Fighting fire with fire

America has been invoked in recent times after every terror attack on Indian soil. Experts and ordinary Indians react with...

America has been invoked in recent times after every terror attack on Indian soil. Experts and ordinary Indians react with understandable anger, and urge the Indian government to look at the American example of counter terror action. After all, as we8217;ve been reminded many times, there has not been a single attack on American soil since 9/11. In India on the other hand, there have been at least 15 major terror strikes after the Parliament attack on December 13, 2001.

But this analysis is simplistic because during this time when American citizens have been safe in their malls and subways, their country8217;s 8216;war on terror8217; has actually destabilized large parts of the world 8211; the Middle East and India8217;s own neighbourhood. So if we examine the US record more stringently it becomes clear that protecting its citizens has come at the cost of someone else8217;s safety. US policies have hurt the security of the region and in fact India as well. The result of American effort in protecting Americans 8212; no further attacks 8212; is good; but the approach is heavily hypocritical and morally unjustifiable. It sends out the wrong message that the means in this 8220;war8221; don8217;t matter. So those who invoke the US should be reminded that there is little to emulate.

Some simple numbers first. The 9/11 attacks killed a little less than 3000 people. Within a month of launching strikes in Afghanistan the US surpassed that number in Afghan civilian casualties. You can imagine what the figure must be like seven years on. The US military, however, does not document civilian deaths or 8220;collateral damage8221; so the exact number is unknown but according to the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, in the last two years alone nearly 8000 people have been killed.

In Iraq the numbers are much higher. According to the Iraq Body Count Project more than 85,000 people have died. nbsp; Collateral damage is a euphemism which means that some people can be killed under certain circumstances like Afghans and Iraqis while American citizens must not be, under any circumstance.

There are more double standards. For instance, democracy is good in some places but not good in others. It is not good in Pakistan because it slows everything down. So as long as Musharraf 8211; the anti democrat can get things done, he gets Washington8217;s support.

Admittedly, Pakistan has been a very difficult question for the Bush administration but it beggars belief that they continue to studiously support Pervez Musharraf even after voters rejected his party. On the other hand, Pakistani lawyers who have surprised the world with their tenacious movement to have the judiciary restored have not received any support from Bush and his team. So even while propagating the virtues of democracy as the antidote to terrorism and war the US stoutly supported a military autocrat. While Indian admirers were looking at America8217;s secure shores they didn8217;t notice the damage being done just across the border even if Pakistan8217;s own leaders deserve a fair share of the blame.

Beyond the double standards the major problem with the war on terror in South Asia has been that it was relegated to second place. Iraq8217;s witless war had to be won and so Afghanistan was ignored. The best troops and equipment were pulled out and diverted to Iraq. During that time the Taliban and Al Qaeda regrouped in Pakistan and today they are launching vicious attacks inside Afghanistan. NATO says they need at least 10,000 more troops to be effective in the country.

Story continues below this ad

These policies negatively impact India as well, albeit in a less direct fashion. Today Indian reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan are running up against a nasty old foe in the Taliban. Pakistan8217;s reckless military has allowed these fundamentalists to regroup even as the US was too busy in the battle in Iraq. In the past the mujahideen have turned their attention to Kashmir, so this Talibanisation of Pakistan is just bad news for everyone.

America 8216;s actions abroad belie the lofty language it has used in the war on terror. It is ironic that the US is invoked after terror strikes because the world is possibly more unsafe because of America. South Asia certainly doesn8217;t present a rosier picture. So for those who still think the 8220;tough8221; measures of the US are admirable, here is a beautiful question from the late Catalonian cellist Pablo Casals. He asks, 8220;The love of one8217;s country is a splendid thing. But why should love stop at the border?8221; It does and that is the problem.

The writer is studying international relations at George Washington University