VZCZCXRO7393
OO RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHIL #2459/01 2830624
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 100624Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5265
INFO RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL PRIORITY 0977
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 1481
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI PRIORITY 5562
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI PRIORITY 2351
RUEHLH/AMCONSUL LAHORE PRIORITY 7953
RUEHPW/AMCONSUL PESHAWAR PRIORITY 6984
RUMICEA/USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ISLAMABAD 002459 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL PTER PK
SUBJECT: HEATED DEBATE IN PAKISTAN'S NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON 
KERRY-LUGAR BILL 
 
REF: ISLAMABAD 2448 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  In three days of intense debate in the 
Pakistan National Assembly October 7-9, the Kerry-Lugar Bill 
(KLB) has come under fire (reftel). Post has been observing 
the debates daily.  During debates on October 8 and 9, 
criticism of the bill by opposition members of parliament 
continued, while the ruling Pakistan People's Party (PPP) 
parliamentarians have had to come to its and their 
government's defense as well.  The media has reported that a 
resolution on the KLB will come before parliament for a vote; 
however, some of our sources think such a scenario is not 
very likely. Debate on the Kerry-Lugar bill will resume 
October 12.  End Summary. 
 
¶2. (U) On October 8, in a two-and-a-half-hour session, former 
Interior Minister Syed Faisal Saleh Hayat of PML-Q and former 
Foreign Minister Sardar Asif Ahmad Ali of PPP made speeches 
on the bill.  Hayat, who spoke for about 45 minutes, charged 
that the government was "about to trade" its national 
institutions in return for money offered by the KLB, adding 
that Pakistan is "mortgaging" its country for a pittance. 
Alluding to government corruption, Hayat asked how much of 
the aid from KLB would actually get to the Pakistani people 
if passed.  He also questioned whether the amount to be given 
to Pakistan was commensurate with its importance to U.S. 
policy.  In stark contrast, he claimed that in Afghanistan 
alone the U.S. spends $6 billion a month. 
 
¶3. (U) Hayat further charged that for the last six months 
there has been a "campaign" against the ISI and security 
forces, and that by accepting the KLB, Pakistan is "giving 
permanence to this (negative) perception" of these 
institutions.  Further speaking out in defense of the army, 
Hayat said that four or five months ago, the world was 
proclaiming that Pakistan had become a "failed state" and was 
on the verge of disintergration. It was the army that was 
responsible for avoiding such a fate despite all the pundits 
and think tanks, predictions, he said.  Hayat stated that 
the KLB had now brought about a "serious divide" in relations 
between the civilian government and military. 
 
¶4. (U) Hayat criticized aspects of the bill that seemingly 
make it a foregone conclusion that Pakistan is involved in 
terrorism and nuclear proliferation, which are charges 
repeatedly made by India and Afghanistan, he said.  He argued 
that the bill takes India's concerns into account while 
failing to acknowledge Pakistan's concerns about India; he 
said there was not a single mention in the bill about India's 
involvement in Pakistan (i.e. Balochistan). In his closing 
remarks--to the sound of opposition members of parliament 
banging on tables in resounding approval--Hayat urged the 
government to "stand up the U.S.," and he promised that, in 
turn, the members of parliament will "stand behind you like a 
solid wall." 
 
¶5. (U) The PPP's Ali, while conceding that he found aspects 
of the KLB objectionable and "highly intrusive," urged for 
sensibility and an emotion-free discourse from the opposition 
so that there may be "convergence" between the U.S. and 
Pakistan on areas of concern in the bill.  He asked the 
opposition, in its zeal to appeal to the public's 
anti-American sentiments (which he said was well-deserved 
given the U.S.'s past support of Pakistani dictators and U.S. 
foreign policies in the region), not to lose sight of the 
substance of the bill; he said the KLB overall was in 
Pakistan's favor.  He added that this was the first time the 
U.S. was giving substantial support to Pakistan's  democracy 
and he could not understand why it was being perceived so 
negatively.  Despite such views, Ali was also critical of the 
U.S. Congress for including provisions within the bill that 
he perceived to be pro-India, asking at one point whether the 
Indian lobby was responsible for the inclusion of concerns 
about Quetta and other issues in the bill. 
 
¶6. (U) Ali remarked that previous Pakistani governments had 
never brought such a bill before parliament for debate, and 
now a democratic government was giving it an opportunity to 
analyze the bill, not to approve or oppose it.  He reminded 
parliament that the KLB was not a "treaty to be signed," but 
that rather once signed into law it will be binding on the 
USG not on Pakistan.  He further argued that the U.S. has 
 
ISLAMABAD 00002459  002 OF 003 
 
 
included "reservations" in the KLB because it wants to ensure 
that the aid it is giving to Pakistan from American taxpayers 
is being well spent.  Ali suggested that Pakistan should 
engage in back channel talks with the U.S. about its concerns 
to avoid a situation whereby, in all of the uproar and 
hysteria about the KLB, Pakistan "cuts off its nose to spite 
its face." 
 
¶7. (SBU) During one of the breaks, PML-N spokesman Ahsan 
Iqbal told poloff that the USG's well-intentioned effort with 
the KLB has turned "sour" because the government--in its 
eagerness for KLB's passage--failed to get parliament's 
buy-in while KLB discussions were underway in Washington.  He 
said that the government could have arranged for key 
parliamentarians from across the political spectrum to meet 
with Congress in Washington during the KLB debates so that 
they could have been properly briefed on Pakistani 
sensitivities.  Iqbal said that the government was not only 
facing resistance on the KLB from the opposition, but also 
from some of its allies.  He also claimed that some in the 
Cabinet were not consulted on the KLB.  Iqbal said that had 
the army been consulted earlier, it would not have come out 
publicly about its concerns.  Iqbal further charged that it 
was the government's responsibility to have flagged 
objectionable provisions of the bill to Congress. 
 
¶8. (U) Prime Minister Gilani and Foreign Minister Qureshi 
attended an abbreviated (approximately one-hour) October 9 
National Assembly debate on the Kerry-Lugar bill, during 
which Qureshi made brief remarks.  The Foreign Minister 
informed the National Assembly that the Prime Minister had 
instructed him to return to Pakistan from Washington to brief 
the parliamentarians.  Commending the assembly for its 
"healthy debate" on Kerry-Lugar, Qureshi called for a 
"balanced" and "dispassionate" discourse in addition to the 
expressed dissent.  He reassured the parliamentarians that 
the government "will never surrender Pakistan's sovereignty" 
and would "never compromise" on its nuclear program.  He 
informed that in his frank and candid meeting with U.S. 
officials, he made it clear that the Pakistani government 
"will never let anyone micro-manage Pakistan." 
 
¶9. (SBU) MQM's Abdul Qadir Khanzada, PML-N's Makhdoom Javed 
Hashmi and Ahsan Iqbal, and PML-Q's Marvi Memon also spoke 
during the October 9 debate.  MQM's Khanzada, a member of the 
coalition, was measured in his remarks.  He said that 
Kerry-Lugar was a very important bill deserving of thorough 
study and that MQM's legal experts are in the process of 
reviewing it.  (Note:  Fouzia Khan, a long-time MQM member, 
told poloff following the debate that MQM will decide its 
position on the bill in the next day or two.  End Note.). 
Khanzada added that the MQM was not taken into confidence 
when the PPP was reviewing the bill.  MQM head Altaf Hussain 
was unhappy about this failure to consult with MQM, he said. 
Khanzada stated there should be an all-parties conference 
(including parties not in parliament) to review the bill 
before moving forward. 
 
¶10. (U) PML-Q's Marvi Memon said that Pakistan should not 
tolerate any interference in its nuclear program and 
suggested that perhaps a clause should be added to the 
Pakistani Constitution making it a treasonous offense to 
compromise the nuclear program.  She charged that "Mr. Obama 
will be deciding regional security" in South Asia through 
this bill and that RAW and the Mossad will be given greater 
entree.  She added that clauses in Kerry-Lugar "fuel the 
civil-military divide," and accused the government of having 
sold out the country's nuclear program and sovereignty by 
accepting this bill. 
 
¶11. (U) Hashmi, a major PML-N figure who has fallen out with 
Nawaz Sharif, criticized the government for having failed to 
protect the country's interests and declared that Pakistan 
had been "robbed."  He equated Kerry-Lugar to a drone attack 
on Pakistan.  He charged that the U.S., having failed in 
Afghanistan, is now focusing on Pakistan and turning it into 
a "battlefield."  He claimed that the "war machines" of other 
Muslim countries (i.e., Iraq, Iran) are being dismantled and 
Pakistan is next in line.  Hashmi asserted that while 
"America needs Pakistan,"  Pakistan does not need America and 
its money because "Pakistan is not a poor country, it's a 
poorly administered country." This statement led to applause 
 
ISLAMABAD 00002459  003 OF 003 
 
 
from fellow parliamentarians.  Iqbal, who does represent 
Nawaz Sharif, in very brief remarks before the October 9 
session adjourned, requested copies of four agreements 
referenced in Kerry-Lugar (one of which he said involved DoD 
and the Pakistani military) to facilitate a meaningful 
debate. 
 
¶12. (SBU) Comment:  Press reports on October 9 state that 
parliament is poised to bring up a resolution on the KLB for 
a vote.  However, we have heard from some sources that this 
is not likely.  KLB debates will resume the evening of 
Monday, October 12.  End Comment. 
PATTERSON