August 6, 2005

SOME of the observations made by Mr Abul Fazl in his article titled “Pakistan in the US, China ‘cold war’” published in this space on July 30 are debatable. First of all, I do not agree with his contention that ‘young Americans are prepared to die for the defence of their country’. The facts are different. American policy in combat situations has always been simple: keep the men behind the shield. One might think of this strategy as a pretty straightforward one. No, it’s not. Because of this consistent policy in the US armed forces, bravery — an important attribute of a soldier — of the front line men has weakened to such an extent that today most of them are quite incapable of fighting in major battles.

And we are seeing that happen in Iraq today, where most of the front line soldiers want to return home. None of them is willing to die for the American cause, as the author contends.

A second reason for the lack of will (to die for their country) among most Americans, whether a soldier or not, can be attributed to that country’s social structure. In the US, there is what we call a ‘happy life’ bubble. Rarely do Americans ever seriously think about dying (here, I am only referring to the mainstream white Americans of European descent). So, when they are sent to the front lines, they are quite incapable of bearing that tremendous mental pressure.

No wonder, all American soldiers live behind heavy barbed wires, so much so that sometimes it becomes easy for suicide bombers to actually reach them (as happened a few months back when a lone bomber easily entered an American mess in Iraq).

And if the author meant to suggest that the common Americans are prepared to die for their country, nothing could be further from the truth. We have seen how Americans reacted to 9/11. Even today a minor false alarm in an American subway can cause big panic.

This indeed is one of America’s greatest problems. Although they have taken war to many countries — with both covert and overt means — interestingly, they are facing most problems at home. The recruits are not willing to fight in foreign lands (for which they were actually recruited). This is posing problems for America’s ‘expansionist plans’ in far away regions like Asia Minor and South Asia. It is here that Pakistan and India can play an important role to help the US deal with China.

The US desperately seeks to ward off any threat from China, both in military and political terms. And it knows it will have to create allies who are willing to sacrifice their soldiers. Europe will not fall in that trap. Pakistan has already shown its willingness to sacrifice for America’s cause, first in Afghanistan and then in south Waziristan. India can hurt (even if it is psychological) China’s interests in the region and in the world as a whole. The US has realized this and has decided to take some practical steps.

It is in this context that I do not agree with Mr Fazl when he suggests: “... China does not pose a direct threat to the US. The reach of its conventional armed forces is not much beyond its frontiers or shores. Its heavy industry is no match for that of other great powers”.

First of all, China is a nuclear state. And that alone is enough to deter Americans or any other nation from intending to attack China, today or tomorrow. As far as conventional armed forces are concerned, they are of little significance or concern when one possesses nuclear power. Anyway, the United States is not coming to the shores of China. So, China is not worried about conventional army (and India is too busy with its economic bubble). Secondly, the US economy is declining at a faster rate. And to make matters worse for American foreign policy makers, China’s economy is growing at a faster rate.

The powerful economy of an adversary like China can, of course, hurt American interests badly. In this scenario, the US desperately needs a strong ally that can act aggressively and be of great help when things start going bad. And India appears to be cut out for such a role. In other words, India suits America and is able to satisfy its ambitions in the region. And it is in this context that the recent Indo-US deal assumes extraordinary importance.

India, too, wants to show to the world that it is powerful. America wants to engage China in trivial problems — that can later be bloated so that China’s booming economy derails. For that, both of them want each other’s support. To suggest that the US has been too outlandish in its approach to sign such a deal with India is not correct.

If the economy of China grows for 10 more years at its current pace, it will be ahead of America’s. And a good economy also means having a good army. This deal, though not surprising for those who are familiar with the policies of the Bush administration, is quite dramatic in the sense that it has come at a time when everything is going against Americans. But this deal is already boiling Pakistan down.

Where does then Pakistan come into the picture? Mr Abul Fazl talks about the possibility of pressure coming from America due to this deal. That pressure is simple to understand. The US can literally ask Pakistan to act against Iran and stop China from going ahead with its projects in Pakistan. And it can also pressure Pakistan not to allow any pipeline to pass through its territory to India. In this way America can cause a setback to the economic progress of Iran while putting pressure on India to do more against China.

Seen from the Pakistani perspective however, this is an immensely dangerous situation. Earlier, during the Afghan war, we helped change the political map of the world by creating a situation in which the Russians had no option but to withdraw from Afghanistan. The loss of the Soviet Union meant that there would now be only one superpower in the world. And we are already experiencing the problems that are associated with this circumstance. The world desperately needs to shift and distribute power in multiple hands, and Pakistan can help the world yet again by playing what is being deemed as the great game of the 21st century.

We should not go with the United States completely. We know, from our bitter experiences, that the US is not a friend in need. Therefore, if we are offered any nuclear deal by the Americans we should reject it. We cannot afford to have more weapons. Already, our weapons can strike all our enemies (India and Israel). We don’t need to spend more on that. And we cannot afford to lose China’s favour in this tough situation. So where do we go now?

Let us remain neutral as far as possible. And let us continue our good relations with China. Our foreign policy’s main aim should be to ‘create’ a world having multiple superpowers rather than one. In this respect, we must help China to become another superpower so that the world can return to normality. And a superpower at our doorstep would mean our own safety. Nobody, not even India, will then be able to bully Pakistan on matters like water, gas or Kashmir.

Of course, China has already helped us in building numerous projects. Currently, it is building our Gwadar port. If we remain neutral, we can persuade China to contribute more to the economic development of our country. In this way we will be playing a balancing game. Neither America nor China shall be allowed to influence our foreign policy against each other. In this great game Pakistan will have to show strength of character and willingness to face new ground realities. And let’s not get afraid of yet another looming ‘Cold War’ era.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)