Ever since the twin towers in New York City were reduced to rubble and a few other planes fell in the USA guided by human missiles who controlled them, the U.S. has been following an imperialist approach in trying to avert a repetition of terrorist attacks on its soil as well as its ‘susceptible targets’ elsewhere in the world. This simple approach can be explained more because of the fact that the U.S. has the ability and the means to sustain a war on different fronts, thousands of miles away from home. It does however suffer from an inherent defect in that it fails to recognize other viable and meaningful approaches which can be followed to control the menace which might include reviewing its policies vis a vis the Middle East and elsewhere, which is tainted with flaws.

The U.S. has been a staunch supporter of Israel and this has prevented it from any positive role that it might have played towards resolution of one of the oldest outstanding dispute which has cost many lives and displaced people as well as destabilize the region. The U.S. also ensures through its policies that the Middle East stands divided and Muslim countries strive for competition and control to outrun each other so that they do not challenge Israel at all. It is accepted by many that this biased approach has been a main cause for events which culminated in several disillusioned people carrying out suicide attacks against U.S. including the big event of 9/11.

The failure of the war in Iraq is an inevitable consequence of a war, whose explanation was control of weapons of mass destruction, which never existed. What has happened however is Balkanisation of the region and ethnic clashes which are beyond the control of U.S. forces as well as continue to provide an impetus to adjoining countries like Turkey where the Kurdish minority has become increasingly anxious and nationalistic over the years. Turkey was at the outset against the invasion of Iraq for this very reason and the outfall of the war can be felt in the background of Turkish invasions in the Kurdish outskirts of Iraq in a self-defined exercise to control sovereignty of Turkey itself.

In a very different manner, yet with the same disturbing consequences, Pakistan has bore the brunt of U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. However, unlike any other ally in this war on terror, we have acquiesced in the U.S. attacks on our soil in an unprecedented manner and have totally neglected its outfall in our region and the nationalistic tendencies it may create. Not only this, the wave of suicide attacks in the country in a not so distant past reaffirmed the ability of militants and extremists to fight the war against Pakistan should it so allow its soil or airspace to be used for the purpose of eliminating them. Hundreds of tribal leaders, many of whom were sympathetic to the government more than towards the militants, have been killed by militants in an attempt to establish command of the militants in the tribal areas.

One should also not forget that the vast majority of the NWFP as well as the common majority of the rest of the country is not in favour of a complete disregard of rules of engagement when it comes to the U.S. drones hitting targets in this part of the world without any real attempt to control collateral damage. It is not to say that it is perhaps beyond control that such collateral damage would occur as such strikes are based upon limited intelligence gained through satellites and local agents and the prospect of collateral damage is overlooked. It is hard to imagine for example if these strikes were allowed say, by U.K, a strong U.S. ally, should U.K. had been in our position. It is easy to imagine the U.K refusing permission to the U.S. for any such strikes and would have sought a political solution perhaps in the same way that the Irish Army was partially disbanded through engagement.

danish.iftikhar@gmail.com