Pakistan is crumbling, its President barely clings to power and the United States is arming the wrong people. Brahma Chellany is professor of strategic studies at the Center for Policy Research, New Delhi, India. He was interviewed by Zeit Online.
Zeit Online (ZO): Pakistan barely avoided a bitter power struggle without a violent overthrow or bloodshed. Since the November 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai that originated in Pakistan, India looks toward its neighbor with increasing concern. Is Pakistan a hopeless case, a terrible black hole in global politics, or could it be stabilized?
Brahma Chellaney (BC): President Asif Ali Zardari did well to avoid confrontation with the opposition and reinstate the judges fired by former dictator Pervez Musharraf. But the easing of political tension hasn’t removed the danger that Pakistan, a nuclear nation, might dissolve. Pakistan – as well as Afghanistan – is de facto a “failed state.” The boundaries between the governmental and non-governmental participants are extremely blurred. The president is really more a mayor of the capital city. The national borders between Pakistan and Afghanistan have virtually ceased to exist; it’s difficult to deal with both nations as though they were separate political entities. That appears to be irreversible. The world has to consider a new political order for this region.
ZO: Do you long for the Musharraf days because he at least had his country somewhat under control? Is democracy appropriate for Pakistan or would a military regime be the better choice?
BC: Before Musharraf seized power in the 1999 overthrow, no one considered Pakistan a “failing state” or a threat to international security. When he was forced from office last year, Pakistan’s reputation had fallen so low that it was almost considered a terrorist nation by the rest of the world. It was Musharraf’s dictatorship that pushed Pakistan to the brink of ruin.
ZO: From the point of view of India, how should the world deal with Pakistan?
BC: The long-term solution is to strengthen democracy there. It’s always the civilian government that gets the blame for Pakistan’s problems although it’s helpless. Real power there is in the hands of the military.
ZO: Does the Obama administration have the right policy toward Pakistan and the whole region? He wants to take up contact with the “moderate” wing of the Taliban.
BC: America is preparing to repeat the same mistakes that were made by Ronald Reagan when he opposed the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. That’s when the entire Afghanistan-Pakistan disaster began. Obama wants to train and arm new militias in every Afghan province although the country is already awash in armed militias. The militias armed and trained by Reagan, the so-called Mujahadin, became international terrorists. Besides that, Obama wants to cut a deal with the Taliban at the same time he’s hiding behind a troop surge. History again repeats itself. The Taliban was created by the Pakistani intelligence services with the support of the CIA. In October 2001, American policy did a complete turnabout and declared war on the Taliban. Now comes the next complete turnabout and they want to make deals with the Taliban.
ZO: NATO is in deep difficulties in Afghanistan. Will India become more engaged in the region if Western influence wanes there?
BC: India is already one of the largest donor countries in Afghanistan. It has already given the gigantic sum of $1.2 billion in aid monies there. It has many civilian workers on the ground giving reconstruction assistance and helping to set up new institutions. Unfortunately, Obama wants to get out of Afghanistan. He doesn’t want to risk his presidency on the Afghan-Pakistan problem and see it ruined the way Iraq ruined George W. Bush’s administration.
afghanistan will be obama’s vietnam.
american imperialism is running out of fuel.
economic decline will put the finishing touches on american imperialism and trying to police the world.
america is a failed state with its 700 military bases around the world.
americans still want to be a super power it is a national ego thing but economic decline will force it to reconsider.
americans are willing to have high jobless rates, someday large inflation due to the national debt, failed banks, and even the loss of its middle class, to keep its super power status.
this economic decline in america is not a recession but the failure of capitalism.
few politicans if any will tell americans that as they want to get reelected.
with communism man exploits man with capitalism it is the other way around.
few americans understand this above axiom.