Adil Najam
UPDATE POST HERE: March 16, 2011: Raymond Davis Released! This Story Ain’t Over Yet!
Strangely, the more we get to know about the case of Raymond Davis, the less we seem to know. Even more strangely, the fact that the entire incident happened in broad daylight and in front of dozens of witnesses seems is itself confusing the facts rather than adding clarity. Moreover, it seems that no one seems to want to get much clarity either; although different parties may want different parts of the story to ‘disappear.’ The incident was rather eerie and disturbing to begin with; and it continues to become more so.
Here is what one does know. Raymond Davis, a staff member of the US Consulate in Lahore shot two Pakistani men dead on Thursday in a crowded part of Lahore (Mozang Chowk), according to him in self-defense. A US Consulate vehicle that rushed in to ‘rescue’ Mr. David then ran over a third person, who also died. A murder case was then registered against Raymond Davis, who was handed into police custody. A case has also been registered against the driver of the US Consulate vehicle that ran over a third person, but the driver has not yet been apprehended. After a fair deal of scrambling by both US and Pakistani officials on what to do or say, the positions of both have now started becoming clear and they have taken the stance that is usually taken in such cases: the US is asking that Raymond Davis, as a diplomatic functionary, should be handed back to them; Pakistan seems to be responding that the matter is sub judice and should take its course.
Beyond that, there are more questions than answers. For most part, these questions fall into three categories: (1) Questions about who is Raymond Davis? (2) Questions about exactly what happened at Mozang, Lahore? (3) Questions about what should happen now ?
On the first question, earliest reports suggested that Raymond Davis was a “technical adviser” and a “consular” official. More recently, US Embassy officials have described him as a “functionary” of the Embassy assigned to the US Consulate in Lahore and carrying a US Diplomatic passport. Reportedly he was hired at the US Consulate in Lahore as a security contractor from a Florida-based firm Hyperion Protective Consultants. All of this has material relevance to whether he would enjoy diplomatic immunity or not, but even more because of the apprehensions of many Pakistanis that he could be linked to the CIA or to the infamous firm Blackwater (later renamed XE Services).
And that leads squarely to the second question: what exactly was happening at Mozang? Very much in line with the immediate knee-jerk reaction of many Pakistanis, an early commentary by Jeff Stein in The Washington Post seemed to suggest rather fancifully that the shootout could have been a “Spy rendezvous gone bad?” That would be a conspiracy theory, but not an entirely implausible one. Mozang is not a part of town that you would expect too many foreigners, let alone a US official, visiting; and certainly not in what was reportedly a rented private vehicle. And while Pakistan today is clearly an unsafe place, the question of just why an Embassy official was carrying a firearm be wished away. On the other hand, however, Mr. Davis claims that he shot in self defense as the two men on the motorcycle were trying to rob him at gun point. Anyone who knows Pakistan knows all too well that this, too, is entirely possible. TV footage and reports coming immediately after the incident showed one of the young men lying dead with a revolver and wearing an ammunition belt. And certainly, the question of why at least one of the two young men on the motorcycle was carrying a loaded firearm cannot be wished away just because he had “dushmani.” Indeed, serious questions need to be asked about just who the two young men on the motorcycle were, just as they need to be asked about who Raymond Davis is. There just seem to be too many unnecessary weapons in too much proximity in this story. All of the many explanations that are floating around are very disturbing, but also very plausible. Which is exactly why this story is even more dangerous if left unresolved.
Finally, the third question – which is now getting the most attention – about what should happen now. Much is being made – maybe too much – about the Vienna Convention and its implications for diplomatic immunity. Familiar diplomatic games about the minutia of vocabulary are being played and will in most likelihood result in all too familiar results. That is exactly what one would expect in any such situation anywhere. But this is not ‘any‘ situation’; and this is not ‘anywhere‘. This is about US-Pakistan relations: there is just about nothing that the US can say or do which Pakistanis are likely to believe, and there is just about nothing that Pakistan can say or do which Americans are likely to trust. Which is why getting stuck in the intricacies of the Vienna Convention of 1963 is the exact wrong place to get stuck. This is a time for public diplomacy: certainly from the US and maybe even from Pakistan. It is not in America’s interest to be seen to be standing in the way of justice and due process. And it is not in Pakistan’s interest to be seen to conducting a flawed process of justice. There are too many people on the extreme in both countries who will not and cannot to change their opinion and apprehensions about the other. But there are even more people in both countries who could all too easily be swayed to the extremes on distrust if this delicate case is not handled with clarity and transparency by both countries. Doing so will probably bring with it more than just a little diplomatic embarrassment. Not doing so can only bring worse in the tinderbox that is US-Pakistan relations.
See, did not I say this guy use multiple alias while comment here? :-) an old tactic of liberals?
The guy use the alias “Peace” and see the hatred in his tone. ;)
Davis has lost the minds of liberals as they are not finding the room.
My nannay Mufti and Internet warrior, if writing the name of Qadri is going to give you life then lo, I would rather say k Qadri should be turned into dust or pieces just because he dared to killed a liberal extremist, named Salman Taseer?
Ab kush? or still pumped up call me a Kafir or Munafiq? ;)
By the way, is tarha k Fatwa Bazi tu Mullahs ka kaam hay, what happened to you? Why do you guys take shelter of Islam for your own need by using terms like Shaheed Taseer or Munafiqoon. Oh by the way Munafiqoon is an Arabic word. Last time I heard you guys despise Arabic just like an Infidel despise Ka’ba. *smirk*
@Monano
I did not see the response from you to the below comment other than again beating around the bush
@Adnan/monano
I was in no pain whatsoever. Enjoyed writing my comment. See how clear I was. Unlike you munafiqoon…. you coudl not even get yourself to once name using the murderer Qadri’s name… not once!!!! Ah, you slaves of killers, just say out once, loudly and clearly that Mumtaz Qadri is a inhuman lowlife as is anyone who supports him or his vile act. Just once, say it clearly. And if you cannot, stop embarrassing yourself with teh whining.
Just once. Say it clearly. Without this lafaazi and excuses. Just once.
I bet you will not and cannot because your Taliban masters won’t let you.
Lets stop for a while and take a flashback of right-wing elements of Pakistan, specially the Barelvi sect.
Until recently, this Barelvi sect (the one Mumtaz Qadri belongs to) was considered much enlightened and moderated as compared to Deoband sect [out of which Afghan Taliban emerged (TTP are not religious, they are just rouges)]. During the whole of Musharraf regime, the Barelvi sect was always brought forward by government of secular elite portraying them as peaceful and patriotic religious leaders.
This is the sect which denounces Taliban and the secular government gained religious support from this Barelvi element in almost every issue even to the extent of brawls over moon-sighting and Hasba bill with Deoband dominated MMA government in NWFP (now KP).
Does anyone realise what went wrong which pushed this “buffer element” (between pro-taliban fundamentalists and liberal extremists) into the category of pure fundamentalists???
Liberals pulled the wrong chord and too hard to make Aasia case an issue rather a stand-off. No one in history has been hanged as yet over blasphemy law. A powerful defence of Aasia in High court could have easily settled the case without making a fuss out of it. And then, in the absence of emotional hype, a logical discussion could be evolved around the law, its interpretation, implementation, proposed amendments or even abolition.
But with a top government official, hitting the most sensitive element of Muslim faith, specifically to Barelvi sect, in a careless manner and openly announcing to bypass the courts in a bid to free Aasia, things resulted in an uncalled for rise of emotions and murder of Salman Taseer.
History confirms that Barelvi sect has highest sentiments over love for Prophet Muhammad (SAW), be it the issue of insulting caricatures or knighting of Salman Rushdi. And hitting the core of Barelvi belief in a demeaning attitude had to result in extreme reactions.
My point is that sensitive issues have to be dealt sensibly. Creating sudden public hype about them means you never want the issue to be resolved.
This Barelvi sect is most widely rather dominantly followed sect in largest provinces of Punjab and Sindh. Moreover, they have heavy presence in Kashmir and Hazara division.
Pushing the Barelvi sect and its followers into the extremist category is the most dangerous thing liberals have done to Pakistani society. Why? Because by doing this Pakistani society is now specifically divided in two extremes, there is no moderate element. Now its a question of “either you are with us or against us” situation. So much so that the Quranic-ignorant interior minister of secular government has to take sides by announcing to fire any blasphemer himself.
At the same time, liberals have now lost the support of even those elements which previously sided with them. MQM did not pray for Salman Taseer in Senate while no PPP leader attended the 40th day mourning service of their own governor.
Political analysts say that revolutions like Tunisia and Egypt cannot make their way in Pakistan due to the existence of political parties. These parties should not agree on a uniform agenda and hence a real revolution is not likely. Even if a public movement develops into widespread protests and chaos, political parties should defuse the situation over differences of leadership and political mileage.
But now I dont agree with the analysis in the above para: simply because the divide over extremist attitude has left nobody incharge. Not even political parties have the potential to handle this divide or diffuse any possible face-off between the two sides.
@Monano:
“No wonder why Kaafir belongs to the community declared infidels almost unanimously by Pakistan’s elected representatives (headed by the most liberal leader of the time).”
Dude, with blessing of 2nd ammendment by Most liberal leader of the time, now in Pakistan everyones belief is questionable. One cannot open his mouth before establishing his credentials of being a “Muslim”. In Pakistan, anyone who things he is a Muslim, there are TWO PEOPLE to call him Kafir.
Pakistan should be re-named as Kafir-istan. As now in Pakistan everyone is calling others Kafir. And there are more Kafirs than Muslims.
Yes, it is again the blessings of most liberal leader of the time that Salman Taseer was murdered. The blood trail of murder of Salman Taseer leads straight to Pakistan elected representatives in 1974 and ENDS ON HAND OF ZULFIQAR ALI BHUTTO.
It is because of that 2nd ammendment that Mulla like Malik Qadri thinks that he has more right to decide who is a Muslim and who is Kafir, and who deserves to live and who deserves to die, than that ALCOHOL CONSUMING MOST LIBERAL LEADER OF OUR TIME I.E. ZAB.
Monano, wait when you get into the same category of Salman Taseer by likes of Qadri.
Allah-O-Akbar.
Very well written and powerful article. You say more clearly than anyone else has what is evident here:
1. This man, so-called Raymond Davis is certainly a Blackwater type.
2. The two men on motorcycles who died were clearly up to some hanky panky. Maybe even more.