Give and take, American style

Improved relations between Pakistan and the United States might not be all good news for President Pervez Musharraf, writes Mariana Baabar from Islamabad
The Americans were coming to town and the military leaders in Islamabad were all dressed up. Pakistan's flag, bearing the crescent and the star, waved proudly in the evening breeze as US Secretary of State Colin Powell descended the steps of his aircraft on 15 October at Chaklala air base to be met by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, rather than his counterpart Foreign Minister Abdel-Sattar.
This was the same air base where former President Bill Clinton, accompanied by his Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, touched down during his visit to Pakistan.
Powell's visit and the warm reception he was given marked a major shift from the days when the former US president refused to be photographed with the Pakistani military leader. Today Pakistan can do no wrong and threats of labelling it a terrorist state lay buried deep in the debris of New York's twin towers.
But what really happened during the secretary of state's visit? Pakistani officials would not even confirm that Musharraf had joined Powell for dinner at US Ambassador Wendy Chamberlain's official residence. Confirmation of the meeting was only forthcoming from Powell's staff.
Publicly, at least, both men were all smiles. They praised each other and promised to usher in an era of closer bilateral relations between Pakistan and the US.
Of course, there was a lot of give and take. The Americans were giving because they needed Pakistan, which in return did not have much choice but to return the compliment.
But even the "peanuts" offered Pakistan by the US are still being dangled in front of Musharraf, says editor of the Pakistani English-language daily, The News, Sherine Sehbai, who spent several years in Washington. "Powell dwelt on the need to shore up the Pakistani economy. But, he has promised that once back home he will ask the relevant departments and officials to examine what the US can do for Pakistan -- both directly and through the military agencies. An aid package would be developed after the US considers the Pakistani president's reply regarding their future ties," Sehbai added.
On Afghanistan, Powell, after being "educated" by his hosts, acknowledged that not all Taliban were bad. Having made polite noises about a broad-based government in a post-Taliban Afghanistan, Powell said that some of the movement's moderates could be accommodated in a future government there. However, the last thing that the Afghans need is a government that bears the slightest hint of a "Made in the USA" stamp.
Representatives of former Afghan King Zaher Shah and commander Jalaluddin Haqqani, a Taliban minister who was reportedly dispatched to Islamabad to negotiate a deal, were both in Pakistan this week. Apparently Powell can be very persuasive, because these visitors are now stating the Pakistani line on Afghanistan.
Just a few weeks ago, Zaher Shah's aides were asking Pakistan to keep its hands off Afghanistan. Today, they say that any government in Kabul would be friendly towards Pakistan. They also say that Pashtuns, who make up nearly 50 per cent of Afghanistan's population and who are the ethnic group from which the ruling Taliban hail, are a reality within Afghanistan. This second pronouncement is reassuring to Pakistan because it has a large Pashtun population residing near its border with Afghanistan, added to which it is concerned that the next Afghan government be a stable one.
However, Pakistan has made it clear that it wants Zaher Shah's role in a post-Taliban Afghanistan to be limited to that of a catalyst for a national consensus. It also indicated that it is nervous about the support that Russia and India are offering to the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance.
The Northern Alliance, along with Iran, has rejected the "moderate Talibans" theory that the US and Pakistan were circulating.
In spite of a degree of warming in the relations between Pakistan and some opposition figures, there remain plenty of pitfalls along the road to establishing a broad-based government in the war-torn Afghanistan. "Don't forget that Afghanistan will soon be up for grabs," says political commentator MB Naqvi. "The war will not necessarily end. Only the formal battles by the Taliban's army will come to an end, and with that the collapse of their administration in Kabul and Kandahar.
"But the remaining Taliban will, as many assume, take their resistance to the mountains, caves and ravines. The Anglo-American forces will probably have to stay on in Afghanistan indefinitely, as indeed they have started to say. That gives their security specialists full scope to motivate and guide the general staff to serve the ends they think need to be achieved," Naqvi added.
The UN secretary-general's special envoy to Afghanistan, Lakhdar Ibrahimi, will also be in the region soon, and it is an open question the type of proposal that Pakistan will present to him.
A controversial question, and one for which this correspondent failed to get anybody to answer on record, is whether Musharraf will deploy Pakistani troops in Afghanistan. Also provocative is whether this matter was raised during the meeting between Musharraf and Powell.
For the time being, Pakistan is rejecting this possibility. But with Turkey offering its troops once the Taliban are removed, there is the possibility that Pakistan, which has a great stake in how things shape up in Kabul, might be tempted to follow.
Suggestions that Pakistani forces might get involved are due primarily to the fact some of the country's troops are familiar with Afghanistan. Thus, Pakistani expertise would be indispensable for the Americans.
However, Musharraf would be taking a major risk if he offers to cooperate in this manner with the Americans. Popular sentiment against the US strikes is growing in Pakistan, and even the liberals and non-Islamist groups that initially supported the action are now raising concerns about civilian casualties in Afghanistan. Even "the silent majority" is manifesting signs that it will not remain a spectator as the bodies of those killed by US bombs are pulled out of the rubble in Jalalabad, scenes witnessed by the entire world on television screens -- with the exception, perhaps, of the United States.
Ironically, the same day that Powell arrived in Pakistan, angry demonstrators shouted for the first time slogans calling for Musharraf's downfall.
After three weeks of relentless bombing, nothing much appears to have changed for Afghanistan. One Afghan from Kabul said, "We are used to war. It has actually never stopped. The only thing that changes is the technology used."
Most observers here agree that the time is fast approaching for US ground troops to take positions outside Kabul. Yet, US officials are very keen to avoid another Vietnam.
Reports from the Northern Alliance suggest that they might be used as cannon fodder when the time is right and the US will push them into action on the ground against the Taliban.
Shireen Mazari, director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies, believes that "while Pakistan has made a decision to support the anti-terrorist coalition in its own national interest, this same reason requires that it point out the problems with the way in which the Americans are conducting the military campaign."
Did the Powell visit strengthen Musharraf? It seems that it has not. Regardless of the "peanuts" the US eventually offers the regime, it is clear that Musharraf is in a no-win situation where someone else is calling the shots, over which he has no control.
Recommend this page
Related stories:
Special coverage: War
War 18 - 24 October 2001
War 11 - 17 October 2001
Fall-out 4 - 10 October 2001
Fall-out 27 Sep. - 3 Oct. 2001
US Tragedy: The fall-out 20 - 26 September 2001
US Attacked 13 - 19 September 2001
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
Send a letter to the Editor