Developereo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 14,093
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
What's brewing in Washington?
In most competitive endeavors, having a winning strategy is only half the battle. Arguably, it is the lesser half, the more important being the ability to anticipate and neutralize the opponent's strategy. In serendipiditous instances, you can even use the opponent's strategy right against them. The most glaring example of this is the co-opting and use of jihadi elements by certain nameless countries against the Pakistani army and populace itself.
In the context of this thesis, and in light of recent events, it's natural to ask what exactly is America's strategy towards Pakistan? What's brewing in Washington?
The unwritten assumption here, of course, is that America is Pakistan's opponent. Much has been said about anti-Americanism in Pakistan, but where's the other side coming from? What are the dimensions of America's view of Pakistan? To tackle that conundrum, we must first take a very brief historical tour of America's relationship with the region. Up through the Cold War, there was a clear alignment of US and Pakistani interests to balance the Soviet-India nexus (the NAM charade was amusing at best). It is important to note that, even during the Cold War, the US anticipated China's rise and viewed it as a nemesis-in-waiting. That status got elevated to primacy after the Soviet collapse and Russia's descent into irrelevance. To counter the perceived Chinese threat, and cognizant of the tension between India and China, the US decided to promote India as a counterweight. The US has made no bones about where it views India in its geopolitical plan, and it continues to sponsor India's membership in any number of internal forums. Certainly, India's economy is a draw, but the primary focus of US policies is the geopolitical agenda. You don't get to stay top dog by being complacent.
So, how does all this relate to Pakistan? Does Pakistan being an Islamic country have any relevance here? What about Afghanistan and the war on terror? I submit that these are irrelevant red herrings in America's great plan. Terrorism is not, and has never been, a serious threat to American dominance. In fact, it has been a boon for governments all around to enact invasive legislation and increase control over their own people. For its part, the Afghan war on terror is just a front for continued American military presence in this important geopolitical location. As for Islam, again America doesn't care since most Muslim countries are irrelevant on the global stage. The few countries that matter are solidly under the American thumb.
Coming back to the regional calculus, India is playing it smart. It plays the double game of friendly overtures to Pakistan and China while, at the same time, making sure America understands that India wouldn't mind at all (wink, wink) if Pakistan and China were to 'suffer' at America's hands. Reading between the lines, America knows that the price of India's cooperation in the greater game is Pakistan's head on a platter. To that end, the only thing standing in the way is the Pakistani security apparatus (army and ISI). The feudal politicians have long since been bought -- if not by America directly, then through the Arab proxies -- and can be counted on to do their master's bidding. The few oligarchs that haven't been bought have been exempt precisely because of their incompetence and, hence, unworthiness.
The focus of America's wrath, then, is squarely upon the Pakistani security apparatus. The American agenda is to erode the respect and morale of these agencies. Their weapon of choice is the 'free' media and the method of choice is the famous 'leak', or alleged quotes by 'unnamed officials'. The Western media, now exposed as being a fully complicit agent of government propaganda, is Pakistan's number one enemy. It is the enabler for government policies by setting the public mood -- by 'manufacturing consent' as Chomsky noted.
For its part, the Pakistani military seems to have wised up. In the past, they played America's game, partly to get military support to balance Russian patronage of India, and partly as lucrative personal sellout. However, the military now understands that for every F-16 they get, India will get 10 F-35s, so American military support is worthless against their primary opponent. The ISI also understands full well America's real goals in Afghanistan and why it is imperative to thwart them.
Assuming the above reflects the current American agenda, and given that the US is perhaps the single most important country in the world, the question for Pakistan is how to negotiate the waters ahead.
How can Pakistan convince America to re-calibrate its view of the region, to convince it that it is more useful alive than dead? What are the common interests that Pakistan can propose to change the American administration's mindset? And, just as importantly, what are likely to be the main roadblocks derailing any Pakistani efforts?
(Thanks to Kakgeta for reviewing.)
In most competitive endeavors, having a winning strategy is only half the battle. Arguably, it is the lesser half, the more important being the ability to anticipate and neutralize the opponent's strategy. In serendipiditous instances, you can even use the opponent's strategy right against them. The most glaring example of this is the co-opting and use of jihadi elements by certain nameless countries against the Pakistani army and populace itself.
In the context of this thesis, and in light of recent events, it's natural to ask what exactly is America's strategy towards Pakistan? What's brewing in Washington?
The unwritten assumption here, of course, is that America is Pakistan's opponent. Much has been said about anti-Americanism in Pakistan, but where's the other side coming from? What are the dimensions of America's view of Pakistan? To tackle that conundrum, we must first take a very brief historical tour of America's relationship with the region. Up through the Cold War, there was a clear alignment of US and Pakistani interests to balance the Soviet-India nexus (the NAM charade was amusing at best). It is important to note that, even during the Cold War, the US anticipated China's rise and viewed it as a nemesis-in-waiting. That status got elevated to primacy after the Soviet collapse and Russia's descent into irrelevance. To counter the perceived Chinese threat, and cognizant of the tension between India and China, the US decided to promote India as a counterweight. The US has made no bones about where it views India in its geopolitical plan, and it continues to sponsor India's membership in any number of internal forums. Certainly, India's economy is a draw, but the primary focus of US policies is the geopolitical agenda. You don't get to stay top dog by being complacent.
So, how does all this relate to Pakistan? Does Pakistan being an Islamic country have any relevance here? What about Afghanistan and the war on terror? I submit that these are irrelevant red herrings in America's great plan. Terrorism is not, and has never been, a serious threat to American dominance. In fact, it has been a boon for governments all around to enact invasive legislation and increase control over their own people. For its part, the Afghan war on terror is just a front for continued American military presence in this important geopolitical location. As for Islam, again America doesn't care since most Muslim countries are irrelevant on the global stage. The few countries that matter are solidly under the American thumb.
Coming back to the regional calculus, India is playing it smart. It plays the double game of friendly overtures to Pakistan and China while, at the same time, making sure America understands that India wouldn't mind at all (wink, wink) if Pakistan and China were to 'suffer' at America's hands. Reading between the lines, America knows that the price of India's cooperation in the greater game is Pakistan's head on a platter. To that end, the only thing standing in the way is the Pakistani security apparatus (army and ISI). The feudal politicians have long since been bought -- if not by America directly, then through the Arab proxies -- and can be counted on to do their master's bidding. The few oligarchs that haven't been bought have been exempt precisely because of their incompetence and, hence, unworthiness.
The focus of America's wrath, then, is squarely upon the Pakistani security apparatus. The American agenda is to erode the respect and morale of these agencies. Their weapon of choice is the 'free' media and the method of choice is the famous 'leak', or alleged quotes by 'unnamed officials'. The Western media, now exposed as being a fully complicit agent of government propaganda, is Pakistan's number one enemy. It is the enabler for government policies by setting the public mood -- by 'manufacturing consent' as Chomsky noted.
For its part, the Pakistani military seems to have wised up. In the past, they played America's game, partly to get military support to balance Russian patronage of India, and partly as lucrative personal sellout. However, the military now understands that for every F-16 they get, India will get 10 F-35s, so American military support is worthless against their primary opponent. The ISI also understands full well America's real goals in Afghanistan and why it is imperative to thwart them.
Assuming the above reflects the current American agenda, and given that the US is perhaps the single most important country in the world, the question for Pakistan is how to negotiate the waters ahead.
How can Pakistan convince America to re-calibrate its view of the region, to convince it that it is more useful alive than dead? What are the common interests that Pakistan can propose to change the American administration's mindset? And, just as importantly, what are likely to be the main roadblocks derailing any Pakistani efforts?
(Thanks to Kakgeta for reviewing.)
