March 16, 1995


 A week after the killing of two U.S. consulate employees in Karachi,

 Pakistan, foreign commentators continued to deplore the violence, but

 also looked at the incident's impact on U.S.-Pakistani relations and

 international efforts to combat terrorism.  In Pakistan, editorialists

 promised that the attack would be treated with the "utmost" diligence by

 authorities but saw Islamabad walking a fine line "between international

 cooperation and foreign dictation" in prosecuting the case.  Karachi's

 centrist Dawn rejected U.S. Ambassador John Monjo's contention that

 since the murder of Americans overseas is a crime under American law,

 the perpetrators should stand trial in the United States.  The

 extradition of suspects would mean "a...great deal of embarrassment for

 Pakistan," the paper said.  Islamabad's radical Muslim was skittish

 about the offer of U.S. assistance in prosecuting the case, saying that

 "the parameters of such a cooperation should be clearly spelled out so

 that our sovereignty is neither compromised nor targeted."  Elsewhere,

 there was solid support for dealing with the case through established

 criminal justice procedures instead of through harsh undemocratic

 measures.  Dhaka's independent Daily Star said that the fact that "the

 United States has offered FBI assistance to track down the assailants is

 encouraging."  Hong Kong's independent Standard judged that a crackdown

 on Islamic radicals is "likely to radicalize already aggrieved

 populations" and actually promote more extremism.  An Indian paper said

 that the imposition of new sanctions on Pakistan would be useless and



Observers also tried to assess the extent to which the killings had

 damaged U.S.-Pakistani relations.  Some noted the belief held by the

 Benazir Bhutto government that the attack was part of a sinister design

 by extremists to bring an end to her government's initiative to improve

 ties with the United States.  Most analysts concluded that in fact, the

 incident will seriously hamper Prime Minister Bhutto's efforts to get

 the U.S. Congress to lift the ban on aid to Pakistan imposed in 1990

 because of the country's refusal to halt its nuclear arms program.  But

 writers also concluded that while Mrs. Bhutto "may be given the cold

 shoulder" by American investors during her upcoming trip to the United

 States, the fact that First Lady Hillary Clinton's trip to Pakistan has

 not been cancelled indicates that bilateral relations have not been

  seriously "impaired."


Journalists in Pakistan, Bangladesh and France expounded on the dangers

 of the spread of extremist violence.  But these writers also blamed the

 United States, in part, for this situation, saying that the Karachi

 attack is the legacy of huge amounts of money and arms distributed by

 the U.S. to anti-Communist guerrillas during the Afghan war.  In Paris,

 economic Les Echos hoped that the incident would open the eyes of U.S.

 officials to the existence of an international Islamic terrorist

 network, and, in an oblique reference to Algeria, make the U.S. "more

 circumspect about the radical Islamic movements which they sometimes

  treat with kindness."


 This survey is based on 34 reports from 10 countries, March 9-15.


 EDITOR:  Gail Hamer Burke 


                                    SOUTH ASIA


 PAKISTAN:  "A Judicious View"


According to Karachi's centrist Dawn (3/15), "The opinion expressed by

 Justice (retired) Dorab Patel, a former Judge of Pakistan's Supreme

 Court, that any move to try outside Pakistan the persons suspected of

 the murder of two American nationals in Karachi the other day would be

 inconsistent with the laws and constitution of this country merits

  strong endorsement....


"U.S. Ambassador John Monjo's contention that since the murder of

 Americans overseas is a crime under American law, the U.S. government

 would have the powers to pursue the perpetrators of the crime for the

 purpose of a trial in an American court appears to be based on a

 misunderstanding....  The other part of Ambassador Monjo's reported

 statement that the suspect persons could be brought to justice in the

 United States in addition to whatever measures the Pakistan government

 may take for their trial appears to be even more problematic.  If such a

 thing happened, it would in effect amount to a second trial of the

 suspects, something that is specifically barred under the fundamental

 rights provided in the Constitution....  Ambassador Monjo should feel

 reassured by the fact that the murder of the two American nationals in

 Karachi has been universally condemned in Pakistan.  There is no

 question of the crime being viewed except with the utmost sense of

 compunction. There should be no reason for the ambassador, or any other

 American dignitary, to believe that the demands of justice would not be

 fully met if the trial of the suspects in the case is held in a

 Pakistani court of law.  On the other hand, it would be a matter of a

 great deal of embarrassment for Pakistan if the American authorities

 were to insist upon the suspects being sent outside the country to face

 a trial in the United States as in the similar case of the trial of a

  Mexican national cited by Justice Patel in his statement."


 "Karachi:  Cause And Effect"


Karachi's centrist News opined (3/15), "Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto

 has blamed the West for its role in creating the present conditions in

 Pakistan.  The Afghan war brought the Western nations in droves to

 Pakistan to assist in the 'holy war' against the Soviet Union.  But when

 the war ended, the West withdrew, leaving Pakistan to reap a rich

  harvest of problems."


 "U.S. Contribution To Extremism"


Peshawar's pro-opposition Frontier Post editorialized (3/15), "Quite

 apart from the U.S. policies toward Pakistan, extremism here is also

 fueled by the perception that the West is actively engaged in targeting

 Muslims be they in Bosnia, Kashmir, Chechnya or Palestine.  Given that

 perception, any government that seeks to maintain friendly or even

 normal relations with the West and particularly the United States--still

 seen to be running the show in a political and military context--

 confronts an uphill task in combating extremism....  If the issue of

 extremism is to be tackled effectively, not just in Pakistan but in the

 broader context, the United States and the West generally will have to

  credibly demonstrate a different, much more even-handed approach." 

 "Targeting Diplomats"


According to the Frontier Post (3/12), "Although the United States has

 reacted to the killing of the Americans in Karachi with restraint and a

 sense of realism, the tragedy may well have adverse implications for the

 prime minister's forthcoming tour of that country.  In a crucial sense,

 Wednesday's violence will almost certainly reinforce the current

 international perception about Pakistan being a society at war with



 "Who Should Tackle This Problem?"


Islamabad's radical Muslim held (3/12), "Terrorism at all levels and in

 every region deserves to be eliminated and condemned but the situation

 in Karachi is our problem and while we can seek help in better

 methodology and skill from those who have effectively overcome this

 problem, we will have to be very careful in handling the affairs of

 Karachi especially when there is evidence that foreign hands are

 involved in creating the law and order situation.  The parameters of

 such a cooperation should be clearly spelled out so that our sovereignty

 is neither compromised nor targeted.  We have already become a laughing

 stock for the rest of the world in not understanding the delicate

  difference between international cooperation and foreign dictation."


 "Fighting Out Terrorism"


Lahore's opposition, right-of-center Nation remarked (3/12), "While the

 killing of two U.S. Consulate employees in Karachi has evoked widespread

 indignation from Washington to Islamabad, and it seems as if the entire

 state apparatus in Pakistan has been jolted into action, the track

 record of our intelligence agencies in tracing culprits involved in acts

 of terrorism has been so outrageously poor that even vows of decisive

 action by the President and the Prime Minister do not inspire much

 confidence. And it would be a matter of shame if 'experts' were to be

 flown from Washington to investigate the crime....  Whether it is sheer

 incompetence or lack of political will to confront the prophets of

 terror, the government's credibility to meet the challenge of violence

 has slumped to an all-time low, raising serious doubts about its ability

  to salvage a modicum of law and order in the country."


 "Pakistan Nation Insulted"


The sensationalist, right-of-center Pakistan Observer asserted (3/12),

 "There seems to be no end to the humiliation handed out to our nation

 from Washington.  The latest in the series is the fast dispatch of a

 large contingent of detectives, forensic experts and ID kit makers

 subsequent to the murder of two Americans in Karachi....  By this heavy-

 handed and high-pressure approach, the United States has condemned this

 nation, its institutions, and its integrity in one go.  Washington

 appears to believe that we are a lesser breed, with no competence to

 probe crime, no knowledge of the due process of law and no idea what the

  concept of justice means."


 INDIA:  "Pakistan's Woes No cause For India To Gloat"


An analysis in the independent Times Of India (3/13) by contributing

 editor of the Economic Times Swaminathan Aiyar stated, "If Islamic

 terror spreads in Pakistan, it will spread to India too....  India can

 do little to curb the rise of Muslim militancy in Pakistan.  That

 country claims that Indian intelligence agencies have caused the

 sectarian mayhem in Karachi, a claim the international community does

  not take seriously.... 


"Many Indians want the United States to declare Pakistan a terrorist

 state and impose sanctions on it.  There is a small chance this could

 help us, a bigger chance that it will be counterproductive.  We must

 distinguish between terrorism sponsored by the state (as in Kashmir) and

 terrorism that undermines the state (as in the Shia-Sunni shootings and

 the murder of U.S. diplomats).  It would be extremely gratifying if U.S.

 pressure could end Pakistani state support to Kashmiri militants....

 Declaring Pakistan a terrorist state will not harm or deter killer

 groups, and will weaken those elements in the administration (admittedly

 not all) who want to control extremism....  Instead of depending on U.S.

 pressure, we need to focus on winning over the alienated people of the

 Kashmir valley.  This will take time, a decade or more, but there is no

  obvious alternative.... 


"Instead of gloating over Pakistan's travails, we need to see it as a

 bell that tolls for us too.  When the state is unprincipled, it created

 major problems for itself....  We cannot be saved from the consequences

 of such folly by asking for U.S. sanctions:  We must put our own house

  in order."


 "Price Of Riding Tiger Of Terrorism"


The United States, declared an editorial in the independent Times of

 India (3/10), "has had to pay with American blood for its policy of

  selectively riding the tiger of terrorism."


 "U.S. Should Reassess Ties With Pakistan"


An editorial in the independent Indian Express (3/10) judged that the

 incident "should serve as an eye-opener to the United States, which has

 been showing Pakistan considerable indulgence over the years."  Noting

 that despite hard evidence of Pakistani support to terrorists in the

 Kashmir valley, Washington "has been fighting shy of declaring Pakistan

 a terrorist state," the editorial found it "surprising that there is a

 body of opinion-makers in the United States who continue to view

 Pakistan as a trusted ally....  The killings should make Washington

 reassess the emerging scenario in Pakistan and its relations with



 "U.S. And The Subcontinent"


An editorial in the pro-Congress Daily (3/10) opined, "Now, when

 American lives have been lost in Pakistan, the U.S. secretary of

 state...has realized the 'dangers (the Americans) confront in the

 worldwide struggle against terrorism.'  The U.S. administration needs to

 be reminded that what is happening in Karachi is exactly what happened

 in Punjab some years ago and continues to occur sporadically in



 BANGLADESH:  "We Condemn"


The independent Daily Star opined (3/10), "Whether the aim of the attack

 on the Americans in Pakistan is to hamper the process of improvement in

 the U.S.-Pakistan relations is not yet clear.  But the government of

 Benazir Bhutto would like to believe that it was part of a sinister

 design to bring an end to her government's initiative to improve the

 bilateral ties.  The fact that the U.S. First Lady's visit to Pakistan

 later this month will go ahead as planned shows that America has

 confidence in the host country.  However, Benazir's visit to the U.S.

 next month with the aim of inviting American investors to her country

  may be given the cold shoulder. 


"To know that the United States has offered FBI assistance to track down

 the assailants is encouraging.  The involvement of the U.S. intelligence

 might add sophistication to the process of investigation hopefully

 leading to an apprehension of the assailants.  We sympathize with the

 bereaved families of the victims and express our outright condemnation

  of such an act of terrorism."


 "Killing Of U.S. Diplomats Strongly Condemned"


Independent Banglabazar Patrika (3/9) commented, "Armed attacks are not

 usually made on diplomats even during wars....  Yet we had to watch the

 brutal killing of two diplomats....  The incident is a violation of all

 international conventions and practices.  We strongly condemn the

 incident and hope that violence and barbarism will decrease in Pakistan.

 We also hope that Pakistan will be able to uphold its position as a

  civilized nation, not a militant one."




 BRITAIN:  "Alarm"


The conservative Times (3/9) editorialized, "The murder of two American

 diplomats in Karachi yesterday has sown alarm in the government of

 Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's increasingly unconvincing prime minister. 

 Ms. Bhutto is due to visit America next month and the killings, coming

 in the wake of the widely-publicized trial for blasphemy of a teenage

 Christian boy, are bound to ensure that her welcome in Washington will

  be much less effusive than she would like.


"The murders are accounted to be in reprisal for the extradition from

 Pakistan to America of Ramzi Ahmed Yusuf....  Ms. Bhutto has condemned

 the killings as part of a 'well-planned campaign of terrorism,' designed

 to 'create fear and harassment' in Karachi.  What she has not done,

 however, is to explain how she proposed to check the descent into

 anarchy of her country's commercial capital.  Karachi is now an urban

 battleground whose resemblance to Beirut increases with each passing

 month....  Cynics have suggested that the government in Islamabad would

 do well to redeploy in Karachi those Pakistani UN peacekeepers who were

 recently withdrawn from Somalia....  The collapse of Karachi would be an

 economic catastrophe for Pakistan....  Karachi--like the rest of

  Pakistan--needs more democracy, not less."




The liberal Guardian (3/9) opined, "In April, Benazir Bhutto makes an

 official visit to the United States....  She wants the U.S. Congress to

 lift the ban on aid to Pakistan imposed in 1990 because of the country's

 refusal to halt its nuclear arms program.  The administration supports

 Ms. Bhutto's plea on the grounds that U.S. business in Pakistan is being

 hampered by the congressional ban.  Their analysis is only partially

 right.  U.S. investment, and above all the welfare of Pakistanis, is

 being undermined by extremism and violence, which the elected government

 is failing to curb.  The international community should be putting much

 greater pressure on Benazir Bhutto to confront the insidious enemy

  within before the country explodes."  


 FRANCE:  "Boomerang"


Renaud Girard concluded in an editorial in conservative Le Figaro

 (3/10), "The United States should do well not to forget the role it

 played in the Afghan war against the Soviets.  Pouring billions of

 dollars, the CIA blindly gave its support to the mujahideen and to the

 most fundamentalist Pakistani factions.  This money is boomeranging

 against the Americans today.  The West, too, bears responsibility for

  the evolution of the Islamist cancer."


 "A Reprisal Operation?"


Economic Les Echos (3/9) said in an editorial, "The assassination of two

 U.S. diplomats in Karachi yesterday seems to be a reprisal operation....

 The deaths of the two diplomats should incite U.S. leaders to open their

 eyes to the existence of an international Islamic terrorist network, and

 make them become more circumspect about the radical Islamic movements

 which they sometimes treat with kindness.  The fact that this happened

 precisely in Pakistan makes us wonder about the danger of manipulating

  such groups.


"One thinks that the United States is reaping, although unjustly, what

 it had sowed during the Afghan war against Soviet occupation.  In the

 '80s, Washington supported...the most reactionary Islamic resistance

 movements.  Today, these 'Afghans' are back in their homeland...and they

 often show violent opposition to those regimes who get along well with

  the West and America in particular."


 ITALY:  "Fundamentalist Spoilers"


Economic Il Sole-24 Ore (3/9) contended, "The death of the two American

 consular employees in Karachi is a triumph for those who want to restore

 isolationism and obscurantism in the 'country of the pure.'  No symbol

 could have been more immediate and effective or have an equally

 resounding echo in the world.  The reason for the terrorist attack is

 probably a reprisal for the arrest and the handing Pakistani

 authorities of Ranzi Ahmen Yousef, the alleged organizer of the '93

 World Trade Center terrorist attack....  Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto

 is scheduled to visit the United States in less than a month.  The

 fundamentalists have spoiled what was to be the most important trip

 abroad by Bhutto, the time to reassure the United States about the

  nuclear issue and to firm up contracts with American firms."


 RUSSIA:  "One Of The Assassinated Diplomats Was A Spy"


Under the headline above, Maria Smirnova and Andrei Smirnov observed in

 reformist, business Kommersant-Daily (3/10), "Following the American

 diplomats' slaying, the strife between the Sunni and Shiite communities

 has gone beyond the framework of an internal conflict, assuming an

 international character.  Even so, the assassination of the Americans

 will hardly impair the relationships between the United States and

 Pakistan any further.  In any case, Hillary Clinton is not going to

  cancel her visit to Pakistan this month." 


                                    EAST ASIA


 JAPAN:  "Potential Damage To Pakistan"


Liberal Mainichi's New Delhi correspondent Kojima wrote (3/10), "The

 killing of two U.S. consulate officials in casting a dark,

 long shadow over the Bhutto government's ability to maintain law and

 order in Pakistan.  The attack is also adding a new twist to violence

 sapping Prime Minister Bhutto's bid to portray Pakistan as a moderate,

 Islamic nation open to Western investment.  If terrorist attacks against

 Westerners continue, U.S. and European investment will decline sharply,

 throwing the female prime minister's economic growth program into



"The ambush occurred at a sensitive moment for Bhutto, who is visiting

 Washington in April to promote efforts by the United States and Pakistan

 to put their nuclear dispute aside and build a new relationship based on

 economic ties.  Using her status as a female prime minister of an

 Islamic republic, Mrs. Bhutto is also trying to foster the image of

  Pakistan in the Western world as an outward-looking, stable democracy."


 HONG KONG:  "Shockwaves"


The independent Hong Kong Standard opined (3/10), "The shockwaves from

 this affair will reverberate far beyond the borders of Pakistan.

 Fundamentalism is a threat to more secular Islamic regimes in, for

 example, Egypt and Algeria, which are cracking down on fundamentalists

 for self-preservation.  But drastic repression is not only an affront to

 democracy, it is, ironically, likely to radicalize already aggrieved

 populations and promote the very Islamic extremism that rattled regimes'

  military backers seek to contain.


"There is irony, too, in the fact that Washington reacted to the World

 Trade Center bombing by showing Americans that it protects them and puts

 their anxieties above foreign criticism.  By doing so, however, it may

  have put other U.S. citizens around the world at risk."


 THAILAND:  "Pakistan Deserves Support"


The lead editorial of the top-circulation, moderately conservative

 Bangkok Post held (3/13),  "Pakistan and its terrible killings in

 Karachi are at the center of the world's eyes at the moment.  But the

 threat of terror is not restricted to any nation or area.  It can strike

 from anywhere at any time.  Pakistan deserves full support from our

  country and others, not least because terrorism worries us all."


 "Bhutto Government Has To Bear Repercussions Of Zia Regime"


Noting that the current situation could create hurdles for further U.S.

 commitments to invest in Pakistan, the independent Nation told its

 readers (3/11), "The dictatorship of Zia ul-Haq was blindly supported by

 the West during the Cold War because it was fervently anti-Communist.

 Sadly, the repercussions in the post-Cold War are being borne by a

  democracy in Pakistan trying to instil law and order in the country."