Should we be Pak-ing Heat in South Asia?
No.
This week, the Bush Administration announced it would clear the way for sales of F-16 fighters to Pakistan. The only rationale for this I can think of is that this is Mr. Bush making good on a past promise he made to Pakistan’s President, General Pervez Musharraf in exchange for Mr. Musharraf using his army to hunt the remnants of the Taliban along the Afghan-Pakistan border. While the missions of the Pakistani army have been very helpful in that area, I find it hard to believe that there wasn’t anything better we could have offered Mr. Musharraf in exchange for his help because supplying Pakistan with F-16’s has many drawbacks that far outweigh the interests of giving Mr. Musharraf this particular reward. Here are the main ones:
1) INDIA. What are we thinking even risking the alienation of the world’s biggest democracy, an emerging economic powerhouse, and a strategic regional counterbalance to China??? India is an amazing country which is a beacon for democratic and capitalistic values in the region, and likely the world. This is a country we should be embracing on par with members of NATO. We should not be antagonizing it by supplying its nuclear rival and neighbor with aircraft that could decimate its entire airforce. We should have the closest relations possible with this country, irrespective of any short-term cooperation we receive from Pakistan. After all, Pakistan was one of the main forces helping create and buttress the Taliban regime before 9/11/2001.
2) This is detrimental to fighting terrorism in the long run. There is a very disturbing trend in the Muslim world: most citizens of Muslim countries have the opposite opinion of America as the official stances of their governments. Let me illustrate- America has technically good diplomatic relations with most Muslim nations, yet the closer our governments are, the more the people on the street hate us- i.e. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, PAKISTAN, Morocco, ect… Conversely, in the few nations we have hostile relations with, the people actually like America. See: Iran. The reason for this is because most governments in the Muslim world stink, and when we embrace them, their people hate us for it. Pakistan is certainly no exception, essentially a corrupt dictatorship that routinely violates human rights where most of the population lives in desperate poverty. Our embrace of Musharraf does not help our image in the Muslim world. It actually does serious damage.
3) Supplying Pakistan with F-16’s only makes these problems worse. Pakistan needs to return to civilian rule and the last thing it needs is a larger military apparatus. Instead of aircraft, how about expanding free trade between the countries? We’ve already liberalized trade with Pakistan’s textile industry to some extent to reward Musharraf for his help, and it has caused a boom in that sector of the economy. The only problem is that that is a sector where the wealth has been distributed disproportionally to the top of the economic ladder, doing little to alleviate the poverty that contributes at least partially to the potent extremism of many Pakistanis. Instead of F-16’s, how about a free trade agreement in agriculture and some development aid for education and public works (perhaps in exchange for some democratic reforms to boot)? That would make a far more serious dent in extremism in Central Asia than a couple of F-16’s would.
4) You can’t use F-16’s to fight terrorists! Pakistan already has a more than adequate army and air force to take on the Taliban near its border. Give them some predator drones- one might actually find bin Laden!- not F-16’s. There is only one reason F-16’s mean anything to Pervez Musharraf, and that reason is India (see point #1).
Again this is an example of Mr. Bush drawing the wrong inferences from the lessons of the Cold War. Here, supplying sketchy strategic allies with arms will not really help us (at least this type of arms- if we gave Pakistan some Predator drones and some technology for their intelligence services, it would be different). And Mr. Bush is not learning from what helped us and is currently helping us in the real fall of the iron curtain taking place right now (see Georgia, Ukrane, Kyrgyzstan, and maybe Belarus (keep your fingers crossed!)), which is LEADERSHIP BY EXAMPLE.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this is why Mr. Bush is truly weak on terror.
This week, the Bush Administration announced it would clear the way for sales of F-16 fighters to Pakistan. The only rationale for this I can think of is that this is Mr. Bush making good on a past promise he made to Pakistan’s President, General Pervez Musharraf in exchange for Mr. Musharraf using his army to hunt the remnants of the Taliban along the Afghan-Pakistan border. While the missions of the Pakistani army have been very helpful in that area, I find it hard to believe that there wasn’t anything better we could have offered Mr. Musharraf in exchange for his help because supplying Pakistan with F-16’s has many drawbacks that far outweigh the interests of giving Mr. Musharraf this particular reward. Here are the main ones:
1) INDIA. What are we thinking even risking the alienation of the world’s biggest democracy, an emerging economic powerhouse, and a strategic regional counterbalance to China??? India is an amazing country which is a beacon for democratic and capitalistic values in the region, and likely the world. This is a country we should be embracing on par with members of NATO. We should not be antagonizing it by supplying its nuclear rival and neighbor with aircraft that could decimate its entire airforce. We should have the closest relations possible with this country, irrespective of any short-term cooperation we receive from Pakistan. After all, Pakistan was one of the main forces helping create and buttress the Taliban regime before 9/11/2001.
2) This is detrimental to fighting terrorism in the long run. There is a very disturbing trend in the Muslim world: most citizens of Muslim countries have the opposite opinion of America as the official stances of their governments. Let me illustrate- America has technically good diplomatic relations with most Muslim nations, yet the closer our governments are, the more the people on the street hate us- i.e. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, PAKISTAN, Morocco, ect… Conversely, in the few nations we have hostile relations with, the people actually like America. See: Iran. The reason for this is because most governments in the Muslim world stink, and when we embrace them, their people hate us for it. Pakistan is certainly no exception, essentially a corrupt dictatorship that routinely violates human rights where most of the population lives in desperate poverty. Our embrace of Musharraf does not help our image in the Muslim world. It actually does serious damage.
3) Supplying Pakistan with F-16’s only makes these problems worse. Pakistan needs to return to civilian rule and the last thing it needs is a larger military apparatus. Instead of aircraft, how about expanding free trade between the countries? We’ve already liberalized trade with Pakistan’s textile industry to some extent to reward Musharraf for his help, and it has caused a boom in that sector of the economy. The only problem is that that is a sector where the wealth has been distributed disproportionally to the top of the economic ladder, doing little to alleviate the poverty that contributes at least partially to the potent extremism of many Pakistanis. Instead of F-16’s, how about a free trade agreement in agriculture and some development aid for education and public works (perhaps in exchange for some democratic reforms to boot)? That would make a far more serious dent in extremism in Central Asia than a couple of F-16’s would.
4) You can’t use F-16’s to fight terrorists! Pakistan already has a more than adequate army and air force to take on the Taliban near its border. Give them some predator drones- one might actually find bin Laden!- not F-16’s. There is only one reason F-16’s mean anything to Pervez Musharraf, and that reason is India (see point #1).
Again this is an example of Mr. Bush drawing the wrong inferences from the lessons of the Cold War. Here, supplying sketchy strategic allies with arms will not really help us (at least this type of arms- if we gave Pakistan some Predator drones and some technology for their intelligence services, it would be different). And Mr. Bush is not learning from what helped us and is currently helping us in the real fall of the iron curtain taking place right now (see Georgia, Ukrane, Kyrgyzstan, and maybe Belarus (keep your fingers crossed!)), which is LEADERSHIP BY EXAMPLE.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this is why Mr. Bush is truly weak on terror.
posted by Rich at 9:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home