Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Nightmare in the Balkans, An Army Story



 Nightmare in the Balkans, An Army Story
By Felicia Whatley

I enlisted in the Army Reserves from Albuquerque, New Mexico a few months from graduating high school. I had early acceptance into UMass Boston and joined the Reserves because I enjoyed Junior Marine Corps ROTC and my high school internship at Kirtland Air Force base. My independent attitude would have lasted five minutes in the Marines and the Air Force didn’t seem like enough of a challenge.
My recruiter understood I was going to college in Boston and explained to me the college benefits the Army offered. I was idealist and stupid. I made it quite clear that I didn’t want going to drill to be about the money. The detail I was firm about was being able to choose my job. I wanted to be a paralegal. I thought I was going to go school doing Pre-law and then eventually law school. It was the summer of 2000 and I had no idea how much life was going to change for me a year later.
There were no paralegal, or legal secretary positions available within a 50 mile radius to Boston. I figured with all the universities nearby other pre-law students had the same idea I had. So I thought about it and I asked if there was anything similar, something in the legal field. My recruiter thought about it and conducted a new search.
“There is a CID at Fort Devens in Ayer, Massachusetts. You could be a clerk in a Military Police Criminal Investigation Unit. You’d work for Special Agents.” That sounded very exciting and definitely in the legal field.
“You were in your school newspaper. Are you sure you don’t want to do Public Affairs?”
I immediately said, no. I thought there was no way I could write about what I wanted to in the military. So I took split option, which my boot camp would be that
So I did just that. The CID unit was great. The Special Agents had the same idea I did about military service. They had really good civilian jobs as cops, detectives, FBI, CIA and DEA agents. They didn’t need the Reserves for income; it was more of a hobby. Each agent handpicked their own two missions to do protective services for everybody but the president. But it was the ultimate boys club. I was the youngest, the only Private and one of two females. The other female was rather masculine and was a high ranking unit administrator. The men treated me well. They would read my newspaper articles, crack jokes with me, and when I got ready to head to admin school run with me for encouragement. They treated me like a little sister and the UA hated it. I was young and I didn’t fully understand it at first, but there was a bit of resentment and it had something to with sexual preferences.
One of the agents tried to explain it to me once. The UA Warrant officer Bucannon had an alternative lifestyle and men in the Army will always treat her differently. I was pretty and feminine and was treated favorably. The UA attempted to give me a counseling statement, a written statement, and in this case declaring fault, because I was late to drill. I didn’t have a car the first year of college and two of the agents, one coming from the Cape, would pick me up and drive me an hour to drill each month. This time Agent McLaughlin was running late, so we were all late. The UA pulled me into her office and was starting to unload a bunch of rules and regulations I messed up on McLaughlin and O’Connor came running into the office and stopped her mid-sentence. They said they were part of my chain of command and had a right to be there. She started up again and McLaughlin cut her off and explained how it was his entire fault. He dismissed me. I glanced at Bucannan on the way out. She was angry at me and furious she couldn’t reprimand me. I could see it in her face.
A similar situation happened a few months later. I can’t remember what the deficiency was but it was over before it even started, with the same result. I shrugged it off. Around this time, a couple of the guys were joking about “ate up” Army Postal units. Warrant Officer Smith was laughing about numerous EO complaints. I didn’t know what that was. I figured it just went along with the “going Postal” joke.
 After 9/11, all of the agents were swept up immediately and sent to the Pentagon to clean up the mess. There were only five us left from the unit that hadn’t been activated for military service. It was the support staff: a few clerks, a couple of new military policemen waiting to get certified as agents, the unit administrator, and me. Even the commander got transferred and told he was to prepare for a mobilization with another unit. A new girl came into the unit this drill. She was going to be our new mechanic. The Unit Administrator was now the acting commander. She called a meeting.
She explained that the unit was transforming. Then she turned to me and the new girl and said, “This is a stepping stone for you two. I will not promote you.” I found myself nodding along and then it hit me like pile of bricks. I sat there. What could I do? What could I say? To make matters worse she wanted me in her office afterwards. She had that tone of voice like I was about to be reprimanded. This time there were no agents to rescue me.
She said I had an unprofessional attitude, and she had a list of rules and regulations I would have adhere to or I would loose rank and pay. I was a Private First Class by then. I swallowed hard.  And then she said something strange. She said I was not allowed to put my civilian clothes on after drill to drive home in. She handed me the form and “Sign here.” I don’t know what possessed me but I looked at her square in the face and said “No.” Then I walked across the room straight to the trash can. I took the counseling statement and tore it into four pieces and threw it away. She was shocked and horrified. Before she could say anything I opened the door, grabbed my keys and walked out the building door. It was Saturday and the duty hours were almost over. For me, the day was definitely over. I got in my car and drove home.
The four of the MPs in training pulled me into an office the next day. They handed me a revised version of the counseling statement. It could have been a novel. This one was at least ten pages long. My parents had moved to Texas for the past year but the job was only temporary. He took a high paying, high risk job, hired in attempt to save a franchisee of Drug Emporium from bankruptcy.  It was unsalvageable.
 I decided not to go back to UMass. I moved home with my father but not without having one more fallout with Bucannon. I was the assistant news editor of the school paper and after 9/11, I got the CID unit to put me in for the military journalism school. I wasn’t needed as a clerk. I wanted to make a difference in something I knew I was I was good at. I was over my fear of being over edited. But I wasn’t going to the print journalism school. The UA Bucannon said, since I wasn’t coming back to Massachusetts, the Reserve center in Massachusetts shouldn’t have to pay for my training. She asked where I would be. My father was taking an upper management job in Winn Dixie in Charlotte, North Carolina and we were moving there soon. She said she would transfer me to a unit there.
My family moved to Charlotte Summer of 2002 and I moved with them. I transferred to Winthrop University pursuing a Communications degree. It was my first day of class on a Friday. I settled in for Com 101 and sat near the front. The professor began his introduction. He was starting to explain about his adventures and tribulations as a Vietnam journalist. All of a sudden my cell phone started ringing. I glanced at the number. It was a North Carolina number. Puzzled, I ran out of class and answered the call.
“Hello?”
“Where are you!? You are supposed to be at your Army drill! You are AWOL!” the angry female voice yelled.
“Um, who is this?”
“PFC Whatley, this is your First Sergeant Cahill of the 312th Postal Unit. We are in the field in Columbia today, tomorrow and Sunday. Why aren’t you here?”
I explained I was in class and would call back. I joined up the next day in the field after being issued a sleeping bag and a few items for the field. I met the First Sergeant in person. She was just as angry and short in person. I didn’t understand how I ended up in a postal unit. I was not postal qualified and did not have a secret clearance. I started asking questions on how I could get a transfer to a public affairs unit. Cahill just looked at me strange and dismissed my inquiry. She was black, southern, chubby and spoke with a deep accent. I could barely comprehend her, because she put her verbs at the end of the sentence.
Most of the unit was black and lived in the rural areas of North and South Carolina. I felt very isolated and out of place. We spent the rest of Friday running in the woods, in the rain. I didn’t get issued any raingear or flashlights. I was wet, cold, and I couldn’t see anything, but I was yelled at continuously, so I kept moving. This wasn’t boot camp. Why would they act like that?
 The next morning after breakfast some Colonel who oversaw the Army Reserves in the Carolinas and Alabama told us to huddle in. He had an announcement. He congratulated us and told us we were deploying to Bosnia for a postal mission with Rebecca Cahill as the First Sergeant and Sarah Kuhaneck, a young Lieutenant as the commander.
Most of the unit was not physically fit or educated. Right after it was announced the unit would be deploying, half to Bosnia and then the other half to Iraq, twenty percent of the unit went AWOL absent with out leave; they basically stopped showing up for drill. Some even moved. Another twenty percent started pissing hot for drugs and a few conveniently and immediately got pregnant. There was no camaraderie, and discipline only through fear. I knew immediately that these people did not join the Army Reserves for the same reasons I did.
I was stunned and horrified. I began doing research on how I ended up in the unit and what I could do to change my situation. I was supposed to sign paperwork for the gaining unit. Bucannon bypassed that. I went to recruiters and job liaisons. They said all I needed was a letter of acceptance from another unit nearby. I got a letter of acceptance from the public affairs unit in North Carolina, willing to slot me as clerk and retrain me as a journalist. I brought it to drill the next month. I presented the documentation and spoke to two sergeants on how I wasn’t a postal clerk and just didn’t approve this transfer. They didn’t know what to say so they got the First Sergeant. She refused to sign the paperwork.
So I did a lot of thinking and decided I would put my paperwork in for active duty.  I would rather do three years active duty and go to Iraq as a journalist than do a tour to Bosnia with this unit. The First Sergeant was always angry and chewed us all out whenever she addressed us. I couldn’t imagine ten months of that. I had a conditional release from the Reserves drafted. I met with First Sergeant Cahill and she refused to sign the paperwork.
The second month I was in the unit, we received official mobilization orders to begin January 1, 2003. The next weekend drill we were bused to Fort Bragg to begin intense soldier skills training. We were told nothing. I was anxious and scared. We were told to get all of our gas mask gear on quickly. I did so but there was something wrong. The mask would not seal. Air was escaping and entering around the sides. I couldn’t breath. I started hyperventilating and was anxiously trying to loosen the ties so I could get it off. I finally ripped it off by pulling the whole thing through my hair and over my head. I almost passed out. What went wrong? I looked at the mask and it said “L” for large. The supply sergeant issued me a large. I couldn’t have been more than 110 pounds. “We are preparing to deploy and they issued me a large gasmask. Does it LOOK like I need a large gasmask?”
A black female Staff Sergeant Jennings looked up and me and said, “Yeah. You need one. You have a big mouth.” A couple laugh and high five her.
“Great, so we are going be dead because we are unprepared, but its ok we’ll be happy because we’re all ghetto on the block. Is there ANY good leadership here?”
Jennings launches forward offended and pissed. She starts to open her mouth and a male’s voice coming up the stairs says, “Who said that?” We are called to attention as a high ranking officer enters the room. First Sergeant Cahill introduces the important Colonel from Fort Bragg. He asks his question again. I am pointed out and am told to follow him and the First Sergeant to his office. He asked me to explain what the problem was.
I explained the angry isolating climate, the incessant yelling all the time. We where never told what any of the plans were, not even the training schedule. We were dropped off at Convenience marts and told to “go find dinner” on multiple occasions. Spc. Racki was hospitalized for severe dehydration. The Lieutenant kept arguing with the doctors to release her and return her to training. After seven hours of harassment the doctors released Racki, still throwing up and returned her to the field. The equipment I have or haven’t been issued, like the rain gear or sensitive inspectable items, like the gas mask, have been too big or missing. These are safety and health and welfare issues. I didn’t feel safe in this unit.
“Bosnia has been a rotational deployment for years. The chain of command knew for at least a year when they were going and only now is preparing their unit to go.  I’m not supposed to be in this unit in the first place, but since I’m not doing drugs, getting pregnant, or going AWOL, I’m trapped with the most miserable people I have ever met. I wouldn’t trust anyone in the unit with my tooth brush let alone my life.”
The Colonel tried to question my patriotism and soldierly skills.  I asked if he had ever deployed. He said no and got quiet. “PFC Whatley will get her transfer and not deploy with the 312th.  Agreed First Sergeant?”
“Yes, she will get her transfer soon,” said Cahill. He lied and she lied, and I knew it.
As we were waiting for formation, Cahill was standing with a lady I hadn’t seen before a Sergeant First Class Smith, a tall black lady with long red painted, unauthorized finger nails. They were laughing and Cahill pointed to me and said something, and then Smith retorted, “Oh yeah, she is definitely going.”
We were called to attention and the platoon filed into formation. Sergeant First Class Smith was introduced as a being from the headquarters in Alabama. She was in charge of making sure we got trained up for our deployment. She addressed us.
She told us how her brother died in Vietnam and she understood personal sacrifice. She said, “For those of you whining, if I were out there with you I would shoot you.”
I hastily finished up the semester. January came so quickly. We had a send off and promotion ceremony. All the Privates were made Specialists, including me. I didn’t fell like I earned it. I had difficulty breathing and didn’t pass my two-mile run.
So we deployed. We flew first to Germany for a month of postal training. I befriended Spc Racki, Spc. Ritchie, and Spc. Bee, and in the evenings we were released to do whatever we wanted. We were based near Amberg so we would take the cabs into the city and go to the local restaurants and pubs.
I made a phone call to my parents and showed up to the bowling alley a little later. Sgt Pew was outside and met me as I headed toward the door. It was five o’clock on a Sunday and he was already falling over drunk. “Get in the cab right now; we are leaving now,” he was yelling. He had to have been drinking all day.
“No, I don’t think I’m going to go,” I said turning to leave. He ran out in front of me and physically stopped me.
“Get in the car now. I own you Spc. Whatley!”
I got away from him and ran back to the barracks. I went to sleep depressed. I told a friend and she told the First Sergeant what happened. It didn’t matter. When I got to Bosnia, I was assigned first shift, the 4am shift, and Sgt. Pew was my first line supervisor. I felt uncomfortable around him.
I won the post 5 K run in my bracket and I found a way to write and publish. I wrote an essay to the Public Affairs commander on post why I wanted to contribute to the post paper. One-thousand words later, Major Wall called Lieutenant Kuhaneck and said, “My mission is more important than yours. I can either pull Spc. Whatley out from underneath you or you can let her come on her own time to write for us.” My commander was not happy, but agreed I could come on my off time. I did just that. I unloaded the trucks until noon and then did a few hours at the PA shop. I was tired, but it was worth it.
It was around the third month of the deployment. I got to the post office in the morning and First Sergeant was there. She was going to assist in unloading the truck. We opened up the back doors of the truck and Sgt. Pew jumped in. The First Sergeant looked at me and said, “Go get the belt. We always need to use a belt.” I looked at her, scratched my eyebrows and said, “Ah, what belt, Top?”
She was taken back and suddenly angry. “What? She then mumbled something, and then, “Go to the rooms and wake everybody up. Tell them they have five minutes to get dressed and be at the post office.”
So I did. Nobody was very happy about this. “Five minutes, are you serious?” said Racki.
When everybody got there the First Sergeant formed us up and addressed us. She was angry, slurring, and again putting her verbs at the end of the sentence. I still couldn’t tell if she was talking about a conveyer belt or lifting belts. Halfway through her ranting she turned to Sgt. Le and said in front of the entire platoon of enlisted, “How could you? You know how I feel about this.” Sgt. Le was probably one of the nicer sergeants I had worked with. But he had a communication issue. He was born and raised in Vietnam and his English was broken. She continued on for a few more minutes and then said, “Any questions or comments?”
Reluctantly, my hand went up. “With all due respect, I was born and raised in the U.S. and I still can’t understand you.”
A young enlisted Specialist on my shift said, “She just called the First Sergeant stupid.” There was some muffled laughter. The First Sergeant shrunk and stepped back. We were quickly released. I didn’t know what to say, but after that we started using both the conveyer belt and lifting belts on my shift.
My shift had three junior enlisted, all the youngest in the unit. We got up at 3am every morning to unload the truck with incoming mail for the troops on Eagle Base. Because I had no postal certification, I was legally not allowed to work in any other job, especially the ones that dealt with the transaction of money. Sgt. Pew was motivated, and the First Sergeant and Lieutenant rarely got involved and oversaw, so nobody on my shift got a day off.  My shift went three months without a day off unloading 300-pound parcels, 70 pounds or less every day. The afternoon shift that loaded up the truck with outgoing mail each got a day and a half off every week. By the third month we were all exhausted, delusional and tired. We were talking strange and we started breaking physically. Spc. Guice pulled her back out and was on painkillers and muscle relaxers, Spc. Witiker had tendentious and arthritis, and Spc. Racki had shooting pains up her legs, muscle spasms, was and dropping packages.
About a weekend after the belt incident, Spc. Bee woke up cussing and frantically running around. “Look what time it is! I’m late for work. I’m going to get an Article 15,” she said.
Spc. Ritchie was a tough, robust, correctional officer back home. She got up from her bed more than mildly irritated said, “For God’s sakes, Bee. Go back to bed. It is your day off.”
A month later around 8’oclock I walked over to the Return-to-Sender desk, where I often worked in the middle of my shift after the truck was unloaded. Spc. Laney was there. He was on the phone with his wife. Laney was in his late 30s. He was always impeccably groomed and probably noticeably had the nicest set of teeth in the unit. He had two teenage kids. Laney was obviously having marital problems. I walked into some of the conversation. He was screaming calling his wife profanities, and said that she better be home when he called. It was strange because Laney was having an affair with another soldier in our unit who was stationed in Tazar, Hungary. In hindsight, the command separated them on purpose. Spc. Boyd was also married with children.
I was embarrassed to walk in on that. But I couldn’t go anywhere. After ten minutes of his angry threatening, I started getting concerned. I told my first line supervisor my concerns. It was taken up to the First Sergeant. She said she would handle it later. My shift ended and I headed to the PA shop. When I got back to the sleeping quarters later that day, Spc. Ritchie told me what happened after I left.
Laney locked and loaded his M16 and tried to force the driver out of the postal truck so he could drive to Tazar, three hours away to see his girlfriend. Two other Postal soldiers tackled him and took his weapon away. I was told the matter was to be handled internally. 
What would you do? Should I continue to raise this issue to supervisors? Or keep this quiet to not cause more friction?
Well I didn't stay quiet. There were many "forced retirement parties" to attend to, and my unit was grateful for standing up for them. I was always taught to put your fellow soldiers' needs before your own. I did and life was very difficult for me. But I won in a way that I brought back moral. We pour our hearts and souls into what it means to be a good soldier. I follow another code: Integrity, which means you do what needs to be done. Well 312 Postal that was the most difficult mission I have ever been through. I will always remember that during those months far from home I found me and I am proud of me. God Bless America and thank you troops for pushing on.  




Saturday, September 24, 2011



International Threat: Pakistan
A State in Need of a Better Fate
Capstone Public Affairs International Relations
 May 20, 2011
By Felicia Whatley


Introduction:

In this paper I will establish what a failed state is, how Pakistan is a failed state, and why that is detrimental to the international community. Pakistan’s destabilized region is a hotbed for terrorism. Most major terrorist attacks of the 21st century link back to Pakistan where Al Qaeda and the Taliban train and house some of their top leaders and training camps. The big fear is Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, which is the now the world’s 5th largest. The fear is that one of the terrorist groups will get control of the nuclear arsenal. Pakistani Army has admitted they do not have control over their government, their streets, and their cities especially in the tribal regions bordering Afghanistan. It is important to note that the war in Afghanistan has had a profoundly negative impact on Pakistan as the displaced citizens fled the war torn region to Pakistan, where public works and resources are scarce. 
            I will establish what some of the major problems facing Pakistanis and what a few solutions and policy suggestions will be for the U.S. officials who play an active role in aiding the country’s military and public works’ programs. Pakistan is the second country to receive the most amount of aid from the United States. Though, the U.S. has been criticized for its drone attacks perhaps killing civilians, Pakistan is very reliant on America’s funding. I will attempt to set forth policies that will help Pakistan get out of its failed state status. As a failed state, its country is a threat to all other states in the region and all over the world.
            Some of the problems Pakistan has are rooted in the imbalance of government power and military control. Pakistan’s history of development and the many wars with India haunts them. Its strategic interest for the U.S. due to the wars in the Middle East adds to an already volatile environment. The military is thought to have too much power over the government but not enough power to protect the state. We will evaluate the military coups and the political powers’ assassinations. I will prove that it is in the international community’s best interest to have more involvement and intervention in Pakistan until the nation can protect itself and other regions from the criminal terrorism that plagues it. Pakistan has been dubbed the most dangerous state for a reason. Now is the time to help fix that before it becomes an ultimate international center of crisis. It is in the U.S.’s best interest to become more politically involved and deliberate as to where the funding should go.
            Corruption is widespread. It has been noticed that the president of Pakistan is one of the wealthiest in the nation. How can this be when so many of Pakistan’s citizens cannot make their basic needs? Is that where a portion of our billion-dollar funding for their military goes? What is most devastating is the illiteracy rates. The majority of women do not know how to read and only 60% of men do. If the country wants to invest in its future it has to start with the education or lack thereof. The country has schools—religious Islamic schools that teach extremist thought to many Saudis. This just adds to Pakistan’s reputation of being a dangerous place to be. The radical tribal leaders either go unchecked or get murdered by U.S. drone attacks. The Pakistani military does raids as well, and though they seem over funded they are overpowered by the insurgency. They need America’s help but they also need to make some major changes. Military coups should be a thing of the past, but for Pakistan it is a recent past that blemishes their future and derails the opportunity for its citizens to have trust in their government. Let’s help overcome the corruption and re-establish that trust as well as learn how to help the 10th most failed state Pakistan.
           
           





Felicia Whatley
Capstone
Is Pakistan a Failed State?

Abstract

The term failed state is often used to describe a state having failed politically or economically at some of the basic conditions and responsibilities such as an erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions; for it to not be able to provide public services; and/ or not be able to interact with the other states as a member of the international community. There can be widespread corruption, crime, and a stark downfall in the state’s economy. A failed state can be a threat to the international community. “The Reagan administration also cheerfully tolerated Pakistan’s slide toward radical Islamist extremism under the rule of Muhammad Zia-u-Huq, one of the brutal dictators supported by the current incumbents in Washington and their mentors. Reagan and associates also looked away politely awhile their Pakistani ally was developing nuclear weapons, (Chomsky, Noam: Failed States, 16). Recently, we have seen the United States military do drills on the risk that the Taliban gets control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
            Is Pakistan a failed state? The Taliban and Al Qaeda have their training camps within the country of Pakistan. “South Waziristan was a haven—and now the base from hundreds, perhaps thousands of Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters who had fled Afghanistan. Every major terrorist attack since 2004—London, Madrid, Bali, Casablanca, Istanbul, and Mumbai—has been traced back to the tribal areas of Pakistan,” (Weaver, Mary Anne, Pakistan: Deep Inside the Most Frightening State xvii). If it is a question of power and control, do the militias have too much power? Should the international community get more involved?


Defining a Failed State:
            The term failed state is often used to describe a state having failed politically or economically at some of the basic conditions and responsibilities such as an erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions, for it to not be able to provide public services and/or not be able to interact with the other states as a member of the international community. There can be widespread corruption, crime, and a stark downfall in the state’s economy. A failed state can be a threat to the international community. Democratic consolidation is influenced by a variety of factors, including economic development, political leadership and the attributes of formal institutions. The existence of an effective state is one essential ingredient that is lacking in some countries. In the current debate, four different approaches to engaging failed and collapsed states have emerged. The revivalist school is committed to resuscitating dysfunctional states and is currently the entrenched approach in official circles. The ‘shared sovereignty’ framework advocates various levels of quasi permanent intervention in difficult cases of state failure or collapse. Territorial restructuring of states calls for the recognition of de facto sovereignty and the restructuring of de jure international boundaries when necessary. The fourth and most controversial approach, which focuses on stateless zones and uncertainty, insists on a historically grounded analysis of modern statehood as a failed global project, (GFN SSR).
            Robert Jackson’s work on the weakness and failure of the state in the developing world was a debate of loss of sovereignty, and even with a loss of sovereignty the failed state can still prevail. Jackson defined this as negative sovereignty: a normative framework which upholds the de jure legal sovereignty of states in the developing world, in contrast to ‘positive sovereignty’ in Europe in the 21st century which had emerged after states were consolidated and many colonies were given the right to lead themselves. “Such states, in theory, enjoy legal freedom from outside interference but they lack the ability to meaningfully function or provide public services, including order. Jackson described this as the ‘sovereignty game’,” (Newman) In Jackson’s ‘negative sovereignty game’ the statesmen tolerates and supports this as a result of the ‘uncritical and widespread faith in self determination or equal sovereignty’.
Again how sovereignty for the state verses the individual has been redefined for modern purposes. Though, this is not a paper about sovereignty, it is important to evaluate that a state in crisis failed mode’s sovereignty is on trial because the dire need for judication and intervention from other states. One may argue if a country is unable to defend itself from enemies within and abroad then they do not have sovereignty. This may not be the exacerbated truth, but it is definitely important to understand how such a state values its military and fears its loss of independence.  A failed state may not have either definition of sovereignty, yet instead is dependent on outside aid and jurisdiction, even in a country like Pakistan where they have set dictatorship government. We live in a unique time where the Middle Easterners and Northern Africans are revolting and demanding democracy and perhaps an old and new form of sovereignty, where the citizens have a say in what happens in their own state. Perhaps globalization can be blamed for the erosion of some state’s stateness. I am sure North Korea’s Kim Jung Ill would make that argument and for many years China and its wall wished to keep out globalization. Within this paper I will discuss how food products with U.S. labels on it are not as welcome as you may think in Pakistan despite the poverty and starvation. Globalization is a form of expansionism and according to the scholar Newman, an invasion that can weaken the state. “Globalization is sometimes seen as an important component of state weakness: ‘the processes known as globalization are breaking up the socio-economic divisions that defined the patterns of politics which characterized the modern period. The new type of warfare has to be understood in terms of this global dislocation.’ According to this argument, therefore, neoliberal economic forces have resulted in a weakening of state capacity and a weakening of the provision of public goods in states which are already fragile and often contested.”
            If it is question of power and control, do the militias have too much power? So, ‘the “failure” of the state comes with a growing privatization of violence. This is where the new wars were characterized by a multiplicity of types of fighting units both public and private, state and non-state, or some kind of mixture’,” (Newmen). An alternative but complementary explanation for failed states is that declining superpower support for states after the end of the Cold War – as the strategic importance of the developing world appeared to be in decline it undermined the integrity of some such states. Other analysts like Gerald B. Helman and Steven R. Ratner felt that the ‘negative sovereignty game’ put strain on the consequences of a weak state creating more civil war because of security problems locally or globally. The humanitarian aid would then be misappropriated. In Gerald B. Helman and Steven R. Ratner’s famous “Saving Failed States”, Foreign Policy, No. 93, article, they argued that the weak/failed states throughout the 90’s linked to international insecurity and the newer ideas of non-traditional security threats and they described the negative implications of such an action.
            The concept of failed states has attracted the attention of many analysts, and there are three mains poles of opinion.”. “Following Jackson, theories of conflict and instability increasingly point to the weakness of the state as a key factor in the onset of violent conflict – the ‘declining state’ or ‘the problem of the modern state’. Some scholars have put this into a broad social context, suggesting fundamental changes in the nature of conflict,” (Newman).

                        Failed states do not have to be weak states. In fact a strong failed state often is what makes it so dangerous, especially when talking about failed states in Africa or the Middle East. A day does not go by when a tragedy does not happen in Somalia, Haiti, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan. Where there is lawlessness, militias or terrorists are not contained. “Failed states need not be weak…the aggressive, arbitrary, tyrannical or totalitarian state would equally be regarded as having failed—at least according to the norms and standards of modern day international law,” states Chomsky. He goes on to say that even in the naked definition of what it means to be a failed state, the danger for its statesmen or the international community is at stake. “Even in the narrowest interpretation failed states are identified by the failure to provide security for the population, to guarantee rights at home or abroad, or to maintain functioning democratic institutions.” Even the concept of sovereignty is under attack in failed states. If we agree that personal freedoms embody a modern definition of sovereignty, then we much understand that in a failed state that has rights is under fire.
In Pakistan, children have to worry about getting blown up by a suicide bomber for playing in the streets or going to the market. And in Pakistan, schools are for a limited few. There are many jihad training camps and schools that Saudis send their kids to because they are numerous in Pakistan and they can afford to. If a state fails to provide basic services to its people, as Pakistan clearly does, then it is a failed state as I will diligently prove throughout the paper. For many reasons, if it should fall under the criteria of a failed state, then what should be done to help remedy this situation?


What Happens When States Fail:             
            How does it affect the international community when nation states fail? “Desirable international norms such as stability and predictability become difficult to achieve when so many of the globe’s newer nation-states waver precariously between weakness and failure, with some truly failing, and a few even collapsing. In a time of terror awareness, appreciating the nature of and responding to the dynamics of nation-state failure, and to restore the functionality of failed states is urgent policy questions of the twenty-first century,” (Rotberg). Failing states become an international threat when the government, economics, and military of a country are unstable. Nation states are also supposed to provide public goods for those within their borders. When that disintegrates, they lose faith in their own country and look for desperate means to provide for their families. In many cases they flee to neighboring nations hoping for more stability and safety. 
            When citizens cannot find work or are stricken and plagued with war in their neighbors, many flee to get away from that. A traditional definition of security and what it means for a state to protect that is still among some of the most important things that citizens value the most. Safety is one of the most important public good. When that fails, there is an upset in the state and often the economy is strained. “The state’s prime function is to provide that political good of security—to prevent cross-border invasions and infiltrations, and any loss of territory; to eliminate domestic threats to or attacks upon the national order and social structure; to prevent crime and any related dangers to domestic human security; and to enable citizens to resolve their differences with the state and with their fellow inhabitants without recourse to arms or other forms of physical coercion,” (Rotberg). The ability to provide many public goods is possible when security has been reinstated.  Most modern states are able to adjudicate disputes and provide norms for mores for a particular society. The state must have a working judicial system and enforceable set of laws to provide stability and reasonable punishment for its citizens’ crimes. Ideally, the political system will allow those it governs to participate freely, openly, and comprehensively in their political process. Much political dissidence, disobedience and unrest comes from citizens who are locked out of free participation of their politics and governments’ decisions. The embolism of sovereignty continues to be the important compass that nations need to be whole. A failed state often loses its sovereignty. “[Jeffery] Herbst goes so far as to recommend that states that cease to exercise formal control over parts of their nominal territories should lose their sovereignty, which is to be decertified. They should also lose sovereign status if they fail to project authority or fail to provide basic services outside a capital or a few cities,” (Rotberg). 
            You see it isn’t suggesting that the government necessarily has to embody democracy, but it at least encompasses diplomacy. Though, there is a movement all over the world, mostly in the Middle East and Northern Africa as citizens realize there aren’t fair democratic elections. These revolts were a long time coming and are forcing their governments to reassess and reshape how their countries conduct their governments, which is fundamental to civil rights and human rights. “Failed states are tense, deeply conflicted, dangerous, and contested bitterly by warring factions. In most failed states, government troops battle armed revolts led by one or more rivals,” (Rotberg).  The instability can lead to terrorism, gangs, or some form of crime among its citizens because the borders are not protected and its resources are strained. Often times, the official authorities in a failed state will have to fight a couple insurgencies, much of civil unrest, different degrees of communal discontent, and much of dissent directed at the state and at groups within the state, (Rotberg).
            Rotberg explained further that a failed state is often a state in anarchy that happens when there is tension between countering communities. Some newer failed states have differing ethnic, religions, and language factors that contribute to not being able to build a cohesive nation. Many of the recent holy wars were based on religious or ethnic identities. He states that state failure cannot be blamed on groups of diverse backgrounds. It can be a contributing factor as is the oppression of a minority, but often they are a main reason that adds to why a nation failed. Perhaps, poverty is another underlying factor. These may be reasons why a nation is at war but not necessarily why it is a failed state.
            “Many failed states flunk each of the tests, but they need not flunk all of them to fail overall, because satisfying the security good weighs very heavily,” (Rotberg). 
Other public goods that its citizens expect states to provide are homes, medical and health care, schools and other educational instruction, roads, railways, harbors and other infrastructure. The people want ways to conduct commerce, communications networks, money, banks, and a place where the citizens can exchange items and prosper. “Failed states are typified by deteriorating or destroyed infrastructures. As rulers siphon funds from state coffers, fewer capital resources remain for road crews, equipment and raw materials. When a state has failed or is in the process of failing, the effective educational and medical systems are privatized informally with a result of hodgepodging of shady schools and questionable health clinics,” (Rotberg).  In a failed state health care and education may be a luxury for the few that can afford it.  Yet the population may expect it to be a public good that should be more universal to access. When states fail, a country may not be able to provide such goods, especially if they are in a state of war and/ or poverty and starvation is rampant.  The government may focus their funding on their military instead.
            What can happen when a state fails according to Brennan M Kraxberger “Failed States: Temporary Obstacles to Democratic Diffusion or Fundamental Holes in the World Political Map” as various strengths and weaknesses from ‘number of strengths and weakness can be traced and shown how a state fails when:
  • The state revival strategy has been successful in countries with small territories although there is no consensus about how to reconstruct political institutions after state collapse.  
  • The shared sovereignty approach requires longer-term external oversight, which can promote transparency in the management of natural resources and monetary policy and can lead to better development outcomes. However, this approach may not aid larger failed states. Furthermore, the decay of institutions in collapsed states undermines negotiated power-sharing agreements between local and external actors.  
  • Territorial restructuring of states involves giving juridical sovereignty to regions demonstrating empirical sovereignty, thereby supporting the emergence of new territorial entities. Altering the territorial status quo through creative diplomacy would entail significant risks. However, proponents argue that such risks may be worth taking.  
  • According to the fourth approach, the government in a failed state is often viewed as a threat to indigenous cultural identities. Collective governance may be desired but the modern state model may not be. Thus, it advocates a return to pre-colonial stateless zones, although it fails to adequately address the question of what should replace modern states in regions where they are ill-suited.
            There is a significant need for creative approaches to failed and collapsed states. Whether state failure will be a temporary roadblock to political liberalization depends largely on the international context in which it operates. The necessity and emphasis on sovereignty demonstrates a country’s need to operate independently, but also it needs to provide services for its citizens. Interestingly enough Kraxberger uses the term “shared sovereignty”, which I can only imagine means a shared interest in the nation and its operations. This reminds me of Bosnia; the country was split for religious reasons. It is still seen as a collective region, but it is definitely no longer the old Yugoslavia. Many political scientists suggest that a failed state should be divided into many smaller more manageable regions. Kraxberger makes the argument for fragmentation.
  • Major powers have consistently opposed redrawing international boundaries.  
  • There have been more developments with regard to shared sovereignty arrangements but changes have been piecemeal and limited.  
  • Austere budgets and worries about neo-colonialism have been key factors limiting these quasi-permanent relationship


Why is Pakistan a Failed State?

            Pakistan is a failed state because it is corrupt, unable to secure itself for outside actors nor able to secure itself from within its borders, its economy is frail, and the country is unable to provide public works programs for its citizens. The Fund for Peace Failed Index goes into 12 criteria that the nation is judged on and on that basis the nation ranks as the tenth most failed state in the world. The change in rank from 2009 to 2010 is shown in parentheses and the three table headings correspond to those used by the Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy magazine. This is the current list for 2010.The report uses those 12 factors to determine the rating for each nation including security threats, economic implosion, human rights violations and refugee flows. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Failed_States_Index)


Country
Rank
Total
Demographic Pressures
Refugees and IDPs
Group Grievance
Human Flight
Uneven Economic Development
Economic Decline
Delegitimization of the State
Public Services
Human Rights
Security Apparatus
Factionalized Elites
External Intervention
Somalia
1
114.3
9.6
10.0
9.7
8.3
8.0
9.6
10.0
9.6
9.9
10.0
10.0
9.6
Chad
2
113.3
9.4
9.5
9.8
8.3
9.3
8.5
9.9
9.6
9.6
9.9
9.8
9.7
Sudan
3
111.8
8.8
9.8
9.9
8.7
9.5
6.7
9.9
9.3
9.9
9.8
9.9
9.6
Zimbabwe
4
110.2
9.4
8.6
8.8
9.7
9.4
9.6
9.6
9.4
9.5
9.2
9.5
7.5
Dem. Rep. of the Congo
5
109.9
9.9
9.6
8.6
8.0
9.5
8.7
8.8
9.0
9.4
9.8
8.9
9.7
Afghanistan
6
109.3
9.5
9.2
9.7
7.2
8.2
8.3
10.0
8.9
9.2
9.7
9.4
10.0
Iraq
7
107.3
8.5
8.7
9.3
9.3
8.8
7.6
9.0
8.4
9.1
9.5
9.6
9.5
Cen. African Rep.
8
106.4
9.1
9.3
8.9
6.1
9.2
8.4
9.0
9.2
8.8
9.7
9.1
9.6
Guinea
9
105.0
8.3
7.5
8.2
8.6
8.7
8.9
9.8
9.0
9.5
9.4
9.3
7.8
Pakistan
10
102.5
8.1
8.9
9.4
7.9
8.4
6.2
8.9
7.3
8.9
9.7
9.5
9.3

 

Indicators of a failed state

12 factors are used by Fund For Peace to ascertain the status of a country.

Social

  • Mounting Demographic Pressures
  • Massive Movement of Refugees or Internally Displaced Persons creating Complex Humanitarian Emergencies
  • Legacy of Vengeance-Seeking Group Grievance or Group Paranoia
  • Chronic and Sustained Human Flight

Economic

  • Uneven Economic Development along Group Lines
  • Sharp and/or Severe Economic Decline

Political

  • Criminalization and/or Delegitimization of the State
  • Progressive Deterioration of Public Services
  • Suspension or Arbitrary Application of the Rule of Law and Widespread Violation of Human Rights
  • Security Apparatus Operates as a "State Within a State"
  • Rise of Factionalized Elites
  • Intervention of Other States or External Political Actors
Pakistan was ranked tenth in the 2010 Foreign Policy and Fund for Peace Failed State Index. It was judged based on the twelve indicators above. 
2010 Failed State Index

                   Rank

Country

FSI
2010
Change compared to 2009
2010
Change compared to 2009
1
steady
114.3
positive decrease(0.4)
2
negative increase(2)
113.3
negative increase(1.1)
3
steady
111.8
positive decrease(0.6)
4
positive decrease(2)
110.2
positive decrease(3.8)
5
steady
109.9
negative increase(1.2)
6
negative increase(1)
109.3
negative increase(1.1)
7
positive decrease(1)
107.3
positive decrease(1.3)
8
steady
106.4
negative increase(1.0)
9
steady
105.0
negative increase(0.4)
10
positive decrease(1)
102.5
positive decrease(2.1)


Is Pakistan a failed state? The Taliban and Al Qaeda have their training camps within the country of Pakistan. “South Waziristan was a haven—and now the base from hundreds, perhaps thousands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters who had fled Afghanistan. Every major terrorist attack since 2004—London, Madrid, Bali, Casablanca, Istanbul, and Mumbai—has been traced back to the tribal areas of Pakistan,” (Weaver, Mary Anne, Pakistan: Deep Inside the Most Frightening State xvii). From the beginning of Pakistan’s independence in 1947, many wars plagued the nation. It was once ruled by British along with India. The land divided via religion—Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India. They fought for control of Kashmir on multiple occasions. The wars led to the country splitting for the Line of Control, but the wars continued between the two nations.
Pakistani President Iskandar Mirza declared martial law in 1958 and Commander in Chief Ayub Khan kept it in such a state until 1962 when a new Constitution was made.  Then power was turned over to dictator General Yayha Khan in 1969. Bangladesh demanded its independence from Pakistan in 1971 and successfully defeated Pakistani forces with help from India.  Then Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a leader from the Pakistani Peoples Party took control of the Pakistani government. A new Constitution was drafted and Bhutto took control of a few public works’ programs that helped land reform so peasants could have land. He took on the title of Prime Minister.  His nationalization efforts made him very unpopular and as a response, the Pakistan National Alliance was formed and an attempt at democracy happened. The election was thought to be set up and Bhutto won by a landslide in 1977.
            The PPP and the PNA worked to negotiate, but instead General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq as the Chief of Army Staff seized control of the government in a military coup. He reined for ten years as a dictator until he was killed in a suspicious plane crash in 1988. Afterwards, there were elections and the country was ruled by civilians for eleven years, but most were under Benazir Bhutto, who was dismissed twice as Prime Minister because of corruption charges. Then there was another military coup in 1999 as General Pervez Musharraf took control of the government, who later had to resign to avoid impeachment. Then Asif Ali Zardari (husband of Ms. Bhutto) was assassinated. So you see the country was never a true democracy but instead with long corrupt dictatorships. “The Reagan administration also cheerfully tolerated Pakistan’s slide toward radical Islamist extremism under the rule of Muhammad Zia u-Huq, one of the brutal dictators supported by the current incumbents in Washington and their mentors. Reagan and associates also looked away politely awhile their Pakistani ally was developing nuclear weapons, (Chomsky, Noam: Failed States, 16). Recently, we have seen the United States military do drills on the risk that the Taliban gets control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
Pakistan is different in that the aid increased after the Cold War because of strategic interests. One must keep into account that such dangerous wars have continued throughout the past century. Four times Pakistan has been at war with India and four times they have lost. Bangladesh broke away and very recently Mumbai was attacked by Pakistani militants. The death toll was almost 200 people killed. Jews, Israelis, British, and Americans were specifically targeted. One must ask, should the international community get more involved? Whatever has been done in the past to try to keep the terrorists at bay, is obviously not working now. If a failed state is one that cannot impose laws and protect its citizens as well as the international community, then definitely Pakistan would be a failed state. Every country has criminals but something of this large scale begs for intervention.
            Also it was a country plagued with wars from India, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda. Pakistanis suffered through two military coups. Knowing now that the military in Pakistan is disproportionately over funded verses the rest of the public programs tells me that perhaps the military in that country has too much power over its citizens. It is empathetic to note that the country has been at war since its beginning and worries that it must hold up a strong military, but at what cost? Thus far, Pakistan has survived two military coups and two assassinations. This situation is not sustainable and the army itself will crash and burn at some point, with horrific consequences. Meanwhile, the country is splitting further on ethnic and sectarian lines and is always one step away from economic chaos. No one, not the army, not the mainstream political parties, not the intelligentsia, has a coherent framework in which they can disengage from Islamist millenarian dreams and rebuild the country as a more normal country ‘developing’ country, said Ali, O.
The population in Pakistan is growing rapidly, along with a stark unemployment rate and a lack of educated adults. A newspaper Jung did a report in 2007 stating that the population will double by 2050. In 2007 when this report was done 70% were uneducated and resources were very thin.  “The population growth has caused an eight-time increase in the unemployment...With almost one third of the population living in abject poverty, 54 million people do not have access to safe drinking water ... 53.5 million are illiterates. The population explosion has led to the shortage of educational facilities, health services, housing units, food, living space, arable land and clean water,” (Ali). This imbalance of education and lack of resources is still true today. There aren’t enough public works programs to help the citizens of Pakistan. The population has increased by 50 million in the past 15 years, while the impoverished has doubled. Also the literacy rate for 2002 was half the population. Almost 60 percent of all men know how to read and only about 30 percent of all women can read. We can already see the stratification and lack of women’s rights in this country. It is devastating. 
At that time, the country set aside $107 million a year for education verses their $2 billion for their military—granted the country has been in multiple wars since its existence in 1947, but how will the country grow and complete with other nations if they are uneducated? Instead they have madrasses—Islamic schools that scatter the countryside adding to the theocracy of the state. “The state of Pakistani women has a powerful bearing on the condition of Pakistan. For example, two out of three women in Pakistan are uneducated. The importance of this fact lies in that many studies show that poverty, malnutrition and child labor are higher in societies where the women are uneducated,”(Sastry). Pakistani women's rights activist Ameera Javeria, in an article entitled “To Be a Woman in Pakistan is to ask for a Life of Subservience wrote:
“Pakistani women continue to be victims of an unjust society rooted in history and tradition. Lack of awareness about their rights and their need for education has added to their predicament. Most Islamic communities are averse to the idea of giving women social status equal to that of men. That a strong feudal elite still rules the roost in the vast countryside is a major impediment to enlightenment and democracy, while a powerful clergy rejects all notions of equality and freedom for women. Those women who rebel by asserting their rightful place in society are punished and considered immoral; many have been the victims of domestic violence, rape, and murder.”
Pakistan had a baby boom with 37% of the population are fifteen or below, but a large high infant mortality rate of over 67 deaths per 1,000 births, (www.foreignpolicy.com), due to a lack of a healthy system and sanitation.  There is a big risk for communicable diseases in this nation. These factors give Pakistan an 8.1 on the Failed State Index. It is a slight improvement from 8.3 the previous year. The amount of refugees and displaced population increased from 8.6 to 8.9. The worst that there could be is a 10 on the index scale, so as you can see so far the country ranks very high, unfortunately. 
There are about 1.4 million Afghanistan refugees who fled to Pakistan, which puts pressure on an already impoverished state, but it is the internally displaced people that really put a strain on the economy. Because of wars over 3 million Pakistanis had to leave their homes in Swat, Buner, Shangla, and lower and upper Dir. There are much military resistance in the tribal regions and rival parties. After the female PPP leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in 2007 much reaction violence spiked. A bombing in the capital killed 50 and injured 200. The skirmishes of the Pakistani Army and the militants continued to spike. What did improve were the group grievances. It went from an index indicator of 8.3 to 7.9.  And the human flight indicator improved by .4 also.  The social indicators also track the emigration rate of 2.2% as published in the 2010 Human Development Report.  The poverty is unbelievable and the economy is stunted.

 

Poverty in Pakistan:


The Human Poverty Index (HPI) is an indication of the standard of living in a country, developed by the United Nations. For highly developed countries, the UN considers that it can better reflect the extent of deprivation compared to the Human Development Index.

Cases of poverty in Pakistan rose from 22–26% in from 1991 to 32–35% to 1999. They have subsequently fallen to 25-28% according to the reports of the World Bank and UN Development Program reports. These reports contradict the claims made by the Government of Pakistan that the poverty rates are only 23.1%3. The CIA fact book places the 2006 poverty rate at 24%. Poverty in Pakistan is a major economic issue. Nearly one-quarter of the population is classified poor as of October 2006. The declining trend on poverty in the country seen during the 1970s and 1980s was reversed in the 1990s few federal works programs and rampant corruption. The government of Pakistan has launched an "Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper" that suggest how to reduce poverty in the country. The World Bank evaluates that the program has much success, with stating that poverty has fallen by 5 % since 2000.
For many people in developing countries, poverty means difficulty in living and being able to feed, clothe, and provide shelter for their families. It also means a lack of basic services in health and education. In Pakistan lack of access to credit, training to income generating activities, basic social services and infrastructure are the critical factors behind the persistence of substation poverty. Poverty is widely spread in Pakistan and is affects the majority of the rural phenomenon. Nearly two-thirds of the population of Pakistan live in rural areas. In the 1970’s to 1980’s the poverty rate of Pakistan fell down a bit, but then in the 1990’s it rose up. According to the Government of Pakistan’s poverty reduction strategy papers, currently about 10 percent of the population is chronically poor, but a much larger portion of the population [for about 33 percent] is considered vulnerable and likely to sink in poverty, stated the CIA fact book.
The amount of poverty varies between rural to urban areas, and from one province to the next. In many other mountainous parts of the country where communities are small, isolated, and there are few major urban centers, poverty is vast and evenly disturbed. There is much controversy between the government officials and independent economists about the statistics of poverty, but both agree that three out of four Pakistani living under the poverty line are women.  It is concluded that if a person who is living in Pakistan earns less than a dollar per day then he is in poverty net. On other hand if he has lack of facilities than it is also borderline poverty. More than 40% of the population of the Pakistan is living below the poverty line.
Poverty in Pakistan is a growing concern. The middle-class has grown to about 35 million, yet still nearly one-quarter of the population is classified as suffering from poverty as of October 2006. As of 2008, 17.2% of the total population lives below the poverty line, which is the lowest figure in the history of Pakistan. The declining trend in poverty as seen in the country during the 1970s and 1980s was reversed in the 1990s by poor federal policies and rampant corruption; it is known as the poverty bomb. As of 2009, Pakistan's Human Development Index (HDI) is 0.572, higher than that of nearby Bangladesh’s  0.543. Pakistan's HDI still stands lower than that of rivaling India's at 0.612. According to the Human Development Index (HDI), 60.3% of Pakistan's population lives on under $2 a day, and some 22.6% live under $1 a day. Wealth distribution in Pakistan is highly stratified, with 10% of the population earning 27.6% of income. Pakistan's human development indicators, show especially those for women to be falling below those of countries with comparable levels of per-capita income. Pakistan also has a higher infant mortality at 88 per 1000) than the South Asian average 83 per 1000 (Qazi Shamveel Bin Tousif).