Might is right

Just because it’s a cliché doesn’t mean it isn’t trueIt is not just individuals that fail to benefit from common wisdom but nations as well. Even though they can benefit from such conventional wisdom that often applies across cultural and geographical boundaries, individuals and nations often choose to repeat the mistakes of history. Take for example, the English proverb “Might is Right”. This simple adage is not only instructive in personal dealings but also on matters of international relations. If we look at world history, we will find that the powerful nations always had their way by coercing the weaker nations through different manifestations of their strength or military power. History is also replete with examples of powerful men commanding subservience from weaker individuals. There is a similar saying in Punjabi: “Daadian Da Satti Wian Soh Eh” (Even seven twenties of the mighty make a hundred).
Both these sayings explain the innate instincts of the powerful that determine the nature of their conduct while interacting with their weaker and lesser counterparts. It is probably because of the devilish leanings of the mighty that the wise men have also advised the weak to maintain a proper distance from them. The inference one can safely draw from the foregoing sayings is that the powerful nation always force the weaker nations into playing a subservient role for the fulfillment of their objectives and those who enter into relationship with the mighty powers lose their sovereignty. This common wisdom explains the true nature of our engagement with USA when we became its so-called ‘ally’ during the cold war and more so when we recently became its partner in the war on terror.
There cannot be a better exposition of the bullying stance of US towards Pakistan – that has suffered much in the war on terror – than the statement of Pentagon chief Leon Panetta while on a visit to India recently that the US would continue to launch drone attacks against Al-Qaeda in Pakistan despite complaints from Islamabad that the strikes violate its sovereignty. He said “We have made it very clear that we are going to continue to defend ourselves. This is about our sovereignty as well. The Al-Qaeda militants who orchestrated the September 11 attacks on the United States were in Pakistan’s tribal areas. The leadership of those who were involved in planning this attack is located in Pakistan, in FATA. The effort to succeed in Afghanistan, in many ways is dependent on our ability to eliminate the safe havens in Pakistan.”
This statement undoubtedly represents a snub to the parliamentary recommendations regarding halting of drone attacks and tendering of apology by US and is also a ranting manifestation of the fact that US will go to any extent to protect its own interests with or without Pakistan’s consent. The US incursions into Pakistan are a clear violation of the international law and the UN mandate on Afghanistan, but who cares? Panetta has defended US action by giving a bizarre logic that it was a question of US sovereignty as well. How come? Nobody is violating the territorial boundaries of US. It is Pakistan whose sovereignty is being pummeled and violated with impunity. Having presented those conditions for re-engagement with US and the same being flouted disdainfully, Pakistan is in a dilemma. What next?
Pakistan is certainly not in a position to pick on the mighty US by striking down the drones. The US has already signed agreement with CAS for transit facilities which means that Pakistan’s clout has further been diluted. The US announced its strategic policy in January with greater focus on Asia-Pacific. According to Panetta, India is a “lynchpin” in the new military strategy focused on Asia. The US is also trying to prop up India as a regional power with increased role in post-US Afghanistan. These are all very ominous portents for Pakistan. The US will do what it wants to do in conformity with its overall strategic interests in the region. Panetta’s statement by default also clarifies one thing that the launching of drone attacks in Pakistan does not enjoy the nod of the Pakistan government and it was simply coercive action by the US.
Under the circumstances, Pakistan will have to tread very cautiously and pragmatically rather than letting emotions overtake the conduct of foreign relations. We need a complete review of the strategic depth syndrome and the security paradigm practiced by the establishment that has brought Pakistan to the brink of a precipice and led to its international isolation. This is the time for all the stakeholders to get together and evolve a policy that not only saves us from confrontation with a superpower but also protects our vital interests.
Our chances of getting out of this quagmire lie in facilitating a US exit from Afghanistan according to the scheduled time-frame and building regional linkages like joining SCO and expanding our economic ties with the CAS, Russia and other neighbouring countries. The government is moving in the right direction in this area and needs to further step up its efforts. Pakistan belongs to South Asia and will have to look for addressing its security and other concerns in this region. With excellent relations and cooperation with China in the economic and defence areas, such an approach will not only help in improving regional security environment but would also lessen the chances of foreign interference in this region in the long run.