Author: Shekhar Gupta
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: March 6, 2010
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/them-and-us/587521/0
Introduction: A Weak America means we will
find ourselves on our own in the roughest of neighbourhoods sooner than we
thought
There was nothing un-Holbrooke-like about his utterly insensitive statement
that the Kabul attack had not particularly targeted Indians. The use of really
awful language, "I do not accept [that this was like the attack on the
Indian embassy]" and "let's not jump to conclusions", was also
true to form. In fact, coarse directness of this kind is so much his hallmark
that, talking about him when his appointment was announced, a former American
envoy - who himself was not exactly some Mr Congeniality - told me, "You
guys will learn to deal with Holbrooke... he will make me look so diplomatic
to you." It follows, therefore, that there was also nothing so unusual
about what should normally have been shocking insensitivity. What kind of
a guy - other than Holbrooke, of course - speaks like this when four Indian
victims of that terror attack are still battling for life in the hospital?
His tone was dismissive, almost an admonition of those (read the Indian government)
who "jumped to the conclusion" that this was an attack specifically
on Indian interests.
More significant, however, is his double-quick
retraction. Within a day of making that silly statement he had "clarified"
it in a manner that almost sounded like an apology - and this, indeed, was
so un-Holbrooke-like. The Richard Holbrookes of the world will not usually
be heard saying, "Oops, I screwed up on this one."
So what conclusions do we draw from this sudden
turnaround? Do we go home feeling vindicated, and happy that he has seen reason
so quickly? Or was it just a hasty remark which, thank God, has been withdrawn?
Or do we start to worry, lose sleep, and weigh our options?
Facts would point to the latter option. We
would be erring gravely if we see in Holbrooke's uncharacteristic near-apology
a vindication of India's rising power and stature. It is, on the other hand,
indicative of the rise of a new, weak and further weakening America. This
weakening is underlined by both his initial statement, and his quick retreat.
Here is how.
The note of irritation in his initial statement
was caused not so much by any arrogant claim of better information from the
ground as by irritation with India on the part of somebody representing a
power that is increasingly short of ideas and options - and losing both influence
and the will to exercise it. Obama's "I will send more troops but will
withdraw by a deadline" approach has weakened the American position in
the region gravely and not just the Taliban but even the Pakistanis are smelling
victory. Pakistan now rightly believes - though these things can change quickly
- that the only game left for America (and its envoys like Holbrooke) is to
work towards some kind of an arrangement where a withdrawal could be arranged
by declaring some kind of a quick "victory". That can only be through
a deal with a faction of the Taliban, chosen and controlled by Pakistan. Of
course, the Pakistanis will then promise to ensure that these new rulers of
Kabul will be no nuisance to America and its allies. Smelling success, the
Pakistanis have become so bold as to again openly talk of their need for Afghanistan,
for the strategic depth they always dream of vis-à-vis India. Their
protestations over the "activities" of Indian missions in Afghanistan
have increased and the Americans are now showing less and less conviction
in countering that charge. In Holbrooke's kind of worldview, it would do nobody
any harm if the Indians agreed to be "a little more reasonable"
keeping in mind the "big picture". He is now speaking for a declining
superpower that is no longer determined to go fight for its interests far
from its shores, and is keen to buy peace, bury the hatchet. The problem is
that the Pakistanis, who are central to the success of this defeatist strategy,
would prefer the hatchet to be buried in India's back. Holbrooke's quick retraction
in the face of Indian disgust and revulsion further underlines the lack of
conviction that has seized Obama's waffling America.
Signs of this have been visible for some time.
This columnist has also pointed to the perils of continuing with the strategy
of "outsourcing" the countering of our terror threat to the US,
particularly in view of the new evolving Af-Pak approach in Washington ('Our
faff-Pak policy', IE, November 14, 2009, www.indianexpress.com/news/our-faffpak-policy/541281/).
This week's developments, seen together with the increasing Pakistani confidence
that they have the Americans (and maybe even the Indians) exactly where they
want them, shows that Obama's America no longer has either the confidence,
or the spine, of a superpower. Further, this declining America needs help
from both our immediate adversaries, China and Pakistan, in different ways,
but equally desperately. One must continue to fund its deficit, and the other
must bail it out of the Afghan quicksand.
Both China and Pakistan have already responded
to this remarkable turnaround by hardening their respective postures towards
India in their own different ways. The Chinese shifted the goalposts on border
negotiations earlier, and now the Pakistanis are resiling even from the vague
ideas discussed in the Musharraf era to settle Kashmir. We need to acknowledge
and understand this new reality, in which we are much more on our own, and
where the power we treated as our own "stalwart ally" (to turn a
metaphor on its head) may be taking a very different view of life. I have
talked in the recent past of the Pakistanis playing a game of triple-nuancing
with terrorists, treating Pakistani, Afghan Taliban and then the India-specific
Lashkars differently in pursuit of a larger objective vis-à-vis Afghanistan
and India. Could it now be that the impatient Americans may also be indulging
in a nuancing of their own, telling us that we face a "common" threat
because "Al Qaeda and Lashkar are the same thing" while at the same
time setting minimalistic targets for themselves to neutralise Al Qaeda so
they could leave us to deal with threats specific to us, and with a revitalised
Pakistani military intelligence complex?
The time has therefore come for us to shift
gears, to readjust the viewfinder and re-set the strategic GPS. We will find
ourselves on our own in the roughest of neighbourhoods eventually. But with
American will weakening so much that even Holbrooke is losing his style, this
could come to pass sooner than we imagined.
- sg@expressindia.com
