Page 1

AMERICAN MEDIA FOR PAKISTAN

Presented to
Prof Sameea Jameel

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 2

Table of Contents

1 Political history of Pakistan 3

2 Historical background of Pakistan – American Relationship 4
and American Media
Kashmir Issue
Nuclear tests
Talibanisation
4 American Foreign Policies – Basis for the Media Policy 7
5 Image of Pakistan Portrayed By American Media 9
6 American Media Pakistan and India Relationship 9
7 Post 9 – 11 Situation 11
8 Factors Shaping U.S. Media Policy towards Pakistan 12
9 Double Faced ness of American Media Policies 13
10 Bombing on Pakistani Villages – An Example 14
11 American Media against American Muslims 15
12 Regime of President Parvez Musharraf 16
13 War against Terror, its effect on Pakistan Political Structure 17
14 Anti-Americanism in Pakistan 18
15 Current scenario 19
16 References 20

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 3

Political history of Pakistan

The history of Pakistan country shows how partial and distorted the political
structure has been. Pakistanis have been ruled by their military – directly or
indirectly – almost through out their fifty – nine years of independence. At the
same time popular sentiment has been consistently anti–dictatorship. For
decades Pakistan’s civil society has struggled against military rule and also held
civilian rulers publicly accountable. Numerous leaders of the legal profession,
trade unions, press and women’s rights groups have been imprisoned, harassed,
beaten, humiliated and persecuted by successive military governments or their
sponsored Islamists.

A number of complexities are found in Pakistan’s political scenario. Some of

which are, the co-existence of old and new powers from the powerful and
sophisticated army to the middle-class Muttahida Qaumi Movement MQM.
Leaders living in exiles, Benazir Bhutto, Altaf Hussain and Nawaz Sharif and a
regular pattern of Army rules Marshal Laws.

Pakistan has a vibrant civil society that aspires to create a democratic process.
Culturally we are part of the subcontinent and remain so despite deliberate
attempts by our rulers and mullahs to Arabise us.
By the criteria of George W. Bush's "axis of evil," however, Pakistan might rank
near the top of the list of the world's most dangerous countries.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 4

Historical background of Pakistan - American

Relationship and American Media

The historical background of Pakistan America relationship shows a lot of ups

and downs.
A close security relationship with Pakistan has been the cornerstone of U.S.
policy in South Asia for more than three decades. Beginning with the Eisenhower
administration, Washington regarded the country, together with Iran, as an
essential obstacle to Soviet expansionism toward the Indian Ocean and the oil
fields of the Persian Gulf. Following the Iranian revolution and the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan in 1979, Pakistan acquired an even greater importance as a
component of U.S. geopolitical strategy throughout that region.

The strategic cooperation between Washington and Islamabad is symbolized by

a security agreement concluded in 1959, but the relationship is far more
comprehensive.

That relationship of Pakistan and America had experienced a steep decline in the
1990s, as the end of both the Cold War and the common struggle against the
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan eroded the perception of shared strategic
interests.

The growing consensus among American policymakers and lawmakers was that
Pakistan was not only losing its strategic importance to the United States; it was
also becoming an unreliable “failed state.” That perception was partly
transformed after September 11, when Pakistan became a critical theater in the
U.S. effort to take the fight to the terrorists.

Today, Pakistan's armed forces, 12th largest in the world, are equipped with an
array of modern weapons, courtesy of the American treasury. A succession of
governments in Islamabad have rewarded this generosity by consistently
supporting U.S. foreign policy positions-a marked contrast to the stance adopted
by most Third World states. Today, more than ever, Pakistan is Washington's
principal political and military asset in South Asia.

Kashmir Issue
It is a hard reality that the Kashmir issue has been of little impact on the policy
formulation in Washington. There is no powerful Kashmiri lobby in the United
States. Unlike United Kingdom, US have no legacy or guilt for making unjust
decisions with regard to Kashmir. The dispute poses no threat to the US or its
allies in any manner (like the Iraqi threat to Israel). Likewise, it neither offers

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 5

economic benefits nor it has extraordinary geo-strategic significance, thus totally

reducing its importance for US. Although, US has deep interest in India and
Pakistan but not to the extent where Washington would put its energy, cash and
diplomacy on the line to settle the Kashmir dispute. At the same time, US is
skeptical about its role and finally the results. The American policy makers ask:
Would any Kashmir resolution backed by Washington be of any significance?
The American perception of what is best for Islamabad and particularly its
security and its commitment with Kashmir cause is different from Pakistan.

US policy in foreseeable future will be identical to its present approach.

Washington will continue its efforts to promote dialogue between India and
Pakistan along with the Kashmiri leadership. It is not expected to offer any kind
of road map or solution for settlement. The American Media views Kashmiris as
terrorists and militants who are causing a great deal of problems in the name of
Jihad for India.

Nuclear tests
The America Media truly represents Pakistan as a Nuclear Walmart, which is
involved in all sorts of illegal activities ranging from nuclear tests to providing
other Islamic countries with Nuclear Power.

Congress finds that Pakistan's maintenance of a global missile and nuclear

proliferation network would be inconsistent with Pakistan being considered an
ally of the United States.

The American media declared that Pakistan is more prone to nuclear proliferation
than the Original-5 and India. Pakistan is a self-proclaimed ISLAMIC country
which supports the so-called Islamic cause around the world. It will be just a
matter of time before nuclear technology is passed on to rogue states such as
IRAN, IRAQ and LIBYA either for ideological reasons or monetary benefits.

Talibanisation:
In the past successive United States governments have supported Pakistan’s
military dictators. At the very moment when the notorious General Zia ul–Haq,
along with US intelligence agencies and the rulers of Saudi Arabia, were
collectively trying to bring down another “evil” empire (the Soviet Union) through
a multipurpose Jihad, many of the Pakistani’s were protesting in the streets of
Lahore against Pakistan’s Islamisation. Pakistani citizens put up brave resistance
to a process of “Talibanisation”. Many voices even within American
administrations were raised in the support of those Pakistani’s yet at that tme
American Media presented those whom are called militants by the same media

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 6

as “Mujahids”. The so called Mujahids enjoyed full American support and a

backing by American media in order to justify their cause.

The 9/11 report is astonishingly silent on the historical role of US foreign policy in
the Muslim World, which many argue contributed to the rise of anti-Americanism
in the Muslim World. It was silent on the US role in Afghanistan. We cannot
understand how the “Mujahideen” became a “Jihadi” without understanding US
policies in the region.

The US media presents Pakistan as guilty. It claims Pakistani authorities helped

fund the militia and equip it with military hardware during the mid-1990s when
the Taliban was merely one of several competing factions in Afghanistan's civil
war. Only when the United States exerted enormous diplomatic pressure after
the Sept. 11 attacks did Islamabad begin to sever its political and financial ties
with the Taliban. Even now it is not certain that key members of Pakistan's
intelligence service have repudiated their Taliban clients.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 7

American Foreign Policies – Basis for the Media Policy

While the attacks of September 11 gave President Bush great power in crafting
the range of appropriate responses in the nascent war on terror, a variety of
subtle and direct forces continued to shape the depth of his presidential
leadership. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the dynamics of the U.S.-
Pakistan relationship in the war on terror.

As a tactically and strategically vital state in the offense against terrorism,

Pakistan holds a strategically important place in Bush's agenda, namely
destroying Al-Qaeda's operational infrastructure. Concerns over Pakistan's human
rights record, Pakistan's involvement in the nuclear proliferation ring, as well as
the undemocratic nature of President Musharraf's administration, contribute to
hesitancy among legislators to support openly amicable ties. It is the interaction
of these competing forces that have shaped the current U.S.-Pakistan
relationship at this crucial stage in the struggle against Islamic fundamentalism
and terrorism.

It is undeniable that, in the realm of Media policy, the war against terror
occupies the number one position on America’s agenda. Among the most
important strategies is The National Security Strategy of the United States of
America, which sets forth the guiding principles behind the Media’s conduct of
international relations.

A number of items relating directly to the U.S.-Pakistan relationship become self-

evident. Amongst the most significant are:

1. To strengthen alliances to defeat global terrorism and work to prevent attacks

against the United States and our friends.

2. Work with others to defuse regional conflicts.

3. Prevent our enemies from threatening us, our allies, and our friends with
Weapons of Mass Destruction.

The drive to meet the first goal has contributed to a number of moves which
have brought U.S.-Pakistan relations closer than ever before. As reinforcement
President Parvez Musharraf became the first Pakistani President to address the
American Nation.

In November 13, 2003 Nancy J. Powell, American Ambassador to Pakistan,

outlined four broad areas that constitute American foreign policy priorities
towards Pakistan. Which were …

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 8

„ Working together in the global war on terrorism,

„ Helping the states of the area to enhance regional stability,
„ Aiding Pakistan to strengthen economic, social, political, and democratic
development, and
„ Building bridges between our two nations' peoples in order to
foster greater mutual understanding between us.

But as we look closely little has been done to fulfill the promises made to
Pakistan.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 9

Image of Pakistan Portrayed By American Media

American media reports routinely view Pakistanis as hooligans, corrupt, criminals
and uncouth people who are being herded by a single moderate soul in uniform,
a born–again messiah.
Yet there are many aspects of Pakistan which are being totally ignored by
American media and Media Policy Makers. Pakistan’s open culture, its relatively
free press, its entrepreneurial ambitions, and its long history of political struggles
for democratic constitutions and civil rights are a few of those aspects. These are
the qualities that should truly bind Pakistan and the United States, as they are
more reliable and enduring sources of understanding and alliance than are
short–term military pacts based on common enemies. Yet they are now barely
visible or remarked upon in Washington.

The universal appeal of our core values of democracy, social equality, and
human rights – has been undermined by the invasion of Iraq and our failed
public diplomacy since 9/11. The United States is today the universal country, a
military hyper power – led by “super–rulers” whose media and media policies are
determined to portray Pakistan and Pakistani’s as a highly underdeveloped nation
consisting of fanatics Mullahs and illiterate and oppressed veiled women.

American Media - Pakistan and India Relationship

Although both India and Pakistan enjoy good relations with Washington but lack
of trust limits both the South Asian nations’ ties with the world’s sole
superpower. Pakistan and India both have always been skeptical about America’s
intentions. Some Indian commentators believe that US cannot be an impartial
player as it is heavily tilted towards Islamabad. Similarly, Islamabad suspects
that the United States has been complacent regarding India’s coercive diplomacy
since December 2001. Although India voices its concerns yet the American media
makes it very clear that Pakistan is a terrorist state on the other hand India’s
claim to be the biggest democracy and the most peaceful country in the region is
very well supported.

America has made army such an important part of Pakistan’s political process
that we see an array of dictators from army in Pakistan.

whether Pakistan, led by such a narrow and self– interested army – unable to
develop the stable, self– correcting national consensus that a democracy
provides – can really make the hard decisions that peace with India will require?
Pakistan continues to fulfill its assigned role as a U.S.- sponsored guard in South
Asia, and it is far too weak to bear such an enormous burden.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 10

According to the US media, the crisis between India and Pakistan is entirely
Pakistan's fault. With a few notable exceptions, most writers have argued that
India is the victim and Pakistan the villain in the dispute, and argue strongly that
the US support India. For example, a writer in the Washington Times called upon
the US to take out Pakistan's nuclear assets, to prevent a nuclear war.

The Center for International Policy wrote that the United States should "make
sure that its relations with Pakistan do not undermine friendly U.S. relations with
India, a rising power of much greater long-term importance to American
interests than Pakistan."

No careful or unbiased observer of South Asian politics could fail to notice the
asymmetry in Western reporting concerning relations between India and
Pakistan. The Western public is repeatedly informed how India and Pakistan
have fought four wars, but rarely is it acknowledged that in each situation, in
1948, 1965, 1971 and 1998 - India was the aggressor.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 11

Post 9 – 11 Situation
The fallout from 9/11 has destroyed earlier links between pro–democracy
elements in Pakistan and the United States. In the post–9/11 era, Pakistan’s civil
society feels abandoned by the international community. The contradiction in
American policy between its foreign policies and its attitude to civil liberties is
more pronounced. For example, the welcome attempt to initiate the process of
democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq is combined with a disregard for Pakistan’s
Political parties and civil society when they call for the restoration of democracy.
We receive sermons about the virtues of being governed by a moderate military
general instead of autocratic and corrupt politicians. The choices here are not
about people but about a system.

Some members of the American foreign–policy establishment have argued that

the United States failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks in part because its policy
toward Pakistan was too soft–headed and diffuse. The American policy makers
commented that they spent too much time hectoring Pakistan about democracy
and nuclear proliferation. They using that time should have made it clearer to the
Pakistani army and intelligence services how important it was to crush al–Qaida.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 12

Factors Shaping U.S. Media Policy towards Pakistan

All American foreign policy is really about domestic policy and doesn't actually
take account of the foreigners much, if at all. There are several explanations of
why the US media is biased against Pakistan. One of them ties the bias to
Pakistan's consistent support of the Palestinian cause. Since the security of Israel
is judged to be a cornerstone of US foreign policy, regardless of which political
party governs the country, a Pakistan armed with nuclear weapons is regarded
with suspicion

Another explanation says that Pakistan has provided financial and military
assistance to extremist Muslim groups that have caused havoc and destruction in
Afghanistan and Indian-held Kashmir. Thus, US analysts attribute the tens of
thousands of deaths that have occurred in Kashmir in 1989 to Pakistani backed
militants, not to Indian security forces. They don't analyze why a few thousand
militants would require India to deploy half a million troops in a region that is the
size of Belgium, nor do they critique The crimes these troops have committed
against unarmed civilians.

But the most significant factor appears to be the significant penetration of US

academic and think tank circles by analysts of Indian nativity. India, with a
population of one billion, is large enough to have professorial Chairs devoted to
Indian studies in major US universities. Most occupants of these chairs are of
Indian origin. The media often contacts them as sources of information not only
on India, but also on South Asia as a whole. It is a comment on the naiveté of
US correspondents that they don't seem to realize that such persons will
invariably be biased in favor of the land of their birth.

The fact that India has had an uninterrupted tradition of democratic rule,
beginning with Prime Minister Nehru, and that Pakistan has been ruled for more
than half of its history by the military, ensures that US writers will naturally
gravitate toward India.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 13

Double Faced ness of American Media Policies

America clearly has a two faced policy towards the coverage and portrayal of
incidents taking place at various parts of the world including its domestic affairs.
In an incident a regular army unit of a nuclear armed nation on border patrol
shoots at a drugs smuggler. Paramilitary guards on the other side of the border
think those soldiers are shooting at them. The ensuing firefight between army
and paramilitaries lasted all night and most of the next morning, with "a heavy
exchange" of mortar and machinegun fire and over 10,000 rounds of small arms
ammunition expended.

Imagine that scenario being played out on the Gaza Strip or Iraq's border with
Iran or Syria. Every single U.S. media outlet would be all over it. There would be
Senatorial and Presidential statements. It would, in short, be huge news. Yet
exactly this scenario happened on the India/Bangladesh border. No-one in
America noticed. American media succeeds by accepting the language of
the "masters" and twisting the news to fit their sordid world view.
The view of Pakistan that is presented by American media consists of oppressed
women who wear a veil from top to toe, have no education and are not a part of
the everyday activity in the country.

The American media truly presents Pakistan’s as a terrorist state itself, that
Pakistan is swarming with terrorists. Terrorist who have participated directly or
indirectly in violent attacks on the US and other democratic countries. And the
prime hand behind terrorism is Pakistan's ISI.

It is disturbing that so many western analysts adopt a double standard when

dealing with South Asia. There is no discussion of the subversive activities of
India's Research and Analysis Wing, but extensive discussion of its Pakistani
counterpart's activities. There is little recognition of India's failed intervention in
the civil war in Sri Lanka that resulted in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, or of
its violent intervention in Indian Punjab, which resulted in the assassination of
Indira Gandhi. But there is continued discussion of the brutality of the Pakistani
army during the civil war of 1971.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 14

Bombing on Pakistani Villages – An Example

On 7th and 13th January 2006 Pakistani villages were bombarded by America. A
number of civilians died in this attack. By any national or international criterion
the destruction and killing were illegal. It all sounds a bit like 9/11, in fact,
except that many people who condemned the 9/11 slaughter in the US have
supported the slaughter in Pakistan.

There is no point in anyone trying to claim there is a moral difference. All who
died were innocent of any action against their murderers. The difference is that
those who planned the atrocity in New York are regarded quite rightly as
demented fanatics, and those who planned and executed the killing of villagers
in Damadola are considered to be American and portrayed so by the American
Media.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 15

American Media against American Muslims

The American Muslims are frustrated at what is going on in American media.
They are seeing blatant racist and bigoted slurs used by many pro-Israel
commentators to incite anger and hatred while responding to the current crisis in
the Middle East. Congressional candidates and syndicated columnists have
portrayed Islam as "Murderous" and Palestinians as "lower than pond scum" or
rag heads", "pieces of S--t" and "turds." The American Muslims are facing these
situations despite their nationality.

Los Angeles Times syndicated columnist Cal Thomas who also stated that Islam
is "the threat of the present and immediate future" stated that American Muslims
are a threat to the country. These and innumerable other examples bring Media’s
endeavors to incite violence against American Muslim minority with no
consideration to their nationalities, beliefs or activities.

These attacks on Islam, Islamic Civilization and the Muslims appear to be part of
a desperate attempt by the American lobbies to deflect attention away from
America’s extremely excessive attacks Muslim nations and the injustice practiced
there.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 16

Regime of President Parvez Musharraf

Pakistan is “blessed” with a military leader – General Pervez Musharraf – who
has even been described by leaders in Washington as a “true democrat”. In
Pakistan today, the only two players in the political field are the military rulers
and the religious parties. In moments of crisis they join ranks to save one
another and at the same time remain spoilers in the progress of democratization.
They play as a team to confuse Pakistanis as well as their foreign allies.

Even the Bush administration, which has preached passionate sermons – to use
your word – about the need to spread democracy in the Middle East, appears to
have no interest in applying its doctrines to Pakistan, and instead repeatedly
accommodates the army leadership’s oppressive and self–interested dominance
of domestic politics? Clearly, the hunt for Osama bin Laden and his senior
lieutenants have taken precedence over everything else in American foreign and
media policy.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 17

War against Terror - Its effect on Pakistan’s Political

Structure
To Pakistan, the logic of this phase of the American government’s campaign
against Al–Qaida and the war against terror is painfully clear. The Saudi and
Egyptian architects of 11 September 2001 are hiding in or near Pakistan’s
federally –administered tribal areas. The United States depends on collaboration
with the Pakistan army to reach these fugitives, but the Pakistan army pays a
high political price at home and abroad for such collaboration.

So, in exchange, the Pakistan army demands that Washington forgive its other
transgressions – domestic repression, corruption, and a repeated refusal to open
Pakistani politics to the country’s secular, civilian parties. Washington, keeping its
side of this dubious bargain, pours billions of dollars in military aid into a country
that ought to be spending such sums to increase literacy and create jobs.

These factors show that though Washington enjoys Islamabad’s support in the
war against terrorism but their differences on various issues are obvious and
fundamental.

Pakistan needs to understand three realities in the present situation. First, the
United Nations Security Council's unanimous resolution mandating use of force
against terrorism can put Pakistan's Kashmir policy at risk, since at least one
Kashmiri jehadi organisation has already been banned by the US for alleged links
with Osama. An imaginative approach and deft diplomacy would be required to
preserve important segments of Pakistan's stand on Kashmir, since its legitimacy
is derived from UN resolutions.

Second, we should no longer continue to delude ourselves. The hard fact is that
Pakistan's Afghan policy lies buried in the debris of the World Trade Center

Third, after the candid comments of Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
regarding the "superiority of Western civilization over the Islamic civilization" and
his optimism that that the West will "conquer" Islam just as it "conquered
Communism," there should be little doubt regarding the intended targets in the
current campaign against terrorism.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 18

Anti-Americanism in Pakistan
Pakistanis give three kinds of reasons for negative feelings about America.

One involves U.S. policies toward Pakistan such as failure to come to Pakistan's
aid during the Bangladesh crisis, using Pakistan for its own interests, and
opposition to Pakistan's peaceful nuclear program.

A second deals with American global policy, including support of Israel,

opposition to Iran's present government, and use of force against small Third
World nations.

The third includes American involvement in Pakistan—for example, support of the

military regime, obstructing a settlement of the Afghan issue, and responsibility
for the decline in the value of the local currency.

Most Pakistanis are uneasy about the relationship with America as opposed to
being hostile. American support of Israel, India, and military dictators has
undone a lot of the goodwill gained in other ways. Religious, ethnic, and cultural
differences are rejected by most people as a basis of anti-American feelings.
Speculation about interference in Pakistan's internal affairs has provided a basis
for more ordinary people to develop feelings of anti-Americanism.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 19

Current scenario
During the cold war, the United States constructed a largely bipartisan foreign
policy grounded in a belief – shared by Republicans and Democrats alike – that
American ideas of freedom, self–government, and individual rights would
ultimately defeat Soviet communism. A bitter presidential campaign has
emphasized how far American foreign policy today has become the subject of
sharp, angry partisan disputes.

Whatever the outcome of America’s election, it is feared that for the United
States and Pakistan the result will mean more of the same. The Americans have
used Pakistan earlier in the cold war and is using it again. The statements by
Condoleezza Rice in January 2007 and time to time accusations of all the Taliban
leaders being nurtured by Pakistan reveal America’s true intentions.

The US intent towards Pakistan has now become completely unambiguous and it
is a threatening and hostile design the US is unfurling in the context of its
frontline ally in the war on terror. For the US, it is of no significance that this
country's leader has put his life on the line for the erroneous military-centric
strategy the US continues to dictate in the war against terror; or that some
innocent citizens of Pakistan have paid with their lives for this cause, while
others have had their kith and kin disappear to feed America's insatiable appetite
for punishing "Muslim extremists".

The more Pakistan and its leadership have sacrificed in order to deliver Al Qaeda
to the US and be the most committed ally in the war against terror, the more
abuse has been hurled at it from the US -- both the political elites and the media.

Now the US has effectively moved to threaten Pakistan directly. In the second
week of January, the Democrats in the House of Representatives put forward a
bill providing recommendations for the implementation of the recommendations
presented by the 9/11 Commission. Without following procedural niceties, the bill
was passed by the House on January 12. The section on Pakistan (1442)
effectively takes Pakistan-US relations back to the Pressler days with limitations.

The point is that by now Pakistan should accept that the US intent towards
Pakistan is threatening and overall negative. And there is a pattern to it all -– the
bill, followed by the Negroponte statement and then by Major-General Benjamin
Freakley's accusations against Pakistan from Kabul -– all coincide thereby playing
to a certain strategy.

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan

 Page 20

References
Newspapers:

• New York times

http://www.nytimes.com/
• Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
• Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com/

Books & Articles:

Lancaster, John and Kamran Khan. .Investigation of Attacks on Musharraf Points to

Pakistani Group.. Washington Post, 14 January 2004.

Robbins, James S. .Cashing in on Kashmir.. National Review, January 8, 2002.

Tahir- Kheli, Shirin R. The United States and Pakistan: The Evolution of an Influence
Relationship. New York: Praeger, 1982.

Thornton, Thomas P. Indian and Pakistan: The First Fifty Years, ed. Selig Harrison, Paul
Kreisberg, and Dennis Kux. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1998.

Jaffrelot, Christopher,ed. A History of Pakistan and its Origins. London: Anthem Press,
2002.

Weblinks:

http://www.ijtihad.org/9-11%20Commission%20Report.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50544-004Jan2?language=printer

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/pakistan/nytimes02.html

http://www.cfr.org/pub2771/morton_h_halperin_richard_n_haass/after_the_tests_
us_policy_toward_india_and_pakistan.php#findings

http://media.www.thecolonialreview.com/media/storage/paper837/news/2005/11/26/Pers
pectives/Domestic.Factors.Shaping.U.s.Foreign.Policy.Towards.Pakistan-
1113048.shtml?sourcedomain=www.thecolonialreview.com&MIIHost=media.collegepu
blisher.com

http://www.state.gov/p/sca/rls/rm/2006/75709.htm

Term Paper American Media Policy for Pakistan