meacham and Fareed Zakaria, for providing good reading material and for fighting the deliberate shrinking of attention spans; of thinking and expressing oneself within sound bites; of considering concentration as nonessential; of the trend so eloquently described as “just the kind of learning that average Americans adore: instant, painless and cheap.” It is unfortunate that this mentality is now spreading all over the world. Ian Shaw Johannesburg, South Africa
Thank you very much for your new look. It’s a great improvement and was overdue. Our two weekly copies are passed on to seafarers of many nationalities via the local Seamen’s Mission. Those people want news they missed during their isolation onboard ship, not about pregnancies of movie stars or Milan fashion shows. H. Georg Fries Brunsbuttel, Germany
