US President Barack Hussein Obama is the great white hope of the world. But he makes America’s friend India “nervous”, its ally Pakistan “anxious” and its partner Afghanistan “uneasy”. In fact, they should all be happy if he offers renewed hope for change for the better. Here’s why.
India’s nervousness stems from its fear that its established “status quo” regime in the region may be subjected to the winds of “change” blowing from the Obama presidency. After decades of studiously bowing to India’s insistence that the Kashmir problem is an internal matter, or, at worst, a bilateral issue with Pakistan, the US under Obama thinks the Kashmir problem with Pakistan is linked to Pakistan’s problem with Kabul, which is linked to the problem of Al-Qaeda-Taliban, which impacts American interests in the region. An imminent change in American policy was indicated some months ago when Mr Obama warmed to the idea of a “special envoy on Kashmir”, later amended to a special envoy to the “region”. India was alarmed when Susan Rice, President Obama’s ambassador-designate to the UN, included Kashmir among the “conflict hotspots” of the world like the Golan Heights, Cyprus and the Balkans in which the UN should play a conflict-resolution role. More recently, New Delhi was miffed that both the US and the UK did not entirely buy into its line that the Pakistan state was directly involved in the Mumbai attacks and warranted censure. Certainly, the alarm bells in South Block must have gone off when renowned Pakistani journalist and Afghanistan expert Ahmed Rashid, who recently mooted the idea of a regional approach to Afghanistan in an important article in Foreign Affairs which South Block didn’t like, met President-elect Obama last week at a cosy dinner for a handful of people in Washington DC.
Pakistan’s anxiety, meanwhile, has not been relieved by India’s discomfort over mention of Kashmir or the good news emanating from President Obama of a tripling of economic assistance to Pakistan to about US$1.5 billion a year for the next five years. This was evident from meetings between General David Petraeus, the head of US Centcom, and the Pakistani troika of president, prime minister and army chief, at the very moment that Mr Obama was being sworn in as president of America. General Petraeus did not accept Pakistan’s plea to stop drone attacks on select terrorist targets in the tribal areas because they provoke a violent backlash. He also signaled the Obama administration’s refusal to remain critically dependent on Pakistan for supplies to NATO troops in Afghanistan via the Khyber Pass when he announced agreements with Russia and the Central Asian states for an alternative supply route in the north. With an anticipated surge of 30,000 additional American troops into Afghanistan from Iraq, and US drones striking deeper into Pakistani territory, Pakistan will therefore be faced with greater pressure to cooperate in the unpopular war against terror.
Afghanistan’s government, too, cannot expect it will be business as usual. During her senate hearings a month ago, Hilary Clinton, now secretary of state, accused the Afghan government of running a narco-regime. Indeed, corruption charges have so piled up on President Hamid Karzai and family that President Obama is under pressure from his own constituency to explain why the Karzai regime should be propped up much longer. The same question is being asked by America’s NATO allies – most of the heroin produced in Afghanistan goes to Europe – from whom America is requisitioning more troops for Afghanistan. Consequently, the Americans are asking Mr Karzai to shape up or be shipped out in the next presidential elections in October. Mr Karzai has tried to hit back by mooting the idea of “a status of forces agreement” for NATO and American troops in Afghanistan along the lines of a similar agreement in Iraq. But this is likely to irk Washington and provoke it to consider other stake-holder options in Kabul.
In his inaugural speech, President Barack Obama told the Muslim world: “We seek a new way forward, based on mutual respect and mutual interest”. To those “who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent”, he said that they should “know they were on the wrong side of history”; but that he was “willing to extend a hand” if they were “willing to unclench” their fist. And to those poor nations, he “pledged to work alongside to make their farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds.”
Finer words could not have been spoken. Peace between India and Pakistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan, Afghans and Americans, and within Pakistan, India and Afghanistan, requires everyone to cooperate with President Obama if America is ready to change for the better itself. India and Pakistan must resolve outstanding issues, especially Kashmir; Pakistan must clamp down on home grown terrorists against India and Afghanistan; Afghanistan and India must stop fomenting unrest in Balochistan. The region from central Asia in the north to the western and southern tips of India constitutes one big natural economic zone with enormous market potential. It is time its political linkages were also admitted in the larger interest of its constituents.