Last weeks terrorist attacks on Mumbai caused loss of life, heightened tension in Indian-Pakistani relations, and a potential shift in the war on terror. The relationship between India and Pakistan is complicated; since the Partition of India in 1947, three major wars and multiple skirmishes have been fought between the two countries. Even without this historical background, the dialogue between the two countries following the attacks would undoubtedly be heated. Unfortunately, the terrorists have quickly been identified as Lashkar-e-Toiba operatives, an organization based in Pakistan. It is a very difficult question as to how much the nation of Pakistan should be connected to such a group, but it is undoubtedly in the best interest of both countries to abstain from war, especially since there have only been minor skirmishes since 1999, when both countries acquired nuclear capability.
I am interested, then, to see what role Condoleezza Rice plays, and attempts to play, when she reaches Mumbai on Wednesday. Clearly, she has stated her desire to deal with both Islamabad and Mumbai, and to lessen tension. But, besides sincere humanitarian concern, shifts in Pakistani forces could affect US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Historically, Pakistan and India have held forces along their border, and the Kashimiri Line of Control. This has been a deterrent for either country to invade (both have tried).
Northwest Pakistan, the other side of the country, has become a stronghold, or base, of terrorist activity. This affects in anti-US forces in nearby Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as seemingly influencing the Mumbai attacks.
If a renewed spirit of conviction arises from this ordeal, it is in Pakistan and India’s own interest for Pakistan to focus more on this region (and they do currently have operations there).
Particularly because of our own interests, I think Rice will try to help convince Indian leaders of the view that they should renew efforts in counter-terrorism, not just counter-Pakistani-terrorism. There should be major support in India for some sort of retaliatory effort, and it is how this effort is shaped that may greatly affect the region. If Rice could get India to see the interconnectedness of counter-terrorism in Afghanistan to terrorism from Pakistan, we could see a more concerted effort in the region. Perhaps India would be more interested in helping in Iraq and Afghanistan? Such an orientation (if India does not lash out at Paksian) provides no excuse for Pakistan to shirk on fighting insurgents within it’s own borders.
I posit this as an interesting maneuver that might be attempted. Whether it succeeds or fails, we could see one last foreign policy move from the currently lame Bush administration. The options could be a further push for Bush’s War on Terror, and in this case I believe it could be a good push. Or Rice’s tension-dampening presence in Mumbai, which, while necessary, could either be seen as another instance of our current administrations softness of late, or perhaps a shift towards understanding that we should not try to influence too greatly the leaders of foreign nations.
(Note: I'm not taking any stance, outside of the current situation, on whether counter-terrorism in any capacity is good or bad, smart or worthless, necessary or not, etc. The fact is our government considers us in a War on Terror, and after the attacks Mumbai will undoubtedly adjust it's own counter-terrorism policies)
Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/opinion/01mon1.html
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/world/2008/12/01/5-lessons-from-the-deadly-mumbai-terrorist-attacks.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_wars_and_conflicts
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/02/world/asia/02mumbai.html?pagewanted=2&sq=mumbai&st=cse&scp=2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree that the visit to Mumbai is one of the last chances for members of the Bush administration to leave a positive mark. I don't think they will succeed, though, because they have to walk too fine a line.
On the one hand, the US has to maintain Pakistan's status as - at the risk of sounding cliche - a key ally in the War on Terror. Since Musharraf resigned earlier this year, Pakistan has been more bold in advocating its own positions, which is great for Pakistan but bad for the US if we are still seeking their help in finding Osama bin Laden. So the US cannot offend Pakistan even further during the Mumbai visit.
On the other hand, the US could improve public image by reaching out to India. If the US somehow convinces India that cementing their counter-terrorism policy is better achieved by also joining the War on Terror, the US will benefit. Becoming stronger allies with the largest democracy in the world and one that is not in Western Europe, will make the US seem more open.
A great opportunity, but perhaps one that is too difficult to take advantage of.
Post a Comment