Afghan quandary
With the gradual withdrawal of western forces, Afghanistan is again bracing for a rough ride. President Karzai is running around for friends in the neighborhood. He rushed to India to sign a comprehensive strategic agreement but soon realized that it would not work under the suspicious and hostile attitude of Pakistan. Before the ink could dry Karzai started courting Pakistan. Afghanistan had their definition of a sovereign state all along where tribal culture asserted more influence than the state. The lasting value in that restive region is the tribal and ethnic identity. The emerging realities of Afghan quandary are such that of all the people President Hamid Karzai had suggested that if Pakistan was attacked (obviously meaning USA); his people would be with Pakistan. In that incredible scenario it does not matter to the fiercely independent tribal people of Afghanistan which side the government is, their sympathies and support will be with demographically mixed and economically dependent Pakistan. Afghan people are always at war against themselves; finding somebody foreigner in the enemy line energizes them to fight more savagely. Frequent suicide bombings at a time when western forces are withdrawing show that finding a cause to die is more honourable for many people of that region than surviving in hardship. It is not so much religion but rejection of worldly life that pushes them towards extreme decision. Going further north, in the emerging democracies of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and other republics, the situation is more perplexing. Their tribal identity was demolished by the iron hand of Stalin, but their heart still relish in search of more authentic ethnic boundaries than the national or the religious identities of the people. The oozing lava of Afghanistan can spill over barely recognizable boundaries of the surrounding republics. A thin line of religious anchorage and cultural linkage offer little about the complex minds of the surrounding people. What Secretary Clinton meant is clear; spring in the Arab world is on expanding torrent without much bloom, unleashing another one in restive Central Asia; the world cannot afford two springs in one season. Russia under Putin has emerged stronger in spite of the rumblings in the central Asian region that not long ago, was her exclusive prowling zone. The consolidation of national boundaries along with the management of minority nationalities draws immediate attention of the rulers than the growth of democracy and human rights in the emerging republics of Central Asia. Tribalism may have taken a back seat; the leaders are yet to have enough flexibility to glide freely in an agreeable democratic environment. Russia has at least the rituals of democracy, government elected by the people; China is also moving slowly towards openness. Meanwhile, the giants would not like to see people of Central Asian Republics enjoy freedom more than their own people do. If America pushes too hard for the human rights values in Central Asian Republics, the bear will certainly growl from the north and the dragon spit fire from the southeast. Secretary Hillary Clinton's recent visit to Pakistan and Central Asia has reveled more than what she said all these years. It spoke of the egocentric pride of the people of the region, their capacity to fight more than their ability to see reason. If the people are egocentric, their leaders also come from the same stock- ruthless and fierce. President Imomali Rakhmon of Tajikistan and President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan, great survivors from the Soviet era suspect any move that has not been pre-designed or stage-managed with the heavy hand of police state. Democracy north of Afghanistan is hugely managed product, tailored by the rulers more than the ruled. With no history of democratic development, swiping conclusion can only negate the rudimentary start of the journey towards openness. In that backdrop when Hillary Clinton asked restrain from the ruler of Tajikistan for banning the youth from praying in the religious institutions she realizes the danger of annoying the moody horses by the riders. The lesson of Afghanistan is fresh in her mind to ignore the realities of myopic central Asia. Her advice of keeping a tab on the culture of the people may take a longer time but more likely way of laying a bridge for democracy. Leaders not yet exclusively chosen by the people, deeper connectivity with the presumptuous people will save Central Asia from destabilisation. What happens to Afghanistan after American combat troops are further thinned out is anybody's guess. Neither USA nor Europe has any more energy to work as stabilizing factor in that vortex. Europe refusing to turn back quickly from economic troubles, global turmoil showing lot of staying powers, military combat is the last choice for the west. Policing and financing are shy now, consolidation of gains of democracy is more important than the pushing the boundary farther. President Clinton's hindsight (first Lady) and president Obama's forefront (secretary of state) Hillary knows it from three decades of her living experience. When she apprehends trouble about the religious intolerance in Central Asia and elsewhere, cautious move and constructive engagement are the safest option. There is nothing wrong with religious beliefs as long as these do not seek political power for enforcement. It is in fact the finest institution in personal preferences. The World must wait to see what happens to Afghanistan after foreign combat troops are gone and brace against spillover if Taliban's cannot be stopped. Pakistan is no longer a serious threat to India. She provides a stopper from the possible avalanche coming down from the Afghan wilderness. Territorial integrity of Pakistan will work as bulwark for India. Couple of years ago, I commented, India must see that the Durand line (boarder between Pakistan and Afghanistan) does not shift between Pakistan and India. In absence of western forces in Afghanistan, it is more pertinent than anytime before. Immediate threat comes from terrorist activities. It is difficult to see an immediate solution of the Kashmir problem. India should make effort to develop a bypass policy of Kashmir predicament in attractive packages to cajole Pakistan in trade, commerce and cultural activities. The rulers of Pakistan will have difficulty in convincing the emotionally charged people for the necessary initiative. In spite of frustrating experience, India must not give up the strategic push. Meanwhile India should be cautious in vertically landing on Afghanistan ignoring the fear factor of Pakistan.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments