In the first week of May Pakistan joins Afghanistan and America in war games called 'Inspired Gambit 2006'. The location of the war games have not been disclosed; it has been asserted by a Pakistani spokesman that these will be in held in Pakistan, in an undisclosed military training area and not on the Pak-Afghan border.
These war games provide the latest evidence that the support the Pakistani regime is providing to America in her 'War on Terror' is alive and well. Amongst many events, this is despite the fact that America is a country which has on numerous known occasions violated Pakistani jurisdiction and bombed and killed Pakistani civilians with impunity. Rather than seeking to defend her territory and people, as any self respecting ruler or government, it beggar’s belief that we have a surreal situation in which the Pakistani regime is actually still co-operating with the accused aggressor.
All of this comes against the back drop of mounting tension between Iran and America and her cohorts of war. If America decides to attack Iran, as speculation mounts day by day, she will need the tactical and logistical support of Pakistan. No war, no air strike will be possible without attacking a country as large as Iran from all angles for which Pakistani territory and airspace will be indispensable, not to mention the military intelligence and covert support that would be required. So the question is obvious, with existing US bases in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, what is the true intent of these 'air assault' exercises? The 'Afghan army' is virtually non-existent. Are these war games really designed to enhance cooperation between supposed allied armies who trade accusations on a now almost daily basis or are they in fact designed to prime American war plans for Iran?
Aside from any war against Iran, it is a matter of fact that there are daily military operations in both Waziristan and Balochistan. In Waziristan whole swathes of the local population have been put under siege as American and Pakistani helicopter gunships and artillery support Pakistani troops in operations against vague and undefined targets who are conveniently labelled 'Al-Qaeda' and 'Pakistani Taliban' as they allegedly hunt for Bin Laden. As a result of these operations we have seen the displacement and killing of many innocent civilians. In astonishing remarks published in an interview given to The Guardian on 28 April, Musharraf responded to this reality by saying "If someone happens to be very close to [the target], that somebody is an abetter and they suffer the loss. Sometimes, indeed, women and children have been killed but they have been right next to the place. It's not that the strike was inaccurate but they happen to be there, so therefore they are all supporters and abetters of terrorism - and therefore they have to suffer. It's bad luck."
Musharraf's irrational and disturbing comments in truth betray his desperation to justify the unjustifiable and the value with which he regards the lives of the Pakistani people. No one in their right mind can assert that children can discern their actions, let alone 'abet' terrorism. Musharraf's claims about Waziristan or anything else are simply not believable. No independent witnesses have been allowed free access to either area, neither has there been any corroboration of any of Musharraf's claims. Do not the people who have been bombed and killed by American and Musharraf's forces not have the same right to life as anyone else? Apart from Musharraf's word, what proof is there that the people killed by American air strikes were indeed 'terrorists'?
It is ironic that in the global 'War on Terror', of which Musharraf claims Pakistan to be a 'front line' state, the very supposed Western 'values' such as Rule of Law and Human Rights that America claims to be fighting for, have been thrown out of the window. The fact that there is virtually no transparency or any independent judicial oversight over the action of Musharraf's regime in both Waziristan and Balochistan is an indicator of what many suspect is happening all along. In Balochistan a rebellion is being put down and in Waziristan, the traditionally fiercely independent tribesmen are being attacked at the behest of America. In both cases there is no due process for the accused and extra-judicial detentions and killings are taking place.
Musharraf claimed in the interview that he has "teeth" and said "It's not a question of being a poodle. I'm nobody's poodle. I have enough strength of my own to lead." Yet the truth is that Musharraf's decisions ever since he usurped power have served the interests of others and diminished Pakistan's own interests. Pakistan was created so that the Muslims of the sub-continent could have their own homeland, safe to practice their religion in. His dilution of Islam, which he entitles 'enlightened moderation' and enforced peace overtures to India as part of the greater American plan to contain China, are removing the glue which holds Pakistan together. The fact that there is rising provincial nationalism, especially in Balochistan and NWFP, is testimony to the fact that his policies are undercutting the very basis of Pakistan. If Islam is not important any more, what ideological basis is left for Pakistan?
An American war on Iran with Musharraf's assistance will help exacerbate sectarian and ethnic tensions in Pakistan. The Shia who make up twenty percent of the population along with the Baloch have strong clan and religious ties with Iran. As Pakistan's army fights rebellions and insurgencies on Pakistan’s western flank it can only embolden India in the long run. As the earthquake disaster has quietly slipped from the headlines, Musharraf is again showing where his real priorities lie; securing his own survival and serving his masters in Washington. His regime recently announced that Musharraf will 'decide' if the next parliamentary elections will take place in 2007 or as widely expected 2008, thereby picking his own electoral college to 're-elect' him President. Once again the West lead by America is proving that despite it's rhetoric in practice it can do business with all kinds of unsavoury characters, including Musharraf, as long as it's interests are best served.
Source: KCom Journal
