Uncle Sam's Strange Ways

Dwarka Nath Munshi

[In this article the author has skilfully exposed the contradiction in the policy of the USA towards India and Pakistan, particularly on the question of Kashmir-Ed]

If it was not an increasingly glaring fact, no Lone, least of all Home Minister Shri SB Chavan, would have shed the long-observed restraint and made an unambiguous reference to U.S.A. in his December 4, 1995 statement in Rajya Sabha, Said he, "Some big powers are behind the trouble in Kashmir", and "I have no hesitation in naming America I make the statement with full sense of responsibility" In saying so, he gave utterance to the common Indian's belief across the country.

The collusion is no longer covert. It is clear as daylight How else can the Clinton administration and their most loyal apologist term the sale of the lethal weapons to Pakistan in open violation and defiance of the Pressler Amendment by which they swore till the other day? Put against the seemingly civilised and oft-repeated concern of U.S. Government for democratic elections in the State, the sinister effect of their behaviour is hugely heightened And Shri Chavan's accusation of US "instigating trouble" in the way of creating conducive conditions was correct and imperative.

If there is anything covert in the sordid arms. deal, it is only that the package is worth over one billion dollars, almost three times what the U.S. Government makes it out to be, i.e. $368 million. Weapon experts and dealers hold that the three P3C Orion maritime surveillance and strike aircraft alone would exceed that total; each costs $100 million plus $90 million worth of support package. The 27 harpoon missiles and their support packages cost $351 million, the weapon-locating radars $15 million, and other items. The US has also offered F-16 overhaul facilities, spares and parts for the ground. equipment. Thus it has undervalued the hardware to a third or less of the actual value to throw a curtain of dishonesty and falsehood around its nefarious activities.

The story of U.S. relations with other countries-especially after the Second World War when it emerged as the first of the two superpowers (with the erstwhile Soviet Union), has been one of flaunting military, economic, moral, and ethical superiority. The aim was to assume a modern style. day overlordism and neocolonial position in the world. It went all out to help its crushed enemies Germany and Japan to regain their position under its tutelage It also did everything in its power to choke and undermine its war-time comrade-in arms but later became a competing superpower with a prolonged Cold War attrition. It promoted dictators and authoritarian regimes in struggling democracies across the continents in the post-war era.

In Latin America it dethroned and enthroned rulers at will, with threats and show of force and with a blatant interference in others' affairs as a self-appointed world policeman to enforce "order" and ensure "human rights." (At home, however, the Black remain discriminated against, and the poor remain below the poverty line, without adequate medical aid or educational opportunities). It instigated civil and internecine wars in Africa and Asia, and unfortunately on our borders with Afghanistan. There the embers continued to consume, with Pak hand as active as ever, what had remained after their long resistance to the Soviet-backed regime.

All this, not to speak of the military alliances, and adventures in Viet-Nam, the Gulf, Somalia, Bosnia, among others, was directed to one objective-hegemony. This impulse has taken a variety of colours and forms over the millennia. Alexander set out to hold the world at the tip of his arrow. Julius Caesar waged bloody wars to expand the Roman Empire by the might of his sword. Napoleon subjugated much of Europe, spurring his steed for more. Hitler rained death from the skies in pursuit of his monstrous designs of ethnic cleansing, racial supremacy, and expansion into foreign lands. British colonialism was expansionism of a mixed kind- military campaigns and foxy "liberation", mean diplomacy wrapped in poison and sweet nothings. But time overtook them all.

The Americans started with clearing the continent of its original "savages" But the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights bearing the influence of Plato and Socrates, Lincoln's emancipation of the slaves, J.S. Mill, John Locke and Martin Luther King's noble thoughts and principles set new traditions admired around the world. The sublime was, however, overtaken by gradual transformation into the present grotesque state.

In most of the US post-war games, Pakistan took no time to develop a handmaiden relationship with the master. Its military brass who took the lead in the matter, soon assumed supreme power as dictators, one succeeding the other who would have fallen from the master's grace. The democratic urges of their people, watching their neighbour India as a splendid democracy were put in cold storation.

India, however, followed an independent path. It strove hard to create a third force of the non-aligned to provide a balance and ensure peace and freedom in the world. Its development strategy was also much different from that of the U.S.A. and not to its liking. India thus received more frowns from the U.S.A. than any friendship acts or overtures which were reserved for Pakistan. That has been the pattern all through, with variations now and then but never much in substance.

The last four years were different. India went all out to reform its economic structure and policy and, indeed, made spectacular progress. The American hand has been all too visible though. The IMF, World Bank and major investing organizations and agencies have been ingratiate and even pampered. That generated hopes of American policy makers to be more cognizant of the values basically shared by the two democracies of freedom, liberty, equality of all citizens-in our largest, stable and genuine democracy and of the U.S.A., the most advanced, powerful and influential nation.

In matters relating to Kashmir too, India has done much to please the U.S. and satisfy their viewpoints. The decision to hold elections in J and K State, even in impossible conditions prevailing there, was a result of the U.S. pressure, among other things. The frustratingly soft-line in operations against the fundamentalist-terrorists should have silenced the worst critics of India on its approach to the solution of the problem. the intransigent and unreasonable attitude of Pakistan to peaceable resolution of bilateral problems should have convinced the U.S. of Pak's intent and purpose-to destabilize Indian democracy.

The destructive activities of the widespread Islamic fundamentalist fraternity, led by Pakistan, are manifesting everyday. Kashmir was one of their first victims The bombing of the World Trade Center in New York and in Bombay, the mercenaries active in Bosnia where the U.S. troops would be rubbing shoulders with them in more than one sense, the mutual destruction in luckless Afghanistan perpetrated by the same forces, to mention only a few, should have opened the eyes. and minds of even the most prejudiced. But in their eager partiality towards Pakistan, the US. is cheerfully and willingly allowing itself to fall from the esteem of the civilised, impartial and peace loving sections of the world community.

What could be its major policy compulsions for such unreason on the face of it is a billion dollar question. Or is it that personal proclivities flowing from Oxford, Harvard and Ivy League camaraderie of Raphels, Talbotts, Galbraithes, yuppies, exert significant influence on the course of events there? If that is so then it would be profoundly pathetic for this country of such immense influence in the world, and in fact highly dangerous for the world at large.

DISCLAIMER: 

The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."

Courtesy:- Dwarka Nath Munshi and September 1996 Koshur Samachar