Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Linkedin button

Skip to content

Thursday, Feb 9th 2012


The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power

Book Review: Tariq Ali: The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power

A country in crisis

Everything seems to be “on the brink” or “standing at the crossroads” in world politics these days. But Pakistan surely has done enough to earn every cliché in the book: as the country passes its sixtieth anniversary, it finds itself squeezed between mounting political instability at home and growing violence across the border in Afghanistan. Barack Obama has declared his intention to beef up the US presence on Afghan territory and launch raids across the Pakistani border, while the neo-Taliban are reportedly gearing up for a major offensive that will test the resolve of NATO to continue supporting its allies/puppets (delete according to preference) in Kabul. That prospect would test the cohesion of any state, never mind one as fragile as Pakistan appears to be.

Tariq Ali must be a publisher’s dream these days. When the Twin Towers fell, he already had The Clash of Fundamentalisms in the pipeline. A few years later, he was ready to publish a study of modern Pakistan when General Musharraf’s regime began to crumble. The Dual is a more coherent book than The Clash of Fundamentalisms, which could have done with an editor’s attention. It gives the reader a tight, well-focused account of political developments in Pakistan since the British Empire vacated the premises in 1947. The narrative loses some of its fluency as it approaches the present day, but that’s only to be expected (Ali must have had his manuscript ready to go when an assassin took Benazir Bhutto’s life and Musharraf was removed from power). He seasons the mix with personal anecdotes, describing conversations with Indira Gandhi and Zulfiqar Bhutto, or recalling a trip to meet activists from the Bengali independence movement - the fact that Ali was able to travel with a revolver “gifted indirectly with the IRA” past airport security on his way to Calcutta can only leave you nostalgic for such innocent and carefree times.

If you’re going to read this book, you should be aware in advance of the ground Ali chooses not to cover. This is a political history of modern Pakistan, not a social one - facts about the Pakistani social system are mentioned here and there, but there’s no detailed summary of the balance between rural and urban populations, the level of industrial development, and so on. This focus on high politics is a little surprising for an avowed Marxist. Although it’s not a cultural history either, Ali has more to say about Pakistan’s religious tradition, insisting that heretics and dissenters have always been part of popular spirituality in the region. He naturally detests the puritanical, intolerant brand of Islam promoted by Saudi money since the 1970s, and gleefully claims that the thriving domestic porn industry does a roaring trade in the provinces where Islamist parties are strong (only a killjoy would ask him for a source).

Britain’s legacy

As Ali sees it, the problems of modern Pakistan owe much to the manner of its formation. In neighbouring India, the post-colonial state was the result of a long struggle against British imperialism by a mass movement. Pakistani statehood, on the other hand, was achieved by a faction of aristocrats who entered into collaboration with Britain as it sought to undermine the battle for independence. They had never sought mass backing for their agenda, still less consulted the people who became their subjects after 1947. Mohammed Jinnah was the only figure of any stature in the new Pakistani elite, and he died soon after independence was granted by London, leaving behind a crew of mediocre toffs. It was little wonder that the generals and civil servants who had been educated to run a British colony ended up asserting their control over the new state. No army officer would have dared to undermine Nehru and his colleagues in the leadership of the Indian Congress, with their long record of struggle and popular legitimacy. But the civilian politicians who ruled during the early years of Pakistan were not in any position to command fear, awe or even respect. It wasn’t long before the first military dictatorship was established under the leadership of Ayub Khan.

The absence of a popular anti-imperialist tradition left the system of power in Pakistan largely unreformed after Britain left the sub-continent, and limited the opportunities for grassroots democracy and mass participation in political life to develop. It had other negative consequences, according to Ali: lacking a genuine anti-colonial nationalism to give them legitimacy, the Pakistani elite fell back on sterile “anti-Indianism” which has remained one of the central obsessions of the state. The bitter rivalry between New Delhi and Islamabad has drained resources from social development in both nations and brought the two powers to the brink of a nuclear exchange.

Slaughter in Bengal

The best chance for Pakistani political life to transcend its origins came in the late 1960s, when the military dictatorship was brought to its knees by a vibrant protest movement. When free elections were held, the Pakistan People’s Party of Zulfiqar Bhutto swept to victory in West Pakistan. The moderate Bengali nationalists of the Awami League triumphed in Pakistan’s eastern segment (now Bangladesh). If the People’s Party and the Awami League had formed a coalition and negotiated an amicable separation - or at least a loose federation of East and West Pakistan on an equal footing - the path would have been cleared for both parties to set about reforming their societies, with the generals marginalised.

But Bhutto’s party was not an effective vehicle for reform. He came from an elite background and had served as a cabinet minister under the old system. His party was rigidly authoritarian, with power vested entirely in the leader’s hands. Although it contained some of the best activists from the mass movement which had brought down the junta, the People’s Party did not match the aspirations of the urban and rural poor who had voted for it in such large numbers. Bhutto stood aside and offered no resistance as the generals prepared to launch a murderous campaign of repression in East Pakistan. The army preyed on the Bengali people with ruthless savagery, raping, torturing and killing civilians.

Ali recalls the growing radicalisation of the Bengali nationalist movement as its partisans fought against the brutal occupation, and the fear of Indira Gandhi’s government that the mood would cross the border into West Bengal. The prospect of a Bengali socialist revolution was one of the key factors behind the Indian decision to go to war with Pakistan for the liberation of Bangladesh. Aware that this claim may invite scepticism when viewed from today’s perspective, Ali quotes an editorial in the New York Times which issued a stern warning about the opportunities which a protracted war in Bengal would offer to the revolutionary left and suggested that the sub-continent might ultimately go the way of Indo-China. The Indian army quickly routed its Pakistani counterpart and the new state of Bangladesh was created.

The second coup

With the generals humiliated by their defeat, Bhutto had an ever better opportunity to put his election promises of reform into practice. His government proved, however, to be corrupt and autocratic, ditching plans to introduce land reform and making no attempt to transform the structure of the army and break the power of the officer corps. Bhutto stumbled from one crisis to another, launching Pakistan’s quest for a nuclear bomb along the way (another example of the debilitating obsession with matching India). His chaotic period of rule left the door open for General Zia to mount a coup in 1977, initiating the second phase of military rule.

Any qualms the western powers may have had about the military takeover were set aside when the communist PDPA movement took power in Afghanistan in 1978. The US government sensed an opportunity to drag the Soviet Union into a costly engagement and began funding the mujahideen fighting the Afghan Communists. Fearing their Afghan proxies would be ousted, the Soviet leadership ordered an invasion by the Red Army, and Washington escalated its support for the Islamist / monarchist opposition. This military aid would be supplied through Pakistan, and General Zia became a trusted ally. His execution of Zulfiqar Bhutto after a sham trial was greeted with indifference by the West. Hundreds of millions of dollars were sent towards the Afghan border (some of these dollars were lost along the way - Ali notes cynically that many Pakistani generals took care to open foreign bank accounts at the time).

The Afghan war further strengthened the grip of the army over Pakistani society, in partnership with the ISI secret police. The Soviet government soon began looking for ways to get out of the bloody trap (Ali notes in passing that many of his comrades on the Pakistani Left eagerly supported the Red Army in Afghanistan, and could not understand why he opposed the invasion - the same people, he tells us, now tend to support the presence of US troops on Afghan territory). By the end of the decade, the last Soviet troops had left and the PDPA regime was left to fend for itself for a couple of years before the western-backed militias were able to finish it off. The various mujahideen factions immediately began fighting amongst themselves and demolished Kabul in the process.

General Zia’s dictatorship formed an alliance with the Islamic fundamentalist parties and introduced a number of puritanical and misogynist laws to satisfy their demands. The Pakistani army also began using extreme jihadists as proxies in Kashmir, hoping to bleed the Indian army and avenge the humiliation in Bengal. By the time the Red Army withdrew from Afghanistan, Zia himself was no more: the general was killed in a plane crash in 1988, along with the US ambassador. Ali ventures a few theories as to who was responsible, suggesting that a Soviet-Indian revenge operation lay behind the fatal plunge. Whatever the truth may have been, Zia’s death made another return to civilian rule possible, and once again the People’s Party was triumphant - this time under the leadership of Zulfikar’s daughter Benazir Bhutto.

The cycle continues

According to Ali, Bhutto was immediately hemmed in by pressure from the army and the traditional Pakistani elite, and made even less headway than her father in responding to the needs of her mass base for social reform. The internal life of the People’s Party was no more democratic than it had been under the first Bhutto. Benazir’s first government was short-lived, and by the time she returned to power for the second time, any thought of changing Pakistan seems to have been abandoned. Benazir’s husband Asif Ali Zardari took advantage of the access he enjoyed to the highest levels of power and accumulated a massive fortune ($1.5 billion by some estimates). In one of the most sensational charges of the book, Ali accuses Zardari of responsibility for the murder of Benazir’s brother Murtaza, who had denounced the stench of corruption and called for a return to the original programme of the People’s Party. It was also during Benazir’s second term as prime minister that the ISI brought its Afghan creation, the Taliban movement, to power in Kabul.

The corruption of Benazir Bhutto and her main rival Nawaz Sharif made it possible for yet another military coup under the leadership of General Musharraf. As ever, Musharraf took over with promises of reform and renewal to be followed by a swift return to civilian rule; as ever, the promises were soon forgotten and the period of “emergency” stretched indefinitely into the future. In another echo of past experience, events in Afghanistan helped wipe the slate clean after the coup. In response to the 9/11 attacks, Musharraf aligned himself with the “war on terror” and stood back as the Taliban leadership was driven from the Afghan capital. In return, Pakistan was given billions of dollars in military aid by the Bush administration and Musharraf even found a western publisher for his self-serving memoirs.

That was the point at which Ali presumably expected to close the story, when opposition to military rule suddenly flared up after Musharraf attempted to remove judicial critics from their posts. The movement in support of the judges changed the balance of forces radically and drove Washington to broker an “arranged marriage” between Musharraf and the exiled Benazir Bhutto. This uneasy alliance was destroyed by Benazir’s assassination soon after her return to Pakistan, but the People’s Party went on to contest the elections of 2008 under the leadership of Asif Ali Zardari, routing the pro-Musharraf groups. Zardari took office as prime minister at an especially fraught time, with the Afghan conflict growing bloodier by the month and Indian officials blaming the ISI for terrorist attacks in Mumbai. If even half of the charges Ali levels against Zardari are true, he is probably the worst man who could find himself at the wheel in the midst of these crises.

The focus on high politics throughout this book ends up giving a fairly depressing picture of Pakistan’s likely future: we come away with the strong impression that the cycle will go on repeating itself, as corrupt politicians give way to autocratic generals and back again, dragging the Pakistani state from one shambolic episode to another while the basic social needs of its people remain unattended. It would perhaps have been a little more encouraging if Ali had given some attention to Pakistani civil society and suggested where the potential for a different future might lie.

The reforms he advocates are simple: peaceful co-existence with India, allowing the transfer of resources from the inflated military machine to basic health and education programmes; comprehensive land reform, breaking the power of the big semi-feudal landowners in the countryside and giving the rural poor a livelihood; economic diversification away from reliance on cotton and textiles; and democratisation of the political system that will finally remove the dead weight of the British colonial power structure that was inherited unchanged by the new state. Nobody with their head screwed on could dispute any of those proposals, but it’s hard to see where the agents of such a programme can be found.

Ali appears somewhat optimistic, however. He points to the movement which brought down Musharraf as proof that the Pakistani people can always throw up pleasant surprises. Let’s hope there are more surprises to come before Pakistan’s ghoulish elites drag its people into another disaster.

Discussion

We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.

No comments so far

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required, will not be published)

Sins of the Father

Sins of the Father:

Tracing the Decisions

That Shaped the Irish Economy,

by Conor McCabe

from The History Press

Now Available as an e-Book.

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



Irish Left Review on Facebook

Best of the Web

  • The Greek debt workout will establish a benchmark for sovereign debt haircuts across the Eurozone

    I tried to reduce the size of this quote, but I kept on leaving important stuff out. The whole article is a must read, particular the point made earlier that the negotiations being finalised now between the ECB and private bond holders will ‘establish benchmark terms for other struggling Euro sovereigns as well. Thus, it is possible that the valuation of sovereign debt across all Euro nations will be established in relatively short order’. Anyway, this article by a couple of ‘humble investors’ provides plenty of clarity.

    We have not reached the end of history. Mankind evolves, as does capitalism and its many brands. But not that much. An objective look at our modern economic ecosystem shows clearly one unified global banking system that is actually made stronger by predictable, publicly aired tensions among competing political and economic theorists and practitioners. As long as lawmakers and we, the people that must obey them, continue quarrelling among ourselves, those that control money are free to do as they like. When the people revolt against the symbols of political power (storm the Bastille, storm the winter palace), then the people succeed in forcing those that control money to alter the political structure. Only when lawmakers take steps to limit bank system access to the nation’s resources by indenturing the factors of production (dumping tea overboard, storming the Eccles Building), can the nation’s capital shift back to the people.

    Today we have an oligopoly of central banks issuing the world’s baseless currencies and, by having successfully promoted substantial household and sovereign debt assumption, can now dictate resource allocation and fiscal policy terms. Against this power there is fragmentation - (mostly) democratically elected officials overseeing republics of generally obedient populations. Lenin knew; “by continuing the process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens”. John Maynard Keynes himself agreed: “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose”.

    We argue that indebted governments have ceded that power to banking systems without conscience or public accountability. If the global banking system has ultimate power over how global wealth is perceived, (as it does), and it is the only institution powerful enough to keep indebted governments in control of their societies, (which it is), then the only reasonable strategy for an independent investor is to think like a Rothschild. Don’t fight the Fed - bet on it.

    No comments »
  • Protest at cuts in small rural schools Dublin, 1st February 2012

    Hundreds of teachers, parents and school children came from all over Ireland to protest at Minister Ruairí Quinn’s proposed cuts to small schools in Dublin when the Dáil was debating the bill.

    No comments »
  • Ireland has one of the most attractive tax rates for fracking companies in the world

    Very important point made by Natural Gas Europe here (posted on Shell to Sea) about the licencing agreement around Shale Gas (Fracking) and needs to be understood in the context of the news today that Tamboran Resources initial exploration in  north Leitrim has found that they could ultimately reach 2.2 trillion cubic feet of gas, worth $55 billion at today’s prices. Meanwhile Pat Rabbitte has asked the EPA do an environmental study, but this is very, very unlikely to veer from the assessment of the European Commission consultancy study on licensing hydraulic fracturing which found that there is no need for specific new legislation governing the mining activity.

    Besides the environmental impact, the financial cost of both that gas line and the potential shale gas excavation has caused consternation. Currently, Ireland has one of the most attractive tax rates for companies in the world. Companies in Ireland are, in most cases, required to pay only 25 per cent corporation tax, a much lower rate than most other countries with possible shale gas reserves; Ireland also does not require companies to pay any royalties to the government on saleable gas. Tamboran, Lough Allen Natural Gas and Enegi may be required to pay between five and fifteen per cent over this rate, but, even at a higher rate, the gain for the government will be lower than for most other countries in comparable situations. Pundits and protestors alike say that the government is effectively giving away a valuable resource, owned by the Irish people, to outside companies, for very little in return.

    2 comments »
  • Conflict of interest is so deeply embedded in Ireland, no one seems to notice

    The cops were very swift to close down the demonstration in the NAMA building that  Unlock NAMA occupied on Saturday the 28th. They haven’t been as swift though to investigate Anglo Irish Bank. A big blow to that investigation is due, apparently, to the fact that the cop leading it went to work for Bank of Ireland. It is not unusual for people from the fraud squad to move into the private banking sector, we are told, just as we were told that it isn’t unusual for people to move from the regulators office or the Central Bank (when they were separate bodies) to the boards of private banks. Unlock NAMA revealed that the building they occupied was in a very bad state of repair. Add to that the difficulty in establishing that it was a NAMA building at all, considering that it was added to the foreclosure list incorrectly. This should open up discussion on what is happening to all the other NAMA buildings, at the very least. At the most there should be uproar about the massive stock of properties that NAMA controls the loans of which is being allowed to rot and devalue. These properties are being held on to simply to try and artificially hold the price on property and provide the means for future speculation.

    Senior garda fraud specialist retires to work for Bank of Ireland

    The senior garda detective who was in charge of the Anglo-Irish investigation for 18 months took early retirement at the end of last year and is now working with Bank of Ireland, it has emerged.

    Former detective superintendent Pat Collins, 52, was regarded as the Garda’s top expert in corporate fraud investigation. He spent much of his career in the Fraud Squad and before taking charge of the Anglo investigation he spent time on secondment with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement working with its director, Paul Appleby.

    Former colleagues say his departure — on full pension after having served 30 years in the force — will be a major blow to the investigation.

    Coveney adviser’s patriotism stressed to secure special pay

    Elsewhere, Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney is in the news for asking for a €130,000 salary for his special advisor Fergal Leamy, a former chief executive of Greencore USA. The cap as we are well aware after all the breeches of it is €92,672. Leamy didn’t last long, despite Coveney pleading that he was desperate to do the state some service he left after four months. He got an offer from an equity firm in the London that he couldn’t refuse. However, the story also reveals that Simon  Coveney’s brother, Patrick Coveney is chief executive of Greencore. Of course Greencore has a long and controversial history, which Shane Ross referred to as a template for the worst excesses of corporate Ireland, a close rival to DCC.

    No comments »
  • Can We Still Write Big Question Sorts of Books? | David Graeber

    David Graeber and the model of his ‘popular’ yet scholarly book Debt: The First 5000 Years

    So: what was to be the model for a big questions sort of book, and how to write a book that would still be scholarly, but not academic?

    This is what I came up with:

    Of all the models I considered, the most amenable turned out to be the approach adopted by Marcel Mauss. This might seem odd. especially because Mauss never actually wrote a book; he’s mainly famous for a series of essays. Yet many of these essays-not just the Gift, but his essay on the person, techniques of the body (where he coins the term “habitus”), sacrifice and magic-really have had a profound effect both on all subsequent scholarship, and, to differing degrees, political and social debates ever since. Mauss had an uncanny ability to ask the right questions-often, questions he was the first to pose, and which have become mainstays of theoretical debate ever since. His was also an appealing model because Mauss was both a serious, committed activist (he was especially active in the French cooperative movement), and a scholar of remarkable erudition. His problem-and this, I suspect, is why he never did write a proper book, despite numerous attempts-was that he was also almost unimaginably disorganized, and therefore, terrible at exposition. I suspect if alive today he would have been quickly diagnosed with severe ADD.

    1 comment »
  • Irish ‘SOPA law’ another under the radar attack on digital rights by a craven government pandering far too easily to corporate interests

    Very strong and accurate piece from Karlin Lillington in the Irish Times today, making no bones about the motivations behind the changes in copyright law that Sean Sherlock and the Irish government are trying to sneak in. It’s odd at a time when the SOPA law in the US, which is similarly motivated to the Irish law, has just been dropped.

    FOR THREE governments in a row, “short-sighted” and “sneaky” seem to have become the relevant terms in operation when bringing in controversial, high-impact legislation on digital issues.

    In the past, from the government’s perspective, this approach has worked well in shoving in poorly drafted, unscrutinised law on the controversial area of data retention, giving the Republic one of the most severe, internationally criticised, anti-business retention regimes in the world.

    This time around, the Government is trying again to use secondary legislation - a statutory instrument requiring no discussion and no debate in the Oireachtas - to (supposedly) protect intellectual property for a narrow band of hard-lobbying entertainment industries.

    For despite what the ‘hard-lobbying entertainment industries’ might say internet piracy is not killing off its profits. That assumes for a start that the amount produced is static, which given the amount of ‘content’ flooding towards us each day is absurd.

    But more importantly, there is evidence (from numerous mainstream studies and reports) that industry claims about piracy decimating revenue, jobs and creativity are vastly overstated. A careful analysis of such claims by Julian Sanchez on Ars Technica ( iti.ms/wT8l02), picked up and further discussed by Forbesiti.ms/xQJXhg), indicates piracy has actually had only a minor impact on these industries.

    The record industry in the US, for example, has about double the new releases it had a decade ago, when piracy was barely on its radar. The film industry also has more releases now than in pre-piracy days and its most pirated movies are also those that made staggering box office profits. Sanchez cites evidence that the music industry is making back profits lost to piracy through “complementary purchases” such as concert tickets. And a recent report issued by a US anti-piracy lobby group rather farcically indicates its clients are doing quite well, thank you.

    3 comments »
  • Davos dilemma | Michael Roberts

    The majority of those at Davos think that Capitalism isn’t working, but don’t feel there is a need to change anything because its working rather well for them. It’s up to those not in the 1% then to change it.

    The strategists of capital are attending their annual jamboree in the snow playground of the super-rich in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. Many of the top 0.1% of income earners are there. And this year the main theme is whether capitalism works and is fair.

    Capitalism is in crisis - and this time the word ‘crisis’ is not hyperbole. Even the 2600 attendees at Davos recognise that. According to a survey by the financial broadcaster, Bloomberg, almost 70% of those asked believed that the capitalist system is in trouble, with 32% saying it needs “radical reworking”. Less than 20% reckoned ‘free enterprise’ is working. Most Davos 0.1 percenters are really worried that this failure of capitalism to work could lead to ’social instability’ in one form or another.

    And more than half who were asked at Davos thought that inequality of income and wealth under capitalism was damaging economic growth. But only one in five wanted any urgent action on the issue! It seems that greed triumphs over economic logic - or should we say, class interest rules

    No comments »
  • The Promissory Notes | Tom McDonnell

    Economist Tom McDonnell of TASC provides a brief primer on IBRC promissory notes, which is available on Slideshare. Click here to view it in it’s own web page.

    No comments »
  • Michael Taft talks to Doug Henwood of Left Business Observer about the Irish Economy| 7th of January

    Michael Taft talks to Doug Henwood of Behind the News in a detailed 30 minute discussion about the Irish economy which was posted on the 7th of Jan. The second half of the show is given over to a discussion with Jodi Dean about Occupy Wall Street and ‘demands’. It’s also worth reading Jodi Dean’s article on Occupy Wall Street and the Left which was published today on Critical Legal Thinking.

    MP3 Link.

    [display_podcast]

    No comments »
  • What are bankers doing inside EU summits? | Corporate Europe Observatory

    Important information here on the extent of bank lobbies influence in the resolution of the Greek debt crisis, particularly when it comes to plans which require ‘private sector involvement’.

    At the Euro Summits in July and October 20111, crucial decisions “to save the Euro” and “to save Greece” were made. It was agreed to restructure Greek debts and banks were asked to accept a ‘haircut’ to their profits to avoid a Greek default and the risk that some banks might default as a result. In Summer 2011, the press was full of stories about the informal negotiations between EU leaders and the banks about the level of private sector involvement in restructuring Greece’s debts.

    The Institute of International Finance (IIF), a lobby group established in 1983 by the biggest banks and financial institutions in the world to deal with the question of sovereign debt2, became the EU’s interlocutor on the Greek debt issue. Its proposals -described as ”offers”- received red carpet treatment.

    No comments »

Link Archives »

Authors