A 'yes' answer would solve most of the riddles in the air!: was the Security Council Resolution passed at our request?

'This may sound bizarre at this point in time but if the answer to the above question is yes, it will help clear up many of the questions begging an answer concerning the Security Council resolution (on banning Jama'at-ud-Da'wa) and help explain several happenings raising new questions.
CONSIDER:
POINT ONE: Several questions have been raised about the role of Mr Hussain Haroon, our ambassador to the United Nations, in the matter of the Security Council's resolution asking Pakistan to take action against Jama'at-ud-Da'wa.
He has been blamed for being ignorant of the Council's working and for complacent inaction in the matter. The new question is: Was the ambassador to the United Nations in fact following instructions in letting the resolution take its course without any hindrance from his side?
POINT TWO: A remark by our worthy Defence Minister Mr Ahmed Mukhtar a day or two before the Security Council passed the resolution in question, came in for severe criticism and ridicule in the country. He is reported to have said "Pakistan would have been declared a terrorist state, had we not accepted the ban on Jama'at-ud-Da'wa and imposed economic sanctions".
I commented in this column which appeared on Tuesday that his remark may have actually facilitated the passing of the resolution. Although the Defense Minister has come in for severe ticking off for his strange, even stupid remarks more than once on earlier occasions, this one was too bizarre even by standards of his own rhetoric. The new question is: Was the Defense Minister acting under instructions in making this remark?
POINT THREE: The question being asked, with hurt in their heart, by millions of Pakistanis is: How come China, our long term and true friend, did not use the veto to strike down the anti-Pakistan resolution! Some said et tu Brute while others blamed the Chinese action on the failure of our foreign policy.
Experience however has taught us that the Chinese do not act in haste and do not make inconsistent decisions and also that despite several irritants caused by us to our relationship with China, it has remained steadfast in its support for Pakistan. The new question is: Why did Chinese suddenly start acting out of character? Or did it, in the first place?
POINT FOUR: While the average Pakistani was shocked and grieved at the passage of the resolution, the government at Islamabad did not appear unduly worried. It revealed no plans to raise a voice in protest on an action apparently (as alleged by Mr Hussain Haroon) executed without taking our envoy in the United Nations into confidence, or to go in for a review and reconsideration of the decision.
On the other hand, the speed with which the Government started action on the resolution - closing scores of schools, dispensaries, mosques and other welfare centers run by the Jama'at-ud-Da'wa and arresting by the score, the various functionaries engaged in these activities - indicated that it was quite ready and waiting, even eager to carry out these actions.
INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION A dispassionate consideration of these points leads us to a hypothesis according to which there is a strong possibility that the action by the Security Council was carried out at the request of our own government or at least with its consent and that the Chinese "yes" vote, in the light of the hypothesis, could be the result of a request or at least a clearance to China from our government for not vetoing the resolution.
This leads us to the final question as to why our government would want to act in this manner. The answer is that the government has a rather poor record of response to challenges and tends to be on the defensive or apologetic or both when confronted with even a medium intensity challenge and ends up by backing down from long held positions. Its actions and retractions following the Mumbai carnage bear ample testimony to this.
We may be forgiven for thinking that the combined pressure of India and America was rather too much for the government to withstand and it was eager to prove its bona fides by taking some actions along the lines demanded.
But it was, at the same time, apprehensive of the backlash within the country (in view, among other things of the numerous welfare activities being carried out by Jama'at-ud-Da'wa in the country) and therefore sought the cover of a Security Council resolution as the fig-leaf for the actions it felt it had to take to relieve the pressure on it.
The US and India must have been only too happy to oblige and will no doubt now expect to achieve similar victories at the expense of Pakistan's prestige, good name and security. ([email protected])