Donors Pledge to Donate $5 Billion to Pakistan

April 17th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags: ,

asif ali zardari

Good news for Pakistan:

International donors, led by the United States and Japan, pledged more than $5 billion Friday to stabilize Pakistan’s troubled economy and fight the spread of terrorism in the Islamic nation and neighboring Afghanistan.

The U.S. and Japan started off the one-day conference by pledging $1 billion each. Saudi Arabia added $700 million and the EU $640 million. The total pledged was $5.28 billion, according to Pakistan’s foreign minister.

It’s such an incredibly difficult situation. On the one hand, it is not exactly useful to throw billions of dollars away. You might as well burn it. Which is quite likely the equivalent of giving it to Islamabad.

On the other hand, the West – and other countries in the region – cannot allow Pakistan to collapse either. It is too powerful, too influential, too big, and it has nuclear weapons. History has taught us what can happen when a country become destabilized and is thrown into chaos: radicals can take over.

President Zardari understands the above all too well, and uses it to convince foreign governments to support his country. “There is a desire to help Pakistan,” he said, but he added that the international community is still trying to grasp the implications of the problems his country faces.

“I still fear that the understanding of the danger that Pakistan faces still does not register fully in the minds of the world,” he said. “If we lose, you lose. If we lose, the world loses.”

He is, sadly, right.

That does not mean, however, that we lose if Zardari loses. We may “win” nonetheless. Pakistan and Zardari aren’t one and the same, just like his country survived without Musharraf.

Still, there seems to be no other option right now than to keep Pakistan alive by supporting its new president.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.