It seems that the stereotype anti Pakistan journalism has started in US, conveniently before the Chief of Army Staff of Pakistan; Gen. Raheel Sharif’s visit to US, where he has to hold meetings with American civilian and military leadership. According to New York Times editorial, “Pakistan presents a danger to the entire world.” A baseless argument considering the fact that Pakistan has taken successful measures to curb terrorism on its soil. A claim endorsed by USA many times. Success of Pakistan’s anti-terrorism measures can be gauged from the fact that while the entire world has seen a surge in terrorist activities, Pakistan has restored peace on its soil. These facts, however, do not count for anything in the eyes of the New York Times editorial board that claims “The fact that Pakistan is also home to a slew of extremist groups, some of which are backed by a paranoid security establishment obsessed with India, only adds to the dangers it presents for South Asia and, indeed, the entire world.” The editorial then touches on its favorite point “Pakistan’s growing nuclear arsenal,” due to which Pakistan is set to become third largest Nuclear power in a decade’s time. “These are unsettling truths,” according to New York Time’s editorial set up.
“Persuading Pakistan to rein in its nuclear weapons program should be an international priority. The major world powers spent two years negotiating an agreement to restrain the nuclear ambitions of Iran, which doesn’t have a single nuclear weapon. Yet, there has been no comparable investment of effort in Pakistan, which, along with India, has so far refused to consider any limits at all,” it added.
Regarding US striking a nuclear deal with Pakistan, the editorial board said, “What’s new about the administration’s approach is that instead of treating the situation as essentially hopeless, it is now casting about for the elements of a possible deal in which each side would get something it wants.”
“For the West, that means restraint by Pakistan and greater compliance with international rules for halting the spread of nuclear technology. For Pakistan, that means some acceptance in the family of nuclear powers and access to technology.”
The editorial termed Pakistan as a “pariah in the nuclear sphere to all but China,” while recalling the events of 1998 when Pakistan tested its nuclear weapon. An important aspect of the editorial, apart for the Pakistan bashing they have taken to is the fact that it claims that US will not be offering Pakistan a nuclear cooperation deal as generous as it offered India and highlighted that the deal is subject to some conditions which Pakistan has to meet before any progress can be made in this regard.
“As a first step, one American official said, Pakistan would have to stop pursuing tactical nuclear weapons, which are more likely to be used in a conflict with India and could more easily fall into the hands of terrorists, and halt development of long-range missiles. Pakistan should also sign the treaty banning nuclear weapons tests,” the editorial read.
These conditions are all in the interest of the global security because according to the editorial, Pakistan’s nuclear assets are not safe.
This is a baseless claim as Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal has been cleared by the strictest experts, as highly safe. Furthermore, US President Barrack Obama himself acknowledged and certified that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are safe.
Not only is the editorial baseless but it is also lacks research, had the research been sound, they would have known that their ‘generous’ agreement with India is more likely to put the world at risk. New York Times fails to highlight the fact that almost 11 Indian nuclear scientists have been killed or suicide and there have been no leads in regard to their murders/suicide. The manner in which they died was highly suspicious and one which points towards agency involvement. In contrast no such event has ever happened with any of Pakistan nuclear scientists, a claim backed by the fact that Pakistan’s nuclear scientists have not met with any incident.
As far as the matter of extremist elements is concerned, Pakistan has made it clear that it will not differentiate between good or bad terrorists and it has moved against all extremist elements, a resolve demonstrated in the measures taken by the country and the success it has achieved.
As far as the conditions are concerned Pakistan is not obliged to even consider them. America has turned a blind eye towards India, a leisure Pakistan can’t afford. The only matter worth Pakistan’s consideration is its national security and Pakistan will not consider any conditions which might compromise its security. Lastly, New York Times should reconsider its analysis regarding global security and determine whether the country which succeeded in curbing terrorism is a bigger threat to global well-being or does the world face a bigger threat from American intervention in countries like Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan which has led to the creation of terrorist organizations like ISIS one which seems to be doing everything to support US interest or India which is shamelessly spreading hatred in its own country and destabilizing efforts are being harvested by it in all its neighboring countries; Nepal, Maldives and Pakistan. Pakistan has presented dossier to United Nation and provided proofs to USA administration for Indian intervention in Karachi, FATA and Baluchistan, Further, India has invented Cold Start Doctrine to attack from eight soft bellies of Pakistan, Pakistan countered it by Tactical nuclear warheads and short range missiles. That does not stop India from its designs to harm Pakistan. It has 
now brought its 21st Striking Corp for exercise. Earlier, in the beginning of this year one of the three striking Corps has already been brought in the field for the exercise. It is not normal for India as it has ever brought two string corps for exercise in an year time. It has ulterior motives behind it and perhaps it would like to demonstrate that India’s cold start doctrine can still deliver against Pakistan. India is playing with fire that has not been taken into consideration by New York Times Editorial board. Instead they choose to blame only Pakistan just to pressurize the COAS General Raheel Sharif during the visit of US where he has to highlight the irresponsible attitude of India and Afghanistan which is the real threat to the peace of the region and the world. Pakistan shall not tolerate any aggression from any side and shall give befitting response. Pakistan’s army chief would like to discuss the membership in Nuclear Supply group as Pakistan is nuclear Power and Pakistan and India should be treated equally. It has to be made clear that Pakistan is not ready to accept any condition that is not in the interest of Pakistan. The New York Times editorial board should keep Pakistan’s point of view in mind, if it has to maintain its reputation as fair and in the interest of the world peace.
ahmed sabir
Very good reply
USA is favoring it’s new poodle India and trying to pressurise Gen.Rarely Sharef and also trying his visit to USA difficult
Thanks for the appreciation