Two democracies in poll mode

While unemployment and outsourcing remain the prime domestic issues in the ongoing presidential election rhetoric, the evident disinterest within the Bush administration in effectively neutralising the Al-Qaeda in the days prior to the terrorist attacks of 9/11, have become a source of considerable embarrassment and concern to the Bush administration.

The embarrassment started with revelations made by anti-terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, alleging that President Bush and Vice President Cheney seemed more interested in attacking Iraq and implicating Saddam Hussein in the terrorist attacks of 9/11, than in facing up to the reality that Iraq had nothing to do with the Al-Qaeda. Clarke alleges, not without basis, that the attack on Iraq has diverted attention away from the Al-Qaeda threat and has only strengthened those across the world who would harm American interests. But what clearly emerges is that both in the Clinton and Bush administrations, there has been a distinct aversion to dealing firmly with the two main sources of terrorist violence and terrorist financing, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Clarke also glosses over the fact that it was the policies that the Reagan Administration adopted in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation that led to the emergence of militant Wahhabi Islam as a threat to all pluralistic societies. Clarke also glosses over the fact that it was the greed of American oil companies like UNOCAL to exploit the gas resources of Central Asia that largely led to the Clinton administration actually welcoming the advent of the Taliban to power after 1994. Sincere introspection has never been a virtue of many US officials and analysts.

Given the mounting American casualties in Iraq and the absence of a viable and comprehensive political gameplan to deal with challenges there, it has now become crucial for the Bush administration to show visible results in its “War on Terrorism”, if Bush is to be reelected in November. The elimination of Osama bin Laden before November is now a crucial priority for the US president. The grant of the status of a “major non-NATO” ally to Pakistan and the unqualified support being given to General Musharraf has to be seen in this context. Despite domestic opposition, General Musharraf is prepared to undertake military operations against the Al-Qaeda in the tribal areas of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan. While the initial operations by the Pakistan army in South Waziristan were an embarrassment, both militarily and politically, major operations in North Waziristan where Osama is believed to have sought refuge are scheduled to commence shortly. As a knowledgeable Pakistani friend of mine remarked, these operations are going to be akin to looking for a needle in a haystack. It will require large doses of good luck, or carelessness on the part of Osama, for them to succeed.

With India presently in election mode and the attention of the Bush administration focused on getting Osama “dead or alive”, we are heading for a period when there will be very little progress on issues of interest to us in our relations with the Americans, like cooperation in high-tech transfers, nuclear energy, space and missile defence. Despite being fully aware of the fact that not a single senior Taliban leader has been apprehended in Pakistan and growing evidence of the Taliban receiving haven and support in Pakistan, the Bush administration has chosen to remain silent on the fact that Pakistan still regards the Taliban as a future ally in Afghanistan. In these circumstances it is inevitable that the Americans would have little interest in our concerns on terrorism. We cannot ignore this reality as we proceed ahead with the ongoing peace process with Pakistan.