Realism:Failure of 'Power'

Since 9/11 when Pakistan joined the US war on terror as a frontline state, Americans have gradually intensified their pressure on Islamabad in wake of the success of moderate parties in the elections and a continued wave of the suicide attacks in 2008.

Faced with internal backlash and instability, coupled with multi-faceted challenges due to its support to the US anti-terrorism enterprise, Pakistan has been compelled to reject American latest demands as encroachment on the sovereignty of our country. On March 8, 2008, the foreign office, while commenting on a news story, “US Yearns for Pak Capitulation” strongly denounced Washington’s eleven proposals in relation to special privileges and immunities for the military and auxiliary personnel before they are sent to Pakistan. The office explained, “Only those proposals are considered that are in line with our domestic and international laws”. Although Pakistan’s refusal in this regard is a good sign, yet America is trying to increase pressure on the former to conceal her policy weaknesses, followed during the war on terror.

It is noteworthy that the United States which emerged as the sole superpower after the disintegration of the former Soviet Union has always employed ‘coercive diplomacy’ of power in securing its interest and foreign policy goals. Even in the aftermath of the September 11, it left no stone unturned in using it against the Islamic activists and small states. But American diplomacy of duress is failing in respect of both state and non-state entities. Power has also been employed by the Islamic radicals in such a way that the most powerful nation like the US, equipped with larger modern arsenals has become the least powerful in the ongoing ‘different war’.

In sense of power theorists, a renowned strategic thinker, Thomas Schelling remarks in relation to the US, “coercion to be an effective tool of foreign policy”. In one form or the other, Morgenthau and Kissinger also endorse politics of bargaining and pressure through

threats and even violence as essential elements of the US diplomacy. 

On the other side, if we note the unending resistance of the Islamic militants in Iraq, Afghanistan and the defeat of Israel by Hezbollah in 2006, we can witness that the Muslim radical fighters have succeeded in challenging the US-dominated world status quo. Therefore, a number of countries such as Spain, Philippines and Japan have withdrawn their troops from Iraq. As regards Afghanistan, some NATO countries are likely to withdraw their forces in future due to Iraq-like situation as differences have already erupted among the member states. Despite American emphasis, recently, Germany has refused to increase its troops in Afghanistan, while Canada, Australia and Italy are reluctant to maintain their forces in that country for a long time.

At present, a number of small countries have refused to come under the threat and pressure of the US. Iran’s determination to go ahead with the development of nuclear programme, Syrian stand in relation to Lebanon and Palestine—North Korea’s signing   of an agreement with Washington in accordance with her favourable conditions for closing her nuclear project might be cited as an example in this context.

Besides, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez who had called the American President Bush “the devil” and a “tyrant” before the UN General Assembly on September 24, 2006 has refused to yield to the US pressure, this year, in relation to oil supply.

It is also mentionable that American project of democratizing the Middle East and peace process between the Palestinians and Israel has badly failed.

So far as major countries are concerned, influence of the sole superpower has also reduced. China and Russia who favour a multi-polar system in the world, oppose US economic sanctions against Iran.

As the present circumstances show a catastrophic period for American diplomacy on global and regional level, that is why, Washington has intensified its pressure on Pakistan with the sole aim of diverting the attention of American public.

Here, it is of particular attention that Machiavelli in his book, ‘Prince’ advises the ruler to follow an imperialist policy—“to fire the imagination of his subjects by great schemes of foreign adventurism” so as to pacify and divert the attention of his public during internal crisis.

However, it is because of a failed external policy that the US is intermittently insisting upon Pakistan to “do more” against the Al Qaeda-related extremists in the north-western region. In the recent past, American presidential election candidates—especially Barack Obama has said that if Pakistan “would not act” against the terrorists, “we will” without any permission from Islamabad.

Moreover, American cost of war against terrorism which has reached approximately 6 trillion dollar is increasing rapidly—decline of dollar, soaring prices of oil and acute recession inside the country have given a greater blow to the US economy vis-à-vis other developed countries. So to distract the attention of its general masses from internal crisis, American political leaders including their media have been continuously propagating against Pakistan regarding the Afghan insurgency. In this respect, apart from previous strikes, on March 16, 2008, twenty people were killed when some missiles hit a house, though the attacker remains unidentified so far. Just three days before this event, four persons were killed by the US fire from across the border in North Waziristan. About the violation, ISPR, spokesman, Maj-General Athar Abbas pointed out on March 13 that they “fired five rounds which landed in our territory” and “we have lodged very strong protest with the coalition forces”.

Without any doubt, America has made Pakistan a scapegoat for her failed policies and has intensified pressure on Islamabad without bothering for the present internal backlash and particularly by ignoring the perennial suicide attacks in our country.

At this critical juncture, our politicians, security forces and general masses need a strong unity and sense of nationalism which is essential to castigate any conspiracy and to maintain the integrity of Pakistan.  

The writer is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

My own article, published in Pakistan’s English daily, The Nation on March19, 2008

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com