 |
| Photo: Reuters |
Source/Credit: Daily Times | Pakistan
By Yasser Latif Hamdani | October 3, 2011
Having a friendly government in Kabul is no doubt in our interest but first and foremost it is the right of the Afghan people to decide who will govern them
Stephen Cohen, the author of The Idea of Pakistan, said in an interview some time after 9/11 that Pakistan and the US were between two divorces. Well that time has now come and in so far as spouses go, the US might have been mildly abusive but we were entirely unfaithful. This makes for an acrimonious divorce.
The problem is that we never could handle our relations with the US without playing footsie with the militants, which in turn makes for an incestuous relationship but that irony has not dawned upon us. The result has been a manipulative relationship based on lies and hypocrisy. I say this well aware that in Pakistan these days an appeal to reason might be equated with treason. Yet one must point out that there are other countries that have managed to carry on a perfectly healthy relationship with the US without sacrificing their self-esteem or independence.
A case in point is Turkey. Like us, Turkey is an erstwhile Cold War ally of the US. We were, during the Cold War, two corners of a great Islamic crescent containing Soviet expansionism in Asia. Many of the problems Turkey has faced vis-à-vis their military are very similar to our problems. During the Cold War we were on an equal footing yet clear thinking and sound policy has ensured that Turkey is today well respected as a modern secular democratic state with a proudly Muslim government and we are considered an unstable pariah nation plagued with poverty, religious extremism and social backwardness. Consequently, unlike Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, who comes across as a proud and confident modern Muslim leader of a great Muslim-majority nation, our leaders lack self-confidence leading as they are a post-Cold War nightmare of a country. We cannot therefore take a principled stance on anything. Meanwhile, Erdogan openly defies the US — its closest ally — on many fronts without invoking any rebuke or slap on the wrist that our civilian and military leaders have become accustomed to.
Who is to blame for this state of affairs? The truthful answer is that we are. In the 1980s, instead of adopting a balanced approach towards the Afghan mujahideen, Pakistan alienated a major section under Ahmad Shah Massoud and chose to put all our eggs in Hekmatyar’s basket. Given our history with Afghanistan — that had tacitly supported Pashtun nationalism and separation of the then NWFP from Pakistan — it was logical for us to support the forces of an inclusive Afghan nationalism, which was blind to the considerations of an ethnic makeup. Ahmad Shah Massoud was the perfect option because he was ethnically Tajik and yet was acceptable to most mujahideen factions. Instead some myopic military strategist sitting in the GHQ came up with the idea that Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan were tied with the fortunes of the Pashtuns. This gross miscalculation, which went against the logic of history, cost us a friend in Massoud. The Lion of Panjshir died cursing Pakistan.
After the Afghan war, our military planners and great gamers were obsessed with the idea of strategic depth. Having a friendly government in Kabul is no doubt in our interest but first and foremost it is the right of the Afghan people to decide who will govern them. Ignoring this basic common sense, our brightest military minds chose to inflict on the Afghan people a barbaric ragtag outfit, i.e. the Taliban. Once again the Taliban — who were unstable and whose policies in the late 20th century were unpalatable to the world — were of Pashtun makeup with rigid religious puritanism. Once again in our quest for strategic depth, we backed the wrong horse. No reasonable person could have imagined that the Taliban could be controlled by the ISI but then the ISI often shows itself impervious to reason and logic. At this juncture we were so isolated that even our all weather friends, Turkey and China, came to blows with us. Yet there was no course correction.
Post-9/11 Pakistan could have cut its losses and decisively weeded out from its establishment all pro-Taliban elements that had clearly shown themselves incompetent. Instead we chose to adopt a policy of deception. Humiliation in recent times has become our kismet. On the bin Laden issue for example, we have to be either incompetent or complicit. There is no third option. Now our leaders and policy-makers are talking the great game on how to respond to American threats. After decades of shameless subservience, we can no longer afford to talk back to the US. The honourable exception is Imran Khan who had argued very early on that Pakistan’s relations with the US should not be based on temporary opportunism but long-term common interests of the two nations. Unlike our civil and military leaderships, which allowed drone attacks behind closed doors but continued to condemn them publicly, Imran Khan’s policy was clear from day one. One may not completely agree with Khan’s thesis but however we decide to shape our relations with the US, it should be done in a clear and transparent manner without deception and games. Here again the Turkish example is before us. Turkey on numerous occasions has refused to bow down to American pressure, notably during the Iraq War when its parliament rejected $ 25 billion worth of American aid in return for use of airbases on their territory. Could we have even taken such a stance when we had a uniformed military dictator, already discredited for his Kargil adventurism, in power? There is no substitute for democracy for a self-respecting nation.
If there is to be a divorce, let it be a clean and amicable one. Yet there is no substitute for the US as an ally whether we like to admit it or not. For all its prowess and economic growth, China remains a distant second. The US, through a hundred years of dominance, has established a knowledge economy that has helped ensure its dominance for another 50 years despite everything going wrong for it.
Let us not — in our brash haste — throw away our largest trading partner, donor and number one destination for our professionals. It is time we staked our claims to the US’s friendship on something more than periodic tactical interests.
Yasser Latif Hamdani is a lawyer based in Lahore. He is also a regular contributor to the Indian law website http://mylaw.net and blogs on http//globallegalforum.blogspot.com and http://pakteahouse.net. He can be reached at yasser.hamdani@gmail.com
Read original post here: VIEW: If we must part, let us part as friends —Yasser Latif Hamdani
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comments. Any comments irrelevant to the post's subject matter, containing abuses, and/or vulgar language will not be approved.