22.10.11

Clinton Plays Snake and the Rope


While most of the media is patting Hillary Clinton for the “tough talk” with Pakistan in Islamabad, what the US Secretary of State has really done is to send out contradictory signals. Take these two quotes:


  • "Our relationship of late has not been an easy one. We have seen distrust harden into resentment and public recrimination. We have seen common interests give way to mutual suspicion."
  • "We work with the Pakistani military and intelligence services [so] that any person who has committed a terrorist act or is about to commit one can be intercepted. There are many ways of doing that. I think it's one of the real successes of the relationship."


What tough talk? The US has its ways, so where is the mutual suspicion? This is the façade. It is ridiculous, as has been implied by one set of analyses, that things got a bit difficult between the two countries because of Osama bin Laden. What of him? That he was found in Pakistan? Or, that the Americans killed him? Or, that the Pakistanis helped the Americans?

The only problem with the ‘end of Osama’ deal is that the US administration is suffering from an itch. It has to fight terror, but it has nothing to show. After camping in Waziristan and Kabul – not to speak of hovering over the Middle East – it has figured out that the Haqqanis are in charge of the terror network in this part of the world.

The supposed Clinton missive is about asking Pakistan to do all sorts of things to the Haqqani faction that sounds like a bad mixer-juicer-grinder ad: "to encourage, to push, to squeeze…That is what we are looking for." All this is apparently for a peace chat. She reportedly added for good measure, revealing an appalling lack of understanding, that it was not clear whether the militants were ready for talks.

Damn them. Really. Pakistan’s military chief, Gen. Kayani, had in fact made the ‘tough call’ by saying “we are not Iraq or Afghanistan”, although everyone knows that it would take a minute to become one. The US can do that if it has a ruse. Pakistan has managed to resist obvious puppetry due to its Saudi connection.

Since Clinton has already said that the US worked with the Pakistani army, why is she ranting? Because that is her job profile. Her quick visits are part of the banshee cry that needs to resound.

If anything, this was a PR exercise.

"Every intelligence agency has contact with unsavory characters, that is part of the job of being in an intelligence agency. What we are saying is let's use those contacts to try to bring these people to the table to see whether or not they are going to be cooperative." She noted that it was the Pakistani intelligence services that requested the U.S. meet with the Haqqanis.

Where is the problem here? Why make noises about the ISI then? If the US and Pakistan are in this together, then every single meeting is a wasted effort. They are merely sending out signals to no one in particular. Since every intelligence agency has contacts with unsavoury characters, why does the US always need help? Is its own intelligence falling short or do they avoid unsavoury characters due to some moral reasons?

The most delectable comment was from The Guardian quoting Pakistani officials responding to criticism about intelligence links with the Haqqanis as saying:

“It's not like we can pick up the phone and call them to Islamabad. We know people who know people who know them.”

Sheer brilliance!

As for Ms. Clinton’s “you cannot keep snakes in your backyard and expect they will only bite the neighbours'', why has it just become a much-touted quote?

Which neighbours was she referring to? Is she okay with such neighbouring? This is such a typically selfish attitude. And, anyway, the United States of America does know about snakes in Pakistan’s neighbourhood. Its CIA helped create one. When he bit it, they decided that anything that looked like a reptile was a threat and had to be done away with. What no one realised as that the American administration was the chameleon dangling a rope and screaming, “Snake!” A win-win situation.

The noose and the venom, real and delusionary, are powerful weapons of destruction.

19 comments:

  1. Farzana,
    IMHO - the more important aspect of the story is official Indian position reflected in S. M. Krishna's statement.
    Cheers,
    Mahesh.
    p.s.: Have a Nice Weekend and a Happy Divali ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  2. How sexist of me! I never thought Hillary could be so brilliantly perfect in her description, without compromising on the diplomatic finesse!

    "Snakes in backyard" was a masterstroke. I am surprised noone in Indian political class thought of it! Perhaps they were scared of the vote banks taking offence!
    ----

    FV, your reptile analogy was a bit off! I can imagine your reaction had I been the one to use it. I could be wrong, but you never know!
    ----

    ReplyDelete
  3. Snake and rope is an appropriate description, carrot and stick seems naive. US knows damned well they cannot 'win' the war in Afghanistan, unless they level it, parts of Pakistan and of central Asia - not that they are not capable of, but they'd rather a proxy do it for them. Unfortunately, the only 'partner' they have in mind is proving out to be a bit dubious, playing snake and ladders, cloak and dagger, now you see me, now you don't. This is posing a challenge to the linear thinking that has worked for the US policy makers and in a large part an outcome of their linear modus operandi to begin with. The big question to ISI and military is how much are they willing to accept to decapitate themselves, that's what they are being asked to do. You don't need a degree from Yale to figure that out. Or perhaps it is that degree that is getting in the way.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Perhaps they were scared of the vote banks taking offence!"
    You meant the RSS folks who liked Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah ?
    Seriously, what is the deal about Vote Bank ?

    ReplyDelete
  5. FV,
    Why is no one discussing Charlie Wilson now ? The huge payouts to Zia and the "Mango" Crash...they bred the snake and ordered for them to be poisonous. Only after it bit US, now all "snakes" and lookalikes are being Droned . The Same ISI learnt how to breed terrorism from their "aakas". The issue is Pakistan is a run down brothel now , more keen to serve the "new rich" Chinese, not sexy enough for old regulars...
    JJ

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mahesh:

    You mean S.M.Krishna’s worry that US-Pak relations will impact S.Asian regional politics? Let’s put it this way – when those two are good together, then we have trouble nailing anyone who might be nailable (and we’ve lost Russia, as much as it has lost itself); when the US and Pak hit a low note, again we are in trouble because we were become the talking point vis-à-vis J&K.

    The US needs Pakistan as much as Pakistan needs it. Neither really needs India, except Pak for a temp seat in the UNSC :) Seriously, outside of the Kashmir strategy, Pakistan would rather remain in its shell…and all kinds of shells.

    PS: Are you also into the poker for Diwali stakes, a US import, I read?!

    F&F:

    "Snakes in backyard" was a masterstroke. I am surprised noone in Indian political class thought of it! Perhaps they were scared of the vote banks taking offence!

    You never heard about snakes in backyard before? But then, you really are not into the Eve-Adam stuff and the vote bank they created, still kept alive with the likes of Pat Robertson. Oh, I forgot, sarcasm too has to be “agreeable”. Never mind.

    I am quite ok with my analogy, since I am not aiming for a vote bank. Don’t test me on my reactions constantly. It belies your delusions, not mine.

    PS: id you have to piggy-back on a comment on Israel, when you know that your commentd have been published and so have many others that do not agree with me? If someone goes moralistic on me, then that is what they get in return. As regards your love for dissent, then there can be dissent to dissent continually. It does not stop at one.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anon:

    Pakistan has had to develop a survival instinct beyond its natural one. Part of it was the influx of the Afghan mujahideen. So, what they had protected is now being projected as the enemy (and in some ways it has become true).

    I used snake and rope for its obvious sense of the real and the illusion of the real. US policy has worked its way in just such a manner. I do not understand whether you think they are right in wanting to ‘win’ the war in Afghanistan, since they had no business to be there at all. Regarding Pakistan’s role as proxy, you say:

    Unfortunately, the only 'partner' they have in mind is proving out to be a bit dubious, playing snake and ladders, cloak and dagger, now you see me, now you don't. This is posing a challenge to the linear thinking that has worked for the US policy makers and in a large part an outcome of their linear modus operandi to begin with.

    Agree with your take on this, but not quite sure whether Pakistan, even with its now you see me, now you don’t can get away. It can only try. The problem is that even when an uninvited guest tells you that your neighbour is ‘snaking’ in, you believe the guest. There is a psyhcologicla advantage because the guest can say we saw it when we were coming to our house.

    The ISI/military it isn’t the degrees, but a matter of degrees of separating one real from the other.


    JJ:

    In effect, are we saying that the US Congress used the CIA to prop up the ISI that helps the terroprists? I’d cut Zia some slack here and include Bhutto in the deal. The ‘mango’ crashers have a limited shelf life! And snakes don’t eat mangoes.

    The issue is Pakistan is a run down brothel now , more keen to serve the "new rich" Chinese, not sexy enough for old regulars...

    It has always catered to the Chinese as have the latter to it. Besides, the Chinese are into recreating the new, so a run-down brothel just won’t work for them. If anything, it might give a kick to the exotic mujra-seekers who wish to mimic the old colonisalists.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The US needs Pakistan as much as Pakistan needs it. Neither really needs India, except Pak for a temp seat in the UNSC :) Seriously, outside of the Kashmir strategy, Pakistan would rather remain in its shell…and all kinds of shells. "
    Well Said.

    Temp seat is a minor thing. Pakistan builds up India to get the goodies it needs. The US taught them this trick.Indians feel important and the hot air fills up their chests. They are a proud nation because Pakistan uses them in dealing with the US.

    Long time no see. Just dropped in to say hi. But couldn't resist to comment.Would love to see you on FB, we have some great discussions going on there between some oldies from you know where....
    HP

    ReplyDelete
  9. Governments of western military culture have traditionally been sympathetic to Pakistani brass. But with economic landscape shifting (China Rising), US is exploring the possibility of working with India; although it considers India too weak and fragmented but nonetheless a useful way to control China's influence in the region.

    http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278637

    China has traditionally used Pakistan the same way US is hoping to use India; but when it comes to lending them money, China shies away. Missiles are fine, but Pakistanis are no good for a loan.

    Hence, loan shark IMF.

    Also, their misadventures; like the one with Osama, don't help matters either.

    My own gut feeling is that Pakistan will and should move closer to China economically as well. China is sitting on a pile of cash for which it sees no worthwhile investing avenue (0% UST bonds are certainly going to generate losses for China sooner or later). It will likely use it to lock up investments in mineral rich Central Asia and promote its soft power at the same time.

    Pakistan may continue to receive military aid from Washington if they are able to repair the damaged relations. But economically, it does not seem likely that they can put capital inflows from the US to good use effectively (for that matter, I am not sure India can either but having gone through Agni-Pariksha of IMF in early 1990s, accompanying forced liberalization of its economy and Indian business community being active in West may help).

    I actually think almost all economies of Asia can benefit from China but politics will play huge role in this.

    Oddly enough, Pakistan which considers (and indeed veritably is) western in both government, religion and culture will partner with quintessential eastern hegemon like China.

    While India, which shares lot of cultural values and history with China will likely end up with Big Brother USA.

    Politics makes strange bedfellows indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  10. The randi is too tired to even yawn about this anymore. Damned if we do, damned if we dont.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hitesh: Could you elaborate on Chinas soft power? What exactly is it? I think China has an image problem similar to Pakistan. Most countries would prefer to have an Indian or American overlord rather than a Chinese one...probably because India/U.S atleast pay lip service to human rights. China does not bother with niceties.

    Agree with your analysis except the part where you suggest Pakistan is culturally and religiously western. Yay toh bilkool bhi nai hai.

    ReplyDelete
  12. >>>Could you elaborate on Chinas soft power?

    In resource-rich and development-poor Central Asia, China can project the image of "Uncle with thick Wallet who likes to hand out early Christmas presents". Also, it would nervously promote (with an eye on Uighurs) the Silk Road ties.

    >>>Most countries would prefer to have an Indian or American overlord rather than a Chinese one...

    American overlords have done enough damage around the world already (I believe US and Pakistan were ahead of Iran (if it ever did so) in recognizing and supporting Taliban regime.) Libya has been liberated, Syria and Iran are next in line. Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Bahrain are too just nice to be democratized yet.

    As for the Indian overlords, right now Indians are quite weary of them so whoever wants them, they can have them.

    >>>China does not bother with niceties.

    So, don't most local tyrants in the Area; whether it's President Islam Karimov or General Kayani.

    >>>Pakistan is culturally and religiously western. Yay toh bilkool bhi nai hai.

    There is a fun Akbar-Birbal parable about this cultural identities (isn't there always about everything ?)

    Once there is a renowned polyglot in Akbar's court who speaks so fluently in so many languages that Akbar is puzzled about his native tongue. So, as usual he delegates the task to his favorite trouble-shooter.

    Birbal somehow manages to make the pundit stumble as he is stepping away from the Emperor and he cries out in .... shall we say Marathi ? ...

    Birbal shouts "he is Bal Thackeray, Jahanpanah."

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hitesh: "In resource-rich and development-poor Central Asia, China can project the image of "Uncle with thick Wallet who likes to hand out early Christmas presents". Also, it would nervously promote (with an eye on Uighurs) the Silk Road ties."

    To me soft power is things like bollywood and yoga. Things that dont really require a concentrated effort to be sold. I was looking for a chinese equivalent...

    I think americans/europeans feel that Indians are the most like them in terms of facial features and command of english, with just the 'right amount' of exotica to make them feel good about being accepting. They'd be/are more comfortable with Indians.

    Farzana: "Pakistan would rather remain in its shell…and all kinds of shells."

    nail head you hit it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. >>>To me soft power is things like bollywood and yoga.

    China can crank out as many Bruce Lees and Lucy Lius as world needs and more. It can also do Great Wall Szhechuan Cuisine from Arctic to Sahara, but to me soft power is anything that does not require boots on the ground or drones in the sky; which China currently only deploys in Tibet, Taiwan (watch out any other country in the neighborhood starting with T, Turkmenistan?? :)) or South China Sea.

    >>>I think americans/europeans feel that Indians are the most like them

    they don't feel jews are like them after having lived with them for centuries; I doubt they feel any closer to Indians with their exotic last names or accents.

    Do you think Rajratnam was one of the very few on wall street who went to prison because he looked like Hank Paulson or he had George Bush-like command over English? :)

    Things to like about Indians is they are seemingly non-threatening. They haven't had military success in over a thousand years and are barely able to hang on to what they got.

    Despite having adopted European-style legal and political system; they would bend over backwards to accomodate their whims and wishes just for the asking, sometimes even without (Union Carbide to Big Pharma all welcome).

    Yeah, there is an overdose of cynicism here but proverbial pig can only handle so much lipstick before it will puke.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi HP:

    Pakistan builds up India to get the goodies it needs. The US taught them this trick.Indians feel important and the hot air fills up their chests. They are a proud nation because Pakistan uses them in dealing with the US.

    I doubt if India feels good enough, unless the benefits are tangible and economic. As far as I can see, Pakistan uses India wrt US policy only by building up threat perception. This the US has indeed taught. The US does the same with India. And then India, puffed chest and all, tries the trick on Pakistan.

    PS: The FB thing...sounds like the holy grail to me! As regards "oldies", the only ones I can think of are in old age homes or working in telly serials. HP, bad marketing on your part for you know what...it's like saying, hey the ex-in laws are there after you've just had a bad marriage. But thanks for thinking about me.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hitesh/Meriam:

    Good show. I can only add that watching from the sidelines, China gets an election. Vely democlatic, no?

    To me soft power is things like bollywood and yoga. Things that dont really require a concentrated effort to be sold. I was looking for a chinese equivalent... (Meriam)

    Hitesh and I seem to have had some ESP here. I was thinking immediately of Kaka noodles and Crouching Tiger, Chhupa Rustom...

    ReplyDelete
  17. There is actually documentary on it:

    http://www.linktv.org/programs/chinese

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hitesh/Farzana: Despite the cuisine and crouching tiger (oh what a GLLLORIOUS movie it is! absolutely perfect in every way!) I still feel like theres a special affinity towards Indians. It's not something that can be certified a 100% I guess...just something that is...

    Hitesh: "they don't feel jews are like them after having lived with them for centuries; I doubt they feel any closer to Indians with their exotic last names or accents."

    Totally disagree! If Jews are running AIPAC in the heart of the American political establishment while NOT being accepted then I think I want some of that unacceptance!

    "Do you think Rajratnam was one of the very few on wall street who went to prison because he looked like Hank Paulson or he had George Bush-like command over English? :)"

    Ofcourse you can find single instances of non preferential treatment but GENERALLY...I dont hear Americans/Europeans complaining about Indian workers taking away IT jobs as much as chinese factory workers or mexican farm workers. I agree with you when you say that this could be because Indians appear non threatening :) I would add that it may also have something to do with the fact that Southasians in particular have a proclivity to be subservient. Unfortunately.

    ReplyDelete
  19. just heard rumor that rajat gupta is also surrendering to FBI.

    Fabrice Tourre can write incriminating emails about his "sucker deals" and then laugh about it.

    Yeah, these are still isolated cases and I am myself not sure how much of a sympathy these extremely rich and influentual individuals deserve but it does stand out like a sore thumb ... also, possibly reinforces subservience among other brownies.

    As for whining about IT jobs, there is plenty of that. You are just not hanging out with the nerdy crowd I guess :-)

    As for "unacceptance" of AIPAC and other neocons, it is the Christian right that identifies itself as protectors of Israel (kinda like Gorakshak in India) but Noam Chomsky is just a crazy hippie. They have amply demonstrated their capacity for murder of anyone who does not really belong in Fatherland.

    Given the current influence of Jewish lobby, it surprised me to learn that as recently as 1930s, schools like Columbia University rejected Jews like Feynman who had to attend mediocre schools like MIT. But, Ambedkar graduated from there, so who knows. they were looking for most subservient kind of South Asian I suppose; only to be surprised.

    Desis are very well trying to emulate AIPAC and other neocons and sadly for similar goals.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.