Did you enjoy this article?
|
|
Sections
IT is certainly significant that the two leaders [Singh-Zardari in New York] have agreed to open the Atari-Wagah road link, which has been closed to normal traffic of goods and people for 43 years, and the Khokrapur-Munabao railway route for trade in “all permissible items.” Another bold and imaginative gesture, which will have its own resonance in the context of the recent agitation in the Kashmir Valley, is the decision to allow trade across the Line of Control, editorialized English Daily Hindu on September 29, 08.
No body should be surprised about this development. This is what Zardari promised to India. No more “Kashmir first” will be the battle cry for the normalization of relations with anti-Pakistan India in Zardari’s presidency. No more Kashmir will be the “core issue” for the normalization of relations with anti-Pakistan India in Zardari’s presidency. On the other hand, bilateral trade and united front against “terrorism” will be the core fundamentals for normalization of relations with India.
The reason for this about-turn in Pakistan’ policy toward Kashmir is attributed to certain factors. Zardari is the basic factor for this about-turn in Pakistan’s policy toward Kashmir and India.
According to the editorial of Hindu of September 29, 08, Zardari commits himself to break with the old paradigm of “Kashmir first” for normalization of relations with India. Zardari commits that Kashmir is not the core issue for normalization of relations with India. Zardari commits that Gen. Pervez Musharaf’s January 2004 commitment will be honored by his presidency. Zardari commits that terrorists will not be allowed to use Pakistan’s territory for terrorist activities against India. Zardari commits to an autonomous Kashmir. In other words, Zardari’s deal with India is that Kashmir is not the issue of Pakistan. Indians and Pakistanis are bhai-bhai. Hindu-Muslims are bhai-bhai. He does not remember Gurjrat slaughter of Muslims. Zardari eyes Ashouk Chucker.
Zardari knows the dire consequences of selling the Kashmiris to India. He knows that abandoning of Kashmiris in their=2 0struggle against occupation is a suicidal act for Pakistan. He knows that anti-Pakistan sentiments among the Kashmiri will be exploited by anti-Pakistan India if this policy is implemented. Then why he is following this anti-Kashmiri and anti-Pakistan policy?
Answer to this question is very simple. Does Zardari prefer to be hanged in the hall of shame like other Muslim puddles of America or to be hanged by America in a public squire for standing for the just causes of the Muslim World? Ask any past and present puddles of America in the Muslim World that why they pursued and why they are pursuing anti- Muslim World policies. Past puddle had two options – either to remain in power by selling the Muslim world to America like Shah of Iran and Suharto of Indonesia or to be hanged like Saddam of Iraq and Bhutto of Pakistan by uni-polar executioner, American leadership. The same option is open for the present puddles of America in the Muslim World like Karzai of Afghanistan and Zardari of Pakistan. Both of them have opted to be hanged in the hall of shame by selling the Muslim World to America, present master of the universe.
Occupying other nations through different tools is not new in American history. It did not start with the naked occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Ronald J. Caridi writes in 20th Century American Foreign Policy, p. 1-2.
“The drive for territorial and economic expansion has been a dominant theme of the American experience. The descendants and followers of those who settled Jamestown, Plymouth, and Massachusetts Bay were adventurous pragmatists whose acquisitiveness drove them beyond their legitimate boundaries and gained them an empire. The new nation wrested the Mississippi boundary from England and grasped at the opportunity to acquire Louisiana; it had the temerity to issue the Monroe Doctrine and the ruthlessness to instigate the Mexican War. Toward the close of the nineteenth century this drive became flagrantly imperialistic as the maturing nation succeeded in extending its influence from the Caribbean to China, with the implications envisioned by only an astute few.
“There are two general approaches to nineteenth-century American imperialism. In its more narrow conception, imperialism has been viewed as the denial of one nation’s sovereignty by another nation; in its broader definition, control of another people’s resources, trade,=2 0and markets, even if such control does not bring with it the total loss of territorial integrity and national sovereignty, is seen as imperialistic.”
In this context, view Zardari’s slogan trade-first with anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan India. Under this trade-first slogan, Zardari is selling Pakistan’s sovereignty by giving India Pakistan’s resources, trade and markets. In this context, view Zardari’s opening of the Atari-Wagah road link and the Khokrapur-Munabao railway route for trade and allowing trade across the Line of Control.
To occupy by force another people’s resources, trade, and market is costly. To occupy another people’s resources, trade, and market by installing puddles like Zardaris does not cost anything. In every nation, in every society, there have been, there are and=2 0there will be puddles to sell the people’s resources, trade, and markets. A dominant power does not have to twist the arms of these puddles; they offer themselves.
Muslim World has been bleeding since the butchery of the Muslims by First Crusaders. Descendants of First Crusaders under the leadership of American leadership have opened a new chapter in the butchery of the Muslim World by dividing it into moderates and terrorists. It is a “bloodletting” America’s style. John J. Nearshermea defines “Bloodletting” in “The Tragedy of Great Powers Politics” as follows on page 154-155.
“Bloodletting is a more promising variant of this [bait-and-bleed] strategy. Here, the aim is to make sure that any war between one’s rivals turn into a long and costly conflict that saps their strength. There is no baiting in the version; the rivals gone to war independently, and the blood-letter is mainly concerned with causing rival to bleed each other white, while it stays out of the fighting. As a senator, Harry Truman had this strategy in mind in June 1941 when he reacted to the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union by saying, if we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible.”
In the post Soviet Union world, blood-letter America used the blood of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosava. First allowing the Serbs to murder Muslims and then creating pro-America protectorates to encircle Russia. In Iraq, America first patronized Shias to destroy Sunni Saddam administration. This strategy triggered civil war. Now he has recruited and trained one hundred thousand “Sunni sons of Iraq” against 300 thousand Iraqi fo rces to cut each other throats. In Afghanistan, first Muslim blood was used to destroy Soviet Union. Now different factions are used against once pro-America Talibans. As a result, Afghanistan is bleeding. In Somalia, one faction of Somalis is used to destroy another Somali faction. In Sudan, Darfur tragedy is created and sponsored to dismember Sudan. In occupied Palestine, one faction is sponsored against another to destroy Palestinian struggle against the occupation of Israel. In Lebanon, one faction is patronized against another faction to create anarchy and bloodshed.
In the entire Muslim World, one can see the visible hand of America20behind the destruction and genocide. In every bloody crisis, America is patronizing one faction against another.
Now America-installed Zardari is hell-bent to isolate the anti-occupation Kashmiris. Division among the Kashmiris will create the situation like Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Sudan and Somalia. The only beneficiary will be India and its sponsor America.
And this anti-Kashmiri policy is adopted under the deceptive slogan of peace. Anti-occupation Kashmiri will be labeled as terrorists and anti-peace.
Deceptive slogans are the hallmarks of American policy. America always cloaks its genocidal and plundering policies under morality cloak. Note what President Truman is saying about Iraq in his meeting with U.S. Iraqi ambassador Wardsworth in 1948.
“President picked up my [Wardsworth] reference to Iraq. Development of the Tigris-Euphrates plan, he commented [Truman] would support 15,000,000 people. There was one point in that connection he wanted to make. Tamerlane had destroyed that great ancient civilization. In the past, destruction had always been the aftermath of war. Today, for the first time in history, the conqueror was putting everything he had into reconstruction of the conquered. [perhaps reference to re-building Germany after World War 11] (Top Secret. Memorandum by the Ambassador to Iraq (Wadsworth) to the Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African affairs (Henderson), Foreign Relation, 1948, Volume V, 594)
American corporations were to implement “Tigris-Euphrates plan” to “help” 15,000,000 Iraqis and not themselves in 1948 as they are ‘helping’ today Iraqis to rebuild Iraq and not themselves. The fact of the matter is America mega corporations are plundering the resources of Iraqis.
Do not believe American leadership or their regional puddles like Zardari and his slogan peace through trade. It is a naked sell off! Patriotic forces must stop this puddle of America and India.
(Jafar Syed is a Researcher on International Affairs based in New York)
Comments (0 posted)
