Let’s keep the nerve steady

Columnist M B NAQVI cautions that Pakistan has to be careful in the present security environment.

Two incidents took place on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border a few weeks ago. A Pakistani paramilitary scout fired upon an American soldier, or close to the border. The other incident was when the Americans clashed with Pakistani troops and they dropped two 500 pounds bombs on what is described as a Madressa close to the border but inside the Pakistan territory. Whether these were two separate incidents or a sequence is not here clear. However, the fact that an incident of this kind has happened is symptomatic. It may be the first of its kind but, might not, it may be feared, be the last.
The essential background is growing distance between the mind- sets in America and in Pakistan. In Pakistan there are two mind-sets with which the Americans have to deal with. One is that of the government. It is an ally that wants to be trusted and is determined to remain aligned with America. Indeed, the kind of people that constitute the ruling establishment cannot conceive life without friendship with America. The recent success of Muttaheda Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) notwithstanding. Men like Colin Powell and General Tommy Franks have no reason to distrust the steadfastness of the Pakistani establishment. But then there is other Pakistani mind- set that the Americans cannot feel comfortable with.
It is represented by religious parties that have prior to the election, coalesced and formed the alliance called MMA. This is an alliance which has cashed in on a widespread anti-American sentiment in the two provinces closest to Afghanistan in Pakistan: NWFP and Balochistan. The MMA has emerged as the clear winner in the NWFP Assembly election of October 2002 while in Balochistan it is the single largest party in a splintered House.
The presence of the anti-American sentiment in these frontier provinces is a fact of life. It issues from the Pushtoon ethnicity that straddles the Durand Line between Pakistan and Afghanistan: some tribes live on both sides and for Pushtoons the tribal ties are stronger than either their religion or their technical nationalities. Moreover, Pushtoons have never actually recognised the Durand Line that the British laid down in 1893. The American actions in destroying the Taliban regime and the consequent offence caused to the Pushtoon sentiments cannot be minimised. One need not go further back into history. The current realities are enough to go by.
But two factors cannot be ignored and both have a bearing on the Pakistani sentiment. One of them is the current war preparation against Iraq. This likelihood means that a war will erupt and Mr. George W. Bush, the President of America, would mount a military invasion of Iraq with a view to changing the regime. It is not this writer’s love for Saddam Hussain that puts him on the other side of the fence, insofar as Iraqi war is concerned. Saddam Hussain has been a particularly fierce kind of dictator. He runs much too tight a ship. The kind of political murders that had been caused by the thousands in Iraq with complicity, or orders, of Saddam Hussain is no secret. His human rights record is atrocious. Therefore, it is not for the love of Saddam Hussain that one opposes the American invasion.
American invasion of Iraq is to be opposed on several grounds. Nation states, with their sovereignty, remain the cornerstone of the international order. The doctrine of non-interference in the internal affairs of other sovereign states has to remain sacrosanct as long as a nation state with sovereignty survives. That is a matter of principle. America cannot be given the right to take out a bad regime by physical force. That will make the world a nastier place where the strong states will make the life of small or weak state impossible.
Secondly, Iraq, it may be remembered, is a new state. It was invented by Britain as a part post First World War settlement with France. It comprises three tenuously linked regions, each a distinct entity. In the north there are the Kurds and they live in the areas where much of the oil is. There is the south of the country which is predominantly inhabited by Shias. The middle segment of this state comprises both Shias and Sunnis, with Sunnis being in majority. Shia-Sunni distinctions in Iraq matter both as a current reality and as a legacy of history.
The fear is that each region might not find it easy or comfortable with whatever new government the victors, the Americans, manage to put together for Iraq. What Uncle Sam may wish to do can be guessed: they would try to do what they did in the case of Afghanistan. Which means they would nominate a government that would comprise American stooges. Whether the Iraqi people would accept that government would be a matter for history to unfold. Every expert of the area fears that the removal of Saddam Hussain and the consequent anarchic conditions in the immediate aftermath may give a fillip to a separatist tendency in the north as well as in the south, even if the central parts hold. Which equals the desire for maintaining a united Iraqi state.
Few, however, know what is passing through the minds of the people of Iraq’s south. Iraqi Shias are a least known category. Would they want to link up with Shia Iran? Would they want to unite with people of Bahrain, with whom they have various tribal linkages. Or would they want a separate state of their own, independent of Baghdad. There is utter uncertainty about the miniscule Shia intelligentsia about the future status of Iraqi Shias. Some even doubt whether such an intelligentsia exists.
The case about the Kurdish-dominated north is in some ways similar. The fact that many Kurds would want to be independent of Baghdad cannot be doubted, though not many are saying so. They know that the Turkey, where a large number of Kurds live in its eastern territory, would look askance and take grave offence. The Turkish army might not be able to resist the temptation to invade the northern parts of Iraq and occupy it. The northern Iraqi regions certainly offer particular attractions. Most of the Iraqi oil reserves are located in the Kurdish areas around Mosal. Then, Kurdish population is to be found not only in Turkey, Iran and Syria and a few lived in the former Soviet Union. The subject is a can of worms. All states would want to have a say in the disposal of the northern parts of Iraq, not to mention the strong American desire that it remains directly under American control through some mechanism or other.
The second major factor that influences public opinion of Pakistan is the US commitment to Israel’s security. Israelis regard Iraq as to be the greatest and immediate threat to their security. It is accused of sustaining Intefada among the Palestinians. True the Israelis also regard Iraq as the ultimate and longer-term threat to their existence. They are so paranoid that they even dislike Pakistan for the same reason because of the popular sentiment in favour of Palestinians. Pakistanis have good reasons to distrust the Israeli intentions. The kind of tyranny and blood letting the Jewish fundamentalists in Israel have let loose for so many years in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that most Pakistanis are aghast. They dislike Israel as so many aggressive trespassers. Americans and Israelis are clearly aware of it. Pakistanis in any case have a strong weakness for pan-Islamism, the empty shell that it is. But there it is. The only pan-Islamic enthusiasm active anywhere in the world is to be found in Pakistan, although its practical significance is nil. Pakistan has also evolved in a manner that Islamic fundamentalism has been making progress and the world headquarters of Islamic Revolution, when and if it comes about, would be Pakistan. Anti-Israeli and pro-Arab sentiments have coalesced with the Islamic fundamentalist ideas. They have produced a strong pan-Islamic, anti-American, anti-Israel, and indeed anti-western, mind set. This is important to remember.
The latest news stories about the harassment being meted out by the American Immigration Service officials have aggravated the feeling. Pakistanis settled in America are seeking asylum elsewhere. The discrimination with which the Pakistani workers are being treated in America and in the west in general, is strengthening the paranoia of Pakistanis which takes the shape of impotent raze. This mind-set, combined with resentment against American actions in Afghanistan, have produced to vote last October for MMA. It is basically anti-American and anti-Musharraf dictatorship vote.
The Americans in general seem to be aware of the rising anti-American sentiments in Pakistan and appear to be reciprocating. It is therefore, necessary to keep the nerves steady. No one in Pakistan can forget that the Americans are the only superpower and are ready to assert their supremacy. Their tolerance of difference of opinion seems to be overrated.
Pakistanis want to be profound of a free and independent people. They do not want to kowtow to the Americans. Their governments therefore should not be seen to be kowtowing to the Americans, despite their various vulnerabilities and readiness to seek American goodwill on all issues. But a beggar cannot be a chooser except in exceptional circumstances. The Americans, for their own reasons, have also to show a certain degree of tolerance of opposite point of view. Tolerance is a democratic virtue and Americans should be credited with some, if not much of it. Pakistan may be a small and relatively much weaker state. But the USA, despite there being no real equality between them, has to show a superficial respect to the sensitivities of Pakistan by way of international etiquette, if nothing better. Inequalities are facts of life. But the Americans did not have to call the bluff of Pakistanis’ paranoid passions on the Durand Line. A more tolerant and tactful behaviour might achieve just as much, if not better, end results.
Insofar as INS officials’ treatment of Pakistani and other Muslim workers in America is concerned, the INS is, in theory, justified to be extra careful. But that care is expected to respect democratic norms. But American politics does have spasms of hysteria against this or that external or internal group. A long list can be given of how various groups have fared in American society at different times. But that need not be detailed. The Americans have nothing to lose by being a little more patient and understanding about the feelings in lesser and weaker states. Maybe this is too much to expect of all the Americans in their present mood. But Pakistanis cannot forget that the Americans are a superpower and active hostilities with them is not in Pakistan’s interest, though that does not mean bowing down to them all the time. There can be other policies than sheer obedience. But they can only be followed if we have the gumption and ability to stand on our own two feet.