The Hindu Business Line : Pakistan-West relations on a skid?

It must be clear to the US and its Western allies that by not delivering on what he was expected to do, Gen Pervez Musharraf is willy-nilly contributing to a more ferocious form of terrorism, not only in his own country but in the entire region. The time has come for Western countries to decide where their best interests lie, says B. S. RAGHAVAN.

If at all the recent American and European odyssey of the Pakistan President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, could be called a success, it is only insofar as making a sales pitch for his book is concerned. Otherwise, one was able to see from the body language and the subtle verbal nuances that his official visits to Washington D.C., New York, London and Brussels only stoked the embers of distrust about where precisely Pakistan stood in the war on terrorism: Is it still a staunch ally, or has it morphed into a Trojan Horse or a fellow-traveller-cum-back-stabber on behalf of the jihadi fundamentalists?

True, following 9/11, the chilling threat to Pakistan by the neocons of Washington that it would be "bombed into the stone age" if it did not give proof of being on the side of the US made the General instantly drop his erstwhile Taliban protégés whose depredations in Afghanistan and lethal networks forged with other terror outfits, including Osama bin Laden's till now elusive Al-Qaeda, to export their brand of no-holds-barred murderous sprees had culminated in the catastrophic attack on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.

Gen Musharraf's obsequious acquiescence was enough for the familiar weakness of the US — going overboard with ecstasy the moment it has a couple of military dictators in its pocket — to come to the fore: It showered Pakistan with its version of kisses, pumping into the country billions of dollars, cancelling all loans, scratching all sanctions and restoring military supplies. It built up Gen Musharraf and bolstered his regime as some kind of a great China Wall standing athwart terrorism as the first line of defence.

In the years since, because of the failure of Pakistan to live up to the international community's expectations and even specific commitments on various counts, and especially with the revelations of A. Q. Khan's hawking of nuclear components and the pardon given to him by Gen Musharraf, the opinion has gained ground among perceptive observers that Pakistan is indulging in doublespeak, and thereby actually undermining the efforts of the coalition against terrorism.

Of late, stronger expressions such as "duplicity" and "perfidy" have been in use in the media to describe its behaviour.

Pernicious deal

The comments of the Afghan President, Mr Hamid Karzai, about Pakistan doing little by way of taking action against madarsas, which are the breeding ground for militancy, stopping cross-border terrorism or flushing out Osama bin Laden (who, Mr Karzai is sure, is in Pakistan) have further fouled the atmosphere. Mr Karzai has been so outspoken that one wonders whether he was levelling these charges at the prompting of the US Administration.

To cap it all is the latest "peace agreement" with the pro-Taliban tribal elders of Waziristan, local mujahideen, students and the ulema. From every standpoint, it is a pernicious deal, striking at the very root of the so-called strategic objective of the US and NATO to exterminate the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban from the soil of Afghanistan. Just look at a few of the dangerous concessions, that could not have better designed had the intention been to enable the venomous fanatics to thrive and prosper:

Amnesty to Taliban militants and "foreigners" (a reference to Afghan-Arabs who are members of Al-Qaeda) in North Waziristan in the futile hope that they would desist from mounting cross-border attacks into Afghanistan; assaulting Pakistani security forces, public servants, state property, tribal leaders and journalists; and carrying heavy weapons

Dismantling all 12 Pakistani checkpoints that were set up to hunt Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants

Return of their seized weapons (including 24 AK-47s), restoration of their impounded property and reinstatement of their forfeited privileges (including government allowances)

Payment of a cash compensation of Rs 230 million ($3.8 million) for the material losses suffered by them. Since the signing of the deal, Pakistan has set free 132 Taliban fighters who were jailed for terrorist violence and Afghanistan has seen a three-fold increase in "Taliban activity", giving rise to fears of what an expert has called "Pakistanisation" of Al-Qaeda and the "convergence of the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Islamic militant groups waging a terrorist campaign against the Indian presence in Kashmir."

A report prepared by NATO has squarely blamed Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) for the spread of Taliban's revival and the strengthening of its military capability. (Gen Musharraf has conceded that some retired ISI big shots could have been training and instigating Taliban). Commanders from Britain, the US, Denmark, Canada and Holland are said to be frustrated that even after Gen Musharraf met Messrs George Bush and Tony Blair in September, Western leaders are hesitant to call his bluff. One NATO Commander is quoted as saying that "It is time for an `either you are with us or against us' delivered bluntly to Musharraf at the highest political level."

For the record, and to keep up appearances, the US President has continued to praise the General for his support but it has for some time been clear that the adverse assessments by visitors, commentators and no doubt, his own official agencies, has begun to tell on him. For instance, during his visit to Pakistan last March, Mr Bush, with Gen Musharraf by his side, declared openly his mission to be "to determine whether the President (Musharraf) was as committed as he has been to bring the terrorists to justice" and added, under his breath, "and he is."

He testily dismissed the General's demand for a nuclear deal as had been concluded with India, saying: "Pakistan and India are different countries with different needs and different histories. So as we proceed forward, our strategy will take in effect those well known differences."

Quandary

As regards the deal with the pro-Taliban, pro-Al-Qaeda tribal leaders also, when the question came up at the joint media conference at the White House after his recent meeting with the General, Mr Bush was ambiguous in his response: "When the President (Musharraf) looks at me in the eye and says the tribal deal is intended to reject the Talibanisation of the people and that there won't be a Taliban and there won't be Al-Qaeda, I believe him." Paraphrased, the last three words must really be taken to mean, "I find it difficult to believe him."

The US, as also its Western allies, must be in a quandary over something which they can neither spit nor swallow. So long, they were perhaps consoling themselves that Gen Musharraf was the best among the worst in view of his apparent readiness to fall in with their wishes and plans, and his being the only moderate leader in an otherwise volatile, unstable and even explosive country who could be trusted with the nuclear button.

Now it must be clear to them that by falling short in delivering on all that he was expected to do, he is willy-nilly contributing to a more ferocious recrudescence of terrorism, not only in his own country but in the region as a whole. More than everything, the General seems to be capitalising on their helplessness by telling them off for taking him for granted.

The time has come for Western countries to decide where their best interests lie: They can either continue to regard democratic India, the prospective economic giant, and the propped-up Pakistan, the putative sanctuary for terrorist hordes, as being exactly on a par in their calculations to the extent of the travel itineraries of their leaders invariably including both countries for equal number of days or they can make their policies and approaches India-centric, so that they get a greater manoeuvrability to ensure that the uncertainties with which Pakistan is beset do not spin out of control.

The choice is theirs, and the sooner they make it, the better.

More Stories on : Foreign Relations | Politics | Terrorism

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Pakistan-West relations on a skid?

Homing into trouble?

Reconcile ideas on growth and finance

Should we bid adieu to cost audit?

Reservations about quotas for women on boards

The five most dangerous words are: `Everybody else is doing it'

The India business story

Making `allowances'

Rashtrapati Bhavan clarifies

Child labour ban